Five years is the Jays' deal limit; can they be...

I think its a good approach in most situations. Most of the long-term free agent contracts haven't worked out very well (Wells, Werth, Crawford) and there is a good chance that many other won't work out either. Maybe if a team thinks a player would put them over the edge and win them a World Series (Pujols, Fielder). Toronto doesn't seem to be in that position right now.

I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, they got burned twice by Rios and Wells. On the other hand, those stupid contracts shouldnt necessarily prevent them from having more sense to sign better players to long-term deals.

i don't know. i think at some point in time if the talent is worth the market value you have to spend and especially if it addresses a need or makes your team better. prince fielder would've been a perfect fit for the blue jays. young enough to grow with an already young team. also would have provided jose bautista protection in the lineup. so where i think its a good strategy it has to has some exceptions or this team will be up and down for the duration of its years in MLB

This message has been removed by the administrator.

The Jays are simply trying to run a Tampa model, and I, for one think it's the right way to go. Yeah I would have loved to see Prince Fielder in Toronto, but not on a 9 year 214 million dollar contract. I think the Jays would have been willing to invest on Darvish, and I believe their bid was legit, but that whole process is a crapshoot. If they bid 50 million, that's a pretty legit shot, but they will never tell us for sure. Other than those two, I believe AA and company simply didn't believe the others were worth the asking price, and I think they're right. They have a ton of legit talent in the minors, and all kinds of blossoming players on the MLB roster. Given a good first half, the Jays are a trade away from being a contender in my mind. Call me optimistic, but I think the pieces are in place to be competitive, and one "Dave Winfield/Paul Molitor" and "David Cone/Dave Stewart" type acquisition would put them in the position they are going to be in the next five years. Have faith in AA and Beeston, they plan is legit, and they don't want to blow it by making a bad deal.

If you have a guy that came up at 20 and is 27 I could see perhaps signing him to an eight-year contract. I wouldn't sign anything that invested major money to a guy who will be older than 35 at the end of it. The steroid era is dead. Guys aren't supermen. Most will break down and then you've thrown those seasons away.

I'm sorry. But with the young talent they have that will be coming up for deals in 3,4,5 years that will be the time for big spending. The Lawire's, Arancibia's, Escobar, Bautista again, Lind. The starters have to catch up to the Bats is the issue in Toronto. Morrow needs to be consistent. Striking out 14 is great, not when you walk 5.

4 out of 5 long term big free agent contracts never work out. The Pujols contract is awful!!! Werth--awful, Wells-awful, Crawford-awful, Gonzales--hard to say since it has only been a year. The Jays basically are avoiding the things that don't work but GM's that are desperate to save their jobs do. You see it all the time--GM knows he won't be with the organization in 5 years so who cares if the clubbed is screwed after he leaves. Big name today doesn't mean big name tomorrow. Keep up what you are doing A.A.

i don't know. i think at some point in time if the talent is worth the market value you have to spend and especially if it addresses a need or makes your team better. prince fielder would've been a perfect fit for the blue jays. young enough to grow with an already young team. also would have provided jose bautista protection in the lineup. so where i think its a good strategy it has to has some exceptions or this team will be up and down for the duration of its years in MLB

In five years, how many games do you expect out of a player?  Obviously, as many as you can get. But how many players actually last 5 years without a single injury?  On average, you might get 4 out of 5 injury free years, and out of those 4, may be start 4 out of 5 games/week.  In 10 years, I'd estimate you'd get at most 8 years without a season ending injury, and out of those 8, you'd be lucky to play in more than 3 out of 5 games/week.  If you ignore the injury risk, what are the odds of getting 10 years on par with the player's current production?  

Hurray for the Blue Jays. Common sense should eventually prevail. Baseball needs a cap, it's a simple truth. Ball clubs can't police thenmselves and money rules. Yankees all star teams. I could give a crap less about them winning, it doesn't count. Baseball needs a cap, it's a simple truth.

I think its a reasonable policy for the team, as people have said, it can save a lot of headaches down the road if a player wears down later on in a long term contract. I know its true that most players chase the money, but players also chase championships, so when the Jays are close enough, they shouldnt have any problem bringing in a free agent for 5 or so years. The Jays have been build up very well since AA came to town, with a lot of core pieces in place and one of the best farm systems in the league. The team is set up so when its ready for the playoffs, they will be able to keep the momentum going for many seasons to come, hopefully bringing the team the success they had from the mid 80's to mid 90's.

Now, im not sure how ironclad the 5 year policy is, I think they have room to move if AA feels the right deal is there to be made. Im thinking about Votto when he becomes a free agent, He is a proven player in great shape, plus hes from Toronto so it might be good to sweeten the deal to 6 years and maybe add a team option for a 7th. I just think the player has to be acceptional offer a long contract, and im not just talking talent, im talking age and health as well. Puhols is great, but 10 years is pretty extreme, that deal could really hurt a team down the road.

I think the Jays are pretty close to where they want to be, especially with the extra wildcard slot, and if other players see that, I could see them being willing to sign for 5 years just to go on that run with the team.

Smart. I wish I could check the history of every contract of seven years or more and see how the players performed in the last three years compared to the first several. Guaranteed flops.

Other than Adrian Gonzalez of the Red Sox, the rest of the long term signings of last year didn't fair very well. Those 10 year deals are idiotic and if a team chooses to go that route, then they must also pay(in dollars) the consequences. Small market teams like the Blue Jays don't really have those options. That's why they dumped Vernon Wells on the Angels. How many of those long term deals have really worked out? Yankees Alex Rodriguez is OK, but hes getting older and more brittle. Jayson Werth was "worthless" and Carl Crawford was injured and who knows if those deals will work out. MLB is out of control...a salary cap is the only real answer.

This winter, Albert Pujols got 10 years from the Angels. Prince Fielder got nine years from the Tigers. Jose Reyes got six years from the Marlins.......And which of these signings will look good 6 years from now? Personally, I'm not a big fan of arbitrary rules. I agree with the Jays policy up to a point....but there should be some flexibility. Nine and 10 year deals for players in their 30s are absurd....though there is always someone out there that will make the gamble. But a 7 or 8 year deal for a stud 28 year old homegrown fan favorite...that is a deal you probably should make.

The 2 names that immediately come to mind where the Jays let players go rather than signing them to lucrative long term deals are Vernon Wells and Alex Rios. I'm pretty sure the Jays have no regrets there. Losing Halladay hurt, but they did have him for 11 years, into his early 30s. He gave the Jays a decade of quality service and earned the right to go to a contender.

I believe the Toronto 5 year maximum is a great approach to reducing contract disasters. We have seen way too many teams ruined by 1 to 2 long term contracts on the books. The 2012 Cubs will be a perfect example of what it looks like when big contracts go bad; you have to dismantle the team and start from scratch. The MLB does not like these huge contracts because they can cause a financial collapse for the teams that take the huge risk. The lack of a salary cap has created this mess where a team that doesn't want to sign a player for 6-10 years is unable to sign the very talented players they need to make the playoffs. I believe the way to go for contracts is to give 2 years guaranteed money followed by three years of much richer option years(held by the team) with a large buyout going to the player should the team decline the option. So instead of Pujols making 25 million for 10 years, he would make 50 guaranteed, followed by 3 years of 30 million options. If the Angels wanted out because Pujols' can't hit for average anymore, then they would have a steep 10 million dollar buyout. Ideally you want a system where players are paid close to the market value for any given year, and when they don't perform they way they are paid, then they can be bought out within two years.

Maybe the Jays bring Halladay back after his current contract is up, I know he always liked it here in Toronto and by that time, the Jays should be a very good team. I could see him finishing out his career here, and imagine how great it would be to win a World Series with him on the team!

Obviously signing a player to a 5 year deal isn't likely to be cost effective, but you can't let people know that. If it were up to an owner, every player would be on a year-to-year incentive based contract so the books can stay clear. That just isn't realistic though, you gotta play the game if you wanna get big fish to swim in your pond. Let's see how the Jays handle Brett Lawrie in the future, that's the only guy I see breaking this mold for them in the near future.

They already have Jose. Why do they need to "Lure" free agents? They are going to spend when the time is right.