Blue Jays Discussion: Bo Bichette is pretty good at this whole "baseball" thing.

Status
Not open for further replies.

stickty111

Registered User
Jan 23, 2017
26,532
32,731
Per Sportsnet, apparently there was no interest in him..

"The decision comes after the Blue Jays couldn’t find a taker for Galvis ahead of the July 31 trade deadline, and with a logjam in the infield created by Bichette’s subsequent promotion."

Cincinnati Reds claim Freddy Galvis off waivers from Toronto Blue Jays - Sportsnet.ca
Alright thats fair. If the Jays couldn't find a team, then thats good enough for me.
It still feels a little hard to believe though.
 

kovacro

Uvijek Vjerni
Nov 20, 2008
9,744
5,133
Hamilton, ON
Alright thats fair. If the Jays couldn't find a team, then thats good enough for me.
It still feels a little hard to believe though.

I had thought there was some discussion the Mets may have been interested in him as part of the Stroman deal.

Going forward, I didn't feel he had much of a spot with the Jays so I'm not surprised he's gone. However, you would have figured someone in contention would see value in him at the very least off the bench in a platoon role. Guess not.
 

The Nemesis

Semper Tyrannus
Apr 11, 2005
87,847
31,026
Langley, BC
is "zarp" a real stat or just an obsolete Blue Jays stat coined by Gregg Zaun?

It was something Zaun made up on a pre-game one day. I was never sure if it was supposed to be a legitimate attempt at a stat to try and bridge the gap between him and pro-analytics people after he spent so much time on social media running them down or denigrating their rebuttals to his opinions, ot if it was just another attempt to mock or snark at stats people. Reality was it was probably straddling the line.

It was basically total runs created per game. (Runs scored + RBI - home runs) / games played.

It ended up being roundly criticized because as a parody/dig it failed on account of being tone-deaf and as a straight, legit stat it was flawed to the point of basic uselessness
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,211
82,939
Vancouver, BC
It doesn't reflect well on management that they weren't able to get anything for this player at the deadline. And no idea what the point of just waiving him now is.
 

SeaOfBlue

The Passion That Unites Us All
Aug 1, 2013
35,591
16,773
I guess you could say they traded him for cash. Don't need to pay him for the rest of the year and don't need to pay the 1 mill buyout either. I guess the Jays thought the couple mill + open roster spot for younger guys was worth more than a veteran leader for the infield.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
So controlled position players next year (last calendar year wRC+ in brackets):

OF Gurriel 26 (112)
OF Grichuk 28 (98)
OF Teoscar 27 (93)
3B Vladdy 21 (113)
SS Bichette 22 (197)
2B Biggio 25 (92)
1B McKinney 25 (91)
DH Tellez 25 (96)
C Jansen 25 (79)

UT Drury 27 (76)
OF Fisher 26 (75)
IF Urena 24 (82)
C McGuire 25 (124)

X - OF Alford 25 (-100), OF Pompey 27 (n/a), OF Brito 27 (14), C Maile 28 (40), OF Davis 28 (9), 2B Travis 29 (50)

after that there's the current AA kids - Smith, Adams, Palacios, Wall - but they all likely need plenty of AAA time before hoping to challenge for a big league spot.
 

The Nemesis

Semper Tyrannus
Apr 11, 2005
87,847
31,026
Langley, BC
It doesn't reflect well on management that they weren't able to get anything for this player at the deadline. And no idea what the point of just waiving him now is.

How does it reflect badly on a management? If there was no market for him, that's on everyone else. You're not going to phone a team and force them into wanting a guy.

It's possible they had a handshake agreement with him like "we'll try to trade you if we can, but if there's no takers we'll waive you when an opportunity presents itself."
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,211
82,939
Vancouver, BC
fans overrate the hell out of periphery players

He's a 2-3 WAR durable solid MLB shortstop on a bargain contract with another season of control. There were worse middle infielders moved at the deadline.

Mets, Brewers, Cubs, Athletics are all in playoff chases with huge holes in middle infield, and Galvis would have been a huge upgrade for all of them.
 

Jozay

Registered User
Jul 9, 2012
14,611
10,546
Toronto
He's a 2-3 WAR durable solid MLB shortstop on a bargain contract with another season of control. There were worse middle infielders moved at the deadline.

Mets, Brewers, Cubs, Athletics are all in playoff chases with huge holes in middle infield, and Galvis would have been a huge upgrade for all of them.
Athletics didnt even claim Galvis off waivers.
 

justafan22

Registered User
Jun 22, 2014
11,629
6,249
My got, people are rioting on facebook and twitter

People have to realize that just because one fanbase values a player doesn't mean other front offices do.

That's why you see some players traded for so little that are worth more and vice versa.

Doesn't excuse it, but that's the rationale.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,211
82,939
Vancouver, BC
How does it reflect badly on a management? If there was no market for him, that's on everyone else. You're not going to phone a team and force them into wanting a guy.

It's possible they had a handshake agreement with him like "we'll try to trade you if we can, but if there's no takers we'll waive you when an opportunity presents itself."

Some GMs are much better at creating a market and selling their players than others.
 

Cor

I am a bot
Jun 24, 2012
69,648
35,246
AEF
I just don't see the point.

Galvis is a solid player, and could probably help Biggio and Bichette improve their D.

Maybe a team misses out in free agency and is willing to give a prospect for him this winter. Maybe Galvis has another solid year next year and we get an asset then.

Unless he requested the chance to move to a better team, and Shapiro and Atkins were just doing right by him to get him closer to a playoff team, but other wise, it seems rather pointless.

I guess Urena comes up now? :dunno:
 

Cor

I am a bot
Jun 24, 2012
69,648
35,246
AEF
I've been okay with what Shapiro & Atkins have been doing, but boy, the Astros trade, and waiving Galvis are baffling to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoglund

phillipmike

Registered User
Oct 27, 2009
12,481
8,272
It doesn't reflect well on management that they weren't able to get anything for this player at the deadline. And no idea what the point of just waiving him now is.

19 teams passed on Galvis for free. Only really the Reds, Giants, Brewers and Phillies had use for him. Reds and Giants have no incentive to trade for him and Galvis' 1.4 WAR isnt much better than Iglesias 1.2 WAR so i dont really see the fit with the Reds.

So it comes down to the Brewers and Phillies. Thats a poor market to sell in.
 

dubplatepressure

Registered User
Jul 10, 2007
15,831
3,446
I've been okay with what Shapiro & Atkins have been doing, but boy, the Astros trade, and waiving Galvis are baffling to me.

As a casual observer, I sure am confused by all this. It just seems like incredibly poor asset management from a trade/transactional perspective. Thank god the prospects are showing promise otherwise I'd have to think the fanbase would be rabid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trellaine201

Suntouchable13

Registered User
Dec 20, 2003
42,944
17,902
Toronto, ON
How does it reflect badly on a management? If there was no market for him, that's on everyone else. You're not going to phone a team and force them into wanting a guy.

It's possible they had a handshake agreement with him like "we'll try to trade you if we can, but if there's no takers we'll waive you when an opportunity presents itself."

If it was a favour to him, it backfired. Cinci is on the fringes of the race. I would definitely not consider them a serious contender for a wild card spot.
 

phillipmike

Registered User
Oct 27, 2009
12,481
8,272
He's a 2-3 WAR durable solid MLB shortstop on a bargain contract with another season of control. There were worse middle infielders moved at the deadline.

Mets, Brewers, Cubs, Athletics are all in playoff chases with huge holes in middle infield, and Galvis would have been a huge upgrade for all of them.

Galvis hit 2 WAR (fWAR of bWAR) once in his 8 year career.

Averaged 1.5 fWAR over 162 games.
Averaged 1.3 bWAR over 162 games.
 

Longshot

Registered User
Jul 2, 2008
11,161
312
Ontario, Canada
I just don't see the point.

Galvis is a solid player, and could probably help Biggio and Bichette improve their D.

Maybe a team misses out in free agency and is willing to give a prospect for him this winter. Maybe Galvis has another solid year next year and we get an asset then.

Unless he requested the chance to move to a better team, and Shapiro and Atkins were just doing right by him to get him closer to a playoff team, but other wise, it seems rather pointless.

I guess Urena comes up now? :dunno:

I heard about this in the car after lunch and was baffled as well. One thing I wondered: is this a waiver trade without the actual trade? As in, the Reds wanted Galvis (I'm not familiar with their roster, do they need him right now?) and spoke to the Jays and Toronto said: "We'll put him on waivers and if he gets to you, you can have him, in exchange for a prospect this winter." And the Reds agreed.

Seems like a longshot to me, but not impossible. It's more likely this is a cost saving/open up a roster spot kind of move and nothing more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->