Olerud363

You make a good point in that Kawasaki doesn't have experience at second. I suspect he will get some time at second in the minors. You make a bad point in that Kawasaki can't hit. He might not be able to hit. But if not it's not a "tools" thing. He showed an amazing "pitch recognition" tool. And a surpisingly "line drive power tool", take a look at his 4 doubles, 4 triples, and homer. Watch the video if you have time. His line drive power tool is as good as Boni's no doubt. So it comes down to wether he can make hard contact more consistently (he has a little gap power when he does). Hard to scout this and really just have to give the guy at bats and see.

Kidding?? I'm not really kidding. I mean I'm plagarizing Scott Adams and Dilbert quite a bit. But I used to read Dilbert in College in the late 90s... it was real big then. And I thought Scott Adams was kidding, but looking back with 10+ years of experience in the work force I realize he wasn't kidding at all. There is no doubt in my mind that in a coorporation like Rogers, AAs hair and confidence will get cut him a bit more slack then Gord Ash would get. I mean AA allready has had Jeff Blair write the AA-Jesus-Saviour book... Gord Ash in 97 did the same thing (Clemens and all) and didn't get a Jesus-saviour-book. Hair is important. Especially if you want to get compared to Jesus. Jesus had good hair.

We can't give Travis Snider 500 at bats in 2010 because we are only 10 games back and we gotta keep trying, a miracle might happen and we want good old Cito to have the best team (Fred Lewis and all) to try and get him out on a winning note. But we can give Boni 500 at bats in 2013... because.... because... WE CANT LOSE A GUY WITH BONI-TOOLS NO MATTER WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ha ha... I first read that as "very, very, bad" which is why I replied with the AA/Ash comparison. But yes he was very, very, bald. They are both fat. Gord Ash was fatter I think, but older. AA will probably be just as fat if not more fat as he ages. AA has much better hair which is very important when talking to Rogers suits. AA won't be slammed quite as much as Ash was because he has better hair. Ash - developed better players. AA - didn't develop a farm system, but had much better hair. 5 tools for GMs?? Tallness, Hair, shmooziness, fatness (or lack of)... what else?? AA is a 2-tool GM, hair and shmooziness, average height. Very fat and will likely get fatter as he ages.

Gord Ash wasn't as slick as AA. Wasn't as good politically. But like AA he was a baseball outsider with a big scouting staff. And they did develop players. Wells, Halladay, Rios, McGowan looked good for a while. Felipe Lopez looked good, Josh Phelps. The farm looked very, very good at times. But he wasn't sabermetric savy... and he always made a couple of stupid moves that tanked the team. What is the difference between AA and Gord Ash?? Both outsiders, big scouting staff, never won a thing. This is why I'm saying that AA now has to win big. If AA just wins 86 like Ash, then he's Gord Ash without developing a farm system. That is he's lower then low. A failure of epic porportions.

So what I am trying to say is that at the end of the season we end up looking back and analyzing what happened. You look at the team and you say "how did so and so get all those at bats??", he really messed up. And why did so and so lose playing time?? In the late 90s it was Jose Cruz that was the guy. At the end of the day Jacob Brumfield, Brian Macrae, and a 20 year old very raw Vernon Wells, got significant time in center. And in November you'd look back and say "wft?? How did that happen". Fire Gordie Ash. AA has put himself in the same boat. Jays win 86. Boni has 500 plate appearances with a .250 oba and -2 WAR. Kawasaki does eventually come back and play well for a bit but only gets 250 plate appearances. People will say "wtf?? how did that happen??". AAs moves still might work out. Who knows. But he's raised the stakes. That's all I'm saying. He's at the point where has to win big, or everything will (justifiably) be criticized.

His arm is only average for a short stop, possibly a bit below average (for a short stop), but his arm is as good as Maicers or Boni's. His arm would be very good for a second basemen. We don't really know about his hit tool yet... he was OK in Japan. He hasn't had enough at bats in North America for us to know yet. Can he hit hard line drives at a level with Boni and Maicer?? No question. I saw his game winning double ("I am Japanese game") live, watched his homer, his triples. There is no doubt when he connects he can hit the ball hard... so even though he is a noodle he is not limited that way, he can hit the ball out, and way out of the infield. So like Boni and Maicer the question is how often can he can hit the ball hard?? That is hard to scout. So this isn't hyperbole. There was a choice between a number of players. We rejected the one with a great bb/k ratio. That has effects beyond the immediate move.

You don't get it mr. HerpDerp. We are looking at performance not "tools". Boni has lots of tools, defence, speed, gap power, average, aggressiveness, tooliness, arm, clutchiness?? Is that a tool?? I know Kawasaki has clutch hits, but does he have the clutch tool?? I don't think so. Boni does right?? Tools are a bunch of garbage for idiots. What matters is reality. Mr. Herp Derp, you yourseltf might have a tonne of tools. I don't know. And I don't care. Reality is strike out to walk ratio, on base percentage, defensive metrics. Slugging. War. They may not be perfect. But better then the toolshed. The similarity between Cruz and Kawasaki is that both were players with a good strikeout to walk ratio, a good approach at the plate, and according to WAR were both doing OK. The similarity is they both got sent down. One for "vets", one for "toolsheds". Ash was slammed for this in retrospect, and the same may happen to AA. AA has put himself now into a situation where he has to go deep in the playoffs. AA, like Ash makes moves that are anti-sabermetric... so even when Gordie Ash won 88 games he still got slammed because the saber people pointed out all the little moves that lost a win here, and a win there and prevented a playoff appearance. So now AA is in the same situation. If the Blue Jays win 86 and Boni has 500 place appearances with a .230 on base percentage then AA deserves to be fired.

Wow!!! AA has basically just put himself in a situation where he has to win the division, or win the wild card game. Anything less including a wild card loss will be grounds to discuss his dismissal... So what does Jose Cruz have to do with it?? Jose Cruz wasn't exactly Kawasaki. He was, as a young kid, a guy who hit .250, walked a lot, a real lot, and hit for middling power (middling for 1990s standards). In 1998 and 1999 he got sent down and replaced by "vets". Cruz was not bad, on pace for 4 WAR in 1999, the "vets", chiefly Brian McRae in 1999 were awful. In retrospect Gord Ash was tarred and feathered by the "progressive" baseball media (mainly early baseball prospectus) for the Jose Cruz moves. This was sort of a early big battle between the saber fans and the blue jays organization. Ash was almost confrontational. The fans began calling him Dr. Evil (he did dress up as Dr. Evil one day... can't remember why but he really did). Ash and his scouts basically confronted the fans and the saber community. F-U. We will outscout you and win. Screw Jose Cruz and his stupid walks. This had a number of effects. 1. Jose Cruz was replaced by horrible players. 2. When Jose came back full time in 2000/2001 he lost a lot of his walks (didn't regain them until he played with San Fran later). According to WAR he was 2.7 in 100 games in 1999, but regressed to 2 in 150 or so by 2001. His numbers looked way better to Cito and Ash, but weren't. 3. It seemed to send a message to the team "we don't value a good approach at the plate". Now we send down a guy with a 24-23 bb/k, and keep a guy with a 6-49 bb/k, a lower slugging, and an on base 100 points lower. I know Kawasaki will probably be back. But Jose Cruz came back too. But not the same. And the message to the team was "we don't care about approach at the plate. You'll be sent down anyway, be aggressive boys!". Who cares if a player has a .230 on base percentage. It doesn't matter. It's about scouting, and never losing an assett. Right?? It might be. But AA has put himself into a corner. If the team has a horrible record he will be tarred and feathered. If they win 86 games, or even get a wild card but lose the play-in every single move will be analyzed and AA will still be tarred and feathered as Ash was in 1999. AA has made his life difficult. Barrying a deep playoff run he will get a lot of criticism for giving roster space and playing time to horrible players like Boni. In the end if it's 86 wins, and we needed 90 there will be all kinds of decisions (including this one) that people will look at closely, a win lost here, and a win lost there.

He will probably get injured again... but I voted for never. I don't know... just figured it would be bad luck predicting an injury.

Did Wilner really say that?? Awesome. Makes me like him even more if he acknowledges that he's being called a corporate shill... And just to clarify. I think Wilner is a corporate shill. But we all are. We have to feed families, survive in a phony harsh world. Another day, another dollar. We all have to do it. Wilner is the everyman. Happily doing his phony job for the man... just as we all are, but Wilner is a little more public. We all wish we could stick it to the man, but I don't, Wilner doesn't, and you probably don't either. We all like to eat, drink, and be fat and comfortable, so we give the man what he wants.

Good for him. There are different types of s*** people say. I never once blamed Gibbons. In fact I have repeatedly said that Gibbons was a good choice, I like Gibbons, and if everyone else is fired, from Beeston on down to the last scout and intern stats boy, if AA and every last secratary is gone... John Gibbons should stay. Controversial view but I want to make sure I am on the record for this. Gibbons is a good guy. I don't like Beeston, Gaston. I am unsure of AA, mainly because I don't know if he has the balls to stand up to Beestona and Gaston if they suggest stupid moves. But I like Gibbons. He's not responsible for any of the bad stuff, and I think he's done a great job managing.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/21/showbiz/jackson-death-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 Some interesting comments from a sleep expert at the Michael Jackson trial. Note that he's consulted for the Portland Trailblazers. The next revolution will not be superscouting or a statistical breakthroug, super-war or something. It will be in player development. It won't be one thing it will be a series of things, designed to create an optimal environment for taking an 18 year old, transforming him into a 22 year old mlb player, transforming him into a consistent star at 27. Note he talks about how nba players actually learn their shot while sleeping, the part of their brain that activates while shooting, also activates during REM sleep. I think it's pretty obvious this would be relevant to baseball, a baseball swing is even more complicated then a basketball shot. You have these guys like Travis Snider, who talks freely about having past anxiety and anger management issues (admittedly stemming from family trajedy)... guys like Alex Rios who people claim struggled with alcohol, guys like Colby Rasmus who struggles with every failure (see recent Jon Lott article). To get these guys to develop properly you have to get them in a good head space. Starting when their 18. So these "hole in the swing"s that everyone loves going on about shouldn't be viewed as a permanent unfixable things... but as a symptom of other problems. Not taking instruction properly for one thing. Or if people's heads aren't in their right spot, if their not sleeping well, if they have anxiety or drink to much, or take 200 swings after every bad game... they will not be able to learn complicated physical tasks properly.

He has impressed me for the last month for sure. Did Wilner predict this would happen? I slammed him as much as anyone, questioning the wisdom of building a staff around a couple of junk ballers.. still an open issue. Remind us again of this in a few weeks. If required I am willing to issue a full-page apology to Mr. Paul Beeston, his consultants, Mr. AA, Mr. Wilner, and any posters on here who predicted a Buerhle bounce back. An apology that will be truly heartfelt and humble. Since this will be a bit embarassing I am going to hold off a few weeks. I'd hate to apolagize to all these folks, only to see Buerhle get smoked 5 consecutive starts, then have to retract my apology and re-slam Beeston etc. al. However I am currently working on my Buerhle apology letter... will issue it Aug 1st if required. Also working on various "this is the worst organization in baseball" letters... also keeping these in reserve if needed. I am prepared for anything at this point.

McCown seemed to be more aggressive, actually insulting Cito's character, calling him despicable. Wilner just asked a question in a snarky tone. As far as I know McCown never got as much as a slap on the wrist and in fact still freely insults Cito when he feels like it. Wilner got a suspension. The concern at the time was that Rogers was effectively muzzling Wilner. Should Rogers punish Wilner while letting McCown do whatever he wants?? Your bring up a good point. McCown didn't interact with the team and Gaston on a regular basis... Wilner does. Thus the reason for more punishment. Anyway I hated the incident when it happened. I still do. Rogers lost my business that day. Showed me what Rogers is made of and the lack of character in their upper management. I will always have a soft spot for Wilner in a weird way. To me he is just the guy who made the choice we all have to. His cheer leading and Rogers aplogizing on jays talk is just his job. And it's a good one he doesn't want to lose. Another day, another dollar, working for the man. Rogers, or atleast elements of Rogers, are the true enemy. A despicable group that treated our boy Mike so badly and robbed us forever of a legitamite Jays talk.

Last year I think most of the defensive metrics had him near the best. Most "experts" seemed to think he was doing good there too. I wish he played a full year this year. Bbref still has him on pace for about 3 or 4 defensive WAR this year (if he played 162 games). Interesting to see wether that would hold up over 160 games. Not sure how the bbref dwar works as his range factors look way down, and ussually range factors do a good job of aproximating defensive value for 2nd, 3rd, and ss.

If this poll was created this time last year he might of beaten Trout and Harper as the best young player in the game. And it was arguable... On this date last year he was at .290 .335 .430 or so... and there was no reason to believe he wasn't headed way higher (based on 2011 performance and other things).... He was leading the world in WAR... and even after making an adjustment for (as I remember) a flaw that was giving him to much credit for getting balls in right field (when shifted) you could still argue he was the best... because he was that good. 1 year later his value is down more than any other player in baseball. No power, no average, no walks, 3 major injuries, attitude problems, and healing problems. Still great at third, for the 35% of time he actually can get in the line up.

Actually pretty interesting. I voted Bautista. Guy has done it for 4 years... Not quite a monster this year. But given the multi year track record I still had him ahead of Edwin. Interesting that Colby is ahead of Bautista. If it lasts I guess it indicates people are tired of Bautista's act?? I don't know. Colby has had a good half season... nice to see people recognize that. But he had a good half season last year and we would need to see more before placing him second on the team.

Haven't heard a tonne of Hayhurst. Will have to listen to him more. I also have liked Jack Morris. Way better then I thought he would be. Has mentioned plate discipline in his own folksy way several times. "Nothing wrong with taking a few pitches, take a look at things, you might get a walk and that's not always a bad thing."

Put it this way. Rogers suspends McCown, he probably quits on the spot and goes somewhere else, he slams Rogers relentlessly. He's well connected and he gets revenge. If you mess with McCown he's not going to forget. He's going to get you... and you'll live the rest of your life wondering when. You think anyone would feel the same about Wilner?? Live in fear that Wilner would get them somehow??

Excellent point. I have pondered McCown... he literally has said that Cito Gaston is a rotting pile of manure, that Cito Gaston is one of the most Despicable and evil human beings Bob McCown "I think he’s just such a despicable human being that I can’t be—I can’t judge his decisions fairly." (http://blogs.thescore.com/djf/2010/10/01/talkin%E2%80%99-managers-mccown-opens-up-on-cito-assessing-baylor-wedge/) So Wilner gets a suspension but no one would ever touch McCown for slamming Cito. Obviously McCown has something... whether he has dirt on someone, or he's just an alpha dog... or he just doesn't care about anything... I don't know. I would say the third. I would say McCown just doesn't care. If you've gone through a segment of your life where you don't care you'll get this. When you don't care you get everything you want. If you don't care about some girl, she's yours. You don't care about your job, you get a promotion. So McCown is inhuman somehow. He really doesn't care. Wilner is a different dog. He occupies a different place in the dog pound.

So what do you think?? Wilner is genuine?? You think Rogers would want a sophisticated, smart, and edgy post-game host that will confront the organization head on if needed?? And they haven't found the guy. Wilner's simple, stupid, positive act is just his personality. There's been no instruction from Rogers suits for him to be more "friendly" so to say?? His little suspension after the Cito incident didn't really happen?? If you think the point is stupid argue it. I'd be interested to hear. Maybe I've got Wilner pegged wrong. You don't really say much. Like a lot of people.

No one knows what will happen**?? Never. If you don't know what will happen then your scouting and stats skills aren't up to par. Learn to scout better. Learn even more advance stats. Invent them if you have to. (Between you and me no one knows what will happen.... but we need to pretend we know)

You guys are assuming Mike Wilner believes the s*** he says. Wilner, like AA is living the dream. Have you ever been employed in coorporate North America?? Wilner's job is a great one. I think he has a wife, kids, nice house. And he announces baseball games. Anyone on this board would kill to have Wilner's life. But to have this life he has to play politics with Beeston and Rogers coorporate. For a brief moment Wilner gave us some honesty, he stood up to Cito Gaston. Then everything he held dear was threatened. Wilner realized he was living a dream life, and there were literally hundreds of other people who could do it. So now he just plays the game. Yeah he talks like an imbecible. But here is his choice. 1. Be an idiot and feel very secure in his lottery life. 2. Be smart and honest and have to deal with occasional threats to his way of life. What would you choose?? Your telling me you'd give it all up, say what's really on your mind, act intelligent, tell the Beest where to go?? Or would you just give Rogers the product they want for mass consumption by the casuals??

but herein lies the problem. He missed all of training camp. Back for 5 weeks now another x week vacation... and we have no idea how long x is... but at this point we assume this break is atleast a month... he comes back, he'll either miss almost 2 months (if he spends a couple of weeks in the minors) or he comes back with the same timing problems. At this point IF he doesn't have another injury he can be back and effective by August (assuming he comes back July then needs some time to round into form). So allready 2013 is looking like at most we get 2 months of effective Lawrie... and thats if things break right from here.