Blue Jays Discussion Thread (2026)

[bronson44]

Any chance we are allowed to have like an "other sports" catch-all thread here? I know it's baseball centric forum so I understand if not. I just think it might drive some traffic during the offseason and during big events like the World Cup.

I'm not a football fan at all normally but some of these matches have been very fun like England and Mexico today. I don't understand the whole extra time thing though. I have seen some discourse around about it but it still seems horribly flawed. Ok fine you want to keep the sanctity of your games traditions, I get that. If you don't want to stop the clock then why not at least have a timer on the screen that ticks up during stoppages so everyone knows exactly how much time will be added. From what I can gather just the refs that have this secret timer and they just go trust me bro at the end. It just invites controversy and seems so unnecessary. Fans, is there a reason it's done this way I'm not getting?

Sorry if this is inappropriate.

[Brownie19]

7 hours ago, bronson44 said:

Any chance we are allowed to have like an "other sports" catch-all thread here? I know it's baseball centric forum so I understand if not. I just think it might drive some traffic during the offseason and during big events like the World Cup.

I'm not a football fan at all normally but some of these matches have been very fun like England and Mexico today. I don't understand the whole extra time thing though. I have seen some discourse around about it but it still seems horribly flawed. Ok fine you want to keep the sanctity of your games traditions, I get that. If you don't want to stop the clock then why not at least have a timer on the screen that ticks up during stoppages so everyone knows exactly how much time will be added. From what I can gather just the refs that have this secret timer and they just go trust me bro at the end. It just invites controversy and seems so unnecessary. Fans, is there a reason it's done this way I'm not getting?

Sorry if this is inappropriate.

I'd support this.  I like having another thread for all the major sports and I'm sure there are lots of regulars who would like to talk about what's happening in other leagues (especially when the Jays suck).

I also share the same frustrations about the clock in soccer, as someone who essentially only watches during the World Cup.  I also think it's wild they only have 1 ref.

[John_Havok]

7 hours ago, bronson44 said:

Any chance we are allowed to have like an "other sports" catch-all thread here? I know it's baseball centric forum so I understand if not. I just think it might drive some traffic during the offseason and during big events like the World Cup.

I'm not a football fan at all normally but some of these matches have been very fun like England and Mexico today. I don't understand the whole extra time thing though. I have seen some discourse around about it but it still seems horribly flawed. Ok fine you want to keep the sanctity of your games traditions, I get that. If you don't want to stop the clock then why not at least have a timer on the screen that ticks up during stoppages so everyone knows exactly how much time will be added. From what I can gather just the refs that have this secret timer and they just go trust me bro at the end. It just invites controversy and seems so unnecessary. Fans, is there a reason it's done this way I'm not getting?

Sorry if this is inappropriate.

Having other sports to talk about would be welcome now, if only for the fact that talking about and watching the Jays is depressing as f***.

[rydermike]

Rogers buys out Larry Tannenbaum of MLSE. 

Rogers now fully 100% owns all of the Toronto sports teams. 

Jays, Leafs, Raptors, Argos, TFC. 

I guess Jays get absorbed into MLSE now

 

 

 

[jaysblue]

On 7/5/2026 at 9:11 PM, max silver said:

You are creating a strawman counter argument based on an opinion that I didn't even state in the first place. I never once stated that I think Hoffman should be pitching in the 9th inning so there's no need to spend so many paragraphs on a statement I didn't even make. My argument hinges on the opinion where I believe Hoffman likely would have enjoyed similar success if he had been pitching in the 9th inning during this recent stretch of dominance. He's largely been bringing his best stuff into games, commanding his pitches more effectively, and avoiding mistake pitches that end up in seats. Having said that I'm firmly on board with the current setup of Varland typically pitching the 9th inning as he's one of MLB's most dominant relievers and can pitch more than a single inning at a time if the situation warrants it. I like the current arrangement of the 3 headed monster of Hoffman and Rogers in setup roles with Varland closing as it's a very potent trio that should allow the team to successfully close out most games where they have a late lead.

You seem to be confusing correlation with causation a bit. We can absolutely correlate Hoffman having success when not pitching the 9th inning during this recent stretch, but what we can't do with any level of certainty is assign causation to Hoffman's success due to the inning he's pitching in. At the end of the day you are crafting a theory in exactly the same fashion as I am and neither of us can prove or disprove our theories due to the other confounding factors. As I previously mentioned I surmise that Hoffman's recent success is largely due to utilizing a more effective pitch mix and evening out of his historically inflated BABIP over the first few months of the season. Hoffman was the victim of a comically high .500 BABIP over the first two months of the season and this was something that was bound to regress to the mean in time, and reducing usage of a pitch that was being hammered on the regular in favor of his best pitch was a tweak that probably should have been made sooner. Once again Hoffman has experienced extended runs of several months of consecutive success in the 9th inning in the closer role, so a 4 week sample of success in a non 9th inning role isn't any kind of silver bullet towards proving causation of him being unable to succeed in the 9th inning.

I think you’re overcomplicating what I’m saying and turning it into a claim I never made either.

I never said Hoffman is incapable of succeeding in the 9th inning. He obviously can. He has the stuff to dominate in any inning, and yes, the pitch-mix adjustment and BABIP regression are real factors. I’m not dismissing that.

My point is that you’re going too far in the other direction by acting like the inning/role component can basically be dismissed. It can’t. The 9th inning is not just another inning for every reliever. The pressure is different, the leash is different, the psychology is different, and with Hoffman specifically, the concern has always been how quickly things snowball when he loses command. You're completely dismissing the psychological part of the game, which absolutely exists, even if your computer can’t calculate it.

That’s why the mental aspect matters. Hoffman’s issue has never been a lack of stuff. It’s that when the command goes, he can unravel in a hurry. That’s not purely a BABIP problem. That’s not purely a pitch-mix problem. That’s also a composure and role-trust problem, especially when you’re asking him to protect the final three outs.

And yes, neither of us can prove causation with certainty. That’s exactly the point. You’re accusing me of building a theory, but you’re doing the same thing when you say he “likely would have enjoyed similar success” in the 9th. That’s also speculation. It may be reasonable speculation, but it’s still speculation.

The difference is I’m not saying the recent success proves he can’t close. I’m saying the current setup reduces the risk of his worst traits showing up in the most damaging spot. There’s a big difference.

If the argument is simply that Hoffman has looked better because his stuff, command, pitch mix, and batted-ball luck have improved, fine. I agree with that. But acting like the role itself is irrelevant is where I disagree.

And honestly, if we both agree Varland closing with Hoffman/Rogers setting up is the best arrangement, then we’re not that far apart. The only real disagreement is that I’m not willing to hand-wave away the mental side of Hoffman in the 9th just because his underlying numbers have improved.

[BTS]

On 7/6/2026 at 1:49 AM, bronson44 said:

Any chance we are allowed to have like an "other sports" catch-all thread here? I know it's baseball centric forum so I understand if not. I just think it might drive some traffic during the offseason and during big events like the World Cup.

I'm not a football fan at all normally but some of these matches have been very fun like England and Mexico today. I don't understand the whole extra time thing though. I have seen some discourse around about it but it still seems horribly flawed. Ok fine you want to keep the sanctity of your games traditions, I get that. If you don't want to stop the clock then why not at least have a timer on the screen that ticks up during stoppages so everyone knows exactly how much time will be added. From what I can gather just the refs that have this secret timer and they just go trust me bro at the end. It just invites controversy and seems so unnecessary. Fans, is there a reason it's done this way I'm not getting?

Sorry if this is inappropriate.

I don't see the harm. 

[jaysblue]

We always had a general or other sports thread. Just not on the main page correct?

[bronson44]

6 minutes ago, jaysblue said:

We always had a general or other sports thread. Just not on the main page correct?

We did and oh man I just noticed there already is one one here. I just never scrolled down far enough in the forum section to see it. My bad.

[Brownie19]

4 minutes ago, bronson44 said:

We did and oh man I just noticed there already is one one here. I just never scrolled down far enough in the forum section to see it. My bad.

Moving it to the main board section would help.  Nobody goes in the other ones, which is why we created (or moved?) the minor league discussion to the main board as well...

[BTS]

1 hour ago, Brownie19 said:

Moving it to the main board section would help.  Nobody goes in the other ones, which is why we created (or moved?) the minor league discussion to the main board as well...

Yeah. Someone can just add an 'Other Sports' thread to the main forum. Nobody reads the subforums

[Laika]

Should be nuke most of the subforums? lol why are we like this

[max silver]

5 hours ago, jaysblue said:

I think you’re overcomplicating what I’m saying and turning it into a claim I never made either.

I never said Hoffman is incapable of succeeding in the 9th inning. He obviously can. He has the stuff to dominate in any inning, and yes, the pitch-mix adjustment and BABIP regression are real factors. I’m not dismissing that.

My point is that you’re going too far in the other direction by acting like the inning/role component can basically be dismissed. It can’t. The 9th inning is not just another inning for every reliever. The pressure is different, the leash is different, the psychology is different, and with Hoffman specifically, the concern has always been how quickly things snowball when he loses command. You're completely dismissing the psychological part of the game, which absolutely exists, even if your computer can’t calculate it.

That’s why the mental aspect matters. Hoffman’s issue has never been a lack of stuff. It’s that when the command goes, he can unravel in a hurry. That’s not purely a BABIP problem. That’s not purely a pitch-mix problem. That’s also a composure and role-trust problem, especially when you’re asking him to protect the final three outs.

And yes, neither of us can prove causation with certainty. That’s exactly the point. You’re accusing me of building a theory, but you’re doing the same thing when you say he “likely would have enjoyed similar success” in the 9th. That’s also speculation. It may be reasonable speculation, but it’s still speculation.

The difference is I’m not saying the recent success proves he can’t close. I’m saying the current setup reduces the risk of his worst traits showing up in the most damaging spot. There’s a big difference.

If the argument is simply that Hoffman has looked better because his stuff, command, pitch mix, and batted-ball luck have improved, fine. I agree with that. But acting like the role itself is irrelevant is where I disagree.

And honestly, if we both agree Varland closing with Hoffman/Rogers setting up is the best arrangement, then we’re not that far apart. The only real disagreement is that I’m not willing to hand-wave away the mental side of Hoffman in the 9th just because his underlying numbers have improved.

Ultimately unless this team starts showing signs of life in short order the inning where Hoffman is pitching isn't going to matter to any degree. If the front office does a firesale at the deadilne I do wonder if they would consider moving Hoffman if they get any decent offers in return. I find myself wondering if it would be possible to dip under the first luxury tax threshold if all of the expiring contracts are shipped out and moving Hoffman could help to reach this level.

[Brownie19]

Nobody talking about the draft still, but I think there's a possibility that Jays consider Elliot Lascelles at 39.  He was just named Prep Baseball Canadian Player of the Year.  Young shortstop who's committed to Yale.  He's expected to go Top 50.

[Terminator]

On 7/7/2026 at 6:55 AM, jaysblue said:

I think you’re overcomplicating what I’m saying and turning it into a claim I never made either.

I never said Hoffman is incapable of succeeding in the 9th inning. He obviously can. He has the stuff to dominate in any inning, and yes, the pitch-mix adjustment and BABIP regression are real factors. I’m not dismissing that.

My point is that you’re going too far in the other direction by acting like the inning/role component can basically be dismissed. It can’t. The 9th inning is not just another inning for every reliever. The pressure is different, the leash is different, the psychology is different, and with Hoffman specifically, the concern has always been how quickly things snowball when he loses command. You're completely dismissing the psychological part of the game, which absolutely exists, even if your computer can’t calculate it.

That’s why the mental aspect matters. Hoffman’s issue has never been a lack of stuff. It’s that when the command goes, he can unravel in a hurry. That’s not purely a BABIP problem. That’s not purely a pitch-mix problem. That’s also a composure and role-trust problem, especially when you’re asking him to protect the final three outs.

And yes, neither of us can prove causation with certainty. That’s exactly the point. You’re accusing me of building a theory, but you’re doing the same thing when you say he “likely would have enjoyed similar success” in the 9th. That’s also speculation. It may be reasonable speculation, but it’s still speculation.

The difference is I’m not saying the recent success proves he can’t close. I’m saying the current setup reduces the risk of his worst traits showing up in the most damaging spot. There’s a big difference.

If the argument is simply that Hoffman has looked better because his stuff, command, pitch mix, and batted-ball luck have improved, fine. I agree with that. But acting like the role itself is irrelevant is where I disagree.

And honestly, if we both agree Varland closing with Hoffman/Rogers setting up is the best arrangement, then we’re not that far apart. The only real disagreement is that I’m not willing to hand-wave away the mental side of Hoffman in the 9th just because his underlying numbers have improved.

I'm definitely not reading all of that but here is Jeff Hoffman by the numbers:

• 7th inning: .795 OPS against
• 8th inning: .694
• 9th inning: .718

So based on your theory that certain players perform better or worse depending on the inning, it would appear that the lights simply aren’t bright enough for Hoff in the 7th. He does much better in the 9th, when the lights are at their brightest.

The 8th inning, however, apparently provides a medium level of brightness that creates juuuust the right amount of pressure for him, allowing him to perform at his absolute best.

So we agree on using him in the 8th inning but where I disagree strongly is on using him in the 7th. There’s clearly not enough pressure. He’s too relaxed out there and he's not taking it seriously. He's probably thinking about dinner.

[John_Havok]

21 hours ago, max silver said:

Ultimately unless this team starts showing signs of life in short order the inning where Hoffman is pitching isn't going to matter to any degree. If the front office does a firesale at the deadilne I do wonder if they would consider moving Hoffman if they get any decent offers in return. I find myself wondering if it would be possible to dip under the first luxury tax threshold if all of the expiring contracts are shipped out and moving Hoffman could help to reach this level.

Expiring contracts: Springer, Scherzer, Gausman, Varsho, Bieber, Yimi. 

I wont bother breaking down how much savings there could be since keeping salary would probably happen on a couple of those if they even had takers.  Yimi is hurt so I dont think he can even be traded. Scherzer pitched in Vancouver recently so he's nearing a return. 

The other 4... yeah we might land something intriguing but i dont see any top 100 prospects in that lot. Probably more like we've seen before, multiple guys like Will Wagner, Bloss... guys who are close to the majors and have a certain skillset they think they can work with along with add-ins way down the org charts.

[Brownie19]

I still think Gausman could command a good return.  He's a been a horse for the Jays and I'll be sad to see him go (and happy to have him back on a 2 year deal in the offseason).

[Orgfiller]

3 hours ago, Brownie19 said:

I still think Gausman could command a good return.  He's a been a horse for the Jays and I'll be sad to see him go (and happy to have him back on a 2 year deal in the offseason).

Definitely. Gausman isn't getting you Jesus Made but he's definitely worth at least a mid to back end top 100 prospect. He's been the same pitcher for the last 3 years, and his pro-rated salary won't be that substantial if even a cheap team wants to add on some payroll to make a run. He's slotting into every possible playoff rotation in the league as at least a #2 or #3 starter.

[John_Havok]

21 minutes ago, Orgfiller said:

Definitely. Gausman isn't getting you Jesus Made but he's definitely worth at least a mid to back end top 100 prospect. He's been the same pitcher for the last 3 years, and his pro-rated salary won't be that substantial if even a cheap team wants to add on some payroll to make a run. He's slotting into every possible playoff rotation in the league as at least a #2 or #3 starter.

Granted, but teams arent moving many top 100 prospects for expiring contracts anymore.

Last years deadline saw only 3 top 100 guys moved and all 3 were in deals for closers, one of whom had 4+ years of control left and the other 2+. Miller and Duran. 

Not saying its impossible, just... increasingly unlikely these days

[Brownie19]

11 minutes ago, John_Havok said:

Granted, but teams arent moving many top 100 prospects for expiring contracts anymore.

Last years deadline saw only 3 top 100 guys moved and all 3 were in deals for closers, one of whom had 4+ years of control left and the other 2+. Miller and Duran. 

Not saying its impossible, just... increasingly unlikely these days

Yeah that's certainly true.  Teams now understand just how valuable Top 100 prospects are.

I think there's a possibility we move Hoffman and/or Rogers too, as those bullpen arms are just so valuable at the deadline.