pickoff22

Happ would be the immediate man out with the potential to come back if one of the youngsters hit a wall - my assumption anyways. But I would be surprised if we got any starter

You could argue it would have a similar impact, but you would be wrong. Lester is in a league above him if not two. Proven numbers both in the AL east and unbelievable playoff numbers. For a team "going for it" Lester is the much better option. Not saying that from a cost/value perspective De La Rosa may not be a solid option, but in terms of impact this year, whoever gets Lester is going to get a nice boost.

I'm refreshing MLBtraderumors every 30 seconds. Even though I don't expect us to be involved in much of anything this is a damn exciting time

Very true.

I feel as though part of it is that some people just like to defend the organization at all costs. And I'm often defending the team of FO because Toronto has many delusional and bitter fans. But this isn't a case of the ownership doing anything "wrong" - they can limit payroll as they see fit and have a healthy payroll for this year. But it doesn't change the fact that there are limitations in place.

I thought you were done with this I hear everything you're saying, but I can't imagine anyone would discount the sequence of events in the way you appear to be. Everything still points to it being more than likely that money was a concern. I don't need Rogers to come out and say "Yes, we have asked the Blue Jays front office to maintain payroll around current levels" because a) that would never happen and I have enough information to come to a perfectly reasonable conclusion without them saying so. You really think that players are reading blogs and then decide amongst themselves to involve 5 players on a deferral plan and then go to the players union without ever going to the front office in between? That's just not a logical sequence of events and of all the players involved I'm sure one would have the common sense to just say "hey, let's talk to Alex about this". Especially considering Alex is as close to the players as he is. And yes I have approached management about hiring capabilities. More than once. If there's talent that could help our company I need to get an idea of what sort of resources we have in terms of being able to extend an offer. So that's actually a perfect example - I wouldn't concoct a plan to hire this person without approaching management first. Just like if the players wanted Santana, they would approach management about it to see what sort of resources there were available. That's actually really a perfect example for thanks for bringing it up, because in my industry there are cycles when expenses are closely monitored so hiring budgets can be tight or non-existent – just like they likely were for the Jays in the offseason. And when you asked "If it was the FO, could they be seeing this as a good way to stretch their budget in that they may still have more available money down the road?" - well this example would be exactly what I suspect - that money is an issue and something that is being scrutinized. Otherwise they woudn't be worrying about the budget and taking such a drastic step of approaching the players union wouldn't occur. You say the other option would be the players approaching the union, but as stated above, that sequence of events doesn't seem probable at all. Again, it's about making a reasonable assumption based on all the information you have. The information we have clearly points to it being more likely that AA has fairly tight financial restrictions and limitations that he needs to work with then the opposite. This doesn't mean we should hate ownership as our payroll is a good size, but we have a front office working with the limitations given to them. And the example from 20 years ago of Molitor lending a helping hand isn't relevant to the era that Moogy was referring to that I was responding to.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but we wouldn't pick up the draft pick compensation if we got him.

I'd have a tough time watching two of our top 5 prospects go for a rental. Hell everyone went bat s*** when we did that for Dickey, a guy who we had 4 years of control of on a ridiculously affordable contract. Sure, Lester's amazing but that's a steep steep price

Well at least prior to 2013 you had front office come right out and state there were instances of missed signings. Beltran not coming here because of the turf as an example. They flat out said that there were times they were the highest bidder for free agents but couldn't get the deal done. You sure didn't have that this offseason. And I don't recall there ever being a case prior to 2013 of players offering to defer salary in order to sign any of the free agents they were targeting.

I made it very clear it's a matter of taking the information you have and using it to come up with a reasonable assumption. The players making that offer and going to the players union can't be ignored. It's a powerful piece of the puzzle. And although some might choose to ignore it, I don't. You don't think Bautista or the players have a better idea then we do about what sorts of financial limitations the team has? Why else would they offer a deferral especially when Bautista is so connected to the front office? Just to sign another Dominican is the only reason I can think of. But if AA just didn't think he was worth 14 million then what would a deferral accomplish - it's still 14 million that Rogers pays eventually for him.

I don't think you'll find a link saying definitively it couldn't have happened without (burlingtonbandit may have seen something I didnt though) but Reyes confirmed a deferral was in the works: “I think Buehrle and I were going to give a little more than the other guys since we make more,” said Reyes after the Jays lost 7-3 to the New York Yankees last night. http://www.torontosun.com/2014/04/05/blue-jays-players-wanted-to-defer-portions-of-salary-to-try-to-sign-santana Again, that doesn't mean there was no way they could sign him without a deferral, but I'm hard-pressed to understand why the players would offer that unless they felt they needed to

I have season tickets and use it from time to time. One time they had a hell of a time scanning it, but you shouldn't have any issue. Certainly convenient.

That's actually the only scenario I can think of that possibly points towards them being able to add payroll from the 2013 offseason onward, though there's no actual details of who was involved in the trade (unless people actually believe it was a straight Santos for Kinsler trade which would have been insane). So we really don't know payroll implications. At least in the Santana case you have a quote from Reyes that he and Buerhle would be chipping in the most and you have the players union saying they approved the deal.

I suspect some would say "well look at all the money they spent two offseasons ago". However that really just lends more argument to the purse-strings being tighter now. Payroll's already been bumped significantly and quite frankly, the results last year could easily turn off some execs from approving a further increase in spending.

Sorry, are you asking me if I took a s***? (I did)

If people honestly believe that money isn't an issue, they must be ignoring.....well.....the entire offseason and elapsed time up to now. And this is coming from someone frequently defends the organization. But all signs points to AA having to watch his pennies. The Santana situation isn't the only example that points to that. You can argue all you want that the players volunteered it and weren't asked - and that's likely true - but why would they volunteer it if they didn't think it was necessary? Why would the players union get involved to approve it? And why wouldn't front office immediately dispel the rumours when the story broke in order to save some face? They never denied that players would be deferring their salary to get it done. And why would AA clearly state their post season needs and not be involved in any free agent outside of Navarro and his $4 million AAS. Sure, it's easy to argue that they didn't believe in the dollars or years being offered on ANY of the free agent pitchers, but for a team that made it clear acquiring starting pitching was a priority, they sure seemed to back off that pretty hard. Even with guys like Kazmir who weren't looking for long term commitments. And let's not forget the inactivity thus far leading into the deadline. So far one player, making the league minimum, has been traded for. You can argue that they have a healthy payroll and shouldn't be expected to have to increase it. I have no problem with that. But that's another argument altogether. Ultimately it's about looking at the evidence you have and making a reasonable assumption. I could go to taco bell and eat 8 chili cheese burritos, 6 bean burritos, 12 5-layer burittos all while washing it down with an 84 ounce cup of coffee. Even if I didn't write an article about taking a s***, give an interview about me taking a s*** or tell anyone that I took a s*** in the next 48 hours, it's probably fair to assume I took a s***.

He was all but signed without any leak about deferred salary. They went to the players union to approve it! Just because you didn't hear about it doesn't mean it wasn't in the works.

Players don't just offer to do this without reason. And GMs who clearly need to add pieces in the offseason don't stand pat unless there's a reason. Clearly money is an issue.

Ok I gotta admit, I enjoy the whole "who's the pilot" one.

LOL at Buck saying one of best games JAys played all year. More than one mistake, but I'll take it!

Now that was an entertaining game!

Casey!!!!!!!!!!!

How about we get the reliable, never a doubt CJ today. PLEASE!

f*** Navarro is so terrible in the cleanup spot isn't he?

Hell yeah!