Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Marcum, Jays avoid arbitration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Marcum, Jays avoid arbitration

    TORONTO -- Shaun Marcum will be aiming for a spot in the Blue Jays' rotation this spring and an arbitration hearing will not be interupting his schedule. On Monday, Toronto avoided arbitration with the pitcher, agreeing to a contract for the upcoming season.

    In his first year of arbitration eligibility, Marcum settled with the Blue Jays on a contract worth $850,000 for the 2010 campaign. The right-hander will be in the mix for a starting role with Toronto this year after missing all of last season due to Tommy John elbow ligament replacement surgery on his pitching elbow.
    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?...=.jsp&c_id=mlb

  • #2
    And the other arbitration-eligible players have also been signed:

    On Tuesday the team signed all five of the team's arbitration eligible players well ahead of spring training. Working to beat a deadline imposed by the new general manager, closer Jason Frasor (US$2.65 million), lefty Brian Tallet ($2 million) and right-handed relievers Shawn Camp ($1.15 million), Jeremy Accardo ($1.08 million) and Casey Janssen ($700,000) each agreed to one-year deals.

    Comment


    • #3
      They better give Accardo a spot in that bullpen this year. If they outright him to Vegas, I'll flip.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Big_Mac View Post
        They better give Accardo a spot in that bullpen this year. If they outright him to Vegas, I'll flip.
        He has to earn it, never assume an unproven arm will be lighting it up

        Comment


        • #5
          Would you classify Accardo as unproven?

          I mean, I believe in making people compete for their spots. But at the same time we saw last year for example that even though Jason Lane lit it up in ST, he was picked over for players with previous success.

          In the same vein, I'm cool with Snider having to earn his spot (Wells should have to do the same, but that's another story. ). As much that means you look at how he performs in ST, that doens't mean that you ignore everything he's done before. I think the Accardo situation should be similar - the dude has been good when he's been in the bigs for the most part and that should give him an edge over other players with less cred.

          Assuming he pitches well in ST, which I'm betting he will, he had better make the squad. I mean, he should have been up last year.

          Speaking of which, does anyone know if keeping Accardo in AAA really was a Cito Gaston move? Or am I (among others) just attributing it to him because I want more things to hate on Cito for?
          WAMCO!

          Comment


          • #6
            If 6 or 7 other guys outplay Accardo in ST, then he should start the year in AAA. I don't see that being likely though. I don't exactly know what the deal was last year, but we all know what Accardo can do, and I'd be surprised not to see him in the Blue Jays bullpen.
            Like Maple Syrup, Canada's evil oozes over the United States.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Richmond Hill Phoenix View Post
              Speaking of which, does anyone know if keeping Accardo in AAA really was a Cito Gaston move? Or am I (among others) just attributing it to him because I want more things to hate on Cito for?
              I *believe* it was Cito's call. However, I do agree with his reasoning behind the move. Accardo had options and if we didn't send him down, we would risk losing whatever arm we sent down (and at that time, it would've been Camp who ended up with something like a 3.50 ERA, not bad). Now say we kept Accardo and there was an injury at the major league level, we no longer have a "go to" arm to bring up.

              Comment


              • #8
                Accardo being in AAA last year was entire Cito, IMO. Cito tried to make him into a starter (that move itself was beyond me, but we will leave that alone) and Accardo got ripped as a starter. Jeremy tells the media that his starting is a bad idea and more (wrong move on his part) and Cito promptly says FU and escorts Accardo to Vegas for the year.

                Here are a few names that were called up before Accardo was at one point: Robert Ray, Dick Hayhurst, Bryan Bullington and Bill Murphy. Accardo, imo, is way better than any of these guys and the only reason Accardo was kept in the PCL behind these guys was for what transpired in ST. Once again, this is all just my theories but unless you think Bryan Bullington is a better bullpen option than Jeremy Accardo, it has a bit of merit.

                And sorry, I have to disagree with the whole 'he has options' thing. That could have been a reason but to me, bring your best 25 with you across the border to start the year. Don't jerk a guy around because he can spend a year in AAA. (BTW, you are right, it would have been Camp probably and looking back it was the right move.)

                Meanwhile, this year, I guess Accardo has to earn a spot and all of that but your best seven Toronto relievers at this point has to include Accardo, IMO. He has pitched well before for this club and he still has the stuff. He was good last year when he was here.

                I guess I should change what I put originally though. I just feel Accardo got railroaded by Cito last year and I just hope, for his career's sake, they didn't re-up him this year just so they can mess around with him again.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I highly doubt AA will let an essentially lame duck manager mess with a good young player while the Blue jays are looking to rebuild past Cito's tenure as manager.

                  Theoretically, if the Blue Jays were a serious WS contender this season, you could see Cito getting away with it because you don't wanna mess with that. The Blue Jays, however, are on the complete opposite end of the spectrum.
                  Like Maple Syrup, Canada's evil oozes over the United States.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I was going to write a few paragraphs on why we should have Accardo up regardless, but then it kind of hit me that arguing over Camp vs. Accardo is somewhat akin to re-arranging the deck chairs as the Titanic goes down (Shea Hillenbrand reference not intended btw...).

                    I hate being in the AL East.
                    WAMCO!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It looks like it will be between Accardo, Frasor and Downs for the closer(s) role. Personally, I don't think there's any need for just one guy to be designated for such a job; the three can share the position based on who's best suited for a particular game.

                      Now, what's going to happen with Litsch and McGowan?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Defense Counts! View Post
                        It looks like it will be between Accardo, Frasor and Downs for the closer(s) role. Personally, I don't think there's any need for just one guy to be designated for such a job; the three can share the position based on who's best suited for a particular game.

                        Now, what's going to happen with Litsch and McGowan?
                        Sorry, I don't like the closer-by-committee idea. Boston tried it a few years back and when it failed, the ended up getting Foulke. I think guys in the bullpen need designed roles to be successful and to get into rhythms. Myself, I would like to see Frasor given a shot at being the closer.

                        As for Litsch and McGowan, I don't have a clue, I'm sure we will know more be spring training what their status is with their injuries.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I don't think Accardo is in the plans for the closer role at all. At this point in time, indications seem to be that Frasor has the step-up on Downs, which I think is probably best. Frasor does a good job of killing the pace of the game with his 30 second breaks between pitches, so it'll be harder for them to gain momentum in the inning :P

                          As for Litsch and McGowan, I believe Litsch isn't expected back until somewhere around July. McGowan says he's ready to compete for a job during the spring and he's out of options, so if he's seriously healthy and ready to pitch again, he's a lock to make the club IMO. Whether he's ready to start yet, who knows, but he'll definitely be with us even if it's just in a reliever capacity.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Big_Mac View Post
                            Sorry, I don't like the closer-by-committee idea. Boston tried it a few years back and when it failed, the ended up getting Foulke. I think guys in the bullpen need designed roles to be successful and to get into rhythms.
                            One failure is weak evidence. How did teams get by before LaRussa invented the closer role?

                            The best reliever on the team should be used when the game is on the line. If the score is close in the seventh inning with the bases loaded, why would you bring in a weaker pitcher and risk losing the game at that point? The idea of only using the best RP in the ninth with nobody on base and a two or three run lead is just silly. One of the ESPN writers wrote an article on why the save is grossly overrated, and he quoted a statistical summary based on decades of games which showed that a lead in the ninth, even of just one run, is almost always saved, regardless of the RP involved.

                            I'll see if I dig up a link to the article.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hmm, while I'm on the fence about a closer by comittee. Those stats better be incredibly in-depth. I'd wager most managers aren't going to run out their worst reliever in a one run game bottom of the 9th. Without seeing the stats, they're probably pretty misleading since you do typically see the best reliever come out for the 9th inning in a close game.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X