So, 4 years in, are you guys still as confident in Shapiro and/or Atkins?

[vilifyingforce]

Shatkins just traded Pillar for a lottery ticket and we didn't even have to move him. You think they just woke up one day and realized we were bad? You're crazy if you think they didn't want to trade everyone over 27 as soon as they got here. Most likely Rogers wanted to put asses in the seats for a little bit longer and that's what delayed the inevitable rebuild and hurt our trade returns.

 

These guys are on the front line of everything that correlates to winning. They know every inch of a player's decline curve.

 

The only drawback is that they're insanely risk averse so we're not going to be trading garbage for MVP Donaldson any time soon. They are just going to collect assets for an eternity and hope some turn into Jose Ramirez or Carlos Carrasco.

 

Which part of the Donaldson trade was risky?

[Ray]

The last sentence is the part that makes me doubt them. They are too risk averse. They are not going to outspend the Yankees and Red Sox, they are clearly not on the Rays front office's level, and Cashman can do rebuilds on the fly better than they can too when it comes down to it (look at his trade history and never having a losing season).

 

I like Shatkins but they will eventually need to start finding ways to add high impact talent beyond players they draft. This is not the AL Central. You can polish up 10 Forrest Wall's but they'll still be turds. The high performance dept either has to turn water into wine or the team will be destined to fall right back into JP Ricciardi territory when Rogers gets sick of the low attendance (which might even happen by the end of this year) and forces them to spend whether they are ready or not.

 

I won't judge them on this season since they made no bones about tanking hard this year, but this shouldn't take 5 years to clean up either.

 

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with building the team through the draft and international signings. That’s literally how most current contenders got their high impact talent. If they did end up trading big prospects or paying in free agency to acquire high impact talent, it wasn’t until they were already competitive. They’ve done exactly what they should’ve done so far. Hoard as many prospects as they can because you never know who will pan out. The trades they’ve made haven’t been sexy by any means, but the floor for this team has gotten considerably higher as a result.

 

They’re risk averse, but they’re definitely willing to make deals and trade prospects if it’s the right deal. They were willing to give up Bichette+ for Yelich.

As for spending, they just ran back to back years of near $170M payrolls from 2017-2018. Our future commitments are basically nothing. We’ll have a ton of money to spend when the time is right.

[vilifyingforce]

Well there's always some risk when you trade 4 controllable players.

 

For a guy who had already received MVP votes and also under team control for 4 years?

[John_Havok]

Without a doubt yes.

 

This team is better poised to make an impact in this league for an extended period of time thanks to the difficult choices Atkins has had to make.

 

The payroll is flexible as f*** after this season, impact talent is coming through the pipeline for the next 2-3 years minimum, the current team isnt the true dumpster fire that most every rebuilding team is while they are rebuilding, and whichever assets they choose to dump at this year's deadline will only help to kickstart 2020, the first year of what's looking like at least a 7 year competitive window.

 

Anyone who can't see that, isn't looking at this with the right eyes.

[glory]

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with building the team through the draft and international signings. That’s literally how most current contenders got their high impact talent. If they did end up trading big prospects or paying in free agency to acquire high impact talent, it wasn’t until they were already competitive. They’ve done exactly what they should’ve done so far. Hoard as many prospects as they can because you never know who will pan out. The trades they’ve made haven’t been sexy by any means, but the floor for this team has gotten considerably higher as a result.

 

They’re risk averse, but they’re definitely willing to make deals and trade prospects if it’s the right deal. They were willing to give up Bichette+ for Yelich.

As for spending, they just ran back to back years of near $170M payrolls from 2017-2018. Our future commitments are basically nothing. We’ll have a ton of money to spend when the time is right.

 

Building a team through the draft and international pipeline only would take an eternity to pull off. There needs to be trades, lucky breaks with player development (ex. Jose, Edwin types), etc. So far the team has been so risk averse that they have targeted older players with questionable upside (McKinney types). Those types will have value but they'll need to aim a lot higher to compete in this division, especially since the Rays can do the drafting/international stuff as good or better and the Jays can't spend as much as the Yankees and Red Sox.

[Ray]

Building a team through the draft and international pipeline only would take an eternity to pull off. There needs to be trades, lucky breaks with player development (ex. Jose, Edwin types), etc. So far the team has been so risk averse that they have targeted older players with questionable upside (McKinney types). Those types will have value but they'll need to aim a lot higher to compete in this division, especially since the Rays can do the drafting/international stuff as good or better and the Jays can't spend as much as the Yankees and Red Sox.

 

How have they not done this though? They've acquired players like McKinney, Drury, Brito, Hansen, Teoscar hoping at least one of them breaks out with more playing time. You're acting like these guys are 30 year old write offs when in reality they're all 26 years of age or younger. Guys like Bautista, Encarnacion, Donaldson were all in the same position, or even worse at their ages. They didn't even break out until their late 20's.

 

Player development isn't linear. It takes time. You give these guys a full season in the majors with more exposure to major league coaching to figure out their holes and see what happens.

[glory]

How have they not done this though? They've acquired players like McKinney, Drury, Brito, Hansen, Teoscar hoping at least one of them breaks out with more playing time. You're acting like these guys are 30 year old write offs when in reality they're all 26 years of age or younger. Guys like Bautista, Encarnacion, Donaldson were all in the same position, or even worse at their ages. They didn't even break out until their late 20's.

 

Player development isn't linear. It takes time. You give these guys a full season in the majors with more exposure to major league coaching to figure out their holes and see what happens.

 

Encarnacion was a top 50 prospect in baseball before he came up, and then spent years drawing walks and not striking out (pre breakout) before things finally came together with his power. It's not like he was striking out 30% of the time with a 6% walk rate and suddenly became really good. He was also ass as a 3b, and once he moved to 1b/DH, he probably relaxed a bit more.

 

Bautista was a rule 5 pick that bounced around a lot but even before his breakout he at least had the makings of a good player (similar to Edwin, drew walks and had a low K% but wasn't showing the power potential he eventually had). In his case he changed his swing and became elite, but again, it wasn't taking a fringe talent and getting lucky. There were some aspects of his game that looked appealing before he broke out.

 

Obviously giving flawed players playing time in a lost year and trying to make adjustments to hopefully help them take a step forward can lead to good results. If Teoscar can maintain his stat cast numbers from last year but reduce K's and increase BB's, then you might have a good hitter there. But these are long shots. The Jays can't rely on them panning out. If it happens then it should be an added bonus. Where the Jays need to score big is their own prospects panning out, and also acquiring players from outside the org that pan out. If they keep focusing on McKinney and Forrest Wall types, I'm not liking the chances of an impact player coming out of it.

 

That's why we better be focusing on the Padres when we trade guys at the deadline.

[Spanky99]

Encarnacion was a top 50 prospect in baseball before he came up, and then spent years drawing walks and not striking out (pre breakout) before things finally came together with his power. It's not like he was striking out 30% of the time with a 6% walk rate and suddenly became really good. He was also ass as a 3b, and once he moved to 1b/DH, he probably relaxed a bit more.

 

Bautista was a rule 5 pick that bounced around a lot but even before his breakout he at least had the makings of a good player (similar to Edwin, drew walks and had a low K% but wasn't showing the power potential he eventually had). In his case he changed his swing and became elite, but again, it wasn't taking a fringe talent and getting lucky. There were some aspects of his game that looked appealing before he broke out.

 

Obviously giving flawed players playing time in a lost year and trying to make adjustments to hopefully help them take a step forward can lead to good results. If Teoscar can maintain his stat cast numbers from last year but reduce K's and increase BB's, then you might have a good hitter there. But these are long shots. The Jays can't rely on them panning out. If it happens then it should be an added bonus. Where the Jays need to score big is their own prospects panning out, and also acquiring players from outside the org that pan out. If they keep focusing on McKinney and Forrest Wall types, I'm not liking the chances of an impact player coming out of it.

 

That's why we better be focusing on the Padres when we trade guys at the deadline.

 

McKinney, Wall, Teoscar all hit top 100 lists years back, it's pretty similar, bro, even Hanson was a top 100 spect for a couple years, going with these type of guys in a rebuild doesn't hurt one bit, not to mention payroll flexibility moving forward, you guys are making pretty much similar points, without foresight, and using extremes in hindsight. Meh...

[Ray]

Encarnacion was a top 50 prospect in baseball before he came up, and then spent years drawing walks and not striking out (pre breakout) before things finally came together with his power. It's not like he was striking out 30% of the time with a 6% walk rate and suddenly became really good. He was also ass as a 3b, and once he moved to 1b/DH, he probably relaxed a bit more.

 

Bautista was a rule 5 pick that bounced around a lot but even before his breakout he at least had the makings of a good player (similar to Edwin, drew walks and had a low K% but wasn't showing the power potential he eventually had). In his case he changed his swing and became elite, but again, it wasn't taking a fringe talent and getting lucky. There were some aspects of his game that looked appealing before he broke out.

 

Obviously giving flawed players playing time in a lost year and trying to make adjustments to hopefully help them take a step forward can lead to good results. If Teoscar can maintain his stat cast numbers from last year but reduce K's and increase BB's, then you might have a good hitter there. But these are long shots. The Jays can't rely on them panning out. If it happens then it should be an added bonus. Where the Jays need to score big is their own prospects panning out, and also acquiring players from outside the org that pan out. If they keep focusing on McKinney and Forrest Wall types, I'm not liking the chances of an impact player coming out of it.

 

Most guys I've mentioned have either been Top 100 prospects or top organizational prospects too. They have had prospect pedigree and flashes of success in the minors as well. Are they going to become Bautista or Encarnacion? Statistically unlikely, but even if they become 2-3 WAR regulars and are producing that much when Vlad and Bo are up, that would be a big success.

 

Also, how much high impact talent can you add when your main trade pieces are a 36 year old Russell Martin, a month of an injured Josh Donaldson, half a season of JA Happ, an Osuna who was charged with serious domestic assault, half a season of Steve Pearce etc. The real test is going to be what comes back in trades for Marcus Stroman, Aaron Sanchez, Ken Giles etc. We've almost never been trading from a position of strength thus far.

[glory]

McKinney, Wall, Teoscar all hit top 100 lists years back, it's pretty similar, bro, even Hanson was a top 100 spect for a couple years, going with these type of guys in a rebuild doesn't hurt one bit, not to mention payroll flexibility moving forward, you guys are making pretty much similar points, without foresight, and using extremes in hindsight. Meh...

 

McKinney: top 100 prospect when he was in A+

Wall: top 100 prospects when he was in A

Hernandez: Never on a top 100 list (at least not any BBRef tracks)

Hanson: top 100 prospect in A+

 

McKinney and Wall were rated top 100 prospects shortly after they were drafted in the 1st round. As they climbed through the minors, their production and status plummeted. They were never really top prospects at any point. Hanson was an international prospect who was ranked highly in the lower minors but then saw his production fall as he moved up. I'd say Hernandez is more likely to suddenly breakout than the other three (better track record in the high minors and stat cast numbers were great last year) but again not something I'm going to bank on.

 

Encarnacion was a good MLB player in his early 20's but was playing the wrong position. He became a great MLB player in his late 20's. You can't just assume that any former prospect given everyday AB's has a chance to breakout. It can happen, and that's the beauty of baseball, but there has to be performance indicators that are interesting enough to show whether it's likely.

 

Grichuk might be the only player on the team I could see becoming a late blooming star, but the BB% is the killer. The only reason I have some hope for Drury is because I want to internally rationalize the s***** Happ trade by pretending Drury is better than he actually is.

[glory]

Most guys I've mentioned have either been Top 100 prospects or top organizational prospects too. They have had prospect pedigree and flashes of success in the minors as well. Are they going to become Bautista or Encarnacion? Statistically unlikely, but even if they become 2-3 WAR regulars and are producing that much when Vlad and Bo are up, that would be a big success.

 

Also, how much high impact talent can you add when your main trade pieces are a 36 year old Russell Martin, a month of an injured Josh Donaldson, half a season of JA Happ, an Osuna who was charged with serious domestic assault, half a season of Steve Pearce etc. The real test is going to be what comes back in trades for Marcus Stroman, Aaron Sanchez, Ken Giles etc. We've almost never been trading from a position of strength thus far.

 

100% agree with the 2nd paragraph. The Jays haven't been trading much value in getting the players they got. I'm not knocking Shatkins for those trades in particular, just that getting potential 1 war big leaguers isn't really going to speed up this process. They need players who can realistically be core pieces with Vlad, Bo, etc, and we can't just rely on the draft since the timelines will be hard to match up. That's why people are upset about not trading players sooner (JD, Happ, etc) because maybe you get a core piece in a trade if you trade them in mid 2017 rather than mid 2018 (Flaherty was rumored for JD before).

 

There's still trade pieces on the team to move for help, so hopefully that yields better results (Giles in particular.....contending teams love relievers at the deadline).

[Spanky99]

McKinney: top 100 prospect when he was in A+

Wall: top 100 prospects when he was in A

Hernandez: Never on a top 100 list (at least not any BBRef tracks)

Hanson: top 100 prospect in A+

 

McKinney and Wall were rated top 100 prospects shortly after they were drafted in the 1st round. As they climbed through the minors, their production and status plummeted. They were never really top prospects at any point. Hanson was an international prospect who was ranked highly in the lower minors but then saw his production fall as he moved up. I'd say Hernandez is more likely to suddenly breakout than the other three (better track record in the high minors and stat cast numbers were great last year) but again not something I'm going to bank on.

 

Encarnacion was a good MLB player in his early 20's but was playing the wrong position. He became a great MLB player in his late 20's. You can't just assume that any former prospect given everyday AB's has a chance to breakout. It can happen, and that's the beauty of baseball, but there has to be performance indicators that are interesting enough to show whether it's likely.

 

Grichuk might be the only player on the team I could see becoming a late blooming star, but the BB% is the killer. The only reason I have some hope for Drury is because I want to internally rationalize the s***** Happ trade by pretending Drury is better than he actually is.

 

I believe we're rationalizing a hypothetical, I can't go further into this, I'm sure you get my point, as I do yours, the future money payroll is getting missed here, is what I'm really getting at. You build around a core and draft well for sustainability, it's viable for any team.