Laika

Sure, there's a reason for AA to offer Johnson some type of contract, but I can't think of why Josh Johnson would be so dumb as to accept it. Who takes a pillow contract in the AL East? JJ would have to have an IQ in the 70's, or the Blue Jays would have to offer many millions more than the next highest team. I just can't see it happening. Well, I'd be very surprised. And I don't really care either, JJ is a flake. Even if you buy into his fielding independent stats from this year, he's still a guy that pitched just 81 innings, 2 years after pitching just 60. I'll take one of him and Morrow in the starting 5 for the upside they have, but a rotation with both of them is doomed. DOOOOOOOOMED.

Dickey - #2/3 Johnson - won't be back Morrow - #3 Buehrle - #4 Happ - #6 Hutchison - #4/5 McGowan - RP Redmond - #5 Drabek - #4/5 Nolin - #5 Rogers - #6 Stroman - #3/4 Depth is fine for next year. Big need for above average starters though. Even just a couple of solid #3 types maybe.

I always used to think Breaking Bad was slightly overrated, but this season has changed everything for me.

Watch NYY/BOS game or watch Breaking Bad? Tough decisions.

Yeah, if Belt gets on again then you'll have no choice. If Belt doesn't then it's a hard decision... would suck to start Papi and watch him not get on base while Cano and Nava go 2/8 with a walk and lead me to victory. Would also suck to not start Papi and watch him get on 3 or 4 times while my guys flip the category. Of course I have no choice but to start them since I can still flip HR and Hits and SLG with some big games from them.

Tough call on whether or not to start Ortiz. You have the slim OBP lead, if you start him and he goes 0 fer, or 1 for 4 or whatever, that could be the end of the line for the True Cards.

+ he's a character vet and a PED buy low. It really makes too much sense to happen. AA will think it's fishy for being so obvious, then he'll sign Brayan Pena or something.

I guess I don't have holds as an out anymore. Jennings out + Zobrist homer here would be huge.

I just need to flip 1 cat. You have Ortiz tonight + 1 more PA from Andrus and Jennings, and I have Nava/Cano tonight + 2 or 3 more PA from Belt. I need some some clutch production from my #1 pick.

That was saying more about his team than yours. Tough draw for you.

Butt ---> Couch

Same would go for Nolasco. I wonder how much money he'll get... great career year but 4.33 career ERA while pitching in the NL in massive stadiums his whole career.

Cano Ellsbury McCann Choo Pence? Burnett Kuroda Granderson?? Santana?? Lincecum maybe?? Beltran isn't a sure thing to get an offer. Off chance that some guys like Morales or Infante get offers too. I don't think the Rangers can get comp for Garza so no point in them making him an offer.

Realmin crushes torontofan (as expected). Kats has an 8-4 lead on Darth Vader, but almost everything is close. Nail biter. Arroyo for Kats vs. Parker / Pedro Hernandez for Vader. Like, 10 categories could flip. Who has this tiebreaker? Dinger vs. FTD also a big nail biter. Who has this tiebreaker? I need some help against Chief Norman... throwing some s*** against the wall with Tyler Cloyd and Tom Koehler, hoping to flip K's and W's by brute force. I have the tiebreaker.

It takes ~500+ PA's for something like OPS to become somewhat stable. There's a massive opportunity cost to giving players like Ryan Goins a starting gig and 500 PA in a season to find out if they can hit. It's not a good practice, and it's not something that the Jays have to or should do.

That's a funny, confounding way to frame a pretty simple question. Straightforward question: Can Ryan Goins hit in the big leagues? Logical stance: No. He wasn't even a league average hitter in AAA, at 25 years old! Illogical stance: Yes. I believe in the Goins. 60 AB doesn't prove that Goins can't hit, but every day where Ryan Goins struggles to hit big league pitching is still an affirmation of the logical stance in some respect. We already know that he very probably can't hit at all. The burden of proof here is on the least likely scenario, the one I've called illogical.

You're right, it is. For example: - Some of his offensive profile "inputs", like K and BB%, are far from discouraging. - He'll almost certainly get a chance to play out his peak years in the big leagues. - The tools are existent etc. You said "ideal" but that word isn't appropriate. The general trajectory is what you think he won't follow. I dunno. We have thousands of players to put into our sample and help build our general truths. Yeah, most specific players don't improve gracefully to 27 and then decline slowly. Some of them do wildly different things, like peak at 35 or peak at 23.... but can we really look at specific players and try to outsmart what we know as general truths? Is that a helpful way to approach the game or would it get us into trouble more than it would help us? I have no idea, it's baseball philosophy. I would have to ask what your "couple reasons" are for why you think Lawrie isn't going to make positive improvements. It's not like he has massive holes in his swing, a big K%, an aversion to walks, an inability to juice baseballs, or an inability to hit a certain handedness or pitching. I'm not sure what troubling characteristics you think he has. I just see a guy who's hit tool is better than his gameplan right now, so he swings at a lot of pitches he should spit on, and unfortunately puts them into play weakly. But that seems like a problem that experience would help a lot.

That's a valid point if we have no idea what kind of player he is, but we do have a pretty good idea that he can't hit much at all. The burden of proof is completely on the people who think he can hit.

It would be slightly abnormal for him to stagnate and not improve as he approaches his peak. You didn't say "I'm not convinced that he'll improve", you said "I really don't buy into his bat as above average". The latter is a stronger statement and implies a more definitive judgment. I just think you're a tad pessimistic. As a Blue Jays fan in the context of today, it's easy to be a bit down on Brett Lawrie. From a more objective perspective I find it quite hard to not still be fairly optimistic about Brett. And even if he repeats his 2012/13 production in 2014, I'd probably still have to be a bit bullish.

Bat might be even worse than expected. Defense has looked very good. +1 for the smart people who said that he could totally be a bench player if he could actually pick it, but that it would be egregiously stupid to give him a chance to start at 2B in 2014.

I think the aging curve would say that you're dumb. Unless you just mean "not above average right now", or something like that. He's basically an average hitter right now. He's gonna be around for a long time because of his defense and the fact that he's already a good player. Even if he never really takes off or makes any drastic improvements or leaps forward, the mean projection would probably be that he'll ride the aging curve to the land of above average hitters, since he'll almost definitely be in the big leagues through his peak physical seasons. Some guys have to hit enough to get on the MLB aging curve wave. Lawrie's already done that for sure, he's on the wave.

The guy is 23. It almost doesn't matter what the specific results are at this point as long as the inputs aren't exceptionally discouraging. At his age, lots of prospects and top prospects are getting their first taste of the big leagues. Brett Lawrie has a 6.7 BB%, 16.4 K% , and .164 ISO through over 1000 big league plate appearances. Those are pretty encouraging inputs IMO (even though they aren't truly inputs, just a proxy of inputs when taken together). Through 1083 major league plate appearances he has been an above average major league hitter. I would take that result as fairly encouraging as well. It's easy to let lofty expectations get in the way of appreciating what really still is a very promising blue chip talent, who is still a prospect in a lot of ways. Lawrie is one or two adjustments away from being a monster, and a true keystone piece of the franchise. It's silly as hell to just be like, "welp, Brett Lawrie is apparently a below average hitter. Sigh". That attitude is just so stupidly cynical. You never really know when or if a guy is ever going to click. Thankfully in the case of Lawrie, he doesn't even have to click to be a real good player. Even the all time greats can struggle to crush major league pitching in their first few seasons. It's not easy. f***, look at Roberto Clemente's age 20-24: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1002340&position=OF Look at Robin Yount's 18-23: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1014396&position=SS/OF Look at Johnny Damon's 21-24: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=185&position=OF More recently, check out Alex Gordon's 23-26: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=5209&position=3B/OF And Lastings Milledge's 21-25: http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=6441&position=OF I'd say that all of these guys figured it out. Wait....

Ha, I was just editing that post with their schedules as you were typing this.

" 7 Seattle Mariners 65 81 .445 8 New York Mets 65 81 .445 9 San Francisco Giants 66 81 .449 10 Toronto Blue Jays 67 80 .456 11 San Diego Padres 67 79 .459 12 Colorado Rockies 68 79 .463 13 Philadelphia Phillies 68 79 .463" Just judging the teams at a glance, Colorado and San Diego are probably worse than Toronto right now, so they should drop. But at the same time, I think San Fran and maybe Seattle are better than Toronto, so they might be able to leap the Jays. 10th seems about right. Strength of schedule will mean more than individual team quality though. Jays: O's x 5, Red Sox x 3, Yanks x 3, Rays x 3, White Sox x 1.Very Strong. (14 strong, one weak) Giants: Dodgers x 5, Padres x3, Yanks x3, Mets x3. Medium (8 strong, 6 weak) Mariners: Cards x2, Tigers x4, Angels x3, Athletics x3, Royals x3. Strong (9 strong, 3 med, 3 weak) Padres: Braves x 2, Pirates x4, Dodgers x3, DBacks x4, Giants x3 Strong Rockies: Cards x4, Dbacks x5, Red Sox x2, Dodgers x3 Strong Phillies: Marlins x6, Mets x3, Nats x2, Braves x4 Weak

I thought I was selling high on both arms.... nope.