The Texas Rangers win the exclusive right to negotiate with Yu Darvish on a Major League contract after bidding a posting fee of $51.17 million, according to Jeff Passan of Yahoo! Sports.

While we’ll have to wait to see what type of contract, if any, is agreed upon by Darvish and the Rangers, we can say that based on the posting fee, the total amount of money that it will end up costing is a lot for a pitcher that hasn’t thrown a single inning of Major League Baseball.

Most arguments against large posting fees and expensive contracts for Japanese pitching is that the history of doing so is fraught with bad investments. Six pitchers from the NPB have been signed by Major League teams after paying posting fees. Here’s the total amount that the team spent on the player (posting fee plus initial contract), and the value by WAR according to FanGraphs that they brought back to their organization based on what the same player would make in free agency:

  • Kazuhisa Ishii, LAD: $23.6 million cost; $2.5 million return + a negative $1.6 million return for one year of Jason Phillips (acquired in trade for Ishii).
  • Ramon Ramirez, NYY: $0.35 million cost; $0 return.
  • Akinori Otsuka, SDP: $1.8 million cost; $7.1 million return + additional return as part of trade that brought back Adrian Gonzalez, Terrmel Sledge and Chris Young.
  • Shinji Mori, TBR: $2.15 million cost; $0 return.
  • Daisuke Matsuzaka, BOS: $103 million cost; $44 million return.
  • Kei Igawa, NYY: $46 million cost; a negative $0.8 million return.

It’s not a racist exercise to compare Darvish to other pitchers from Japan because in most cases we’re talking about them all developing from a young age through a similar system. However, Darvish is unlike any of these other pitchers in that he’s risen through that similar system so quickly while still maintaining a reasonable work load. He also possesses such a uniquely large repertoire of pitches, as we can see in the video below.

While any pitcher’s strikeout highlights are bound to be impressive, it should be remembered that Darvish is using an assortment of different pitches with two strikes, all appearing to be swing and miss strikeout caliber. However, these are Japanese batters that he’s making look foolish, and once again, we come back to the idea that the posting fee, plus a contract will be a lot of money for someone with no experience at the Major League level.

Using the idea that a each win above replacement will cost $5 million on the free agent market, while assuming an inflation rate of 5% per year, we can get a rough idea of how Darvish would have to perform in order to live up to the Rangers’ spending in posting fees and his rumoured asking price of a five year contract worth $75 million.

Note: I feel as though too much analysis on Darvish underplays or outright eliminates the posting fee from the equation. That’s simply not an accurate way of looking at any deal involving the pitcher. In measuring cost to value, the posting fee has to be considered as part of the contract because it’s quite literally part of the cost of acquiring Darvish, and will impact the amount of money being spent on the contract. It’s just the total money will be split two ways, between the Hokkaido Nippon Ham Fighters and Darvish.

An argument could be made that the posting fee is similar to the cost of a trade with the Japanese team, and the contract is a separate entity, but the arrangement is far more comparable to a free agent signing than a trade and contract extension, in that you’re dealing solely in money. It’s also clear what amount of value you’re giving up to negotiate a contract with Darvish, unlike a trade where you’re dealing in projected returns from players in addition to previously signed contracts.

With this in mind, we see that Darvish would have to accumulate something close to 23 wins above replacement for that to work out. So, he’d have to be in the top eight pitchers in the league over a five year period in order for a team spending $125 million to theoretically break even. Of course, the whole idea of spending in baseball is to do better than break even, but let’s look at some of the pitchers that Texas would have to believe he will be as good as in order to justify the signing.

These are the pitchers with more than 23  wins above replacement (according to FanGraphs) over the last five years:

Josh Beckett, Zack Greinke, Felix Hernandez, Cliff Lee, Dan Haren, Tim Lincecum, Justin Verlander, C.C. Sabathia and Roy Halladay.

Financially, it’s very unlikely that this deal will work out, especially when we see the most apt comparisons bringing up Jordan Zimmermann, and not Felix Hernandez.

There is something to be said for potential additions of corporate sponsorship from companies in Japan, but this simply isn’t as certain as might be imagined.

While Jeff Blair in the Globe & Mail suggests that Japanese imports Hideki Matsui and Ichiro! were worth millions of dollars to the New York Yankees and Seattle Mariners, Sam Kennedy, Chief Operating Officer of the Boston Red Sox replying to questions about Daisuke Matsuzaka’s off field value, said:

I know it hasn’t been a financial windfall that some people had predicted, but I do think it was always a baseball decision. There was a lot of made of the business aspect. Did we open some doors in Japan? Yes. Was it a windfall? No. Was it a good baseball move? You can debate that all day long.

Aside: By that last sentence, I’m led to assume that Kennedy’s days are significantly shorter than mine.

It should also be mentioned that any additional international television rights or merchandise sales would go to MLB and split up between all teams, as opposed to being a direct increase in revenue for the Rangers.

Dave Cameron from FanGraphs also brought up the point on a recent podcast that a pitcher is different from an everyday player when it comes to international attendance. It’s unlikely that Yu Darvish is going to make Arlington a tourist attraction for the Japanese, at as much as a regular member of the lineup might, considering the difference in frequency with which both would play.

I’m not sure if that difference might also carry some weight in terms of corporate sponsorship as well. Potential Japanese sponsors might ask: What’s the point in bothering to pay for advertisements at The Ballpark In Arlington if Japanese fans are only watching one in five games?

And also, let’s not begin propagating the myth that Darvish’s star attraction will bring out the local fans in droves. If we look, baseball history informs us that new additions to a lineup don’t bring greater attendance. Wins remain the only thing that brings bigger crowds to the ballpark.

So, yes, if everything goes well, Darvish will bring his share of those. However, those wins could most likely be had with a far less costly investment than the one that has been and will most likely be made in Yu Darvish.

After writing all this, it must be said that if any team can justify overpaying for a need, it is the Texas Rangers who have been to the World Series in both of the last two seasons with the 27th highest payroll in 2010 and the 13th highest payroll in 2011. Over those two years, they had the 14th highest attendance in 2010 and the tenth highest attendance in 2011. This led to a reported $22.6 million operating income in 2010, years before a new, lucrative television deal with FOX will begin in 2014.

As for the roster, the Texas Rangers now have six MLB caliber starters in Darvish, Neftali Feliz, Alexi Ogando, Derek Holland, Matt Harrison and Colby Lewis, as well as two prospects in Martin Perez and Neil Ramirez that will soon be knocking on the door. There are many options for the team going forward, but I expect them to hold steady for the time being and see how Feliz and Ogando do in the rotation to start the year, one that despite the Los Angeles Angels’ recent additions, promises to be a successful one.

Comments (42)

  1. Re: Matsuzaka

    With all due respect I think you’re kind of glossing over the reality that a good decision baseball wise might mean very different things to different people. Matsuzaka was an important(overblown maybe but still a 5.1 WAR from BR) part of a WS winning team. That alone is enough to make the acquisition a good one for just about every fan of the Red Sox and, I’m guessing, a bunch of people in the front office. He’s sucked since, sure, but to paraphrase Bill James it’s not like that means they’ve taken down the banner.

    • Sorry, 3.2 WAR, not 5.1

    • I think you’re overstating Matsuzaka’s contribution. He had a very unsustainable season the year they won as his 4+ FIP attests to. He was okay, but hardly the key contributor his win/loss record or ERA would lead one to believe.

      • You might be right about Dice-K but I still think the larger point remains. If a guy is a noteworthy contributor to a WS winner I think a lot can be forgiven. I mean, me personally as a Blue Jays fan, I’ve never regretted the Kent for Cone deal despite the realities of giving away a 24 year old guy who’d go on to a near-HOF level career for 14 starts from David Cone because of the end result there.

        • Definitely. I agree with what you’re saying, especially in a subjective sense.

          An even more recent example is Colby Rasmus coming to Toronto from St. Louis. The Cardinals likely don’t win the World Series if they don’t make that trade, but Rasmus will provide a ton more value than anyone they got. Is Rzepczynski the only player left on the team?

          • Sure, with the exception that I’m not entirely on board with the Enron style of accounting that sees the future profits of AA’s trades already on the balance sheet.

            I understand the instinct to strictly look at the Darvish signing as a business decision and I’m not ignoring that’s the way Rogers is going to look at it, but the competitive realities of the sport that will dominate fans/baseball people’s perspectives, I think, make some allowances for lasting value from even one year of success.

          • yes, but cash, and in a roundabout way, draft picks as well.

  2. Once again, the rumours we hear of do not happen.

    The rumours we don’t hear, happen. (Wells, Santos, Johnson, Rasmus, and others)

    With the exception of the Halladay deal, I can’t really think of a AA move that we knew about before it was officially announced.

    Jays fans (and I include myself) really put the cart before the horse on Darvish.

    Our 2012 opening day roster is way better than it was last year, with or without Yu.

  3. *sings loudly* With or without Yu… Oh…. I can’t live… with or without Yu…”

    That was fun while it lasted, anyway. Wonder if the Jays will go hard after Matt Garza or Edwin Jackson, or just go into 2012 with the rotation they have.

  4. Part of me thinks that since the Jays didn’t get Darvish and are not interested in Fielder, their best course of action may be to stand pat and figure out what this team has. With so many young players it’s really hard to tell where the holes that need to be filled are.

    As for Darvish, I posted this on Tao’s site:

    I think the thing that bothers me the most was that it looked like if the Jays did win the Darvish bid it would have brought Jays fans back in droves. It’s been a very long time since so many Jays fans have rallied together to support something, and for a very brief moment in time we all believed that ownership was willing to do something spectacular to improve this team, something that while it probably didn’t make much sense on paper, was worth the risk in their minds because they want to build a winner at any cost.

    This didn’t happen and now most fans may go back to believing that Rogers are cheap and they have shown nothing to disprove the rumour that they will only spend once fans come back.

    At the end of the day I know it will be winning that brings the fans back and not the signing of any one player, however it felt pretty damn good to be a Jays fan these past few days and now we go back to an air of uncertainty.

    • That really is it – I don’t think any fan truly understood the risk/reward scenario of bringing in Darvish, but the energy surrounding the team for once in the middle of the winter on a weekday night felt pretty surreal. It seemed as if a lot more fans were engaged with the possibility of the signing than what was a great Leafs game. I am very worried that a bunch of people were lining up on the bandwagon to jump off if we didn’t sign Yu, I really hope that is not the case.

    • I think you could have said

      “It’s been a very long time since so many Leafs fans have rallied together to support something outside of hockey”.

      Much of the same demographic that were seriously upset at the Rangers’ bid victory were the same ones clamoring to bring Brian Burke in from Anaheim, and are now demanding he be run out of town.

      • You mean Ron Wilson right? I have not heard a single person and slim to nil writings about wanting Burke out. There are also a plethora of baseball fans that pay no attention to the Leafs. Use facts, not assumptions when quoting demographics.

  5. The Jays may have dodged a bullet on this one, but I’m still raw that they missed out.

    The questions of “worth” break down when we’re talking about elite talent.

    Do I care if Darvish only provides 21 WAR instead of 23?

    All I can think about is the lack of 21WAR in the lineup that we now have to spend prospects to acquire, and the fact that the best hitter this club has ever seen is now experiencing the same deal as the best pitcher we ever had.

    I also think about the seasons tix which I buy and how excited I was for this baseball season with the prospects of Darvish and Fielder. I can’t remember a time when the Leafs were near a playoff spot and this City was talking baseball.

    Ultimately its a pretty big let down.

  6. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 3 years. All fans should remember that at that point in time that the Blue Jays could have had Chapman and Darvish in their rotation for about 10% money than they were willing to offer. If it would have made a difference, ownership should be taken to task for it. If it wouldn’t have made a difference, then these guys must be the kings of assessing value.

    Right now, ownership is acting like a bunch of first-time home buyers. They’re running around wasting their time entering ‘reasonable’ offers and losing out on every deal to someone else who just wants it more. It’s good for your finances, but you’ll never have the home you want that way. There is always some idiot willing to outbid you. At some point, if you really want it, you have to be that idiot.

      • Drew, if the bank foreclosed on Rogers’ ownership of the Blue Jays it would be a great day. Can someone explain to me why we should give two shits if Rogers turns a profit on its team?

        If you don’t want to spend the money it takes to compete, SELL THE [getting blanked] TEAM!

        • It’s a business, not a toy. You might not like that but it IS a publicly traded company. It is one of the largest employers in Canada. They can operate their business as they see fit. These are TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS we are talking about. You want them to just toss it around like candy?

          That doesn’t make it right but what are you going to do? Pack up your tent and go home?

          Stop fronting. Just do it. Quit. Don’t be a fan. Go watch the Toronto Maple Leafs at Christie Pits for the love of the game. They made the playoffs. Just go. Nobody is stopping you.

          • It is a business, but it is also a marketing tool for Rogers. Like it or not but if the Jays had a good team, more people would feel better about dishing out hundreds of dollars to Rogers monthly.

            Think of it this way. When Labatts originally got the Blue Jays Franchise, they were the #3 beer company in Canada behind Molson and Carling-O’Keefe. When the team won the World Series Labatt’s was the # 1 beer company in Canada and Carling and O’keefe were essentially out of business.

          • It is a business with the unusual anti-trust exemption though. So I think it’s kind of fair for us “customers” to voice objections to the fact that our sole avenue for Major League Baseball isn’t very good and we have no recourse by way of a competitor.

            Except, as you mention, the Maple Leafs. Who, it should be noted, are also a business which is why they keep trying to sell you those fucking raffle tickets.

          • That’s a great explanation of why Rogers might not spend, not why we should be ok with it.

            The support for Rogers’ lack of big spending tends to equivocate two positions: spending big on free agents would be a bad baseball decision, and spending big on free agents would be a bad business decision.

            The fact that Rogers is a corporation, not a baseball fan, doesn’t mean that I have to forgive them for passing up on good baseball decisions because they might be bad business decisions. Again, that just explains why they won’t do it, not why it’s ok that they don’t.

          • Rogers is a publicly traded company. It is UNREASONABLE to expect them to throw around money for intangibles like winning.

            A baseball team is NOT a publicly trading company, and in many ways is not even a traditional business. It is REASONABLE to expect them to do whatever it takes to win.

            Since those two can’t be reconciled, that’s a problem. Only three MLB teams are owned by corporate rather than private interests. If we count out the Braves because of Ted Turner’s personal involvement that leaves two teams with 0 playoff appearances since 2001. In the NFL corporate ownership of teams is categorically not allowed for reasons like this.

            Claiming that the structure of corporate ownership of a team is incompatible with a sport like baseball without salary cap requirements is neither moronic, nor does it make me somehow a shitty fan.

        • But a Baseball team will still have owners and a team’s ownership, corporate or otherwise, still has the final say so in whether or not they plunk down 100+ million dollars.

          As a baseball history nerd I understand the romantic notion of a Col. Jacob Ruppert paying out of pocket for the Yankees so he’d have something to brag about to the Roosevelts and Rockefellers over dinner but nowadays, with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, nobody runs a baseball team for fun and damns the expense. Even a guy like Steinbrenner only spent the way he did because he could do so and still make money.

          To drop the kind of money on we’re talking about any owner or ownership group would have to be convinced that the money would come back to them. Thinking otherwise probably is unreasonable.

      • I’m quite sure that the Rogers would not be financially ruined if the Blue Jays signed a couple of quality free agents.

        P.S. The American real estate market, and their mortgages in particular, are entirely different animals than we have in Canada and their systems promote foreclosures. But of course you already knew that right?

    • Wasn’t Mark Cuban looking to buy a baseball team a little while ago?

      Wonder if he would be interested in one a little further north?

  7. At least the non-signing of Yu Darvish puts to rest the idea that droves of Asians and Persians will naturally come to the ballpark and fill the stands for him.

  8. It’s funny how much outpouring of grief there has been re: not getting Darvish.

    While Darvish would have been fun as a fan, as Parkes points out, the cost just isn’t justified. If we’re blowing that kind of money this offseason, Fielder is the one to do it on, not Darvish.

    For my part, I’m much more upset that we lost out on Latos. We have the prospects to give up, and he provides the same value as Darvish would in a best case scenario, but with much greater certainty. Not to mention, he doesn’t tie the organization’s financial hands with a Wellsian albatross of a contract. Would have left us with the ability to sign bats (Fielder?) or pitching (Grienke, Hamels, Cain?) next year.

    Garza (would be pretty nice) and Gio or Niese (not so nice) just aren’t the same calibre as Latos, and I’m not sure if there is anyone else on the market that is.

    If I’m AA, I stand pat for now. I certainly don’t overpay for any of Garza, Gio or Niese. I stick to the original plan of building towards 2013, see what the kids have got this year (especially re: pitching), and stick to making moves when it’s more of a buyer’s market midseason (see both Escobar, Rasmus trades for examples).

    Bautista is still going to be an anchor in our lineup for the next 3-4 years. I don’t think he’s feeling the Halladay “I’ve been the best player on a bad team for years and I just want to win a championship” anxiety just yet.

    • I agree with you on Latos and in terms of standing pat now. But if you do that, you have to trade Bautista now or next season. He’ll be of no use to you in your 2013 scenario and would get you all kinds of help that would be.

      Not that you do…but it’s amazing to me that everyone worries about Fielder’s impending decline (at 27) but forgets that Bautista just turned 31. If they can’t make a run next year they have to look hard at a deal involving him.

      • Can you explain how Bautista suddenly becomes useless in 2013 and beyond? Will he be the best hitter in baseball still? Probably not. Will he still anchor a major league line up? I would expect so.

        I agree with you on Fielder. I’d love to have a hitter like in years 27-33.

        If only we knew the package that the Jays offered for Latos. I’d have happily included either D’Arnaud or Arencibia, but I’m skeptical that either was in fact included in our offer.

        • I don’t think he’ll be useless, I just think he’ll be far less valuable. As his power declines, his OBP will plumet because he won’t be getting as many free passes. Besides last year, Bautista’s never been a particularly high average or OBP guy. You could go either way with it, I just think the package he could bring back now would be much more valuable than the .265 BA, .330 OBP w/ 20 HR that he’ll be putting up by then.

          I agree on Latos. Our package must have been lame. A Thames, Arenciba, Cecil offer surely would have gotten that done.

    • It’s too bad people overrate Yonder Alonso as much as they do. I like imagining that Latos would be ours if they thought of him properly.

  9. I feel the need to vent.

    I take exception to two statements being made today. First, that Rogers is at fault. Second, that the team is no worse off today than it was a few days ago.

    My premise is that AA screwed the pooch on this one. Here goes:

    There were only three realistic approaches to the Darvish posting bidding. A team could simply pass- as many did- to concentrate on more pressing issues. A team could throw in a low-ball stink bid- just in case. Or… a team could determine that Darvish was the real deal. In this circumstance the argument that we like a player at a certain price becomes irrelevant and the only issue is what will it take to win the bidding.

    We may never know what the Jays bid but if we parse the rumors and industry speculation the number is likely to be somewhere between $45 million and $50 million. If this proves to be the case then the assumption that Rogers cheaped out is only relevant if Rogers told AA what he could bid. And… I doubt that this was the case.

    From my completely personal perspective AA made the case for Darvish, was given the green light to go after him, and was beaten by the Rangers. And that hurts.

    Some are arguing today that the Jays are no worse off but that is far from true. For two reasons. First, an AL team is now better. A team that the Jays have to compete with through the season and for a playoff spot has improved. The Jays may not be absolutely worse but they are now relatively worse and after 18 consecutive years of missing the playoffs if one hasn’t grasped the fact that finishing 3rd in the AL East isn’t much better than finishing 4th… then there is not much more that can be said.

    The second reason is that the hopes of the fans have been dashed. Devastated. Raised and then obliterated. AA may not have taken into consideration how desperate Blue Jays fans are for relevance. How important it is for a world-class city to view itself as something other than fodder. How important it was for the fans to feel as if their team deserved their support.

    Is Darvish worth the price that Texas bid? Years from now we will find out. Is he the second coming of Pedro? A once-in-a-generation opportunity now missed? Was this the chance to acquire a Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky, or LeBron? It is not for me to say. All I know is that there are no prizes for finishing second and reading that AA only likes key players ‘at a price’ is scant consolation for a fan base that arguably deserves better.

    Just an opinion of course.

    • Your whole rant/analysis hangs on the following statement:

      “From my completely personal perspective AA made the case for Darvish, was given the green light to go after him, and was beaten by the Rangers. And that hurts.”

      There is no substantial evidence for this. The ONLY kind of evidence we have for this also told us that the Jays won with a bid north of 50 million, that Bautista hit home runs because of an incredibly unlikely sign-stealing process, and that 9/11 was an inside job.

      Calling it your personal perspective, or just an opinion, doesn’t exonerate you from giving evidence. Instead of casting aspersions on AA’s ability to manage assets (which so far has seemed close to impeccable), step back, take a deep breath, and think if you really have good reason to get angry about this. You probably don’t.

  10. I’m missing something in your argument. You say the following:

    There were only three realistic approaches to the Darvish posting bidding. A team could simply pass- as many did- to concentrate on more pressing issues. A team could throw in a low-ball stink bid- just in case. Or… a team could determine that Darvish was the real deal. In this circumstance the argument that we like a player at a certain price becomes irrelevant and the only issue is what will it take to win the bidding.

    But isn’t the fourth option the one you dismiss at the end of that paragraph? In other words, one doesn’t just believe Darvish is the “real deal” full stop. One looks at his numbers, the scouting reports etc. and one does a bit of educated guesswork to estimate what his range of success will be in the MLB (as Fangraphs did by comparing him to Jordan Zimmerman). Once you’ve done that, you place a value on that production, taking into account the risk of underperformance as well as any additional upside.

    In this case, if the Jays did bid in the 40-50 million range, that was the value they placed on him and they got beat out. If it was in the 20-30 million range, then the same argument plays out. It’s why the Yankees only put in a modest bid. They simply didn’t place the same value on him that the Rangers did.

    I think your actual bone of contention is simply that if the Jays valued Darvish at close to 50 million, then losing to a bid of 51.7 million was a mistake. If both AA and Daniels valued Darvish at around 50 million, then AA got beat, just as he got beat out in the bidding for Latos.

    Do I wish AA beat Daniels? No. Do I wish he beat Jocketty? Yes. Will AA make more moves towards placing a real contender on the field for 2013? I can’t help but think that he will.

    • I guess my point was that there is a level where a team’s estimation of price and/or value becomes irrelevant. There is no way to know whether Darvish was ‘worth’ $45 million, $50 million, or $60 million. There are simply too many variables. At that point the scales tip from what he is worth to what it will take. From a fan’s perspective- and also from a major supporter of AA- this was a painful and most unproductive exercise.

      • I disagree that there is no difference between 45 and 60 million. It all depends what value the Jays actually placed on Darvish

        It’s possible that the Jays reasonably valued Darvish at 75-90 million over 6 years (which does strike me as reasonable), in which case, a 45 million bid would actually have been above their valuation by at least 15 million (assuming it would take at least 10 million/year to sign Darvish, which is also unreasonably conservative). In such a case, exceeding their already overly ambitious bid by a further 15 million would make no sense. While you can’t guarantee his success or value (as you say too many variables) you can certainly place an upper limit on what you are willing to pay, factoring the uncertainty into that value.

        If the Jays instead valued Darvish as a 100-120 million player, then 45 is a more reasonable valuation. In which case, your logic does follow to some extent.

        For my part, I don’t think that AA would value an unproven Darvish on par with a proven Cliff Lee (in other words, I’d hope he valued Darvish at closer to 75-90 instead of 120). And we really don’t even know what the Jays bid at all.

        Again, all of that comes with the caveat that maybe Darvish would pay for himself in a way that other players don’t. I really have no idea in that regard.

        • While all of that makes sense, I think you have to include a lesson from history in your logic. If you think Darvish is the real deal, that he’ll be better than Dice-K, and you want to get him, then you have to expect that the posting fee will exceed the Dice-K level. There is no way you should lose to a bid that is only half a million over Dice-K money. No way.

          Now, if you don’t think he’s worth that money, fine, but then don’t bother going after him. Every team involved should have known that they weren’t going to get him cheap and that Dice-K money would be out there. It’s like offering Pujols 5 years at $20 mil per, it’s a lot of money, and probably a fair offer, but it’s also well below market value and thus a total waste of time.

  11. Fucking basball, man.

  12. I think this does put the Jays back a year. I was seeing a fairly reasonable scenario where Darvish is signed, a guy like Beltran is signed (both adding, combined, at minimum around 5 wins), and hopefully full years of Rasmus, Johnson, Lawrie over Davis, Patterson, Nix, J-Mac, and Hill putting the Jays over the hill and in competition mode.

    But now that the window for adding a 25 year old power pitcher who, at worst, will probably be a 2 (and adding him without giving up picks/prospects, only giving up the sunk cost of spending – but $ can change drastically from increased revenue, it’s harder to increase your picks/prospects as fast) , has ended, I’d MUCH rather save the $ and roster spot for one of Cain/Grienke/Hamels next year, put the Darvish/Beltran plans of hastening our competitiveness away, and have another year of really settling on what we have in Arencibia, Snider, Thames, Cecil, etc – a bigger sample to see if they grow and if they will be contributing parts of playoff teams in the future.

    Sucks, but one of those 2012 FAs will be a hell of a better choice re: asset management, player quality, and opportunity cost than trading a bunch of prospects for overrated pitchers now (Gio, Garza, etc). We do need a #2 pitcher pretty damn desperately, but just because we missed out on our best chance to acquire one without giving up picks/prospects doesn’t mean we have to blow our load now just ’cause.

    just have to be patient and do the smart thing – the Jays don’t have an obligation to spend money (Griffin!), but they do have an obligation to manage assets in a way that creates a winning team and spending money CAN be a way to do that (whether on Darvish now, or on a 2012 FA pitcher in a year).

  13. I knew you’d have an article that could help ease the sting from losing the bid. The whole bidding process leads to teams overpaying, but you have to admit, it was exciting.

  14. question, anthopolous is staying tight lipped about everything explaining that then teams don’t know what kind of money the jays have.

    but, by not at least saying we amde a bid in this situation and not going after the big name free agents and making cost effective moves like santos. already give them too much of an idea?

    i mean, all these moves equal a team clearly on a tight budget and trying not to let anyone know about it. If you at least say we placed a bid or we have interest in prince it lets teams know you are for real.

    even the freakin orioles GM said he has interest in fielder and everyone knows they don’t have a huge payroll and are complete shit.but, it does let teams know that they are willing to w/e they can to try to get someone like that.

    Mr. Anth… says nothing and this time i think it is not a smart move. Everyone hears these rumours that you are for real and are in on the big names out there.but, you don’t even confirm them after the fact. which makes people think they are just bullshit rumours and gives them an idea that you aren’t one of the big boys or aren’t for real.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *