Lateral Quicks wrote:On the actual topic, you're right, they all can't stay as long as we have an unnecessary player like Ben Francisco taking up a roster spot. The fact of the matter is you could easily give Thames and Snider 400-450 AB each, which is pretty close to full-time work - and again, that assumes no one gets injured and/or falls flat on their face the entire year.
If the club feels both players are full-time starters, then it would be pointless to carry both on the team while having one sit sporadically. I get the impression Thames will get platooned with Francisco at some point, but initially he will probably get full-time AB's.
A good example of someone the club previously used in the 400-450 AB scenario you mentioned above is Reed Johnson. The club knew he had issues against RHP so they used him as a LHP crusher who also spelled the outfielders at times. They knew he had limited upside and used him to his strengths. It is harder to do that with Thames/Snider, especially if the club feels both of them will benefit from full-time AB's and are better than fourth OF calibre.
Carrying Francisco and Davis seems redundant, but I definitely see the benefit in keeping one of Snider/Thames rather than both IF they intend on playing Lind and EE everyday (which they obviously do). Like I said, platoon Lind/EE at 1B and use EE as the "400-450 AB utility player", and the team is probably better off, but they don't want to do that, so you are left with the other scenario.
But this goes beyond "who is the better player" or "carrying both". There is a reason why the Jays ran out a bunch of garbage last season rather than using Lawrie and Thames earlier than they did. AA uses options very aggressively and options are the only reason this is even a debate. If Snider were out of options, he'd be starting in LF and Thames would be in Vegas.
