Cooler Heads Prevail

I attended a game in Jarry Park at some point, can't remember the details.

Apparently though despite those gaudy strikeout rates in 2012 Kimbrel allowed more guys to get on base ( and eventually score ) then Eckersley in 1990. So your stat seems to lack any relevancy at all.

No one was better then Eckersley in his best years. Check out 1989 and 1990 for example ( 7 walks allowed combined ).

Dozens of posts try to evaluate 2014 pitching staffs based on 2013 results. In fact, starting pitching isn't that reliable. Individual performance varies wildly and hence team performance does as well. The 2012 year for Boston and Cleveland showed no hint of an improved 2013, unless you think Dempster was meaningful etc etc. And Toronto's starting staff looked very solid. In contrast, Toronto's 2012 staff looked weak but before the injuries hit they had one of the best starting pitching squads in the majors ( Morrow was on his way to Cy Young contention, Hutch looked liked a keeper, tons of complete games pitched ). My point is who knows what 2014 will bring, I suspect upside surprises from Stroman, maybe Morrow, maybe Hutch. Adding one solid starter who eats up innings and is no worse then a #3 roughly would help our chances immensely. If Tanaka was better then that our pitching ceiling is quite high. Given the lack of quality pitchers in the free agent market and the market prices, acquiring none of them is not the worst strategy as you say.

In all seriousness, I think the Jays have likely been pitching trades for Iwakuma and/or Ackley for some time now. Tanaka could easily end up being a Jay, multicultural city and the Kawasaki thing might be a leading sign. If we get either guy it's enough I think for us to have a decent to good staff next year. Good chance either Morrow/Stroman/Hutch combo provided one guy who can pitch.

Reported. Let's see how serious the mods are about ending these childish games on here. No baseball content and no attempt to anything other then create arguments.

Like Toronto did, especially when Interbrew made the Jays a profit center milking whatever they could from what was left of a team.

Astros remind me of when the Expos were run into the ground and when Interbrew had control of the Jays. Braves have always spent when they need to and Jays used to operate very similar to them in the glory years. I still blame Interbrew for destroying our team at one point. Takes years and some luck to regain traction, attendance is only now starting to recover. And as some have said, a recent history of losing isn't great for attracting free agents. Jays from 1977-1993 were one of the best run franchises in baseball. So it can be done.

He's better then JPR but I haven't been impressed with him since the Marlins trade was finalized. Not because that trade was bad ( hindsight is nice and I liked the idea he was willing to invest in a winner ), but the Mets trade was an overpay ( surely Syndegaard could have been kept; no need to lose Buck ) and how he reacted in the season when s*** hit the fan was unimpressive. When Reyes got hurt he failed to react, when they had pitchers go down he failed to react, and when the trade deadline approached there were numerous buy or sell possibilities at that time that he failed to find. If they were supposably waiting for the offseason well nothing much has occurred since so the plan seems incomplete all along. Surely they must have known if any starting pitchers or catchers were interested and available. In contrast to AA, I really like how Nonis has operated. And the Raptors guy hasn't been around long but he's damn impressive so far. Leafs have a cap to deal with and had a very poor roster a few years ago. Raptors had a lack of talent, some bad contracts, and an even bigger problem attracting players to Toronto then the Jays. In contrast, AA had some talent already on the roster and a lot of budget to work with. So his performance looks bad to me for a while now.

I'm interested in hearing about teams that actually blew up their team and made the playoffs later on, how long they took to do it, and what the key moves were. The reason I say this is I've seen a lot of really bad teams occur after such moves, far more frequent then successes. But which ones are you modelling your idea on ? I know the Marlins did some strange stuff but I'm not sure that's what people are talking about.

Lol at your emotionally based opinion that has ZERO reality to it. Tell me something, what is the Leafs W/L record this year and last with Bozak in their line up ? Now how did they do without him ? And more importantly, real hockey executives value him far more then a fringe AHL player. But you know what, I see you are from Calgary and you have the Flames to cheer for now so good luck with that.

I'm not liking Colby as a long term expensive piece on this team so I'd look to move him. If it means we keep Bautista on his nice contract even better. Moving JPA and Colby off the team might make us less of a swing for the fences, high strikeout team in some games. Nothing against Colby he has value but the contract issue and the fact we might have to pony up for pitching is a factor. Lee is one of the few veteran gambles we could acquire with the kind of ceiling that might make a difference.

The complaints about those contracts are overdone. Bozak contributes to this team, you may not like him but the team results confirm his value to them at their weakest spot. Clarkson it's too early to evaluate, New Jersey didn't want to lose him ( offered similar money afaik ) and they have a history of good management on that team. I think you've just lost track of where the market is at. I'll give you Clarkson and Phaneuf ( if signed ) as the only real risks in my opinion. I'd be trading either Gardner or Phaneuf this season for a center or a cheaper stay at home defenceman, but I don't follow hockey close enough to know which one of these guys they need to keep. Might just depend on what they can get back. Cap will grow every year next few years. This will open up room when the young core gets more expensive.

I stand by that statement with the exception of the Kessel trade which became bad when the Leafs draft picks ended up being much higher then Burke expected ( no excuse he exercised bad judgement on that move ). It may surprise you to hear me reiterate this opinion but I invite you to look at where there roster was at 4-5 years ago, and note the age of the roster and where they ended up in the standings. There is no doubt they've done a steller job rebuilding this team. Which is why I don't have a lot of patience for the nonstop complaining about them, it's an entertaining team with far greater chances for success then where they came from not long ago. You think a Stanley Cup winner arrives overnight from a team that literally finished second last in the NHL not many years ago ?

That's the thing is you might be right, but I think they could win 85 with this team and a normal amount of bounce back on their luck. In which case adding a quality starter and a solid stick puts them at 90+. Only time will tell but I'm pretty sure standing pat now will mean we miss the playoffs again. I'd have loved to see them just invest money in two players this off season and see where it goes, and bail midseason if it doesn't work out. The timing is perfect, you can just play Rasmus next season for cheap and move or sign him based on his AND team performance in 2014. I expect Lawrie, Stroman, Dickey, Morrow, Reyes all present real upside potential ( maybe even Hutch, Cabrera, Rogers ) and losing JPA, Johnson ( 2013 version ), and Bonofocio are addition by subtraction. Downside from last year seems limited, maybe Bautista or EE totally lose it ( seems unlikely but possible, injuries ? ), Buehrle becomes 100% ineffective ( could happen yes, I see this as being a real risk ). In fact, hard to see many downsides to last season pretty much everything outside of Rasmus and EE went wrong. Address the obvious holes and I can see 85 wins being the floor not the ceiling. A starter means only one of Morrow/Stroman/Hutch have to work out, or possibly just one of them in each part of the season. Another stick means our offence is solid with more depth.

Rangers have had big successes and big failures in their decisions; the top overriding reasons they remain competitive would be their weak division ( some years ) and willingness to spend money. Baseball being what it is, today's landmines and stars can reverse from season to season, but if you keep your hand in on several players one or two of them might do well. If the Rangers need something, they go get it. Sometimes it works out for them, sometimes not. No reason the Jays can't operate on a similar model. I suppose if we listed the free agents signed by Texas and Toronto the last 13 years it would be clear.

Has to be said, the Rangers and Yankees have been throwing money around on free agents for years and the majority on here just seem to accept it as standard and enjoy the prospects of how the team might do. If it's the prospects of the Jays doing the same, you get a different reaction. My view, if the Jays added one big bat they'd have an amazing offence next year, and win or lose a pretty exciting team to watch next year. If they overpay for a pitcher like Santana, they may not get "value" but they'll be a competitive team. If they did both ( as the Rangers have done over and over again most of the last 6-8 years ), they would no doubt have been in the playoff hunt next season. Let's not pretend though that spending money on players wasn't a big part of their strategy. Jays are a big budget team often operating like a moderate one. If there is one top criticism that the Jays of the last 10-12 years deserve, it has been getting cheap more often then not. This was not the way the Jays operated under Gillick. The young guys on here never experienced that era, but we were that team. We filled the stadium, went out and got top free agents ( even hall of famers ) when needed, and money was not an issue. Less guys available now, one would hope the Jays acquire one big player because that would easily fit the budget still and give some glimmer of hope we can contend next season. I don't care how many wins the stats say we need, we are a lot closer to being competitive then the numbers say. The possibility that AA has gotten gun shy and does nothing much would not surprise me, he failed to make the logical moves during last season and I'm somewhat surprised he's still employed at this point. A few recent minor moves ( dropping Johnson, JPA ) were commendable, but only if he truly adds the one big starter he keeps talking about does his recent body of work make any sense. As I posted before, if a strong starter was not likely available, I'd have preferred they add two decent position players and roll the dice on the pitching. That would have created an entertaining team at a minimum. Most of the logical hitters are getting signed now by other teams. My guess is he's trying to trade an outfielder and middle relief for a quality starter and a 2B. Might be Seattle holding things up, and Philadelphia might be in the mix but they seem a little goofy at times evaluating their players ( unwilling to rebuild when they have to ). If this fails, they probably go all in on Tanaka or Santana trying to get them to sign, with no guarantees they win the auction. At which point they may claim they tried, pick up Ackley and that's it.

Leafs aren't in a tough place at all. They are a young team, they have the most valuable franchise ( in $ ) in the league ( with the salary cap set to go up ), and have progressed from having one of the worst and oldest teams in the league only a few years ago. Fan and team expectations are quite moderate, if they make the playoffs a second year in a row everyone will be very happy ( maybe not on this forum but so what ). If any of their current problems are deemed important ( re centers or defence quality ), they have at least two trading chips ( Gardner and either goalie ) that could be moved if needed. Phaneuf might be worth moving now to a strong contendor if its decided he's not in their long term plans. The real question is can Gardner be one of their top guys in the coming years or not, I think Reilly probably will be.

That's an illogical conclusion, they are in a playoff spot, have survived some huge injuries at their weakest position, and rarely aren't competitive in any game they play. Any objective observer knows this team is on the upswing the next few years with their young core. So you say the Leafs are a disaster. That makes half the league worse then a "disaster", whatever that is supposed to mean, and I'd hate to think what the Oilers are supposed to be at this point, a team that rebuilt their team in the same time the Leafs did with higher draft picks. If we are to use the ideas people use all the time on here to evaluate how baseball teams are built, well the Leafs got much younger, have several team friendly contracts, fitted in some nice free agents on cheap riskless contracts ( eg Raymond ), and recent draft choices seem to be doing well ( Kadri, Reilly, Van Reimsdyk via Schenn, and a few guys in their system still ). But I guess it's easier to just claim they are horrible all the time. Which they clearly are not. And in terms of a rebuild, are you not aware of how bad and old this team was when Burke started ? And Burke stumbled out of the game to start making that Kessel trade.

It was a team friendly deal I can't believe you'd question this. He'd get far more money elsewhere and a longer term.

Not really, I just wanted to address some untruths that occurred the other week. And I think its totally unclear what the mandate of this forum is. In terms of baseball, the #1 topic on here recently is what the Jays didn't do and constant whining about how they missed out on EVERY move in baseball. Enough on this my intent is not to make this an ongoing topic.

No, I reported several posts on this precise situation. You can do whatever you want with that, but my point is clearly : a. People posted private messages on here to stir up drama. b. There is no baseball content in their posts. c. The whole idea is to present me in a negative fashion for fun. Look, I can play this any way you want. If this is going to be a free for all internet chatfest with people trying to slay each other with garbage negative posts well fine let me know I'm no blushing violet. Or a baseball forum with some degree of respect I'm fine too. I'm just pointing out the reality of what's going on here, and I'm nobodies punching bag. I'll fire back. Just let us know what you guys want on this forum, and consider that the teenage group on here poses more problems then you may want to admit. ps I'm quite fine if the offending posts all get removed ( including Twisted Logic's assault on my character in the past weeks) and take all these posts out too my intent is not to highlight my opinion here. However, I won't be attacked and just sit on it.

Why do you continually post about me and reference one of my posts in every post you make ? Could it be you just love drama ? Can you go even a week without referencing me in your ideas on here ? I don't think you have the self control to do so.

For the record, at the time of that dispute I asked that the "Admin" delete this account because I was tired of the childish games some posters play on here. Even in my complete absence, there are posters who chose to continue with their grudges in a variety of ways. So, yes, I DID request a "ban" if that's what we should call it. I suspect a temporary ban would have occurred regardless, I was fine with it. Taking a couple of the disputes private resulted in the other user posting them here, which clearly illustrates their need for drama on here that has nothing to do with baseball. I am somewhat disturbed that a poster that is supposedly an adult woman is in quick contact with the underage minor "King" within minutes of my private message, but perhaps they are both high school buddies which would be less disturbing. Would explain a lot of the dynamics on this forum if several posters were simply a clique at a local high school using the same techniques that kids sometimes fall into at that age in group situations.

I did stop posting for a while, as did a lot of people by my observation. In fact, my interest in this place has dropped considerably because of people like you. I have no qualms about stating this; this may be meaningless to you but I like the site owners to hear this and it gives them some glimmer of an idea why the site will never go mainstream with people like you on it.