General 2020 Blue Jays Discussion Thread

[Carlos Danger]

Is there really much of a difference between Epstein and Shapiro?

 

Multiple World Series Championships vs none.

[BTS]

Multiple World Series Championships vs none.

 

Do you think that would be true if Epstein had spent his career with Cleveland and a rebuilding Jays team and Shapiro with Boston and Chicago?

 

I wouldn't care at all if Ross Atkins were replaced, but I'm not sure there's anyone in baseball I'd fire Shapiro for.

[Carlos Danger]

Do you think that would be true if Epstein had spent his career with Cleveland and a rebuilding Jays team and Shapiro with Boston and Chicago?

 

I wouldn't care at all if Ross Atkins were replaced, but I'm not sure there's anyone in baseball I'd fire Shapiro for.

 

I think there is personally.

 

My criticism of Shapiro is that he is all about building a sustainable winner, which is great, but at the expense of the killer instinct needed to some time pull the trigger to win get to a WS.

 

This is based on his past actions and that it is industry recognized, based on comments from AA and Shapiros's history etc, that he is involved in GM decisions and Russ does not have full autonomy for personnel selection.

 

One example I point to is that in 2016 when Cleveland was in playoff contention, Chernoff pulled the trigger on the Miller deal and gave away 4 prospects to get that key piece he felt they needed to put them over the top. I personally, don't think Shapiro does that move. Now, the Indians didn't win the WS, but the Miller deal was a huge piece away that put them a few outs away from winning it and probably the most impactful deadline move during 2016.

 

Shapiro is great at building processes, farms and sustainability. IMO Epstein has the killer instinct to know when to go all in for a WS winner, and also build solid teams year in and year out, which at the end of the day is what I want.

 

That is my .02 cents on those two for what it is worth.

[RustyTrombone]

I think there is personally.

 

My criticism of Shapiro is that he is all about building a sustainable winner, which is great, but at the expense of the killer instinct needed to some time pull the trigger to win get to a WS.

 

This is based on his past actions and that it is industry recognized, based on comments from AA and Shapiros's history etc, that he is involved in GM decisions and Russ does not have full autonomy for personnel selection.

 

One example I point to is that in 2016 when Cleveland was in playoff contention, Chernoff pulled the trigger on the Miller deal and gave away 4 prospects to get that key piece he felt they needed to put them over the top. I personally, don't think Shapiro does that move. Now, the Indians didn't win the WS, but the Miller deal was a huge piece away that put them a few outs away from winning it and probably the most impactful deadline move during 2016.

 

Shapiro is great at building processes, farms and sustainability. IMO Epstein has the killer instinct to know when to go all in for a WS winner, and also build solid teams year in and year out, which at the end of the day is what I want.

 

That is my .02 cents on those two for what it is worth.

 

Epstein himself has said that his strength is building a team from the ground up and that he isn't as good at adding to a team and keeping them at the top.

[Carlos Danger]

Epstein himself has said that his strength is building a team from the ground up and that he isn't as good at adding to a team and keeping them at the top.

 

Not arguing that, especially if he said it. I guess what that translates to is I am good at building a WS winner with different orgs, but I am not good at having a sustainable winner. Basically what I am saying about Shapiro; he is great at a sustainable winner type team, a team that always goes to the dance but never f***s the prom queen. I guess Epstien doesn't always go to the dance, but when he does, he always f***s the prom Queen..

[BTS]

I think there is personally.

 

My criticism of Shapiro is that he is all about building a sustainable winner, which is great, but at the expense of the killer instinct needed to some time pull the trigger to win get to a WS.

 

This is based on his past actions and that it is industry recognized, based on comments from AA and Shapiros's history etc, that he is involved in GM decisions and Russ does not have full autonomy for personnel selection.

 

One example I point to is that in 2016 when Cleveland was in playoff contention, Chernoff pulled the trigger on the Miller deal and gave away 4 prospects to get that key piece he felt they needed to put them over the top. I personally, don't think Shapiro does that move. Now, the Indians didn't win the WS, but the Miller deal was a huge piece away that put them a few outs away from winning it and probably the most impactful deadline move during 2016.

 

Shapiro is great at building processes, farms and sustainability. IMO Epstein has the killer instinct to know when to go all in for a WS winner, and also build solid teams year in and year out, which at the end of the day is what I want.

 

That is my .02 cents on those two for what it is worth.

 

I wonder if Cubs fans might have the opposite take and prefer a more cautious approach. Like, they'd very likely still have a WS title without Aroldis Chapman, but could still have Gleyber Torres. And probably would have been better off keeping Eloy Jimenez than acquiring Quintana to boost their chances at a repeat.

 

I actually really like the cautious approach. I think Toronto has a very good chance at winning a WS in the near future if payroll is competitive with the top spenders.

[Carlos Danger]

I wonder if Cubs fans might have the opposite take and prefer a more cautious approach. Like, they'd very likely still have a WS title without Aroldis Chapman, but could still have Gleyber Torres. And probably would have been better off keeping Eloy Jimenez than acquiring Quintana to boost their chances at a repeat.

 

I actually really like the cautious approach. I think Toronto has a very good chance at winning a WS in the near future if payroll is competitive with the top spenders.

 

 

The counter to that is that the Jays or a team like that does not exist in a vacuum. Other teams will make that move to sacrifice the future and put them over the top/give them that competitive edge they need to win the WS.

 

I guess it depends what you want as a fan. A WS then 5 years of s*** or playoffs every year but no WS...

[BTS]

The counter to that is that the Jays or a team like that does not exist in a vacuum. Other teams will make that move to sacrifice the future and put them over the top/give them that competitive edge they need to win the WS.

 

I guess it depends what you want as a fan. A WS then 5 years of s*** or playoffs every year but no WS...

 

I just don't see it quite the same way. Teams load up all the time and lose in the playoffs to teams that didn't make massive deadline additions (Clevinger this year). You can absolutely win without landing the biggest fish available at the deadline. Most WS winners are an example of this.

 

I do think your concerns might be alleviated a bit in the near future though. The Indians were absolutely very risk averse in Shapiro's time there, but we've already seen one major departure from that MO in Toronto, where they have access to more resource (the Ryu contract). I don't think we'll ever see this FO make a move analogous to Torres for a Chapman rental, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them dip into their farm and move good prospects if the 2021 or 2022 equivalent of Andrew Miller hit the market (elite reliever with 2.5 years of control). This isn't Cleveland, and the FO isn't necessarily going to approach winning in Toronto the same way they did in Cleveland.

[Laika]

A WS then 5 years of s*** or playoffs every year but no WS...

 

False equivalency. A team that consistently makes the playoffs probably has a better chance of winning one world series than a team that goes all-in cyclically. This is BECAUSE the playoffs are super random.

 

You can argue about specific types of team construction, however. Maybe a team like Oakland that can make the playoffs frequently without typically having Ace level pitching would not have as good of a shot at winning a world series, but there's no indication that Shapiro is afraid of Aces. I mean Cleveland is an Ace factory.

[Laika]

I just don't see it quite the same way. Teams load up all the time and lose in the playoffs to teams that didn't make massive deadline additions (Clevinger this year). You can absolutely win without landing the biggest fish available at the deadline. Most WS winners are an example of this.

 

I do think your concerns might be alleviated a bit in the near future though. The Indians were absolutely very risk averse in Shapiro's time there, but we've already seen one major departure from that MO in Toronto, where they have access to more resource (the Ryu contract). I don't think we'll ever see this FO make a move analogous to Torres for a Chapman rental, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them dip into their farm and move good prospects if the 2021 or 2022 equivalent of Andrew Miller hit the market (elite reliever with 2.5 years of control). This isn't Cleveland, and the FO isn't necessarily going to approach winning in Toronto the same way they did in Cleveland.

 

They already made some responsibly aggressive dips into the farm in 2020. Kendall Williams and Griffin Conine were sent out. Those aren't blockbuster deals but they are also not the kind of trades a pearl clutching GM makes. Both players undoubtedly have actual upside.

[metafour]

The nature of baseball is that there is no such thing as "buying" a World Series by "going all in". The Dodgers have been an elite level team for literally a decade and they only now won a World Series. The "simple" statement would be to say that they won because they sold prospects and bought Mookie Betts, but that assumes that they did literally nothing in the previous ~9 years which isn't the case at all. They made other moves and additions in previous years and never won, how come? Probably because of randomness and the fact that making the biggest splash rarely actually secures your team the World Series.

 

The nature of baseball ACTUALLY seems to imply that your goal should be to stretch your playoff window as long as possible. The longer the window, the more likely that you actually "hit" on one of those postseason appearances. Here's the thing about the Dodgers: they could have moved guys like Seager and countless other young players in "win now" moves several times over, but without those players they don't win it in 2020.

[Virgil_Hiltz]

The one aspect of playing safe and building a perennial winner is it makes it easier attracting medium to higher end free-agents on the short term or long term.

[Krylian]

They already made some responsibly aggressive dips into the farm in 2020. Kendall Williams and Griffin Conine were sent out. Those aren't blockbuster deals but they are also not the kind of trades a pearl clutching GM makes. Both players undoubtedly have actual upside.

 

I think Kendall is going to turn into something pretty good. Conine I was never really sold on.

 

Point taken though.

[Carlos Danger]

I just don't see it quite the same way. Teams load up all the time and lose in the playoffs to teams that didn't make massive deadline additions (Clevinger this year). You can absolutely win without landing the biggest fish available at the deadline. Most WS winners are an example of this.

 

I do think your concerns might be alleviated a bit in the near future though. The Indians were absolutely very risk averse in Shapiro's time there, but we've already seen one major departure from that MO in Toronto, where they have access to more resource (the Ryu contract). I don't think we'll ever see this FO make a move analogous to Torres for a Chapman rental, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them dip into their farm and move good prospects if the 2021 or 2022 equivalent of Andrew Miller hit the market (elite reliever with 2.5 years of control). This isn't Cleveland, and the FO isn't necessarily going to approach winning in Toronto the same way they did in Cleveland.

 

I am going to hone in on your Clevinger example. Obviously in retrospect a disaster acquisitions based on missing playoffs and now TJ for 6 solid prospects or whatever it was. I would not have done that trade and I said it before that due to his injury issues.

 

However, it is a prime example of a team going for it. Assuming Clevinger was healthy and Lamet also, the Padres did not anticipate that. I truly believe the Padres would have won that series. It would have had a domino affect on their whole staff and pen and the Dodgers IMO could not have matched it.

 

You all know Shapiro would not have done the July 2015 trades that AA did... But damn was that a fun ride and Ryan Goins catch plus a few things here and there and might have turned out different. The Stripling move was not a gamble, though unfortunately I think we will look back and see the Dodgers won that.. But those trades are not indicative if the Jays have the gumption to go all in and "gamble" to bring us to the promised land. I think the Jays are all about year in year out sustainability, which is great, but sometime you are always waiting for the right opportunity or things to go your way and sometimes it never does or you pass on opportunities that don't appear again with that mentality.

[Spanky99]

I am going to hone in on your Clevinger example. Obviously in retrospect a disaster acquisitions based on missing playoffs and now TJ for 6 solid prospects or whatever it was. I would not have done that trade and I said it before that due to his injury issues.

 

However, it is a prime example of a team going for it. Assuming Clevinger was healthy and Lamet also, the Padres did not anticipate that. I truly believe the Padres would have won that series. It would have had a domino affect on their whole staff and pen and the Dodgers IMO could not have matched it.

 

You all know Shapiro would not have done the July 2015 trades that AA did... But damn was that a fun ride and Ryan Goins catch plus a few things here and there and might have turned out different. The Stripling move was not a gamble, though unfortunately I think we will look back and see the Dodgers won that.. But those trades are not indicative if the Jays have the gumption to go all in and "gamble" to bring us to the promised land. I think the Jays are all about year in year out sustainability, which is great, but sometime you are always waiting for the right opportunity or things to go your way and sometimes it never does or you pass on opportunities that don't appear again with that mentality.

 

So this is CD prevention.

[L54]

CD, what kind of opportunities has Shapiro had to make an impact move at the deadline to bolster a playoff team? You're speculating that he won't. I'd be shocked if the Jays were leading the AL East in 2021 and he didn't make that sort of move.

[Carlos Danger]

CD, what kind of opportunities has Shapiro had to make an impact move at the deadline to bolster a playoff team? You're speculating that he won't. I'd be shocked if the Jays were leading the AL East in 2021 and he didn't make that sort of move.

 

I am basing it on his rumored comments to AA when he came on board. His actions with the Indians, his comments in general in a lot of the interviews I have heard by him.

 

We also need to define a "move". I am sure Shapiro and any GM would make deadline moves to improve a team in a playoff race. I do remember the chatter around the time of the Miller trade was that probably would not have occurred at that cost in a Shapiro regime.

 

Obviously I don't know him, I am just some random fan looking at it from 50,000 ft. I am, just saying based on his comments, history and apparent philosophy, just don't see it because I think his fall back/default mode is play it safe which is fine in most cases. But no risk no reward... I think Epstien has that risk/reward mode and knows when to apply it... Again just observations from some random fan.

[L54]

I am basing it on his rumored comments to AA when he came on board. His actions with the Indians, his comments in general in a lot of the interviews I have heard by him.

 

We also need to define a "move". I am sure Shapiro and any GM would make deadline moves to improve a team in a playoff race. I do remember the chatter around the time of the Miller trade was that probably would not have occurred at that cost in a Shapiro regime.

 

Obviously I don't know him, I am just some random fan looking at it from 50,000 ft. I am, just saying based on his comments, history and apparent philosophy, just don't see it because I think his fall back/default mode is play it safe which is fine in most cases. But no risk no reward... I think Epstien has that risk/reward mode and knows when to apply it... Again just observations from some random fan.

 

I guess I'm just echoing BTS, but I don't think they will operate the Jays in the same way they had to operate the Indians. The Jays have showed a willingness to spend when the time is right.

[Spanky99]

lol

[Spanky99]

CD, what kind of opportunities has Shapiro had to make an impact move at the deadline to bolster a playoff team? You're speculating that he won't. I'd be shocked if the Jays were leading the AL East in 2021 and he didn't make that sort of move.

 

Not to mention they were the most active at the deadline this year past, save for the Padres. Clevinger, ouch.

[DigitalRock]

what a stupid conversation in this thread, folks can tell the future in here.....no one knows if Shapiro would go all in or not if the team was a legit WS contender. I think he would knowing the excitement it would bring. Let's wait for it to happen before we criticize

[Carlos Danger]

what a stupid conversation in this thread, folks can tell the future in here.....no one knows if Shapiro would go all in or not if the team was a legit WS contender. I think he would knowing the excitement it would bring. Let's wait for it to happen before we criticize

 

Yea because in an off season baseball thread we don't EVER try to predict what the GM would do. We don't ever try and predict what FAs they would go after or what players we will protect in rule 5 or try to predict what other GMs will do or how the manager will set his batting order or what position a player will play, etc, etc.

 

Trying to predict what a GM will do is EXCACTLY what we are doing in this thread. It was a discussion between philosophies of two long time VPs/GMs in the game and it is relevant as any other discussion.

 

A lot of board member engaged in the discussion and we had some activity in the place which has like 20 something regulars this time of year.

 

It is stupid of you IMO to criticize a discussion whether a GM would trade a future hall of famer second baseman for a FA starter. (Kent/ Cone) or send a bunch of young pitching prospects for a FA starter (Price deal). If that is not legit discussion on a baseball forum in the offseason then I don't know what is...

 

Why you don't you stop being such a curmudgeon and making comments that discourage engagement and just appreciate there IS discussion and engagement on this board. If you don't like the topic, don't participate and go watch Golden Girl reruns until there is a new topic.

[jerb]

I doubt the Jays will start next season in Toronto.

 

 

Toronto Star

@TorontoStar

 

#Breaking: Federal government denies Raptors request to play in Toronto.

https://t.co/ixeMZ96laj?amp=1

[Carlos Danger]

I doubt the Jays will start next season in Toronto.

 

 

Toronto Star

@TorontoStar

 

#Breaking: Federal government denies Raptors request to play in Toronto.

https://t.co/ixeMZ96laj?amp=1

 

Not good to have that break right in the middle of baseball FA season.. That is going to hurt I think.... s***!

[Orgfiller]

I doubt the Jays will start next season in Toronto.

 

 

Toronto Star

@TorontoStar

 

#Breaking: Federal government denies Raptors request to play in Toronto.

https://t.co/ixeMZ96laj?amp=1

 

December vs April though.

[metafour]

I am basing it on his rumored comments to AA when he came on board. His actions with the Indians, his comments in general in a lot of the interviews I have heard by him.

 

We also need to define a "move". I am sure Shapiro and any GM would make deadline moves to improve a team in a playoff race. I do remember the chatter around the time of the Miller trade was that probably would not have occurred at that cost in a Shapiro regime.

 

Obviously I don't know him, I am just some random fan looking at it from 50,000 ft. I am, just saying based on his comments, history and apparent philosophy, just don't see it because I think his fall back/default mode is play it safe which is fine in most cases. But no risk no reward... I think Epstien has that risk/reward mode and knows when to apply it... Again just observations from some random fan.

 

Your entire viewpoint on this topic is problematic for a wide range of reasons. Ultimately, you are juggling two separate premises and presenting them as "fact", when in reality an actual analysis of both premises would tell you that neither of your positions are as convincing as they are in your own head.

 

1) Overstating Shapiro's Tendencies in Cleveland and Applying them to Toronto

 

I don't know why this position keeps resurfacing, but Shapiro's actual role in baseball decisions is nowhere near as heavy footed as message board posters make it out to be (if it's even there at all). I don't know if everyone saw the recent media blurb about his potential candidacy for the Mets' Presidency, but one of the comments was striking: Shapiro actually represents Rogers at Owners' meetings, a rare occurrence for any President/CEO in baseball. The significance of something like that is simple: his position has long transcended that of "baseball GM" and now more closely mirrors that of "baseball Owner". Its literally been a decade since he was last a GM, and yet his name is brought up continuously as if his personal moves or positions 10+ years ago in Cleveland are a driving factor in what this organization believes/does today. This is a silly narrative which has already proven to hold zero weight. For example, a few years ago I had multiple people on this board telling me that the Jays wouldn't target HS players in the draft because that wasn't Shapiro's history in Cleveland. That position has proven to be false. The Indians under Shapiro also held very little position and commitment in the IFA market, and that too has proven to not carry and transfer over to his time here in Toronto wherein the team is one of the most active in that market year in and year out. Even if you look at his time in Cleveland, once he became President and handed the GM reigns over to Antonetti, he actually gave him autonomy to make his own moves. This has been documented in moves such as the blockbuster Ubaldo Jimenez trade in 2011: Shapiro openly stated that he would not have made that trade himself, but yet he didn't block Antonetti from making the deal. The indication of that is obvious - as he has transcended past "baseball operations", the caveat of "what would Shapiro do" is long irrelevant. The way he operated in Cleveland is an entirely different animal because that franchise has its own limitations and parameters - we witness this even TODAY as the team is currently juggling the idea of shipping out their franchise player - a 27 year old in his prime. Obviously, the positions that one can make as "President/CEO" significantly changes with the organization under which one holds the position. One would not operate as the CEO of Microsoft in the same manner as they would had they been the CEO of some computer-startup. As such, the fallacy that you are committing is to comb through his past in a completely different market, and then carrying those positions forward today as if there was a 1-to-1 translation. Cleveland has considerably more razor thin margins, and thus they must hold a position that represents those unique parameters. If what you believe is true (past predicts future regardless of organization), then Andrew Friedman would not have done ANYTHING that he has done in his time in Los Angeles, as he was not making those moves in Tampa Bay. The Andrew Friedman example presents a more exaggerated scenario, but that exaggeration proves the point entirely: a smart baseball executive will change his position depending on the environment. The only point that you can make about Shapiro is that his viewpoint is that the goal should be to field a consistently winning team. That position in no way indicates that the team will be risk averse, and it is the position of basically every smart/well-run organization in the MLB.

 

2) Misappropriating "Win-Now" Moves and Their Hypothetical Importance

 

Your entire position on this topic began with the fundamental conclusion that if one is in a competing position and DOESN'T unload their future in order to "win now", that another team will do so and it will result in them edging your team out and winning the title. While this conclusion seems to make sense on paper, it actually doesn't seem to hold much truth in baseball as you appear to want to believe. You have been challenged on this point by more than one person and have not really responded in any way to the truth that what you are proposing in reality has NOT actualized in the way that you claim. Your own example of Anthopolous going "all in" at the 2015 deadline is proof in itself: not only were we a better team on paper than the Royals were, but we also made more "win now" moves at the deadline than they did - and we still lost. Today we talk about how the better team didn't win that series, but that is the entire point: baseball has so many more variables than a sport like basketball does, and as such the real truth seems to be that planning your team around moments of going "all in" seems to be a less optimal strategy than trying to build a team that makes the playoffs for 10 straight seasons - because the ACTUAL championship predictor seems to be the number of playoff appearances itself. I'll bring up the Dodgers once again, because they prove this point entirely: if you look at their blockbuster and trade-deadline moves from the past decade wherein they were an elite level team basically every season, you will find that they actually made a plethora of significant "win now" moves that in fact did not, as you predicted, secure them the championship:

 

1) Hanley Ramirez in 2012: a 4+ WAR addition that performed as such in LA when healthy, ultimately didn't push them over the top.

2) Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, and Josh Beckett in 2012: mega-blockbuster deal, still didn't push the Dodgers over the top.

3) Yasmani Grandal in 2014: added a player that would go on to play at a 4-6 WAR pace for LA, still didn't push the Dodgers over the top.

4) Rich Hill and Josh Reddick in 2016: a combined ~4-5 WAR added at the deadline, still didn't push them over the top.

5) Yu Darvish in 2017: this was the move that was billed as THE move that would finally win them a World Series as the team was a heavy favourite even without Darvish, ultimately still didn't push them over the top.

6) Manny Machado in 2018: superstar level performer added at the trade deadline to an already World Series favourite roster, still didn't push them over the top.

 

As as you can actually see, the notion of "buying" your way to a World Series is actually much more complicated than: team A and B are both very good, team B makes more win-now moves at the deadline and therefore beats out team A. It took the Dodgers almost a full decade to actually win the World Series, and that was with moves almost every single season that under "theory" should have given them the title. Of course, that isn't actually how baseball works. Now, the conclusion here isn't that you should never make those moves as the need to improve your team with current MLB performers is always an obvious necessity, but the caveat is that this must be done while also never leveraging yourself out of future playoff appearances. The Dodgers did this masterfully, as while all of the above "star" acquisitions came and left, they maintained a core group of young stars on their roster and elite prospects in their system which were PIVOTAL in them ultimately winning the World Series in 2020. They never actually leveraged themselves out of the future, what they actually did was maintain a window of contention long enough for the "randomness" of baseball to swing in THEIR favour. Their team could have won the World Series in any and ALL of the past 3-4 seasons as they possessed the talent to do so, but it never happened. The longer and more often that you can keep rolling the dice, the more likely it becomes that the winning combination falls for you. Even Anthopolous came to this conclusion: after selling the entirety of our future competitive flexibility to "win now" in the years leading up to 2015, he has been blasted by Braves fans for NOT doing "enough" the past two seasons. Consistency and steadiness ultimately wins this race, NOT bullish and uncontrolled explosiveness.

Edited November 21, 2020 by metafour

[Spanky99]

Good post, but my eyes!

[Jimcanuck]

It makes more sense for a contending older team to move farm pieces.

 

The Jays are a good young team with a very strong farm. They are in a good spot. Well managed, with limited moving of appreciating assets for depreciating assets, they should be a contender for years to come. A WS is more likely from a long window of contention then a short window.

[TheHurl]

people who work in the Jays F.O. have said that Shapiro has zero say in player personnel decisions, beyond approving a budget.

[Spanky99]

So has Tim and Sid mislead us...

 

I was looking for news on Shapiro and I bumped into this...