National Post: Jays aren

[flatjacket1]

How can you advocate signing Madson for 4/44 and not Fielder for 6/120?

Well, first of all, Fielder will not sign for 6/120. He already declined that deal from Milwaukee. It will take more dollars to get him, its looking more like 6/150.

Bautista is 31 years old now. That's a maximum 4 year window for contention that we need to take advantage of while he's still the best player in baseball, and pieces need to be added starting this year. Right now Adam Lind is providing Bautista protection... need I say more. There's a reason why Bautista had 132 walks. I'd have no problem paying Fielder 6/140 or possibly more if you frontload the contract. Elite hitters entering FA in their prime like Fielder are extremely rare, we need to take advantage of it.

You present your point well. I think a case can be made to add pieces this year, but also you could make a case against it. Fielder has weight concerns and had two 5+ WAR season in his career, if you look at his WAR breakdown per season, hes averaged like 2.7 WAR over 7 seasons. That's hardly All-Star level. He has shown that he can be elite for only two seasons so far, and one happens to be his contract year. I think Fielder will be looked back on as a huge mistake, hes destined for more 2 WAR seasons. I'd rather wait until next season and go all out then, because then we get to keep the pick, which lies at around 8M in relative value.

Using this method the hidden costs are:

Surrendering 16th overall pick: $8.3 million

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.ph ... -salaries/


I think we abuse this system for 1 last year, and let Lawrie and Snider have a year before we put too much pressure on contending. I think signing Madson gives us a chance at the playoffs anyways.

[Hendrix]

The main point is we couldn't become a serious contender this year unless we overpayed multiple free agents. When the number becomes a bit more reasonable, they'll do it. This is the last year we can spend big on the draft (assuming we don't lose any picks to compensation) and then next year we get to keep our picks.

The numbers are perfectly reasonable. We have an ~85 win team that is very well cost controlled, and's payroll is way less then the one Beeston said we would pay. We're a few FA signings away from contention, and that would still be well within the amount we were told the Jays would spend on salaries. We could wait for an even better situation, but Bautista is getting older so this time is as good as any imo.

I don't see the logic in overpaying for Fielder. He turned down 120M/6 years, and frankly I wouldn't go a penny above that. I'd rather see us have a 85 win season, and then the Jays sign a solid 2B and pitcher next year.

The logic of paying FA's? How about getting into the playoffs for the first time in a couple decades.

I don't see the logic in how an 85 win season w/o signing a 1b, 2b, SP is better then if we did sign those players and ended up in the 90's/playoffs.

[flatjacket1]

The logic of paying FA's? How about getting into the playoffs for the first time in a couple decades.

I don't see the logic in how an 85 win season w/o signing a 1b, 2b, SP is better then if we did sign those players and ended up in the 90's/playoffs.

Or Pythagorean W-L is 79-83, we got lucky a couple times. The reality is we are an 80 win team. I know that if we signed Fielder now we might make the playoffs next year, but years later when it comes time to resign Lawrie and crew we will be a mess. Would that really be worth it? For 1 year of playoffs?

That's my take on it anyways. I think that if FA's were looking for shorter deals (Aka under 5 years) it would make more sense. Fielder and Pujols are both premier players who face some questions and will get overpaid in a thin FA market. I bet Fielder finishes under 4 WAR next season. And Pujols will only play well for the first year or two of his contract (aren't there questions about his age?).

I think next year there are some younger players in positions that fill our needs. It would be nice to buy a bullpen this offseason though, even though we'd have to overpay because of the lack of compensation.

I feel either sitting out or chasing a closer makes most sense. Both won't affect the team negatively long term. Next year if Rogers doesn't spend some money it'll raise some eyebrows. I'm willing to wait 1 more year though.

[lilneige]

That's what bothers me about this. We have an MVP caliber player in his prime and still won't spend to surround him with high-end talent. I usually don't mind sucking and am okay with rebuilding but Bautista's not going to be putting up these type of numbers forever. I hope we just trade him if stick to this "small market" mentality.

The reality is, Jays currently is a small market team. When Jays was 81-81 last the attendance was at the bottom third of AL. Both Seattle and Minnesota had terrible record in 2011, they were ahead of Jays in attendance.

TOR (81-81) 1,818,103 (10th of 14)
MIN (63-99) 3,168,116 (2nd of 14)
SEA (67-95) 1,939,421 (8th of 14)

If we want Jays to spend more money , we need to show more support to the team. It is plain and simple.

There are opinions that can arugue Jays should sign big FA like Fielder and Reyes. However, there also had opposite side point of view.

I know a goal of the Rangers' offseason is to lock up the "core" of the team and that makes them unlikely to sign Prince Fielder. How much would a huge signing like Fielder paralyze the Rangers financially?
-- Sean H., Salado, Texas

Let's say Fielder commands $120 million over six years. That will push the Rangers' payroll to the $120 million range next season. They could probably afford that in 2013 as well, although Josh Hamilton and Mike Napoli are free agents after next year. Beyond that is the danger, because their young pitchers will start hitting arbitration and free agency. Nelson Cruz, Michael Young and Ian Kinsler will also be free agents after 2013.

The Rangers, if they re-sign Hamilton and keep Young, may also become bloated at designated hitter. But maybe you roll the dice knowing what Fielder can do this year and worry about the future later. That's what big-market clubs do.

As a side note, Prince is terrible in defense even as first-basemen. In American League he is better suit in DH.

In the early part of 2011, Reyes was the best player in the National League and seemed like he'd be able to set whatever price he wanted for his next contract. Then he cooled off a bit and folks realized that he wasn't really drawing any walks. Then he got hurt and we all remembered why long-term contracts are usually bad ideas. Then he stopped running for a while and we started imagining what Jose Reyes sans speed might look like, and it wasn't a pretty sight.

It was around that time that I made a mental shift from "I love Jose Reyes and I want him to be on the Mets forever" to "Jose Reyes with wonky legs isn't worth $20 million more than Ruben Tejada."

Personally, since we don't have enough SP to fill the rotation, I would like to see Jays spend on Darivsh but not Wilson.

[Kurtz]

The logic of paying FA's? How about getting into the playoffs for the first time in a couple decades.

I don't see the logic in how an 85 win season w/o signing a 1b, 2b, SP is better then if we did sign those players and ended up in the 90's/playoffs.

Or Pythagorean W-L is 79-83, we got lucky a couple times. The reality is we are an 80 win team. I know that if we signed Fielder now we might make the playoffs next year, but years later when it comes time to resign Lawrie and crew we will be a mess. Would that really be worth it? For 1 year of playoffs?

I'm dumbfounded by the fact that people keep looking at Fielder as an "all-in" move. The man's 27. A 6 year looks like it'll get it done. He'll help us for SIX years, 27-33, the ENTIRETY of his prime.

Are you serious with the concern of us being able to afford to re-sign Lawrie when he's due for big money FIVE YEARS FROM NOW?! WHAT!? WHAT!? That is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Are we the **** Pirates? What the hell is going on here?

On a bloody 6 year deal, by the time our prospects are due for the big money, Fielder will be off the books. The timing couldn't BE more perfect to sign the man right now. We're bidding against the god damn Brewers and Marlins here. How often do you have an opportunity to bid on superstar who's just entering his prime, who we desperately need, and the bloody Yanks and Red Sox are not even in the picture!? This almost never happens.

Dammit people, stop drinking the bloody Rogers cool aid and wake up. We're a god damn top 5 market in North America, yet the **** Oakland A's spend more than we do! The bloody Orioles AND the Brewers spent 20 mil more than us last year! The freaking Twins spent 50 million more than us last year!! The TWINS! 50 MILLION MORE! And we have posters who are worried about us being able to resign our prospects 6 years from now because of the possibility of us paying ONE GUY superstar money right now? WHAT THE BLOODY HELL IS GOING ON!!?!

[CPT]

I'm dumbfounded by the fact that people keep looking at Fielder as an "all-in" move. The man's 27. A 6 year looks like it'll get it done. He'll help us for SIX years, 27-33, the ENTIRETY of his prime.

Are you serious with the concern of us being able to afford to re-sign Lawrie when he's due for big money FIVE YEARS FROM NOW?! WHAT!? WHAT!? That is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Are we the **** Pirates? What the hell is going on here?

On a bloody 6 year deal, by the time our prospects are due for the big money, Fielder will be off the books. The timing couldn't BE more perfect to sign the man right now. We're bidding against the god damn Brewers and Marlins here. How often do you have an opportunity to bid on superstar who's just entering his prime, who we desperately need, and the bloody Yanks and Red Sox are not even in the picture!? This almost never happens.

Dammit people, stop drinking the bloody Rogers cool aid and wake up. We're a god damn top 5 market in North America, yet the **** Oakland A's spend more than we do! The bloody Orioles AND the Brewers spent 20 mil more than us last year! The freaking Twins spent 50 million more than us last year!! The TWINS! 50 MILLION MORE! And we have posters who are worried about us being able to resign our prospects 6 years from now because of the possibility of us paying ONE GUY superstar money right now? WHAT THE BLOODY HELL IS GOING ON!!?!

+infinite

And while nobody can guarantee Fielder won't fall back to 3, 4 WAR again at some point in his career, is it not more reasonable to assume that his most recent seasons are more indicative of his ability than those he put in 4, 5 years ago? He's been pretty damn good over the past 3, even with his down 2010.

[Hendrix]

Or Pythagorean W-L is 79-83, we got lucky a couple times. The reality is we are an 80 win team. I know that if we signed Fielder now we might make the playoffs next year, but years later when it comes time to resign Lawrie and crew we will be a mess. Would that really be worth it? For 1 year of playoffs?

The reality is that we spent half the season playing EE at 3rd, Cory Patterson, Rajai Davis, Snider, Hill, Reyes, Cecil, Lind. The current team has replaced a good chunk of those guys with upgrades, and stands to be in the mid 80's.

I have no idea where you are getting that signing FA's would make us playoff bound for only one year or that we'de have trouble resigning Lawrie way down the road.

That's my take on it anyways. I think that if FA's were looking for shorter deals (Aka under 5 years) it would make more sense. Fielder and Pujols are both premier players who face some questions and will get overpaid in a thin FA market. I bet Fielder finishes under 4 WAR next season. And Pujols will only play well for the first year or two of his contract (aren't there questions about his age?).

We are underpaying pretty much every single player on our team right now. We can afford to pay free agents a few bucks if the brass is serious about the $150million budget.

I think next year there are some younger players in positions that fill our needs. It would be nice to buy a bullpen this offseason though, even though we'd have to overpay because of the lack of compensation.

I feel either sitting out or chasing a closer makes most sense. Both won't affect the team negatively long term. Next year if Rogers doesn't spend some money it'll raise some eyebrows. I'm willing to wait 1 more year though.

I'de say chasing a closer is probably the worst idea of what we could do this year. The Market is absolutly rediculous right now for glorified relievers.