Blue Jays Discussion: Off-season Edition 5.0 - The Winter Meeting Chronicles

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

Is the following scenario really unrealistic:

Dump Smoak on somebody, you probably have to eat some money, but oh well. Some rebuilding team out there will be willing to take a flyer on him in case he is a late bloomer.

Sign EE. Unless his market goes crazy now that Fowler is off the table, the Jays should have the money to bring him back. If they had $15 million-something for Fowler, surely they have cash for EE.

EE could play first. Morales at DH and Pearce could man an OF spot and fill in at other spots where needed. In his career Pearce has been a platoon guy. Most plate appearances he has ever had in a year is 383.

It's not the ideal situation, but it's workable.

1B: EE
2B: Travis
3B: Donaldson
SS: Tulo
C: Martin
CF: Pillar
RF: Pearce
LF: Upton
DH: Morales

Obviously there is work to do in the OF, but it's the Jays could take a look at Pompey, they still have Carerra and possible a lower end OF free agent. With Smoak off the roster it would open the flexibility to carry an extra OF.

Its not unrealistic, and I said it after Pearce signed and people were jumping off of buildings because they felt it was an automatic no to Edwin. Pearce is flexible enough that he can play the outfield (105 games vs. 119 at 1B over the last 3 years), while Edwin has played an average of 72 per season since 2012 and has not broken in half as many media members have implied he would playing ANY time at first. Even Morales played roughly ~30 games per season from '10-'14 before going to KC; and the only reason he didn't play more in KC is because they were crazy enough to play Eric Hosmer every day.

You could very easily manage it for two seasons. Pearce shouldn't be playing every day anyway if you want to get the most out of him.

 

[Longshot]

its not literally throwing money out the window. But it is almost literally blowing smoak up the fan base's *****

What does this even mean?

They signed Smoak to an extension in the middle of the season.

At the time, they were locking up a useful bench player/back up 1B.

Your comment would imply management is using Smoak's presence on the roster as some kind of justification for not making other moves. As in: "We have Smoak, therefore we don't need Player X." I haven't seen that.

 

[Longshot]

Its not unrealistic, and I said it after Pearce signed and people were jumping off of buildings because they felt it was an automatic no to Edwin. Pearce is flexible enough that he can play the outfield (105 games vs. 119 at 1B over the last 3 years), while Edwin has played an average of 72 per season since 2012 and has not broken in half as many media members have implied he would playing ANY time at first. Even Morales played roughly ~30 games per season from '10-'14 before going to KC; and the only reason he didn't play more in KC is because they were crazy enough to play Eric Hosmer every day.

You could very easily manage it for two seasons. Pearce shouldn't be playing every day anyway if you want to get the most out of him.

With Fowler (who appears to have been the Jays primary target) off the market, the logical thing to me would be to pivot back to EE and try to work something out. Heck, they could do it and still keep Smoak on the roster. They would have to look at Pearce at an OF.

I don't think this is what the Jays have in mind. I think they're looking more towards signing a couple of players with the EE/Fowler money. But stranger things have happened.

 

[zeke]

That's exactly what they've done...

- Martin $20MM
- Tulo $20MM
- Donaldson $17MM
- Estrada $14.5MM
- Liriano $13.6MM
- Happ $13.0MM

- Kids in "depth roles" (whatever that loaded statement means): Sanchez, Stroman, Osuna, Biagini, Pillar, Travis, Pompey, and the younger kids on the 40-man who could potentially see time that I mentioned prior.

"they" didn't do donaldson, martin, tulo, sanchez, stroman, osuna - the guys at the top of the roster.

"they" did smoak, upton, morales, pearce, happ, liriano.

 

[RoyalCitySlicker]

"they" didn't do donaldson, martin, tulo, sanchez, stroman, osuna - the guys at the top of the roster.

"they" did smoak, upton, morales, pearce, happ, liriano.

Grilli too

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

"they" didn't do donaldson, martin, tulo, sanchez, stroman, osuna - the guys at the top of the roster.

"they" did smoak, upton, morales, pearce, happ, liriano.

Oooooh I get it! So those contracts don't count then.

(DJQ opens his office door and yells out to his secretary)

Vera! Get Rob Manfred on the phone! Somebody's gotta tell him the contracts on the books for the Jays that were in place prior to AA leaving shouldn't be counted, but the players should still...you know, be under contract. Vera!!! The phone!!!

(DJQ returns to his computer)

She's working on it, Zeke. We should have things straight by Monday.

 

[zeke]

Oooooh I get it! So those contracts don't count then.

(DJQ opens his office door and yells out to his secretary)

Vera! Get Rob Manfred on the phone! Somebody's gotta tell him the contracts on the books for the Jays that were in place prior to AA leaving shouldn't be counted, but the players should still...you know, be under contract. Vera!!! The phone!!!

(DJQ returns to his computer)

She's working on it, Zeke. We should have things straight by Monday.

if you want to open up playing time for borderline non-star prospects, you don't clog the bottom of the roster with guaranteed contract vets.

 

[Walshy7]

What does this even mean?

They signed Smoak to an extension in the middle of the season.

At the time, they were locking up a useful bench player/back up 1B.

Your comment would imply management is using Smoak's presence on the roster as some kind of justification for not making other moves. As in: "We have Smoak, therefore we don't need Player X." I haven't seen that.

ok man, chill out. I was replying to someone saying they were literally throwing money out the window but you have no issue with that.

 

[Longshot]

ok man, chill out. I was replying to someone saying they were literally throwing money out the window but you have no issue with that.

I am chilli. I was questioning what your comment meant. That's what happens on this board. If you say something, expect to be questioned or even challenged.

And when did I say I was okay with Smoak's contract/signing?

You said management is "blowing smoke..." on the Smoak issue. I challenged you to explain. You didn't, but instead decided to imply I was okay with the contract, which is untrue.

I presented the circumstances/timing under which Smoak was signed and why. I made no comment on whether or not the deal was a good one.

 

[teeder333*]

We better start praying that Smoak somehow learns to hit a ball with any curve or dip on it over the winter. Probably a 3% chance that happens, but if it did, guy would be bank.

 

[Walshy7]

I am chilli. I was questioning what your comment meant. That's what happens on this board. If you say something, expect to be questioned or even challenged.

And when did I say I was okay with Smoak's contract/signing?

You said management is "blowing smoke..." on the Smoak issue. I challenged you to explain. You didn't, but instead decided to imply I was okay with the contract, which is untrue.

I presented the circumstances/timing under which Smoak was signed and why. I made no comment on whether or not the deal was a good one.

well you love to misread and I said you were ok with a guy saying "they are literally throwing money out the window" speaking about smoak's contract, I have no idea if you like or dislike smoaks contract nor do I care

 

[Canada4Gold]

I'm pretty sure Walshy just wanted to use Smoak as a pun

 

[Longshot]

well you love to misread and I said you were ok with a guy saying "they are literally throwing money out the window" speaking about smoak's contract, I have no idea if you like or dislike smoaks contract nor do I care

You said this: "But it is almost literally blowing smoak up the fan base's *****"

I asked you to explain.

You didn't.

Instead you implied I said something I didn't say.

And now you go on ignore with some many other casuals...

 

[Walshy7]

is that guy for real?

 

[Discoverer]

if you want to open up playing time for borderline non-star prospects, you don't clog the bottom of the roster with guaranteed contract vets.

Which vets on guaranteed contracts offer production that could reasonably be expected to be matched internally? Smoak and Upton. Smoak can be moved if needed, and Upton could not only be moved but would actually have a bit of value since he's only owed about $1 million.

Not only that, but none of the "borderline non-star prospects" are ready to be in the majors on opening day.

 

[Eyedea]

no, they're predicting he plays his usual strict platoon role.

Proj.: 482pa
2016: 438pa --- 405pa vRH, 33pa vLH
2015: 452pa --- 399pa vRH, 53pa vLH
2014: 521pa --- 455pa vRH, 66pa vLH

482pa in 115 games vs 438pa in 137 games last season. How are they predicting the same strict platoon role when they are literally adding plate appearances and subtracting games? If you can find a vsR wRC+ projection for him, that would be better applied. Last year for instance he was projected for a 115 wRC+ vs righties. It's not terribly higher than the overall 108 projected this year, but nevertheless either or would be of significant value for the Jays in a platoon role with Upton. You would be replacing Fowler's 600pa for a fraction of the price.

 

[Walshy7]

I'm pretty sure Walshy just wanted to use Smoak as a pun

I really did, granted wasn't too funny but man I got some **** for it. And I was questioning why he was ok with another poster saying "they where literally throwing money out the window" in relation to smoaks contract when "literally" was used wrong but my stupid little pun was critiqued all the way to the ignore list.


anyway no biggie back to some baseball sorry about that guys and girls.

 

[Leaftors]

I really did, granted wasn't too funny but man I got some **** for it. And I was questioning why he was ok with another poster saying "they where literally throwing money out the window" in relation to smoaks contract when "literally" was used wrong but my stupid little pun was critiqued all the way to the ignore list.


anyway no biggie back to some baseball sorry about that guys and girls.

Come on man. This is a baseball forum, this is serious stuff, no joking aloud here.

 

[Walshy7]

Come on man. This is a baseball forum, this is serious stuff, no joking aloud here.

noted

 

[Leaftors]

noted

I mean, it was a longshot you thought someone wouldnt get mad at about it..


Anyone?

 

[zeke]

Which vets on guaranteed contracts offer production that could reasonably be expected to be matched internally? Smoak and Upton.

correct.

Not only that, but none of the "borderline non-star prospects" are ready to be in the majors on opening day.

hey don't look at me - Diamond J's the one who said "get younger and faster" meant making room for the kids.

 

[zeke]

I really did, granted wasn't too funny but man I got some **** for it. And I was questioning why he was ok with another poster saying "they where literally throwing money out the window" in relation to smoaks contract when "literally" was used wrong but my stupid little pun was critiqued all the way to the ignore list.


anyway no biggie back to some baseball sorry about that guys and girls.

i will literally punch you.

 

[Walshy7]

i will literally punch you.

well if we were in the same place or knew each other you would be using literally correctly

 

[zeke]

482pa in 115 games vs 438pa in 137 games last season. How are they predicting the same strict platoon role when they are literally adding plate appearances and subtracting games? If you can find a vsR wRC+ projection for him, that would be better applied. Last year for instance he was projected for a 115 wRC+ vs righties. It's not terribly higher than the overall 108 projected this year, but nevertheless either or would be of significant value for the Jays in a platoon role with Upton. You would be replacing Fowler's 600pa for a fraction of the price.

smith is a platoon bat, always has been, always will. he doesn't face lefties. he's projected to do the same this year.

as for the number of games, it's probably a projection of games started, due to a difficulty projecting pinch hit appearances. last year for example he started 102gms, pinch hit in 35. the year before 107/29. etc.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Bickford 50 game suspension for 2nd positive test for drug of abuse