Blue Jays Discussion: Blue Jays baseball: now with 100% more wins!

[Discoverer]

Last years team was AA's build, every major part was acquired by AA, doing barely nothing is not something you can pin your hat on and say hey the team didn't implode so they get "good" points, no it does not work that way.

Any person who's played competitive sport at any level and has experienced father time can tell you as you age your reaction times slow, your propensity to get injured increases. We have one of the oldest, if not the oldest team in the bigs, the MLB channel did an expose on the Jays declining ability to hit the fast ball, year over year for the last 3 years there has been a steady decline, maybe its just coincidence or maybe its an indication that our aging lineup is past its prime. Shatkin's answer to an aging team, drop one productive slugger for 2 less productive aging players. Not saying that is the only thing that makes me question their vision for this team, but its one of a few things that make me think these guys are either waiting for this team to bottom out or they are simply inept.

Or you could go with the actual answer: they were trying to help the team stay competitive while also recognizing that the core (the one Anthopoulos did an excellent job of putting together but is now past its prime) is aging and declining but still expensive, so it's unwise to lock into expensive, long-term contracts, or to expend prospects in an effort to plug holes in win-now moves.

 

[Bluelines]

Refrained from locking into an older Price for 7 years instead going with Happ and Estrada, two movable pieces that if they failed would be out in a couple years instead of 7.

Refrained from going to 5 years on Bautista.

Refrained from going long term on Edwin and instead signed a younger Morales for less money and term (risk).

Used the financial might to buy prospects from the Pirates to absorb a bad contract.

Filling in bullpen and bench with free agents on short term deals to avoid having to trade prospects to fill them.


Basically, we are willing to pay short term cash to buy players to help now without crippling our future finances while helping to shield the farm for enough time for prospects to develop and move up. They also look to have had a really good draft last year.

Your statement was related to Shatkins inhering an old team with a decimated farm system. Which is fair, Shatkins inherited an old team and a farm system that had traded away a number of good prospects in recent years.

My question to you was what did Shatkins do in the last year to change that situation? I don't see how refraining from signing Price, EE and JoeyBats to long term deals addresses either of those issues.

We still have an old team that their assets valuation is depreciating by the day and according to various MLB publications our prospect pool is ranked somewhere in the bottom 1/3rd of MLB teams.

 

[Bluelines]

Or you could go with the actual answer: they were trying to help the team stay competitive while also recognizing that the core (the one Anthopoulos did an excellent job of putting together but is now past its prime) is aging and declining but still expensive, so it's unwise to lock into expensive, long-term contracts, or to expend prospects in an effort to plug holes in win-now moves.

They were trying to help the team stay competitive? Which move suggest this?

 

[stickty111]

Our prospect pool is incredibly underrated and should be in the top 15 IMO.

 

[Discoverer]

They were trying to help the team stay competitive? Which move suggest this?

Literally all of them since the day they took over.

Last year, it was filling the rotation with Estrada and Happ instead of Price.

At the deadline, it was adding Liriano.

This year, it was adding Morales and Pearce instead of Edwin, as well as a bunch of relatively cheap, one-year contracts to round out the bullpen.

Morales and Pearce struggling for a couple weeks doesn't change the point of the moves. They came into the season as the clear favourite in the AL Wild Card race.

 

[Discoverer]

Your statement was related to Shatkins inhering an old team with a decimated farm system. Which is fair, Shatkins inherited an old team and a farm system that had traded away a number of good prospects in recent years.

My question to you was what did Shatkins do in the last year to change that situation? I don't see how refraining from signing Price, EE and JoeyBats to long term deals addresses either of those issues.

We still have an old team that their assets valuation is depreciating by the day and according to various MLB publications our prospect pool is ranked somewhere in the bottom 1/3rd of MLB teams.

You really don't think long-term contracts for Price, Edwin, and Bautista would have negatively impacted the team? They would be in the same position they're in now, only with a far more expensive team, and one with huge dollars on the books for the next 5+ years instead of far less money for 1-3 years. It would be a complete disaster right now.

The prospect pool has improved quite a bit considering where it was after the 2015 deadline and the fact that they didn't actually have to trade any MLB assets to improve it.

 

[GoonieFace]

Refrained from locking into an older Price for 7 years instead going with Happ and Estrada, two movable pieces that if they failed would be out in a couple years instead of 7.

Refrained from going to 5 years on Bautista.

Refrained from going long term on Edwin and instead signed a younger Morales for less money and term (risk).

Used the financial might to buy prospects from the Pirates to absorb a bad contract.

Filling in bullpen and bench with free agents on short term deals to avoid having to trade prospects to fill them.


Basically, we are willing to pay short term cash to buy players to help now without crippling our future finances while helping to shield the farm for enough time for prospects to develop and move up. They also look to have had a really good draft last year.

Excellent post. Its just unfortunate that they have gotten off to such a horrible start, which I don't think they can or will recover from. It will make it an easier pill to swallow when they start moving guys out in an attempt to get younger.

 

[Woodman19]

Your statement was related to Shatkins inhering an old team with a decimated farm system. Which is fair, Shatkins inherited an old team and a farm system that had traded away a number of good prospects in recent years.

My question to you was what did Shatkins do in the last year to change that situation? I don't see how refraining from signing Price, EE and JoeyBats to long term deals addresses either of those issues.

We still have an old team that their assets valuation is depreciating by the day and according to various MLB publications our prospect pool is ranked somewhere in the bottom 1/3rd of MLB teams.

Long term contacts are virtually immovable. Imagining having Bautista of today for 4 more years after this year.... Are you going to just park $120 million on the bench if he becomes useless? They simply block roster turnover at their respective positions.

 

[Bluelines]

Literally all of them since the day they took over.

Last year, it was filling the rotation with Estrada and Happ instead of Price.

At the deadline, it was adding Liriano.

This year, it was adding Morales and Pearce instead of Edwin, as well as a bunch of relatively cheap, one-year contracts to round out the bullpen.

Morales and Pearce struggling for a couple weeks doesn't change the point of the moves. They came into the season as the clear favourite in the AL Wild Card race.

Talk about going down a rabbit hole. Instead of Price?

Price won 17 games last year, is that a bad thing? Estrada had 9 wins... is 9 wins better than 17? Happ won 20, if anything Happ was a roll of the dice, people thought he figured it out in Pitts but the jury was still out on him. Oh 0-3 this eyar BTW...

Liranio? Sure they traded for him but how for the love of god was that a sign Shatkin's was trying to keep the team competitive. He was OK but by no means an indication that he was going to be a difference maker for the Jays and he wasn't

Morales and Pearce , yes they were moves but since we are discussing moves Shatkins made to improve the team or maintain the team and those 2 cant hit the ball off a tee right now, well I;d say it was a backward move.

Going back to my first post, Shatkins has done nothing, they have not improved the farm team in a significantly measurable way nor have they address the aging mlb team. I still believe that they are intentionally letting this team fail so they can blow it up and rebuild from the ground up.

 

[Discoverer]

Ah, yes. Wins. I should have known that was coming.

 

[Bluelines]

Long term contacts are virtually immovable. Imagining having Bautista of today for 4 more years after this year.... Are you going to just park $120 million on the bench if he becomes useless? They simply block roster turnover at their respective positions.

So what I'm saying is that Shatkins has done nothing to address an old team and what you are saying is kudos to Shatkins for addressing an old Jays team years down teh road... so what are we debating exactly?

So pat on the back for team Shatkin's for not doing something? You;re assuming Bautistia's career is done?

So when my kids DON'T clean their room , I'll give them a pat on the back because cleaning it may be worse than not cleaning it?

 

[Bluelines]

Ah, yes. Wins. I should have known that was coming.

Yes wins.

Last time I checked teams don't make the playoffs offs based on ERA. Who was the last bad pitcher to win 17 games?

 

[Discoverer]

Yes wins.

Last time I checked teams don't make the playoffs offs based on ERA. Who was the last bad pitcher to win 17 games?

Colby Lewis two years ago.

Wins are a horrible, horrible way to evaluate pitcher ability. Horrible.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Talk about going down a rabbit hole. Instead of Price?

Price won 17 games last year, is that a bad thing? Estrada had 9 wins... is 9 wins better than 17? Happ won 20, if anything Happ was a roll of the dice, people thought he figured it out in Pitts but the jury was still out on him. Oh 0-3 this eyar BTW...

Liranio? Sure they traded for him but how for the love of god was that a sign Shatkin's was trying to keep the team competitive. He was OK but by no means an indication that he was going to be a difference maker for the Jays and he wasn't

Morales and Pearce , yes they were moves but since we are discussing moves Shatkins made to improve the team or maintain the team and those 2 cant hit the ball off a tee right now, well I;d say it was a backward move.

Going back to my first post, Shatkins has done nothing, they have not improved the farm team in a significantly measurable way nor have they address the aging mlb team. I still believe that they are intentionally letting this team fail so they can blow it up and rebuild from the ground up.

So you're using Price's wins to prop him up but discounting Happ's wins at the same time?

29 wins from Happ/Estrada is much better than Price's 17 .. And at much less cost

BTW Price has as many wins as Happ so far this season

 

[GoonieFace]

Yes wins.

Last time I checked teams don't make the playoffs offs based on ERA. Who was the last bad pitcher to win 17 games?

Drew Hutchison won 13 games with an ERA of 5.50, are you saying he had a good year? Seriously? Wins are no way to measure the quality of a pitcher.

 

[Discoverer]

Yes wins.

Last time I checked teams don't make the playoffs offs based on ERA. Who was the last bad pitcher to win 17 games?

Here's a fun question for you:

Pitcher A - 3-1, 4.71 ERA, 4.35 FIP
Pitcher B - 0-3, 3.00 ERA, 2.36 FIP

You need one of them to start a single game for you, and you KNOW that, in this game, the pitcher is going to replicate his average individual performance from this season. Which do you pick?

 

[metafour]

The fact that in 2017 we still need to have the Wins/Saves/ERA/RBI talk is pretty ridiculous.

 

[hoglund]

Here's a fun question for you:

Pitcher A - 3-1, 4.71 ERA, 4.35 FIP
Pitcher B - 0-3, 3.00 ERA, 2.36 FIP

You need one of them to start a single game for you, and you KNOW that, in this game, the pitcher is going to replicate his average individual performance from this season. Which do you pick?

Pitcher B is obviously the better pitcher, but not getting run support, I would go with him because he gives you a better chance to win even though his win/ loss record isn't good.

 

[Discoverer]

The fact that in 2017 we still need to have the Wins/Saves/ERA/RBI talk is pretty ridiculous.

At least ERA vs. alternatives is a bit more of a complex topic. I'll never understand people's inability to see the limitations of the others. I've talked to some otherwise smart people who still insist that "A pitcher's job is to win the game." That's never been true at all, and it boggles my mind that so many people don't understand that.

 

[phillipmike]

The fact that in 2017 we still need to have the Wins/Saves/ERA/RBI talk is pretty ridiculous.

We really dont for the majority. Its the few uneducated that continue to cling on to these stats for whatever reason.

Also Andrew Raycroft must be the best goalie the Leafs have had in their 100 year history. 37 wins! Best in Leaf history.

 

[metafour]

At least ERA vs. alternatives is a bit more of a complex topic. I'll never understand people's inability to see the limitations of the others. I've talked to some otherwise smart people who still insist that "A pitcher's job is to win the game." That's never been true at all, and it boggles my mind that so many people don't understand that.

Its really not that hard: pitcher Wins is a team-based stat; therefore using this stat to compare the ability of pitchers is beyond silly. It doesn't even work on pitchers from the same team as the pitcher obviously doesn't have control over when/how many runs are scored by the offense...ie: Estrada can give up 1-run and be saddled with a Loss, while the next day Lawrence or whoever gives up 4 but earns a Win in a game in which the lineup goes off.

 

[Discoverer]

Its really not that hard: pitcher Wins is a team-based stat; therefore using this stat to compare the ability of pitchers is beyond silly. It doesn't even work on pitchers from the same team as the pitcher obviously doesn't have control over when/how many runs are scored by the offense...ie: Estrada can give up 1-run and be saddled with a Loss, while the next day Lawrence or whoever gives up 4 but earns a Win in a game in which the lineup goes off.

The excuses you hear to explain away this kind of random variance are always entertaining, at least.

"He's not a great pitcher so the players know they need to score more runs."
"He's a great guy and his teammates like him so they always work extra hard when he pitches."
"They just don't trust him, so they try too hard to overcompensate."

 

[Starry Knight]

We really dont for the majority. Its the few uneducated that continue to cling on to these stats for whatever reason.

Because they parrot what Zaun and the broadcast team say.

 

[Discoverer]

Because they parrot what Zaun and the broadcast team say.

Buck and Pat are my favourite with this stuff.

"Happ's got a lot of wins so you know he's having a great season because a pitcher's job is to win the game and that's all that really matters."

The next day...

"Estrada's pitched well but he's had some really bad luck this year. He deserves a better record than he has, but you can't win if your offense doesn't back you up."

 

[Woodman19]

So what I'm saying is that Shatkins has done nothing to address an old team and what you are saying is kudos to Shatkins for addressing an old Jays team years down teh road... so what are we debating exactly?

So pat on the back for team Shatkin's for not doing something? You;re assuming Bautistia's career is done?

So when my kids DON'T clean their room , I'll give them a pat on the back because cleaning it may be worse than not cleaning it?

I'm saying that because it takes 2-3 years to get young major Leaguers from scratch to the majors, we have to deal with this time gap somehow. I mean, it would be nice to snap our fingers and have a Mike Trout waiting in Buffalo, but that's not how it works. It also shows the level of competence for them to recognize the fact they need young pieces in the future and are actively trying to start, yes it takes time but you have to start somewhere otherwise you will never get those young players.

Yes, Bautista is old and part of getting old is losing athleticism. That's why we shouldn't be signing older players to long term deals. It would be like you buying a 10 year car with terrible lease terms, if it cost too much upfront, that pain is going to be stretched out over the term of the lease and you end up getting very little for lots of money spent.

This isn't like your kids not cleaning their room, this is like your kids friends not cleaning their mess in your kids room and you are deciding to yell at your kids for it. Some might call that terrible parenting.