jmomcc
-
Posts
1,039 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Toronto Blue Jays Videos
2025 Toronto Blue Jays Top Prospects Ranking
Toronto Blue Jays Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Toronto Blue Jays Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by jmomcc
-
They were two of the best prospects traded the entire day. I just read Keith Law's review and he gave us kudos for being willing to trade real prospects. Just us and the padres. Everyone else dipped WAY into their farms.
-
Great. Buy a rental who strikes people out and find another fisher next year.
-
Let's say we were sellers and we got roden and rojas (let's say 45+ position player ready for the majors and a probable back end starter) for Fisher. Would you think 'wow, that's a big return for a guy with one good year' or would you think its fair? I would think that is an absolute haul and just think that i'll find another fisher. Fisher has similar stuff+ and strikes more people out.
-
Bieber is a good signing albeit risky. That is worth the risk.
-
The problem is that he could be bad that year and you don't get anything. Its my opinion that relievers are just inherently more variable than starters.
-
So... pay the much lower price on Bednar then. Obviously. Or Helsley.
-
Well, yea the twins are obviously really good at producing relievers. That's probably why they are so happy to trade them all.
-
If Varland starts, i love it. If that's the plan, that could be awesome.
-
That's not great for a leverage guy. That's below Sandlin for reference.
-
Doval is debateable. There is no one in the entire world who thinks varland is better than bednar. Also, the fact they both got sent down is the exact reason why paying for 5 years of control is dumb. They both peaked way way higher than varland. They both flamed out at times. Maybe that should be a lesson.
-
He's under 9ks per 9 with a really low HR rate. Is that sustainable? My bar for so good that i want to pay for control begins with a much higher strikeout rate. They also produced Fisher and Little this year which was extremely valuable. Why not back yourself to do that next year? If he can start... that's different. If his velo has ticked up independently of him switching to relief.. and he can maintain 85% of his stuff starting, then i love it. Otherwise, we just paid a high price for a reliever who doesn't strike people out, when that is like the main thing everyone wants in a leverage reliever.
-
I could see it as a desperation move maybe
-
Varland had his very first ever productive season in baseball this year. He is the guy who just made changes and got better. You are just illustrating why you don't pay for control of god damn relievers.
-
Years of control don't matter. But track record for the next few months matter to me. You don't have to pay for the track record. You have to pay for the control. Doval struck out 12 per 9 last year with a 3.44 xERA. That's good. .
-
What have they done pitching wise where i'd assume he knows more than cashman or the rays when it comes to acquiring pitching at the deadline? They are considered two of the best pitching orgs in baseball. Atkins has done nothing to deserve some kind of genius status and kudos for doing the 'unpredictable' thing. He's a thoroughly middle of the road gm who has ONE homegrown starter in ten years. He's not a bad gm but he's not some genius where only the 'smart' people out there can really digest how clever it is to sign varland for his 5 years of control. What a mystifying concept us plebs could never understand.
-
Isn't the NL considered better than the AL this year? it is debateable but we PAID a lot more
-
You see that doval has 4 years of track record and still strikes out more guys than varland who has zero years of track record even in his down year? Give me the first guy.
-
Doval
-
The more i look at varland.. i just don't see it. His stuff really played up in relief but he's still not even 9k/9. This is the literal first year he's been good and he's 27. He throws hard and he gets groundballs. That's nice but why is that so important in terms of getting control? The yankees got two better relievers for less than we paid for one. That matters way more this year. they both also have way more track record. Either spend more and get Jax who strikes out the world and has control. Or spend less and get better rentals. We chose the weird middle where we got control of someone with no track record and doesn't strike people out. He's essentially a slightly worse version of Fisher. I love fisher. The point is we can create our own fisher again next year. We don't need to buy control of that.
-
Athletic review of our deadline is that we are one of the losers of the deadline. Should have got better relievers essentially.
-
I'd definitely take Roden over Loperfido. I think our bullpen is much improved for this year though. Maybe one more rental reliever but varland and dominquez are good adds. I just don't like the price.
-
The Twins don't have all these guys by coincidence. They think they can just make new ones. they also are being sold. Although worrying about varland's money is weird. We did pay a lot.
-
How long is the list of relievers who are good for 5 years?
-
You are massively underestimating someone who had a bad first taste of the majors.
-
France must have been just a throw in? I just don't see how he fits other than maybe DHing twice a week and pinch hitting.
