Kenta Maeda

[KingKat]

Well the biggest argument against the Jays is that he's going to the west coast. If we look at those teams only really the Dodgers are a fit;

 

Seattle - full rotation but Maeda should be able to beat out a couple of their arms for a rotation spot. Japanese ties and have some money; probably the best fit but unlikely to pursue him

 

SF - already has $60M committed to Shark, Cain and Cueto; likely not interested in Maeda

 

Oakland - big ballpark and active in international free agency but doubtful to outbid anyone for Maeda

 

Angels - full rotation but would be their #2 or #3. Not sure they're going to spend with over $40M already committed to Weaver and Wilson.

 

Padres - other than money why would anyone go there? Doubtful they'll even be in it as they're trying to retool and shed salary

 

Dodgers - could use Maeda and have the money but being in the luxury tax means they'll have to make a much larger investment than other teams bidding; likely has to take less to play there

 

Arizona - after adding Greinke and Miller to their rotation they're likely done.

 

Ultimately, I think Maeda looks East out of necessity. I'm very skeptical that anyone on the West Coast is going to give him the best deal.

 

Oh ffs, what makes you think the Jays even have the money budgeted for the posting fee much less the salary?

[DuckDuckGose]

Money isn't an issue?

 

It might be but it shouldn't be

[DuckDuckGose]

Oh ffs, what makes you think the Jays even have the money budgeted for the posting fee much less the salary?

 

Rogers is the richest owners in MLB and they're making boatloads of cash off the Jays. They have the money and I'm not going to make excuses for them.

[Laika]

It might be but it shouldn't be

 

Well now we've descended into the "Rogers is cheap" cesspool.

 

The budget is the budget. The people running the baseball team are given it - they don't set it.

 

Unless you think public statements about the budget and the exchange rate and all of that jazz have been a smokescreen, I see no reason to expect them to add any type of significant payroll for 2016.

[DuckDuckGose]

Well now we've descended into the "Rogers is cheap" cesspool.

your words not mine. I don't think Rogers is cheap but I know they can spend more and still be very profitable.

 

The budget is the budget. The people running the baseball team are given it - they don't set it.

I don't want to be condescending but that's not how operational budgets work. If there is a solid business case and return on investment then the budget can and does change.

 

Unless you think public statements about the budget and the exchange rate and all of that jazz have been a smokescreen

,

It's corporate rhetoric. The exchange rate isn't that big of a deal and that's according to Beeston who knows far better than Shapiro about the organizations financials. They also would never come out and say they have tons of money to spend and are choosing not to because of the obvious PR backlash/unnecessary expectations and because spending for the sake of it is never wise.

 

I see no reason to expect them to add any type of significant payroll for 2016.

To win more games and make more money. That's how the business of sports works. If Rogers doesn't get that they're in the wrong industry.

[Brownie19]

I mean if you want to talk yourself into believing it might happen, go ahead... One can always come put with some sort of rationale for these things but it just doesn't seem likely.

 

Oh I'm not delusional - I know we aren't getting Maeda. I'm just saying we offer something that's better than anyone else. Unfortunately, I don't think there's much history of Japanese players prioritizing winning.

[KingKat]

Oh I'm not delusional - I know we aren't getting Maeda. I'm just saying we offer something that's better than anyone else. Unfortunately, I don't think there's much history of Japanese players prioritizing winning.

 

Well there's not much of a history period. In the old posting system, they couldn't pick their teams anyways.

[KingKat]

They have the money and I'm not going to make excuses for them.

 

No one's asking you to agree with it. I just don't see why you keep pleading this case. You're not going to make it happen. You're not going to convince anyone that's it's going to happen.

[Laika]

stuff

 

I understand that corporate ownership is annoying. Every fan would rather have a rich, human owner that is passionate about winning.

 

That's not the case though, and regardless, their payroll should end up around $142 USD this year with the current team, which will be in the upper third.

 

It could be a lot worse. And even it was a lot better, I'm guessing it wouldn't appease the fanbase.

 

Payroll bitching is f***ing tired, man.

 

I don't think Rogers is stupid. If spending $200M USD on payroll would increase their profits, then I'm guessing they would do it. I don't think my 73 in Business Admin 101 gives me any standing to say otherwise, so I'll default to the paid guys in suits within the massive corporation.

[DuckDuckGose]

No one's asking you to agree with it. I just don't see why you keep pleading this case. You're not going to make it happen. You're not going to convince anyone that's it's going to happen.

 

There is also no reason for Rogers to have $130M payroll. Look at all the money in baseball due to the new TV deals, look at the money Rogers gave to the NHL for the broadcasting rights and consider just how little they give the Jays. In terms of total payroll right now the Jays are closer to the Marlins than the Dodgers. I don't think Rogers is cheap but surely Rogers can turn a profit while spending more than $130M and do the same.If the business case is there (and it is) then you owe it to your fans to go after a WS (and that doesn't mean make a bad deal). Right now they're half-assing it and I'm not okay with that but the off-season isn't over and I'm choosing to be optimistic that they'll spend a little more to fill their needs.

[puphood]

The Oil sands are heavily subsidized by the federal government. Oil needs to be trading above $100/barrel for the oil sands to be profitable and it will be trading at that mark in the near future ( at least if you believe the Saudi's).

 

obviously you know s*** ......2 years ago it heavy crude sold for $38 US/barrel (that was when the dollar was par and sweat crude was about $100 US/barrel) to the only refinery in the US that upgrades it. We are at a 75 cent dollar and $35 US/barrel and yes it is still reluctantly being shipped.

 

There are no projections that have oil at $35 barrel long term. It's supposed to be back over $100 mid-2016.

 

And the projections in 2014 were oil would to hit $65 by Aug. 2015! Sort of off the mark and the analogy could be like taking this forum as projected fact.

[DuckDuckGose]

I understand that corporate ownership is annoying. Every fan would rather have a rich, human owner that is passionate about winning.

 

That's not the case though, and regardless, their payroll should end up around $142 USD this year with the current team, which will be in the upper third.

 

It could be a lot worse. And even it was a lot better, I'm guessing it wouldn't appease the fanbase.

 

Payroll bitching is f***ing tired, man.

 

I don't think Rogers is stupid. If spending $200M USD on payroll would increase their profits, then I'm guessing they would do it. I don't think my 73 in Business Admin 101 gives me any standing to say otherwise, so I'll default to the paid guys in suits within the massive corporation.

 

I'd be happy with a payroll around $150M USD; that would shut me up. It's not there yet and that'd be more than enough to add Maeda (plus they can ship out Revere and Smoak to clear up ~$12M in payroll space or add to the bullpen). I don't think that's being unreasonable as a fan. I'm not bitching about payroll (yet), I'm saying sign Maeda. Lot's of off-season to go and lots of arms that can help this team. I know they'll need more for a WS, Maeda looks like an ideal target to help them get there and that's all I really care about.

 

But yes corporate ownership is the worst. I wish Illitch was a Torontonian

[DuckDuckGose]

The Oil sands are heavily subsidized by the federal government. Oil needs to be trading above $100/barrel for the oil sands to be profitable and it will be trading at that mark in the near future ( at least if you believe the Saudi's).

 

obviously you know s*** ......2 years ago it heavy crude sold for $38 US/barrel (that was when the dollar was par and sweat crude was about $100 US/barrel) to the only refinery in the US that upgrades it. We are at a 75 cent dollar and $35 US/barrel and yes it is still reluctantly being shipped.

 

There are no projections that have oil at $35 barrel long term. It's supposed to be back over $100 mid-2016.

 

And the projections in 2014 were oil would to hit $65 by Aug. 2015! Sort of off the mark and the analogy could be like taking this forum as projected fact.

 

And you know what I looked at the most recent projections; scary thing is oil isn't expected to be back over $100 barrel until 2020. That's really bad for the oil sands which cannot be profitable at the current rate. That being said it's not all doom and gloom for the Canadian economy; it's just one aspect.

[Laika]

But yes corporate ownership is the worst. I wish Illitch was a Torontonian

 

I actually don't.

 

Detroit spent out the ass for a 4 year run, but now they kind of suck and are in a s***** position.

 

St Louis has been good for like two decades, and their recent payrolls have hovered in the 10th-13th overall range.

 

I think there is a sweet spot where a sane payroll a) provides enough funds for a team to compete, and prevents a team from doing anything stupid with its money.

 

Sweet spot payrolls force teams to build long term, from within, through the draft and international markets. They force teams to focus on internal personnel talent (front office, development, analytics, scouting) and not just on expensive player talent.

 

I want to watch Toronto win for the next twenty years, not just for the next two or three.

 

I'll take the payroll right where it is.

 

... unless some billionaire wants to buy the team and fund a payroll up near the Yankees'.

 

I understand that teams can have high payrolls and build long term. They aren't mutually exclusive things. This is just coming from observation of how teams with different payrolls seem to operate. The practical effect, so to speak. I hate how teams like the Angels and Tigers and Phillies were/are run.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Laika

[DuckDuckGose]

IMO more money just lets you take more risks and gives you that leeway when you ultimately make a mistake. STL is a great example of that. They spend enough to win but it takes one of, if not the most, competent front offices in all of professional sports to keep them competitive year-after-year. The Jays don't have the luxury of an extremely competent management team; there will be mistakes and if they're spending the same amount as the Cards (and there is a good chance STL has a higher payroll than the Jays in 2016) in the long run they're going to lose. Now all that may change under Shapiro but it takes at least 3 years to make the franchise your own and he is dealing with AA's roster which means he'll need to spend a little more than the competition to win.

 

Luckily, Rogers are the richest owners in baseball and have the money for a competitive advantage. I'm really hopeful they will spend that $20M more to push this team from a fringe contender in to a truly elite team with depth all over the diamond.

[Thomas Malthus]

By the sounds of it Goose, you should be pleading the case for Rogers spending the $15M-20M a season on better management rather than on Maeda.

[DuckDuckGose]

By the sounds of it Goose, you should be pleading the case for Rogers spending the $15M-20M a season on better management rather than on Maeda.

 

Well if they spent nearly as much on the Jays' FO as they do on the Leafs' FO they'd be in a much better spot. Rogers has never spent to land a big time president, GM or manager for the Jays and I doubt they ever will. Typing that out was kind of depressing though!

[Laika]

Mark Shapiro is a big time president. This team is in good hands.

 

Yeah, definitely. 24 years of front office experience including 15 years as a GM or President. Two (meaningless) "executive of the year" awards. He wasn't cheap.

[DuckDuckGose]

Mark Shapiro is a big time president. This team is in good hands.

 

No he's not, he's a budget guy.

[DuckDuckGose]

Yeah, definitely. 24 years of front office experience including 15 years as a GM or President. Two (meaningless) "executive of the year" awards. He wasn't cheap.

 

He's not the cream of the crop either though. Beeston can boast all of those accomplishments and then some (including two WS rings) but that doesn't make him one of the best in the business.

[burlingtonbandit]

I actually don't.

 

Detroit spent out the ass for a 4 year run, but now they kind of suck and are in a s***** position.

 

St Louis has been good for like two decades, and their recent payrolls have hovered in the 10th-13th overall range.

 

I think there is a sweet spot where a sane payroll a) provides enough funds for a team to compete, and prevents a team from doing anything stupid with its money.

 

Sweet spot payrolls force teams to build long term, from within, through the draft and international markets. They force teams to focus on internal personnel talent (front office, development, analytics, scouting) and not just on expensive player talent.

 

I want to watch Toronto win for the next twenty years, not just for the next two or three.

 

I'll take the payroll right where it is.

 

... unless some billionaire wants to buy the team and fund a payroll up near the Yankees'.

 

I understand that teams can have high payrolls and build long term. They aren't mutually exclusive things. This is just coming from observation of how teams with different payrolls seem to operate. The practical effect, so to speak. I hate how teams like the Angels and Tigers and Phillies were/are run.

 

Does that not have more to do with bad management than payroll size? If the Rays FO were in charge of the Tigers/Phillies they wouldn't be putting all their chips in 1 basket for 1 or 2 years. I see what you are saying if Owners meddle in baseball operations which looks to be the case in Detroit, but if the Blue Jays had a single owner I don't think anyone would be complaining about ownership as much.

 

MLB hates that Rogers owns the Blue Jays and said there will never be a corporate owner again.

[DuckDuckGose]

I trust him a lot more than I do the guys the Leafs brought in. Brendan Shanahan has no track record of running hockey teams and Lou Lamoriello is older than Paul Beeston.

 

 

What does that mean? How do you know how much they're paying him and who exactly would you have been happy with?

 

I'm sure Shapiro is fine but what has he done that would make you feel he's a top executive? Flounder in Cleveland? Cleveland isn't known for spending on it's team or executives nor are they known to be a exorbitantly savvy front office. Why would you think he would be expensive? I'm sure he's compensated quite well but I'd be hesitant to say he's making anything more than the median for his title.

 

Lastly, if you truly feel Shapiro, Atkins and Gibbons is a better management team than Lou, Shanahan and Babcock you're not listening to logic and reason. IMO there is no basis to that argument but maybe I'm missing something.

[Stangstag]

Well, looks like I have some new additions to my Ignore List today!

[DuckDuckGose]

You don't know enough to assert the first paragraph. How much Cleveland and Toronto pay their executives is not known. You can't say that the Blue Jays don't pay their executives while the Maple Leafs do if you don't know how much the Blue Jays executives make. You're making that up. He'd be expensive because he's very qualified.

 

Where is the logic that says Brendan Shanahan knows how to build good hockey organizations? It's all based on hype. Shapiro does have a track record of building a good organization. He and his team built a good team on a very small budget.

 

The exact dollar amount doesn't matter. The Leafs FO team is by far and away the most expensive and quite possibly the most talented in the NHL. The Jays' team is somewhere in the middle of the pack. We know enough to assert both of those points. When you're talking FO teams it's not necessarily about compensation; it's about competency vs the FO teams of the competition. Good executives give you an advantage, spending more gives you an advantage to sign better executives/staff; the Jays do a good job of this in terms of scouting, training and development they can do more at the upper levels (and I imagine they will eventually like the Raptors and Leafs have).

 

Where is the logic that says Brendan Shanahan knows how to build good hockey organizations? It's all based on hype.

 

it's far more than hype, they're doing a great job so far. The biggest challenge will be sticking to the long term plan when they start having success and the only way we can't judge that yet.

 

Shapiro does have a track record of building a good organization. He and his team built a good team on a very small budget.

 

No more so than Anthopoulos or Beeston. I don't think Shapiro will be bad; I imagine he'll be pretty good but he's done nothing to make me believe he is on the level of someone like Theo Epstein or Stan Kasten.

[DuckDuckGose]

Well, looks like I have some new additions to my Ignore List today!

 

How about instead of announcing it you just do it?

[Laika]

Cleveland isn't known... to be a exorbitantly savvy front office.

 

Kind of are, actually. They are/were one of the more progressive teams out there when it comes to embracing SABERMETRICS!

 

Of course, some of that is budget influenced, like it is with Oakland, Tampa, Pittsburgh.

 

Comparing front office and management regimes across sports is just beyond pointless. Apples and orange soda. Hockey is decades behind baseball in general.

 

Compare Brendan Shanahan to Mark Shapiro one more time, and I might have to hurt you.

[Laika]

Surprised to see people still have blind faith in Rogers. Even NJH up there said he'd defer to the guys in suits when they somehow just f***ed up a hockey deal in Canada.

 

How did they f*** up a hockey deal exactly?

 

If your argument is that they f***ed it up by demoting Ron MacLean and hiring George Strombolopoulosh, then I 100% agree. Egregious.

[Sammy225]

Kind of are, actually. They are/were one of the more progressive teams out there when it comes to embracing SABERMETRICS!

 

Of course, some of that is budget influenced, like it is with Oakland, Tampa, Pittsburgh.

 

Comparing front office and management regimes across sports is just beyond pointless. Apples and orange soda. Hockey is decades behind baseball in general.

 

Compare Brendan Shanahan to Mark Shapiro one more time, and I might have to hurt you.

 

Lol..... I know your right but lets me honest here..... your not a physical person.

[DuckDuckGose]

The thing they're known for is starting the trend of locking up their talent with long term pre-arb deals. Under Shapiro they were ahead of most franchises in terms of using analytics, they've made some good trades, signed more good than bad deals (Bourn and Swisher are the only two I can really think of). All that is good and what I want from a FO team. I just don't view him as the cream of the crop (like I do with the Leafs management team but that's an entirely different argument) -- and that was more my point; executives can be competitive advantage and the easiest place to spend to gain that edge. In terms of their FO I think the Jays partially closed the gap on their competition and feel Shapiro is a minor upgrade on Beeston. I also loved Anthopolous work ethic, that's hard to replace and made him a lot better at his job than he should've been but there's lots of room for improvement.

[DuckDuckGose]

How did they f*** up a hockey deal exactly?

 

If your argument is that they f***ed it up by demoting Ron MacLean and hiring George Strombolopoulosh, then I 100% agree. Egregious.

 

Apparently they're losing money and viewers. Not exactly what you want from the suits.