Olerud363

One wonders if he allready explored that route... Same with a couple of other guys. I have no idea if that is the case. But a couple of guys, who seem like reasonable smart people, have been increasingly negative about the organization. I always thought a few people, with realistic aspirations to get inside, pulled their punches. Just in case they ever had to work on the inside. These days it seems the anti-organization, anti-Beeston stuff has ramped up a bit. Used to be only from nut cases like me. Maybe anybody with a hope of ever working inside baseball figures they'll either end up working for TBR or a new Blue Jays regime, so they're now willing to diss the current regime.

People ussually get what they deserve... I write nonsensical rambling posts on Beeston or Stoeten, by all means I deserve what I get. But on occasion when I've been slammed undeservedly I've appreciated someone coming to my defense. So I'm not trying to babysit you. You've stated that Beeston and AA will get what they deserve... if things go bad. I personally don't believe this. If things go really bad they will. But if there's any room to spin it Beeston and AA will stay. Beeston is very good at impressing other suits. Trade Sanchez, Stroman, and what's left on the farm, raise payroll to an unsustainable level then get 82 wins?? You think Beeston and AA will be fired if that happens?? Gibbons will but that's it.

Wasn't trying to be condascending... Yeah I remember that poll... the guy (Arkadium??) put some effort into it, and it was kind of funny... It didn't deserve to be slammed like it was. That's all I was getting at. Most of the time you're right... hell when you slam my posts for being over the top you're right. But sometimes you're a little hard on people who don't deserve it.

So replying to a Nolin comment with "I'm still speechless........no words, inexcusable?" is OK??? But actually trying add some more detail to it is nonsense?? Jesus christ under that criteria 99% of the posts on this board are nonsense we're all aware of. How many starts should a young pitcher get 3?? 5?? 10?? 30?? f*** it, not worth discussing. What is allowed 1. Yer dumb 2. Other clever short zinger reply.

You just told him to f*** off without thinking of the reasoning behind his comment. I'm guessing he doesn't want another 10 years of 75-85 win seasons. You didn't really get into that. You just told the guy to f*** off. I'm assuming his point was that instead of 80 wins with excuses he'd rather have a disastrous season. BTS is not ROOTING against the Jays (atleast as far as I can tell). He just thinks disaster will effect change, thus be better in the long run. Everybody wants a great season... but some don't think it's an option with this regimie. Whatever.... it's the internet... cool one line comments, zingers, blasting each other, assuming the worst from every post... yer good at it!

The criteria for bringing a guy like Nolin up is that you are willing to give him 5 starts no matter what. If you are not willing to do that, then don't bring him up.

If one is hoping for 60 wins instead of 82 so the Beeston era can finally end that is valid. If one is hoping for 60 wins instead of 95 then that is not right. The last 20 years have been like ground hog day. So a lot of us are just hoping for something to finally break the cycle. The preferred route would be a championship (atleast playoff appearance, or even september contention) which starts a positive feedback cycle, which leads to attendance increase, which leads to increased payroll, which leads to more good years. The other option is a disastrous season which leads to major (in which Beeston leaves) management change, philosaphy change and finally breaks the cycle. I think the fear is 82 wins next year leads to 78 leads to 81 leads to 72 leads to 84 and so on and so on and so on....

Yes I know there is a "Josh Johnson qualifying offer thread" allready. In my humble opinion this board has to few threads. I've noticed lately people seem gun shy about posting new threads given the reactionary "not thread worthy bro" they could get. I didn't build this place (thanks to those who did) so I have no problems with the direction... as long as that is the direction the founders envisioned. But really?? No "Josh Johnson signs with Sandiego" thread???? People often scan the topics to see if anything new happened, or anything interesting is being discussed. It's now reached the stage where the topic list is almost the same all the time, and it is impossible to tell if anything interesting is happening or not.

One thing that is weird is that going back 30 years the sports writers are not consistent on this. Cal Ripken won on a 60 win team in 91. Trammell lost in 87 despite being on the winning team (George Bell, rbi guy won). Mo Vaughn won, despite way better pennant winning rbizzzzz guys options (Albert Belle, and Edgar Martinez). And actually John Valentin led in WAR that year?? John Valentin?? It seems rbis, "winning", and "popularity" are important. Then again Bonds won 7 times with 0 popularity and relatively low rbi counts.

More good evidence that Trout deserved the award.

I just posted earlier about people being too reactionary, too judgemental on "differerring opinions". Subject was Trout vs. Cabrerra. I do beleive there is some grey in that kind of issue, and people arguing against the popular opinion (popular opinion being Trout deserved MVP and baseball writers are morons) should not be shot on site. This is a little different. You will be shot on site and you deserve it. You really sound like a Troll... everybody and his brother agrees that J.P. doesn't hit enough for a catcher... and you want to make him a dh?? It shows ignorance on so many levels. If you are for real, it sounds like you really don't know anything at all about the statistical side of baseball... so maybe learn a little about that in preparation for your future posts.

Edelweiss, I don't agree with you sometimes, but I certainly hope I don't insult you. Perhaps I have once or twice, but at the very least I hope I gave some insight into why I disagreed and was insulting you. It was my understanding that the new board was created to prevent people from going way off topic, from using multiple accounts, to prevent a few other crimes, to have at least some law. But it seems that 3 or 4 posters have basically become vigilante admins... if a post isn't up to their standards it gets the old "not worthy Bro!!!"... Ironically this is trolling at it's finest. There is no reason to do this other then to try and get a reaction out of the poster... they have a few other tricks designed only to get a reaction. These guys complain about "Trolls" while trolling the people they consider trolls. Is it that hard to ignore a topic/post that one finds objectional?? The real mods seem to be doing a good job of policing anything truly objectional. If one wants a career in law (message board policing in this case) go through the official channels and become an admin. Back to the topic at hand: Most people agree that the 91st win is more valuable than the 81st, and the 81st perhaps more valueable than the 71st, than the 61st... (though at some point you get into the old "draft position" considerations). If Mr. X. had 8 WAR and hit the playoff spot clinching homer in the bottom of the 9th, and Mr. Y had 8.3 WAR on a 60 win team, I think most people would vote for Mr. X. If Mr. X had 3.5 WAR, 140 rbis (because his team had an awesome leadoff guy) on a 95 win team and Mr. Y. had 10 WAR on a 70 win team, most people would vote for Mr. Y. Sometimes it's obvious... Cabrerra vs. Trout is a little fuzzier. I think Trout deserved it. But it's still something interesting to debate. It depends on how much one values the 91st win, on how much one trusts the advanced defence and baserunning stats.

I had an argument with someone (in real life, not a message board) about Bud Selig and conspiracy theories. In this case we were talking about the 2003 Expos and how they conveniently collapsed in a big series against the Marlins in 2003. Which was extremely convenient for Selig. I argued that it was a conspiracy... but a subtle one.... I'll put on my tin hat. People like Selig have basically a sixth sense about people. They are incredibly manipulative and good at getting what they want. There are people with a sixth sense... they know what people will do, how people will react, they snake their way through life. These people can lie and steal but they somehow don't get caught. Like Bernie Madoff... Well he did get caught, but amazingly late in the game. It's not magic. It's an instinct. Like birds migrating. Some people can just pick up on cues, emotional stuff, then get what they want from others. So I think someone like Selig could get the baseball's dejuiced... and never leave a trace. Without knowing anything about manufacturing or material science, he would know who to talk to, what to say, what buttons to push, and presto, balls are de-juiced without a record or explicit conversation about it. It's like a rain-man kind of talent. -- tin hat off.

If you took Vernon Wells age 23-29 and mixed it in with Matt Kemp seasons 23-29 you woulnd't know which ones were which... except if you are maniac and you have them memorized or look at the strike-outs (Kemp strikes out twice as much). Kemps top comparable is actually Raul Mondesi, Vernon Wells 3rd, George Bell in the top 10. Those guys were bad after 29.

If you can find replacement level 2nd, catcher, and left... it is an 80 win team. Problem last year was those 3 positions were incredibly bad. Bautista, Lawrie, Reyes, Colby, Lind will not average 150 games, it will be 120. If people want to start at 80 and suggest a path to 90 I'm all ears. I think Cano and 3 other good minor moves would put the Jays in good position. But 2015 could be a mess. No chance at getting Cano anyway so I guess that is a silly discussion. Kind of a mess. Need a blockbuster offseason to contend and this is after allready having a "blockbuster" offseason last year.

Use a slightly different model and you could get 2.5 a year for Brown, 3 for Bautista.... I think the reaction to "Brown + for Bautista" should be "tell me about the plus??" not "good laugh bro...". I don't like betting on veteran prescence. Would be much more comfortable betting on 26 year olds with a little bit to prove... You're not going to get Mike Trout so targets are the Brown/Beckham types.

Just our of curiosity is their a place one could find 3 year projections for these guys?? I seem to be in the minority here, but both of these guys seem like good targets. There are worse plans then collecting guys in their mid 20s. Bautista 33-35 is going to be that much better then Brown 26-29?? George Bell, Jess Barfield, Joe Carter... all fell off a cliff in their early 30s. Doesn't happen to everybody, But there is a chance Dom Brown will outperform Bautista the next 3 years... One would have to take a close look at aging studies to figure it out.

I'm as hard on the organization as anyone. And I don't nievely think that the injured guys will be healthy. But I still think the "true" talent level is about 80. That's just intuition... haven't gone any deeper then that. There were weirdly bad seasons by Arencibia, Melky, Johnson, and the second basemen... nothing spectacular on the positive side. I don't think the injured guys will be healthy. But I do think Bautista/Reyes/Lind/Rasmus/Lawrie will average 110 games... about what they averaged last year. Actually they could easily be healthier... but I am not counting on that. I am counting on catcher/2nd/left/5th starter to be 5 wins better. The rest of the Roster about the same. True talent level is 80 not 75. Cano would bring it to 85. The right small moves could get it to 90.

Hypothetically if they were allowed one big move it would put them within putting distance.... It seems many of the fans don't have faith they could putt. Cano + the right catcher, the right outfielder, the right starter would do it. If Rogers signed Cano, fired Beeston and AA, then hired Tampa's front office to finish it off, choose the right cathcer/outfielder/starter(s) do you think the Jays could win in 2014??

If we use 75 as a baseline -- Cano gets it to 80. -- regression to the mean should get it to 85... (even if Arencibia, Melky, Johnson, etc. were brought back they would have to be 5 wins better as a group... ) If they choose the right catcher, the right outfielder (make Melky a 4th outfielder), the right starter... They could get to 90 projected... then it's up to luck. It comes down to doing the one "big" move right... and 5 small moves right. At this point it doesn't seem like people have faith they could do 5 small moves right.

No but with his power he'd be a good player if he could get the obp close or just over .300. What does it say about the jays if he hit .260 .310 .500 with anothe team??

What are your thoughts on Stroman?? Syndergard/Stroman is actually an interesting comparison. The age difference isn't as much as it appears. Stroman just turned 22, Synd 21... about 14 months difference. Looks like 2 years in the books because they use age on July 1st.. but it's really only 1. AA numbers very similiar. Stroman spent the entire year at AA. Syndagard 7 or 8 inches taller.

The Rob Ford thing has just exploded down here in Eastern U.S. this week. The daily show has been all over it... probably you guys are sick of it but here it's still fresh. Nice work... that would explain the offseason.

I can't think of a scenario where Melky is both "best suited as DH" AND "would make a good DH". If he's not completely healthy then I don't see him hitting good enough to be a DH. When not healthy he loses average, power, speed, and wouldn't be suitable for anything. If healthy and performing he should be in left,.

Exactly. We've been through this argument a million times on the old board. So lets say there is a "pitch pattern" that makes Edwin a worse hitter. Wouldn't it make sense to use this pattern all the time?? I mean if he is worse, when you throw out of the strike zone... well why not throw out of the strike zone all the time??