One of the reasons we started this site was to counter some of the more dubious wisdom that finds its way into the popular media. Judging by the coverage in the Toronto Sun, one would think the Jays had bungled their way through the winter meetings.

The Sun heralded the signing of P Tanyon Sturtze with the headline "Jays spend a million bucks on the AL's biggest loser," thereby clogging the club's season ticket hotline for several hours. While technically correct, the headline isn't terribly fair. Signing Sturtze isn't a sparkling move, he's not about to win 20 games, and he'll probably struggle to keep his ERA below the league average. On the other hand he can throw 200 innings, so he gives the Jays essentially what they had in Esteban Loaiza, but for 17% of the money.

Most significantly, no one's depending on Sturtze to make 35 starts. He's being brought in as part of the pitching solution, to compete with Jason Arnold, Mark Hendrickson, Justin Miller, Corey Thurman, Pete Walker and others for spots 3-5 in the rotation. Sturtze can shuttle between starting and relief assignments, eat up some middle relief and mop-up innings, and allow the younger arms to stay in more strictly defined roles.

As for the "million bucks," it might sound like a lot of money, but the league minimum is now $300,000 and the average salary is $2.3 million. To pick up a durable starter for $1 million isn't a bad move, especially if Sturtze can post a 4.40 ERA, as he did in 2001.

The day before Sturtze signed, Sun columnist Bob Elliott criticized the Cory Lidle deal, hinting that Lidle's $4.8 million price tag would have been better spent on retaining Jose Cruz. I've always liked Cruz, the product of the second best trade of the Gord Ash era (after the Tony Batista deal), but he's always been more potential than production. He was just 7th in OPS (on-base + slugging) among Jays regulars last season, and $5 million is a steep price for a right fielder reaching base at a .317 clip.

It's too bad Ricciardi couldn't work out a trade for Cruz, but my guess is that, in the face of meagre returns, the Jays brass figured it was a better risk to let Cruz go and have a chance to resign him for less money, a la Brad Fullmer in Anaheim and Mark Grace in Arizona. I'd be more concerned about non-tendering Cruz if the game's economic climate was different, but with talented young hitters like Fullmer, Robert Fick, David Ortiz and Cruz's eventual replacement, Frank Catalanotto, being allowed to walk, this was clearly a buyer's market. Catalanotto, a formidable on-base weapon, will cost the Jays $2.2 million this season.

Cory Lidle is a pitcher with a career ERA of 3.90. Granted, the SkyDome is a harsher place to pitch than Oakland, but this is still a guy who should start 30 times and keep his ERA below the league average, and that's something the Jays sorely need.

The column concludes with the idea that Braves ace Kevin Millwood, traded to the Phillies, would have been a better fit than Lidle. Incidentally, Elliott is extremely forgiving of the Millwood trade, simply describing the Braves as "pitching rich," as though possessing an abundance of pitching is a license to squander it, "What, we need a fourth outfielder? Take two Cy Young winners out of petty cash." This is the first description of the deal I've seen that does not include the words "incriminating photos."

All things being equal, 30 out of 30 teams are going to opt for Kevin Millwood over Lidle. But in this case all things are not equal, and here the article becomes sloppy or deliberately misleading. Elliott quotes Millwood's 2002 salary of $3.9 million to justify his "better fit" comment, after listing Lidle's 2003 salary of $4.8 million, leaving the impression that Millwood is both better and cheaper. This completely ignores the fact that Millwood was due for a huge raise in 2003 which, as John Schuerholz pointed out in his concession speech following the trade, is the reason he was dealt in the first place. (Millwood ended up signing for $9.9 million with the Phillies).

The Jays came away from the winter meetings with a better, cheaper pitching staff than they had in 2002. The idea that they spared no expense to acquire mediocre talent might make for some fun headlines, it just doesn't happen to be true.