ImageImageImageImageImage

AA's change of stance on "payroll"

Moderator: JaysRule15

User avatar
Chevy Chase
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,979
And1: 820
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: Jane & Finch
     

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#41 » by Chevy Chase » Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:21 am

I look forward to being plesently surprised. And it need not be Fielder. Just show me the willingness to spend an appropriate amount on salary. Something representative of the size of the market.
User avatar
James_Raptors
RealGM
Posts: 22,482
And1: 11,817
Joined: Jan 22, 2009
Location: Born in Toronto,living in NEWFOUNDLAND baby!
         

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#42 » by James_Raptors » Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:43 am

In 2012 (in a few weeks) there are so many options for my entertainment dollar.
For me, as a consumer to "buy into" something, that product needs to show me what it's got.
It's not up to me to spend my buck on an unknown, with no idea whether or not it'll be worth something worthwhile or crap. Now, sports isn't that simple and I understand there must be winners and losers but I will not accept mediocrity (or worse). I do not spend my real money, purposely investing in an obvious loss and I'm unwilling to accept investing my money and passion into a team that refuses to exhaust their resources to provide a winner.

I'm not demanding championships. In fact, at this point I'd just be happy having a reason to cheer and be hopeful that we have a chance at making the playoffs during the final week or two of the season. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation and I believe the Toronto market warrants such an effort on a continuous basis. My patience with Rogers is very low, even though my love for the Jays has grown over the years. I'm sick of hearing terms like "rebuild" and "financial responsibility" every couple of years. (Rogers) Show me that you're investing more in your own product (Jays) and I will gladly do the same with my dollars. But don't you dare turn this around and expect me to blindly toss my money into a bottomless well, while you pad your bottom line.
08-14-'21:
(re: Scottie Barnes)
-Top 3 Raptors of all-time, 5+ ASG, Min 1 All-NBA 1st /2nd,Min 3 All-Def 1st or 2nd team,between years 2-3 in the running for best current player on our roster,best Raptor on the team, multiple years in a row

RIP Hater
Randle McMurphy
RealGM
Posts: 38,329
And1: 21,262
Joined: Dec 07, 2009

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#43 » by Randle McMurphy » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:13 am

Homer Jay wrote:I just think that Rogers looks at TB competing with a low payroll and told AA, "Yeah! Do that!". If they could field a playoff team for under 50 million they would be ecstatic, and rake in tons of profit too.

AA said we would be a TB that could retain it's players, but I think Rogers wants just TB period.

Sounds like a decade ago when they told JP Ricciardi to copy everything the A's were doing.
One flew east, one flew west, one flew over the cuckoo’s nest.
Randle McMurphy
RealGM
Posts: 38,329
And1: 21,262
Joined: Dec 07, 2009

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#44 » by Randle McMurphy » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:15 am

sci96krusty wrote:Its the whole Raptors - we will go into the luxury tax if it will put us over the top.

What pisses me off is that I was starting to get excited about the Blue Jays. My family even talked about looking at season tickets. But why would I make an investment in a company that refuses to commit to ensuring a decent product. How can you admit that what you will be presenting as entertainment will be sub-par and then expect me to spend money to see it. At least the ACC is a fantastic venue, with overpriced but more than decent food. The Skydom is only overpriced. The last game I went to, they forgot to man the special effects booth. It was a weekend game that i took my son to, and there was not a single "charge" or "clap". What a disgrace. If the Blue Jays don't make a splash this year, they can forget about my business.

Funny, I was at that game and I enjoyed it more because of the lack of special effects and outside sounds.
One flew east, one flew west, one flew over the cuckoo’s nest.
User avatar
Indiana Jones
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,121
And1: 1,548
Joined: Feb 21, 2007
Location: Assistant Dean of Students, Marshall College, Bedford, Connecticut
Contact:

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#45 » by Indiana Jones » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:44 am

rogers isn't even mincing words now, they're outright blaming the people of this city for their problems. we won't go to watch a bunch of no-name players not make the playoffs year after year after year, and so they refuse to invest in the team.

they don't deserve to run a major league baseball team because they have no desire to win. they focus on nothing but the professional part of professional sports. it's unfortunate because baseball is still a game, and i don't hope for our team to be the most profitable team in the world, i just hope to be a competitive team worth giving up my money for. i want to watch good sports, not a shoestring budget team that is happy to not suck but never be good.

**** rogers. i can't believe they're putting this on us....
User avatar
Indiana Jones
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,121
And1: 1,548
Joined: Feb 21, 2007
Location: Assistant Dean of Students, Marshall College, Bedford, Connecticut
Contact:

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#46 » by Indiana Jones » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:48 am

i love what the rays and athletics were able to accomplish, but it still hasn't earned them a world series championship. we have two, earned by a combination of good player development and buying everyone else that we needed to help us be the best.

there's no magic formula for success in the mlb, but spending is the safest route to contention. just ask the pirates....
gei
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,670
And1: 394
Joined: Jan 04, 2006
Location: Toronto
Contact:
   

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#47 » by gei » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:49 am

This is a make or break offseason plain and simple.

If Rogers shows fans they are committed to winning, be it through Fielder or other acquisitions, fans will show up. They were excited after last season and are dying for a reason to go to games.

If Rogers does nothing, they will lose ALL the momentum they have built up so far, and attendance will fall drastically. If Rogers does nothing to show me they are making an effort, then I personally will not go to a single game this upcoming season.. plain and simple.
augustine
Senior
Posts: 505
And1: 29
Joined: Oct 17, 2006

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#48 » by augustine » Wed Dec 7, 2011 2:14 pm

AA is giving another smokescreen:
They pump up Molina to trade him
They say they will not spend in order to lower their expected bid on Darvish in order to get Darvish
tecumseh18
RealGM
Posts: 18,944
And1: 11,190
Joined: Feb 20, 2006
Location: Big green house
 

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#49 » by tecumseh18 » Wed Dec 7, 2011 3:53 pm

It seems to me that Jay's management/ownership's position has been consistent for the last few years - that the franchise would crabwalk its way to a higher payroll, based on an improving record (to be achieved over the medium to long term by focusing on scouting, drafting and minor league development) linked to improving attendance.

And we bought into that. We did. We were fine with AA trading away our #1 pitcher - two years in a row! - for prospects. And then we traded the most apparently MLB-ready prospect from the Doc trade for a guy who was three years away (hopefully). We saw the Jays spending more on scouts, acquiring comp picks, going over-slot to sign high-upside draftees, usually pitchers - a particularly fungible commodity (as Molina just proved). We saw them nearly win the Chapman sweepstakes, and sign Hech. Everything was going according to the long run plan. With or without Ted around, I can't really knock Rogers for not fulfilling their end of the bargain.

The completely unexpected Bautista blow-up has caused us - at least as fans on the outside - to become impatient. You don't just plan to have a consistent 50-homer, >1.000 OPS presence in your line-up at the right time. And the offseason availability of the perfect guy to pair with Bau without having to outbid the Sox/Yanks/Phillies seems too good to be true. And we see the instant emergence of Lawrie to bat fifth.

It will be fascinating to see how this plays out. If this is all some elaborate Kabouki theatre to bring Fielder/Boras down to - I dunno, 120/6? - then AA will go down as the greatest pimp in Toronto sports management history (if he follows up by signing Darvish).
notic519
Junior
Posts: 427
And1: 44
Joined: Aug 27, 2004

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#50 » by notic519 » Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:27 pm

Rhettmatic wrote:
xAIRNESSx wrote:How did the city of Toronto get stuck with such horrible ownership groups? All heartless organizations that will never do what it takes to win a championship. Even if the fans were coming out, I still doubt the Jays would spend enough to win a title. They'd spend just enough to be the most profitable.

Beeston's comment made me want to puke.


It's just an absurd attitude, it really is. Would a restaurateur say, "Hey, our food sucks but that's only because no one's eating here. With more revenue, we could buy better ingredients, hire a decent chef and renovate! So come on down and spend your hard-earned money on some mediocre crap and just trust us to put your dollars to good use toward a business in which you have no financial stake."

It's unimaginably arrogant and backwards. I can't even get my head around it.


+1

Fans will come once the product on the field is better and the wins start coming in. I can't believe they think it's the other way around. The blue jays are more like every other sport franchise than the leafs (who can sell out no matter how crappy the product is). The jays need wins in order to get attendance back up. It's as simple as that.

Rogers seems to want to build from within to reach their goal of more wins as opposed to spending a few extra dollars (which have been saved from getting rid of Wells) on a free agent. This strategy is fine but the Jays right now are in a unique situation. Their biggest competition aren't in the market to spend this off season because of budget concerns, new management etc. The Jays have a chance this year to compete in the American League East if the right pieces are added. Not to mention the fact that at least in 2013 a new playoff team will be added. Why not strike when the iron is hot and grab a young MVP candidate in Fielder or at the very least Darvish, whom should easily be able to fill Rogers pockets with more TV revenue from Japan.

Getting back to fielder, I can understand not giving Fielder an 8-10 yr deal but give him a 6-7 yr one with maybe having that 7th year a team option. I can't really see him turning down a deal like that when the free agent market this year is really not there. Fielder just got unlucky this year seeing as he isn't the Top free agent 1st basemen and the big market teams in the AL east just aren't spending. The jays should be going after Fielder. It only makes perfect sense. The stars are aligning in their favor and it seems they are doing nothing about it.
User avatar
Rhettmatic
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 21,081
And1: 14,547
Joined: Jul 23, 2006
Location: Toronto
   

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#51 » by Rhettmatic » Wed Dec 7, 2011 5:10 pm

Shi Davidi suggested this morning that AA had a "Ricciardi moment," where he was campaigning -- albeit subtly -- for more cash. I hope that's the case. Certainly, I think fans are angry.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/meetings_live/

- The change in message from GM Alex Anthopoulos in regards to payroll parameters leaves one to wonder whether the new CBA forced the Blue Jays to change course financially over the coming years, or if the spending thresholds long floated by team president Paul Beeston simply aren’t there.

Either way, Anthopoulos’s comments Tuesday marked his J.P. Ricciardi moment, hinting at the need for more money in an understated fashion, as opposed to the overt demands for cash bumps made by his predecessor.

In looking back to my story from last season’s State of the Franchise season-ticket holders event, Beeston said he could envision the day the Blue Jays payroll was in the $140-$150 million range. The sense I’ve gotten from fans over the last 24 hours is that if it doesn’t move closer to that neighbourhood in ‘12, the team will lose some credibility with them.
Image
Sig by the one and only Turbo_Zone.
User avatar
torontoaces04
Analyst
Posts: 3,365
And1: 518
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Contact:
       

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#52 » by torontoaces04 » Wed Dec 7, 2011 5:48 pm

I'm really glad that the message is starting to get out, and we the fans have been a huge part of this. Sure, the Blue Jays have made significant progress in the past two years. Every area of the scouting department has been upgraded and increased. Great trades have been made by Anthopoulos, leading the general fan base to finally start getting excited about the Jays again. Finally, AA signed the best player in MLB to the best contract in MLB. All, great moves!

Yes, AA has also made questionable moves. The Napoli swap for Francisco, awful. Colby Rasmus, TBD. Where we haven't seen any progress is by ownership. Rogers. The wealthiest owner in North American sports refuses to spend the money necessary to make the Jays relevant again. A couple mill here increased in scouting, a couple more in the draft, and a couple more in signing Intl. Prospects JUST ISN'T GOING TO CUT IT.

Rogers, stop treating the Blue Jays like a revenue stream for the every expanding empire, then finally you'll have a chance at drawing the type of crowds that you want.

Now all this being said, AA could out and give Fielder a 6yr/156 million deal and everything in Jaysland is peachy keen. Maybe AA's talk yesterday was a message to Ownership, because he knew the outrage it would lead to by fans.

The Leafs (have) suck(ed), but at least they always spend.
User avatar
Rhettmatic
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 21,081
And1: 14,547
Joined: Jul 23, 2006
Location: Toronto
   

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#53 » by Rhettmatic » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:00 pm

Wilnerness590 Mike Wilner
Yes. No. @binfordha: Was Santos' contract a big reason for trade and if so, is this an indication AA is looking to spend big $ elsewhere?
Image
Sig by the one and only Turbo_Zone.
User avatar
torontoaces04
Analyst
Posts: 3,365
And1: 518
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Contact:
       

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#54 » by torontoaces04 » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:07 pm

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/baseball/agent-jays-inquired-about-jose-reyes/article2263186/

The agent for shortstop Jose Reyes confirmed on Wednesday that Toronto Blue Jays general manager Alex Anthopoulos approached him about his client before Reyes signed a six-year, $106-million contract with the Miami Marlins.

“Alex loves Jose as a player,” Peter Greenberg said. “They didn’t make an offer, but he was pretty curious about him.”


I guess my buddy wasn't blowing smoke up my ass. Still, the fact that we didn't even make an offer, scares me.
jrsmith
Banned User
Posts: 4,557
And1: 18
Joined: Mar 11, 2009

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#55 » by jrsmith » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:19 pm

This is extremely frustrating. We have a decent-good team on a nothing payroll, we have one of the best players in baseball playing for free, something that happens once in a lifetime.

If they wont spend here in this situation they will NEVER spend. No, in this division these morons will never, ever be able to contend without spending. The CRAZY part is that they can give a ridiculous contract to Fielder and still be around 100million payroll, again because of how unbelievably lucky they got with bautista. They can give out another elite contract and still not be close to 150mil payroll, which again isnt even CLOSE to boston/ny.

Seriously this is a WTF moment, why the **** do we have the **** **** owners in all of sports? Get the **** trash out. These morons treat us like some small town, **** up, middle of nowhere market in the US. This is completely unacceptable.

I started following this team as a kid more then a decade ago, and all the bull promises year after year where perfectly set up to be fulfilled THIS YEAR. There wont be a better opportunity, Bautista isnt 20. Are these idiots brain damaged?

**** pathetic, I might be done with this franchise.

PS to any of the pathetic Pre-K responses let me save you the time...

"We have to be careful with our spending" ~ STFU
"Trade route" ~ GTFO
"Scrubs for Votto" ~ STFU
"Tampa Bay" ~ STFU
"We got a closer" ~ STFU
"Next year" ~ STFU + GTFO

This city deserves better than decades of false hope and promises.
LBJSeizedMyID
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,547
And1: 96
Joined: Jul 22, 2009

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#56 » by LBJSeizedMyID » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:23 pm

The Reyes bit could've been a simple check in. I don't think he was ever serious about putting in an offer. Or perhaps it was "hey, how would your client feel about playing second?"
User avatar
Kapono
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,292
And1: 299
Joined: Apr 25, 2008
       

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#57 » by Kapono » Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:31 pm

Im depressed now :(
Alex Anthopoulos - styling on Major League Baseball since 2009
User avatar
Winggfly
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 289
Joined: Feb 10, 2009
Location: NS
     

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#58 » by Winggfly » Wed Dec 7, 2011 8:14 pm

They need to make a move. This city is oozing for a winner and Blue Jays fans across the country can feel it. What are they expecting in the future if nothing happens this off-season? Everybody fan knows that it will be back to trend-mill status for another several years.

They don't want to spend, well then Blue Jay fans won't spend either.
User avatar
Parataxis
General Manager
Posts: 9,443
And1: 5,741
Joined: Jan 31, 2010
Location: Penticton, BC
       

Re: AA's change of stance on "payroll" 

Post#59 » by Parataxis » Wed Dec 7, 2011 9:44 pm

jrsmith wrote:This is extremely frustrating. We have a decent-good team on a nothing payroll, we have one of the best players in baseball playing for free, something that happens once in a lifetime.


Or, in the case of the Blue Jays, twice in a decade.

And that's what makes this really frustrating. We used to have the best pitcher in baseball, playing on a sweetheart, hometown-discount deal. And we did nothing with him. Wasted the first half of his best years so badly that he asked to be let go so he wouldn't waste the second half of his best years.

And now, now we have the best hitter in baseball, playing on a contract for half his worth. And we can't, simply can't, waste his best years as well.

I've been a Jays fan since the 80s. Toronto loves baseball (go down to Christie Pits on a Sunday and see the crowds watching scrubs if you don't believe me). In the 80s, the Jays were doing great for attendence - they were getting people to go to the worst stadium in baseball. Why? They fielded a good, competitive team; they went to the playoffs regularly.

The fans havn't changed - we still love baseball. Give us a contending team, and the Dome will be full again. It's that simple.

Return to Toronto Blue Jays