2011 Toronto Blue Jays Offseason Thread

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

Lots of people speculating it would be Frasor...all this from the thread on the jays board.

Wouldn't like that at all. Just from a future return standpoint (which IMO is paramount if you consider the Jays to still be in a building phase) you'd be sacrificing 2 upcoming free agents who are likely to have compensation value (Frasor and in a roundabout way Rivera since he'd likely lose the playing time to qualify) in order to get 1 back. Unless you could flip Rivera for a suitable return that is. I'd rather see Janssen and/or Villaneavu sent out if at all possible.

Nice to hear that the glove is sound though... if this happens.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

The Toronto Blue Jays and reliever Jason Frasor avoided arbitration by agreeing to a US$3.5-million, one-year deal with a club option for 2012 on Friday night.

Having Frasor under contract with a club option could potentially make him more attractive to other clubs in need of bullpen help down the road. Relief depth is also very appealing for Anthopoulos and new manager John Farrell.

http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=351484

[bluejays]

I'm not a fan of Frasor, though this year he did well, but I'm definitely not a fan of Kouzmanoff. Sure he's great defensively, but he's got a hole in his bat and there's no offence going to be generated when he's up to bat. Is Batista really that bad defensively to justify this type of move? I think sometimes the public runs with ideas that are thrown out there to the media. Keep Frasor in the bullpen, keep Batista at 3rd. No need to poke holes in the lineup for a defensive specialist.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by fleury

I'm not a fan of Frasor, though this year he did well, but I'm definitely not a fan of Kouzmanoff. Sure he's great defensively, but he's got a hole in his bat and there's no offence going to be generated when he's up to bat. Is Batista really that bad defensively to justify this type of move? I think sometimes the public runs with ideas that are thrown out there to the media. Keep Frasor in the bullpen, keep Batista at 3rd. No need to poke holes in the lineup for a defensive specialist.

Bautista wants to play RF, which is why the Jays are probably looking for a 3B.

Kouzmanoff is actually so good defensively that he's a 2.9 WAR player which is actually fairly good. For comparison, Alex Rodriguez was only a 3.9 WAR player.

Defense can and does make a difference, even though his bat blows.

[Flickered Flame]

The A's have been looking for a new 3rd baseman all winter and for good reason, Kouzmanoff is just not that good. His glove is just not good enough to make up for his bat. Sadly, he led the A's in HR's with 16 but has only cracked 20 once and that was 3 full seasons ago. The A's have actually offered Kouz in a couple of other potential deals this winter with no luck. For the A's to be willing to take on Figgins contract, you should know there are issues with Kouz.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Flickered Flame

The A's have been looking for a new 3rd baseman all winter and for good reason, Kouzmanoff is just not that good. His glove is just not good enough to make up for his bat. Sadly, he led the A's in HR's with 16 but has only cracked 20 once and that was 3 full seasons ago. The A's have actually offered Kouz in a couple of other potential deals this winter with no luck. For the A's to be willing to take on Figgins contract, you should know there are issues with Kouz.

Yep, he does suck with the bat, but the Jays are likely going to need a short term stop gap while Lawrie develops and can either take over 2B or 3B.

Plus having two players who aren't known for defense at 1B in EE and Lind, having someone who can play exceptionally at third would be a huge bonus in helping them ease into the position, instead of having errant throws here there and everywhere like when EE was there.

[Flickered Flame]

I'm hoping the Jays-A's-M's can make this work. Figgins is on the downside of his career but as an A's fan, I would be more than happy to get rid of Kouz. He came to Oakland with big expectations and really failed imo. He can't hit right handers and is only average vs left handers. His glove is solid but I don't think he is anything great. But I do agree, he is much better than EE.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Flickered Flame

I'm hoping the Jays-A's-M's can make this work. Figgins is on the downside of his career but as an A's fan, I would be more than happy to get rid of Kouz. He came to Oakland with big expectations and really failed imo. He can't hit right handers and is only average vs left handers. His glove is solid but I don't think he is anything great. But I do agree, he is much better than EE.

It seems like this could work for each team. It's not often that happens.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

It seems like this could work for each team. It's not often that happens.

Ant recently did an interview, Wilner I think, where he emphasized trades should be win-win because you only have twenty nine GMs to work with.

A win-win trade is in the best interest in the club.


As for Frasor being Type-A, teams aren't going to give up a first for him anyway. At best it's a Burnett-compensation (type a = late 3rd)

[Flickered Flame]

Received an email from my buddies in Oakland that I shouldn't expect the A's to land Figgins.

[RedHot25]

From the not likely file....

http://tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=352991

DOUBLE PLAY: JAYS SHOULD LOOK TO ADD MICHAEL YOUNG

With the Michael Young situation in Texas looking like it's heading to a rather unpleasant ending, baseball fans North of the 49th parallel have to wonder if the one-time Toronto Blue Jays farm hand would make sense for the club in the 2011 season and beyond.

[JayP]

A 34 year old corner infielder who put OPS's of .774, .741, and .784 in 2010, 2008, and 2007? Who's getting $11-$13mil the next three seasons (although Texas will pick up some salary it's still a three year commitment)? No thanks.

I'll deal with EE/Bautista/etc. at third this season and not slow down Lawrie's development for an aging and declining superstar.

[Gozer]

Beyond disagreeing with the author, I think that article reflects poorly on TSN (in baseball).

Just brutal.

[JustAnotherGuy]

Originally Posted by JayP

A 34 year old corner infielder who put OPS's of .774, .741, and .784 in 2010, 2008, and 2007? Who's getting $11-$13mil the next three seasons (although Texas will pick up some salary it's still a three year commitment)? No thanks.

I'll deal with EE/Bautista/etc. at third this season and not slow down Lawrie's development for an aging and declining superstar.

His OPS's are decent compared to the Blue Jays players from last year. If his contract was only two years I think he would be a good pick up for the Jays.

[zukes]

Just got my tickets for the opener, pumped! 2nd level, 3rd base, 9th row.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

His OPS's are decent compared to the Blue Jays players from last year. If his contract was only two years I think he would be a good pick up for the Jays.

Challenge is the value & length of his contract, in my view Young is not an option for the Jays.

I would rather see Bautista play 3rd and give time for Lawrie to take over in 2012 timeframe.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

His OPS's are decent compared to the Blue Jays players from last year. If his contract was only two years I think he would be a good pick up for the Jays.

Those OPS's are worse than EE's career average of .790. EE makes 1/8th the salary and is locked up for one year, giving us the flexibility to promote Lawrie whenever he's ready. Why would we replace EE with a guy who's very likely going to produce about the same, but be locked into him for 3 more years at a ridiculously inflated salary?

Michael Young = Vernon Wells 2.0. I don't get why people want to add another aging, declining, and over-rated veteran immediately after dumping one.

[Sylvanfan]

First off no way Young would agree to a trade to Toronto, and second...it would completely go against everything else Anthopolis has done this offseason.

Whether you like every move or not, I think it's pretty clear that he has a plan and every move he makes more or less fit's into that plan in some way shape or form. A trade for Young would be completely opposite of the other moves he's been making.

[JustAnotherGuy]

Originally Posted by JayP

Those OPS's are worse than EE's career average of .790. EE makes 1/8th the salary and is locked up for one year, giving us the flexibility to promote Lawrie whenever he's ready. Why would we replace EE with a guy who's very likely going to produce about the same, but be locked into him for 3 more years at a ridiculously inflated salary?

Michael Young = Vernon Wells 2.0. I don't get why people want to add another aging, declining, and over-rated veteran immediately after dumping one.

It is my perception that Young is a clutch player etc.

I suppose it doesn't help that I do not think very much of EE. Seems he is cold for most of the time and then gets 3 homers off a weak pitcher.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherGuy

It is my perception that Young is a clutch player etc.

There is no such thing as clutch.

If he was a defensively sound shortstop and put those numbers up, then we could have a different conversation.