From: kirsch@ux.acs.umn.edu (Dave Kirsch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Jays fans, start praying...
Date: 8 Apr 92 03:23:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux.1992Apr8.032352.11323
Organization: David Cone's Pull Toys and Assorted Paraphenalia, Inc.

In article <1992Apr01.173101.22054@cpqhou.compaq.com> carlr@cpqhou.UUCP (Carl Rempert) writes:
>
>One more point.  For a team with such a low OBP, and knowing how important
>OBP is to this newsgroup, any explanation as to why they win?

  Good question, Carl. 

  For starters, they haven't been a *bad* OBP team for any extended period 
of time (unless you count 1977-1982 or so). They just haven't been a good OBP 
team, either. IMHO, they've traditionally built their teams around a high SLG,
and their OBP tends to run about league average. This probably makes sense 
when you look at their home parks; both Exhibition Stadium and Skydome seem 
to inflate SLG without having a significant effect on batting average.
(Skydome has been hard to read so far, but it looks like a good power park, 
especially for RH hitters with the dome closed.) Why not build your team to 
try to outslug the opponent in a good SLG park?  

  Except for last year, the Jays have traditionally been among the league 
leaders in HRs over almost the last decade. They should be in the top third 
of the AL this year with the addition of Winfield, full seasons from Gruber 
and Olerud, Pat Borders with a pulse and anyone not named Mookie in the third
OF spot. (Derek Bell most of the time, and Rob Ducey has decent power.) Carter
and White are likely to decline a bit, but that should be more than offset by
only having one obvious offensive hole in the lineup, one Manuelll Lee.
Mookie's gone, and guys named Tabler or something similar shouldn't be eating
up more than their fair share of plate appearances. 

  They've also traditionally had a very good defense. Tied in with good
pitching depth, both complement one another to make a pretty good end result.
(Although they still insist on always having someone named Acker, Wills,
Cerutti or McLaughlin on the roster at any given moment.) By having good D, I
mean having good physical skills and the range to get to a lot of balls. They
often haven't been fundamentally sound, and occasionally have made what looks
like a high number of errors; IMHO, those things pale in comparison to just 
plaing getting to the ball, and serve for mediot nit-picking more than
anything. 

  If I was going to try to explain their success in a nutshell, it would go 
something like: always have a productive farm system (cuz almost everything 
else you do is directly or indirectly related to that), keep plenty of
pitching prospects around and bring them through the pen a la Earl Weaver, 
stay agressive when scouting/recruiting players - always try to find an edge,
and emphasize 'talent' above everything else at the early stages of
development. 'Character' and 'leadership' come much later, if at all.  

  I can't think of any time when the Jays have made a move for the short term 
that seriously compromised their ability to compete in the long run. They 
may not 'dominate' in any given season as a result, but I'm reasonably 
confident they'll stay competitive year-in and year-out. And they do. They've
made some iffy individual decisions, like letting Cecil Fielder go; however, 
they've never done anything to really hurt themselves on a larger scale.  

  Most of the above is pretty obvious and intuitive, but a person like Jim 
Frey is proof that people don't always pay attention to such things. 
 
-- 
Dave Hung Like a Jim Acker Slider Kirsch  ...   of the Warren Newson fan club 
kirsch@ux.acs.umn.edu                          "Blue Jays all the way in '92"  
"Sportswriters mostly sit in bars and argue about things, then go home and 
 write all the clever bullshit they think they should have said at the time." 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball