General Discussion – Week of 7-14-2014 – THIS TIME IT COUNTS Edition

Weekly Discussion

Very important for the Phillies that the NL wins the All-Star Game on Tuesday because otherwise they won’t have home field advantage in the World Series.

Gosh, I’m funny.

Discuss.

144 thoughts on “General Discussion – Week of 7-14-2014 – THIS TIME IT COUNTS Edition”

      1. Since the start of winter ball 2013, Franco has had nearly 550 ABs. A second half platoon that allows him to get acclimated to the majors would be beneficial.

        Like

        3. Yeah, getting at bats against A and AA pitchers is the same thing as against mlb pitchers. Very common to bring up top prospects and then platoon them. Good idea

          Like

          1. I don’t see any harm in playing him 4-5 days at week and rotating him at 1st and 3rd. I feel like that would be a great way to ease him into MLB action. Get his feet wet before benching Howard

            Like

        4. Before July what was Franco’s BA?

          Just checking before we scream for a callup based on two good weeks.

          Let Franco spend a year in AAA and see how he does next Spring. Let him win a roster spot out of camp.

          Like

  4. We’re all going to be watching closely to see what RAJ does in the next 2 weeks. Its obvious that Pap, Byrd, and Bastardo and very tradeable and I think Lee will get traded in August after he clears through waivers. I’m sure the Phils will also put Howard through waivers hoping someone claims him but no one will. Personally, and its not a popular opinion, but I hope they keep Utley and Rollins and let them retire as Phillies in a few more years. It would be a rare feat. For Pap, Byrd, Bastardo and Lee I think the Phils could get back something of value although I don’t expect a #3 or #4 hitter. I think the Phils will have to eat some money to turn these guys into prospects but that’s what they have to do. If Byrd goes to Seattle, I sure hope our scouting out there is better this time…..

    Like

    1. Lee gets two starts before the trade deadline…July 21st vs SF, then after the rest period July 26 or 27. Teams will have those two starts along with his rehabbing assignments to make their evalusations..
      Whether or not his value remains high is debatable.

      Like

    2. I don’t know if it’s a popular opinion or not but I would also like to see Utley and Rollins stay and retire as Phillies

      Like

      1. There’s no one pushing Utley out anytime soon, but when Crawford is ready, if Rollins is not ready to retire, I say move him. They may move him sooner, and I would not have much of a problem with it, as Galvis can play everyday as he hopefully continues to improve, and we’ll see if he’s even got a chance to be a average big league regular. I kind of doubt it based on what we’ve seen of his bat, but the glove can carry him for a while if he’s allowed to play short, IMO.

        Like

  5. If trading Hamels to the Dodgers gets you Joc Pederson and a 3 or 4 rotation guy, would it be worth it? If any chance for contention is 3 or 4 years away, why not?

    Like

    1. When you trade a star, in my view, you absolutely have to insist on a package that includes a potential star or two. Volume trades (a lot of “good” players or prospects) rarely work out well – three “good” propsects do not replace a single top level prospect. When you go for volume over quality you get deals like the Curt Schilling trade or the Tom Seaver trade – both of which I witnessed as fans of those teams and which, each, were complete disasters. For all of their penurious and trade happy ways, the Marlins have been excellent, on the whole, at obtaining future stars in return for their top players – not every time, but most times. The Brewers have also done a pretty good job recently too. And by the way, I’m not opposed to quality and volume 🙂 (see Pence trade, Colon trade for Lee, Sizemen and Phillips).

      Like

    2. I think Bowden of ESPN went with Pederson, Julio Urias and someoe else for Hamels. First the only GM who would do this is Bowden, which is why he is no longer a GM (Lee, Sizemore, Philips for 6 months of Bartolo Colon). I love Hamels, but if this is offered, you do it in a heartbeat

      Like

      1. correction, the only GM’s who would do this are Bowden and RAJ if he were the Dodgers GM! If you can get Urias, Gurerro (the cuban 2b, i think thats his name) and pederson for Hamels, you do it in a second. As unrealistic as that is, thats prob not any more farfetched than the A’s trade for Smardkzianahaiaha (i think that’s how you spell it)

        Like

      2. You’re wrong. Beane just traded a far superior prospect for two inferior pitchers, albeit with better contracts. It happens it doesn’t mean it will but to say it won’t happen isn’t fair. You’re talking about a GM in colletti who traded Carlos Santana for Casey Blake.

        That said, the dodgers aren’t trading for Price or Hamels… They simply don’t need to.

        Like

        1. That said if the Dodgers were willing to deal from their prospect inventory which it seems they are not (they’re strategy is to spend big in FA which buying time for their guys to develop) I wouldn’t settle for a package of any less than Pederson AND Urias. And I would include money and another throw in piece or two like an Antonio Bastardo.

          There’s simply no reason to trade him now unless there’s red flags in his medicals because you can get the same type of prospect package (a stud and an average prospect) next year or the year after that.

          Like

    3. Yeah, I think you do that. And that’s even in the realm of the possible.

      I said last week that I’d do Hamels for Pederson straight up, though on reflection that’s a little light. But Pederson and a 3 or 4 – assuming major league ready – yes.

      And, while I know there are a few people around here who still don’t want to believe this, if you say you WOULDN’T do that, then you’re pretty much saying that you won’t trade him at all, barring an unlikely overpay.

      Like

      1. Ugh, the nested comments are annoying – almost makes it look like I was saying that the silly Bowden idea was a possibility. Which I am not, and it is not. But if it was, well, OF COURSE you would take it.

        Like

      2. I’d add that a major league ready 3 or 4 counts as a “top” prospect, so that’s two top prospects, one of whom is arguably elite.

        Holding out for that elusive third “top” prospect is a recipe for not trading him.

        Like

        1. You have to do that Hamels deals, but I don’t believe the offer gets more than Zach Lee and the Cuban Second Baseman. Byrd may get you a prospect, certainly not a top 50 one, and Pap is about the 4th Closer on the trade list, and there may not be 4 teams that need a closer. Assuming Lee goes in August, only Hamels and Utley get you anything that helps a rebuild.

          Like

          1. How about Bryd-Franklin swap?
            Cano is going to be there at 2nd for awhile, though Franklin could possibly play ss.

            Like

            1. I do like Franklin a little. A former 1st rd pick who showed he had some power last yr. Granted didnt do much else but there’s potential there. Plus, if u could move Rollins he could fill the void at SS for a couple yrs for Crawford. If he proves he can play, u can always potentially move him to 2nd when Crawfords ready. Although, the name I heard being thrown out a little is Ackley. Not sure how I feel abt that.

              Like

          2. Anonymous. it does seem like there are at least three closer on the market. that are cheaper. pap might be really hard to move.

            Like

            1. You’re right. There will be a fair amount of closers/ back end of the pen guys available. Soria, Street and Benoit all come to mind. I could see SF, Balt, Det., and Angels as potential teams who may try to upgrade. If there’s ever a time to move Paps it’s now. He’s having a good bounce back year and has pitched in his share of big games. I think the Phs would be just happy enough to get someone to take his salary as getting prospects back

              Like

        2. like an Adam Morgan type a few years ago minus the injuries of course and Joc Pedereson I think I would still want a lottery ticket in there aswell like young kid with upside and massive risk attached

          Like

        3. As I said in last week’s thread, you are not considering the effect of adding significant cash to a Hamels’ trade, enough cash to convert Hamels’ contract to a well-below-market, 4-1/2-year deal for a 30-year-old star pitcher.

          Under those circumstances, the Phils should hold out for a much better deal than an elite prospect (Addison Russell) and a very good prospect (Billy McKinney), i.e., the Samardzija trade. Four and a half years of a star pitcher (Hamels) on a well-below-market contract is worth substantially more than one and a half years of a good pitcher who is not a star (Samardzija), entering his last year of arbitration (FWIW, the acquiring team would gain three times as many WAR with Hamels than it would with Samardzija.).

          Russell is an elite prospect. Pederson is a top prospect, but not elite. You are seriously short-changing the Phillies with your suggestion, unless you are not sending any cash.

          And, if you are not sending substantial cash with Hamels, why not?

          You have continuously dodged the issue in last week’s discussion, so I’ll present it once more. What is the effect on a Hamels’ trade of adding enough cash to convert his contract to a well-below-market deal?

          Like

          1. Derek, I’ve answered that seven ways to Sunday. You just don’t like my answers.

            PART of the answer, but by no means all of it, is that, EVEN WERE I TO GRANT YOU YOUR FINANCIAL ARGUMENT IN ITS ENTIRETY, which I don’t, trades of three top prospects ALMOST NEVER HAPPEN FOR ANY PLAYER. they just don’t. Really. Really really. It’s possible that a star who is 23 years old with years of team control at a cheaper price even than Hamels minus the 30 million dollars you want to include, MIGHT get you 3 top prospects. Or maybe not. Stanton could maybe get that, though IMO ,more likely one elite prospect, one very good prospect, and filler. Trout of course, not that he would ever be traded. One or two other young stars who aren’t on the market and won’t be.

            Its not primarily about money. It’s also about his age and the fact that, while he is a star, he is not quite at the very top level of major league starting pitchers.. AND even more to the point it’s about the fact that even the best, young players almost never get that kind of return. Now, I happen to think it’s also about the money to to some extent, but I don’t want to get sucked into debating that with you, because such a debate just feeds into your very odd belief that paying the money would somehow make such a deal happen. EVEN IF you take the money out of the equation entirely, you’re STILL deluding yourself.

            The simple fact is, in the many, many, many long posts in that thread from you in that thread you didn’t cite a single example of a comparable player getting that kind of return.

            And, appearances to the contrary, I don’t have all the time in the world to answer your long redundant posts. Yes, pot calling the kettle black, but really I don’t have nearly as much free time lately. So I’ll spare you the other half dozen reasons why your exercise in magical thinking certainly won’t come to pass.

            Like

          2. Okay, I’ll say one more thing – you keep saying “below market” like it’s some kind of magic talisman. It’s not. Does it make him more attractive? Yes. So yes, it would make it more likely to get back the unusually good return of two very good prospects (and maybe a couple lesser prospects).

            But it’s not magic. He’s still on the wrong side of 30 (albeit barely). It’s still true that VIRTUALLY NO PLAYER gets that kind of return. it is still a contract that, even below market, it pricey for some teams.. He’s still a starting pitcher, with attendant injury risk, which makes the last couple years of that contract very risky, even at “below market” rates. He’s still a step below the very top rank of starting pitchers.

            And your continued citation of the A’s deal is … just bizarre. It’s not a BAD argument, it’s not even n argument at all. It would be a good argument in an alternative universe where Beane hadn’t made that deal and was still looking for a starting pitcher.(Well no, it wouldn’t be a good argument even there, as the A’s don’t take on those sort of contracts, even with 30 million paid by the other team even when they are substantially below market.) But we don’t live in that universe, and there is absolutely no reason in the world why any potential GM would use that deal as guideline for what he would offer. TRADES DON’T WORK THAT WAY. Never have, never will.

            I hate to be mean, but your long series of posts is basically a primer in magical thinking.

            Like

            1. Larry: You continue to be evasive. I have said the trade of Hamels, with substantial cash, puts us in a gray area because there is no track record for such trades. Because it is a gray area, I have said there is a possibility of an excellent return for Hamels, but that it is not a certainty, nor the norm since there is no history of such trades. I have said the Phils could get two Top 30 prospects or even three Top 100 prospects for Hamels plus substantial cash.

              You, OTOH, say with black-and-white certainty that there will not be the kind of return I describe. Yet, you are unable to cite the returns on trades of star pitchers on well-below-market deals because they haven’t happened.

              Rather than making the honest admission that this is a gray area and that you don’t really know what to expect for Hamels plus substantial cash, you prefer to be evasive and to misrepresent my position.

              Like

            3. Evasive is the LAST thing I’ve been. Three final points:.

              (1) As I said quite clearly in the last thread, yes there is a gray area – it’s just at a lower level than you have been saying, more like 1 to 2 “top” prospects than 2 to 3.

              (2) There’s PLENTY of history of such trades. There’s nothing particularly unique about Hamels. Plenty of star pitchers roughly his age or younger have been traded. What you seem to be banking on is the fact that none of them have specifically involved the addition of 30 million dollars to the deal. What you’re missing is that a number of those deals have involved pitchers at below market salaries without the need for large infusions of cash (mostly because they were pre-free agency). It’s probably true that not many of them had 4 plus years of control remaining, but you are vastly over estimating the attractiveness of that fact for a 30 year old pitcher, even at a below market contract. There’s nothing unique about Hamels that would justify the highly unusual, uniquely large price that you expect for him.

              (3) You STILL haven’t really even made an argument for your position after hundreds of words. It’s STILL basically a case of relying on the A’s deal and arguing that Hamels should bring a higher return (if the Phillies add 30 million to the deal. That’s not a good argument (not really even an argument) for reasons that I think I’ve articulated pretty clearly.

              Like

            4. Name some of the trades involving a star pitcher with a well-below-market multi-year contract or under team control for more than a couple of years where the prospect package has been underwhelming. Be specific. I have asked you to be specific a number of times. Your evasion is your refusal to be specific. I think you refuse to be specific because you don’t know what you are talking about.

              Your comments are usually good, but, on this topic, you have gone a little overboard.

              Regarding Hamels’ age, he is not on the wrong side of 30. He is 30, putting him on the right side of 31 and at an age when he should be productive for several more years. Yet, you discount the value of the multiple years of Hamels’ contract. What should be a plus is a minus through your eyes.

              Like

            5. Crhsing workload & other obligations has prevented, and continues to prevent, detailed response to this and other participation herein. But the short asnwer:

              Almost every starting pitcher with multiple years of control a reasonable contract, who has been traded, ever, got a smaller package than you are proposing for Hamels. Including many younger pitchers. And there have been plenty.

              But an even better, albeit indirect answer. The one guy most comperable to Hamels – same age when traded, virtually the same performance to that point, same AAV IF you assume that the Phillies kick in 30 million, received a package that was considered a huge overpay.by almost everyone. i.e., one of the trades best supporting YOUR position. And he got essentially 1 1/2 – not 2, not 3 – top prospects in return (Jake Odorizzi was ranked near the bottom of the top 100 that season – not truly a top prospect IMO – Myers was the one true top prospect in the deal).

              Yeah, Hamels has more years of control, but that probable points to one of the areas where you are most off base. Years 3 and 4 of a contract for a 30 year old starting pitcher, even on a below market contract, carry huge risk and questionable value. A pitcher than age is more likely than not to suffer injury and or significant decline looking 3 to 4 years down the road. It would be interesting to make a list of every 4 plus year starting pitcher contract for a pitcher of roughly Hamels’ age. I would bet that in at least 80% of them there was serious injury or decline over the course of the contract.

              But yeah, maybe someone pays a little more for those years. So IF we get the best case scenario – a James Shields type overpay, we get … two top prospects. And it may happen! Three is ridiculous.

              Like

            6. Now, you are trying to play word games. First, Odorizzi, as a Top 100 prospect, was a top prospect, not half of one. Second, Myers was BA’s No. 4 prospect at the time of the trade. Myers was not just a top prospect; he was an elite prospect. An elite prospect, one who is a Top 10 guy, is probably worth two prospects in the 40-60 range (Addison Russell is another elite prospect, but Joc Pederson is not, being in the 20-30 range.). So, Myers and Odorizzi were worth the equivalent of three top prospects (Looking at the Pirates, probably close in value to three of their top prospects – Meadows, Bell and McGuire).

              And that’s just for 1 1/2 years of Shields, a good, but lesser pitcher than Hamels, particularly at time of trade.

              You are desperately trying to minimize the value of the three extra years for Hamels on a well-below-market deal (assuming the transfer of substantial cash). Your argument of the injury risk involved is misplaced and hasn’t much to do with how GMs value top pitchers at ages 31-34. To determine that value, just look at free-agent contracts given to top pitchers over 30.

              Cliff Lee, at age 32, signed a 5-year market-value deal with a $25MM AAV. Hamels’ own contract pays him $90MM (a $22.5MM AAV) over the next four years because that’s his value in his early 30’s. If Price is traded, the acquiring team likely will send the Rays a top prospect package just for the privilege of giving Price a 5- or 6-year deal with an AAV higher than Lee’s. By contrast, the acquiring team in a Hamels’ trade will only pay $15MM per year in my scenario.

              So, the value of Hamels for three extra years, compared to Shields or Samardzija is worth about $70MM (, but costing the acquiring team only $45MM). That $25MM difference is worth a top prospect, don’t you think?

              You fancy yourself a sabermetrics guy. So, compare 4 1/2 years of Hamels with 1 1/2 years of either Shields or Samardzija by taking the WAR projections of the three pitchers for 4 1/2, 1 1/2, and 1 1/2 years, respectively, and multiplying the projections by the dollar value of a WAR; subtract from the projected WAR dollar values the salaries to be paid to each player; and, in Hamels’ case, add back the $30MM in cash the Phils send the acquiring team. This calculation will show not only how much more Hamels is worth than either Shields or Samardzija, but also how much three additional years of Hamels is worth.

              Either way you do the calculation, market value as determined by GMs in the real world or the dollar value of WAR in the sabermetric world, Hamels is worth two or three top prospects, and the three extra years of Hamels at below market rates are quite valuable.

              Because I prefer to live in the real world and because there is no track record for trades of a star pitcher plus substantial cash for a prospect package, my position is that, based on circumstantial evidence, it is possible to get an excellent prospect package for Hamels, but it is not a certainty.

              Now, I invite you to identify other trades that you think support your position. I will be happy to draw the distinction between those trades and the proposed Hamels’ trade. So far, however, Larry, you’ve shown yourself as terribly uninformed on this topic. Last week, I invited you to bow out gracefully on this topic, but you foolishly declined.

              Like

      3. Your banking on Pederson being a stud. I would never do that deal. but I don’t value prospect like you do. To trade a thirty year old lefthander like hamels. for a prospect and then a lesser prospect is nuts. This trade would be worse than the lee trade. to trade a number one for a prospect out of a hitters league is scary. I hear people talk about its easy to hit homeruns at reading. well maybe I am nuts but Pederson plays in a hitters park, were the ball carries.

        Like

        1. I agree completely. Why anyone would trade Cole Hamels for that kind of package is beyond me and I’m 100% in favor of blowing this team up.

          The phillies have the 2nd best pitcher on the market who’s under contract through the rest of his prime years with the ability to pay his contract down SIGNIFIGANTLY. They could throw maybe $30-50 million into a deal. If I can’t get a team’s two best prospects I’m not making a deal because I have the next 3-4 years to get the type of return these guys are talking about.

          I’m not sold on Pederson as a headliner myself. I think he has enough Red Flags where I would need more than him to start a conversation.

          Like

      4. I thought the Dodgers stated no interest in Hamels, was there a change of heart or are we just assuming they are blowing smoke?

        Like

  6. Getting Franklin for Byrd would certainly be an interesting move. I could be wrong but I would think if you pick up Franklin, chase or rollins would need to be traded. I would definitely rather have him than ackley in a trade with the mariners. I have heard that the royals have some interest as well.

    Like

  7. Wouldn’t it be wise to trade Hamels and Lee for the best packages you can get? Then sign the 2 best free agent pitchers this off season (Lester and ?). Money is not the issue, it is lack of talent.

    Like

    1. Trading Lee at any time during this season would be selling low. I’m afraid that Lee will not be able to restore his value as an ace without making 10-12 starts for the Phillies. It’s also possible that Lee is no longer an ace, in which case the Phils will get a lower return than they could have gotten in a trade last off-season.

      Like

      1. I think it may be better to hold onto Lee until the deadline next year if we can’t get a good package now.

        He would be a potential rental starter and could still next a top prospect if he returns to form. I’m not sure if I’d move him in the off season.

        Like

  8. What the Phillies need is young talent, what they don’t need is to save money in the next 2 years. They should be willing to pay most or all of salaries this season and next season, in order to garner any talent they can on the high end of prospects. Another way to do this is to bundle players, such as if Lee plus someone like Byrd or Burnett or Bastardo gets you a much higher end prospect, they should do that vs trading everyone for b or c prospects. Any money they do save should go towards investment in Cuban or Japanese free agents, the next Guerrerro or Cespedes or Soler. In the process, they could free up money for payroll in 2016 if they could find takers for Lee and Hamels, and I believe if they paid the remainder of Howard’s salary this year, and $24M of it next year, that somebody would take him and pay the majority of his $25M in 2016. And Lee and Hamels salaries should be free and clear by then as well.

    Under this scenario, and using some rumored names referenced above, 2016 could look something like this –

    CF – Roman Quinn
    SS – JP Crawford
    1B – Franco
    LF – Free Agent OF (Major League or Int’l)
    RF – J Pederson
    2B – Utley
    3B – Asche
    C – Free Agent (ML or Int’l)

    Starting Pitching (in no particular order)

    1 Nola
    2 Prospect acquired for Hamels with Pederson
    3 Biddle
    4 Free Agent
    5 Morgan or Pettibone or Imhoff or ……

    Bullpen
    1 Giles
    2 Diekman
    3 DeFratus
    4 Gonzalez
    Etc

    That team, with some luck, could be a contender by 2017.

    Like

    1. Not to nitpick here, but I think there is zero chance a team would take on $25MM for Howard. The guy has the 30th overall WAR for first basemen with 150 or more plate appearances. Take out his terrible fielding, and he still is not a valuable piece.

      Could he be an platoon DH? Perhaps. But, I would see that as a low-salary guy (and not anywhere close to $25MM over 2+ years.)

      Like

      2. Howard has a 10 mil club option in 2016 .1 and a half more yrs of Howard who I feel bad for . HE had very serious injury to come back from. 2 He took the money that was offered to him he’s not stupid. 3 All that He’s been though he wasn’t a cancer to the team or city.4 without him do we win a world series. I know now he’s a below Mlb player in everything besides power. I would love to replace yes. Let’s do it with class.

        Like

      3. Wes I thought maybe someone would take on some money for Howard ,I have been listening and reading about Howard. and now it seems to me impossible we can’t move him, even with us paying most of contract. The scouts that I have heard say he has lost bat speed. that is a real red flag for any trade. what gets me is why they for now don’t drop him in lineup? I get the feeling Ryan Howard is bigger than winning in there eyes, Ryan Howard batting fourth right now isn’t a good move. and he is hurting the team.

        Like

        1. Bingo – I agree.

          Last offseason many hours were spent talking about what version of Ryan we would get this year, and much time spent talking about if a decent year could lead to a trade. I think this offseason, many hours will be spent where we talk about sunk costs, and possibly cutting him (won’t happen, but I predict much discussion).

          I don’t begrudge ryan. For a short period of time, he was amongst the very best. He seems to be a good clubhouse guy, and seems like he has tried to recapture some success (ie spent time to get into better shape). Just wish mr. amaro and management had not crippled the franchise with this unnecessary contract.

          Like

          1. Exactly what I meant Amaro and Company signed him to a crazy contact . Roccom who replaces him in the 4 hole if he gets dropped and Byrd gets traded.this team is void of power.

            Like

    2. That team will need more than just some luck. You’re assuming they do everything correctly and none of the prospects fail and develop to their fullest. I like the optimism, I wish I had as much as you do.

      Like

  9. So here’s a question – not an original one by any means, but since I’m sure we’re all tired to debating whether a reasonable expectation for Hamels is one or two or three top prospects (and the ancillary question of what a “top” prospect means in that context):

    Why do people think that the Dodgers are one of the most likely destinations for Hamels?

    Here’s the thing: the most optimistic scenarios for Hamels – really for any trade – involve the assumption that, in order to increase the chance of a championship a team will sacrifice value. And that assumption is not wrong, even if some people overestimate just how much value teams will typically sacrifice for that increased chance at a championship.

    But ask yourselves this – how much does Hamels increase LA’s chance at a championship? IMO very little. Look at that rotation. Over the course of the post season, maybe they would increase their chances of winning in the maybe 3 or 4 games that Hamels would start by about 10%. That would increase their chances of winning the championship by, what, 2%? That’s just a guesstimate, but if anything probably on the high side.

    OTOH, there are two teams whose chances of winning would be MASSIVELY enhanced – Baltimore and Toronto. Are they on Hamels’ no trade list? If not, even for those two teams, I would be highly skeptical of the “3 top prospects” deals some are imagining. But in those cases, I could at least see the logic of such an overpay. Whereas for LA, not so much .

    Like

    1. Larry so in a 7 game championship, Hamels as your third starter isn’t worth more than a 10% chance he will win that game. so being stupid if hamels starts 4 games and wins, out of the best of 5, best of 7 and best of 7 that’s 19 possible games and to win 4 is ten percent. interesting.

      Like

  11. Dodgers have no interest in Hamels per there GM . GO TO MIBTRADERUMORS hit Dodgers rumors on your right.that leaves no one for Hamels , Ultey bin a dead issue he said he isn’t going.the only ones being traded are Byrd, pap , Lee, and maybe Bastardo or kk.

    Like

    1. The Red Sox were one of a few teams to watch Cole Hamels earlier this week. Hamels has four years remaining on his contract.— Nick Cafardo (@nickcafardo) July 13, 2014

      Like

      1. Thank you, I see Hamels to BOS a very real possibility. Even if they do re-sign Lester which is looking like a big if Hamels would be great in that rotation. The sox have the money and the prospects.

        Like

  13. Utley is also having a house built near the Main Line as well. From what I understand its huge. It leads me to believe he plans on staying here and prob. living here or at least partially living here after he retires

    Like

    1. In fairness, even the die hard magical thinkers who think we can get 5 or 6 or 7 future stars for our old veterans (okay I exaggerate but not by much) seem to have given up on trading Utley, as it becomes more and more obvious that, yes, he really means it when he says he would not agree to a trade.

      Like

  16. What happened to Chris Nichols,Chris Burgess,Zach Taylor and Jon Musser? I haven’t found any transactions for them.

    Like

  17. I think there could be a potential blockbuster with the Mariners. This is just my speculation but they have a strong desire to acquire a starting pitcher with the money and prospect depth to make it happen.

    Perhaps a deal centered around Cole Hamels, Marlon Byrd and Antonio Bastardo for DJ Peterson, James Paxton, and maybe a change of scenery guy like a Dustin Ackley. Perhaps another lottery ticket type guy.

    The issue here is whether or not Cole Hamels would waive his no trade or if Seattle would be interested at all. The Seattle front office is under a lot of pressure to win and they could be the ones to blow the Phillies away with a deal.

    Like

  20. Here’s what I’d do/take.

    1. Byrd/Bastardo to Seattle for Gabriel Guerrero.

    2a. Hamels to the Yankees for Luis Severino (RHP), Aaron Judge (OF), Ian Clarkin (LHP) and Mark Montgomery (RHP)

    or

    2b. Hamels and 10m to the Blue Jays for Daniel Norris (LHP), Roberto Osuna (RHP), Jairo Labourt (LHP) and a PTBNL.

    3. AJ Burnett to the Orioles for Peter Birdwell (RHP) or Jon Keller (RHP)

    4a. Papelbon and 10m to the Angels for Natanael Delgado (OF)

    4b. Papelbon and 10m to the Giants for Joe Panik (2B).

    Like

    1. If i trade Hamels to the Blue Jays I want Aaron Sanchez back. And if he goes to the yankees including mason williams wouldnt be a bad thing either. Although Williams has had a down year, he’s still a highly thought of prospect in the OF where we can use all the help possible.

      Like

  21. One thing I find particularly ironic – the organization, based on public comments and inferences from behavior, probably does expect it’s veterans to bring them as big a return as some of the optimists here expect. And the organization is willing to move those veterans for those prices – with the probable exception of Utley, and that’s a moot point because he wants to stay and can veto a trade.

    And for that very reason – the team having unrealistic expectations about the return for its veterans – there will likely be few Phillies trades at the deadline. Fewer than there probably should be.

    And the “fire sale” crowd will complain – not realizing that the reason for the lack of trades is that the organization AGREES with them as to the trade value of their veterans (whereas the potential buyers don’t).

    Like

    1. At this point their public comments are probably cheap talk trying to establish a good bargaining position. They may not reflect their actual views at all.

      Like

    2. Your assumption Larry about the fewer trades at the deadline is probably correct, due in part to the fact that Ruben is a risk averse person and as a fence sitter will not pull the trigger on any trades that the margin of uncertainty exist…and with prospects that is a high probabliity.
      So bottom-line, what we will have is:
      one trade with Paps,
      one with Byrd;
      and a minor trade of Bastardo.

      Like

      1. And to add…maybe down the road to Baltimore…AJ.

        Not sure those four trades would qualifiy as a fire-sale.

        Like

    3. I cant see guys like Byrd. Bastardo getting us a big return, Pap because of his contract, even though he really is pitching well. wont get us big return, but Hamels should, lee can gets us decent return with us kicking in money, Utley should get you a top infield or outfield prospect, plus a lower a prospect with good upside. I am only stating my opinion have no facts to prove what we would get. only to move certain players if the return isn’t there I keep them for this year. let the teams who are going for a title, see we are not giving away players. see who blinks first is my thinking.

      Like

      1. rocco……..Ruben will only trade the ‘safe’ replacement assets.
        I cannot see him taking a big splash with a Lee, Hamels, Rollins or even Utley.
        BTW….Utley said yesterday he wants to stay, but if he isn’t WANTED then things change. Well I can see a Sabean wanting Utley more then Ruben not wanting him.

        Like

    4. Does anyone have a name of another team’s once highly touted prospect who needs a change that we could get for Dom Brown? Other than Dustin Ackley? I think the lack of energy Utley talked about could reference Dom and he needs to go regardless.

      Like

    5. “the organization, based on public comments and inferences from behavior, probably does expect it’s veterans to bring them as big a return as some of the optimists here expect.”

      So your saying the phillies base the value of their players(and what they expect to get back) on what the fans think and not what other teams think which they have been talking to about trades for months? Thats just laughable.

      Like

        1. Even if I am taking a big leap isn’t that still absurd? I interpret that statement as Larry thinking that the team bases the value of their players on the fans more so than what other teams think and what the phillies think. Is that a big leap

          Like

          1. Youi interpret it that way because you are cognitively impaired. I didn’t mean it that way, and it should be obvious to anyone that I did not.

            Like

            2. Umm, you know that it’s possible to share a belief with someone without being influenced by that other person (or persons) in forming the belief?

              Look, certain Phillies fans and the Phillies’ front office are far from the only groups of people overestimating the value of veterans vis a vis prospects. Plenty of sports “journalists” also share that belief. Unfortunately for the Phillies, few of the people sharing that belief occupy positions in major league front offices.

              A separate point is that, not being mind readers or privy to the private discussions of opposing teams, the Phillies are quite unlikely to know “what other teams think” about the value of their veterans. Or do you (chortle) think that teams are honest with each other in communicating that sort of thing? I can see it now: Colletti says to Amaro at the start of negotiations – “I know I’m just offering you some mediocre prospects for Hamels, but what I REALLY think is that he is worth three of our top prospects.” Doh.

              Like

            3. I’m pretty sure he means, like the fans the org has unrealistic expectations on value of return. Pretty straight forward jack.

              Like

    1. Irony of sorts if the Phillies trade with Seattle and get in return lefty Jimmy Paxton.
      Jimmy Paxton was ‘ratted-out’ by what some suspect was the Jays a few years ago for having an agent at the draft table ….similar to what the Phillies did last year with Ben Wexler.

      Like

  23. Does anyone know how the defensive metrics of Baseball Reference differ from those of Fangraphs? Fangraphs has Asche’s fielding as a disaster, which, when I watch the games does not seem quite right to me, especially recently when it looks like he’s making some good plays over there. Baseball Reference has him roughly as a neutral fielder (-.1 WAR – not a big deal), allowing his bat to play up. I still love the player, but was wondering what to make of these divergent statistical assessments.

    Like

  24. As we all ponder trading proven Aces for prospects, I thought a little perspective might be valuable. Here is BA’s top 25 prospect list from 2011:

    1. Bryce Harper, of, Nationals – looks good, but stats are not overwhelming.
    2. Mike Trout, of, Angels – best in game
    3. Jesus Montero, c, Yankees – bust
    4. Domonic Brown, of, Phillies – bust
    5. Julio Teheran, rhp, Braves – All Star
    6. Jeremy Hellickson, rhp, Rays – good, not great
    7. Aroldis Chapman, lhp, Reds – All Star but not a normal minor leaguer
    8. Eric Hosmer, 1b, Royals – average
    9. Mike Moustakas, 3b, Royals – bust
    10. Wil Myers, of/c, Royals – good rookie year but horrible 2nd year. jury is out.
    11. Jameson Taillon, rhp, Pirates – still in minors. good, not great stats
    12. Dustin Ackley, 2b, Mariners – bust
    13. Shelby Miller, rhp, Cardinals – very good rookie year, below average this year
    14. Manny Machado, ss, Orioles – promising, but not much productivity
    15. Matt Moore, lhp, Rays – very good starter
    16. Michael Pineda, rhp, Mariners – injured. now a reliever
    17. Freddie Freeman, 1b, Braves – stud
    18. John Lamb, lhp, Royals – struggling in minors
    19. Mike Montgomery, lhp, Royals – struggling in minors
    20. Chris Sale, lhp, White Sox – stud
    21. Jacob Turner, rhp, Tigers – not much productivity
    22. Desmond Jennings, of, Rays – average
    23. Brandon Belt, 1b, Giants – good, not great
    24. Martin Perez, lhp, Rangers – was ok, then got hurt
    25. Lonnie Chisenhall, 3b, Indians – having a good year in his 4th year.

    Like

    1. ty Look at the percentages, of these prospect. how many would be worth Hamels? maybe five of them Freeman for sure, Sale. Moore, Harper. Trout? I am on the fence on Teheran. so added in Teheran its a 25% shot you hit on a prospect for Hamels. That’s why for Hamels it must be more than one good prospect imo. but only my opinion, its Ruben who counts and his scouts. omg are we in trouble. Thinking about it now. I hope they don’t make any trades, until Ruben leaves.

      Like

      1. There are very few that we can point to and say that the receiving team made a great deal in trading an Ace. Although I cannot conceive of a plan that makes the Phils good in less than 3 years, Hamels could still be the Ace of that team. Lee, on the other hand, won’t be. I see Lee going in August, and maybe Byrd, Pap and Burnett by trading deadline.

        Like

    2. Come on, you’re taking one years top 25 list and using that as your basis for not trading Hamels or Lee?

      Like

      1. Mark you are missing the point. Go back and look at every year’s top 25. You think the percentage is different? It’s not dude. Prospects have a very high failure rate.

        Like

        1. ‘Prospects have a very high failure rate’
          Thats true for every drafted and international signee….but not as high a failure rate for the BA Top 25 prospects.
          My guess, I say 90% for all draftees/inter signees and when it comes to the BA analysts rankings maybe 25 to 35% failure rate for a BA Top 25.
          .

          Like

          1. This is true. Of course the other side of the coin is that old vets like Lee, Paps, Ruiz, Utley, Rollins, Byrd, and Howard are 100% within in a slide to zero value within 2-3 years and if their present performance can’t lift their team out of the cellar, they aren’t adding a lot of value at present or going forward and it likely is time to harvest what value is left for some prospect lottery tickets. It is not a 100% likely to be true statement, but it is high probability that all of these guys are replacement level or less by the time the Phillies next contend. Trading vets is no guarantee of significant average or better MLB players to speed the rebuild, but not trading for value, when the opportunity arises, is a guarantee of zero help on the rebuild.

            Like

            1. Heck, a big part of these trades is just freeing up money. If you get some decent prospects and take $30 or 40 million off the books per year, that has value in and of itself.

              Like

            2. Good post. I don’t understand the whole desire to hang on to ANYONE at this point. Only blind fans will have that mindset. None of Utley, rollins, Byrd, Hamels, Lee, Burnett, Papelbon will be here the next time we are contenders. Do you guys really care that much about going to the ballpark to see a particular player? Or do you go to see the team you love win?

              I’m puzzled

              Like

        2. Well this team has a failure CERTAINTY for at least the next couple years. Hanging on to Hamels during that time with the hope that 3 years down the road he will still be an ace caliber pitcher and lead the staff is beyond foolish. It’s insane and idiotic. And that is also assuming that he would be ok with staying here for a few years on a bad team! If he demands out then we have no leverage and are screwed. By no means do you give Hamels away, i’ve said before that you need a MAJOR haul to move him. And I do think that is possible. At this point, his contract is almost a bargain in comparison to what a team is going to have to give Price if they trade for him.
          I’m tired of folks thinking that, once again it’s ok to rely on what will be a 34 year old pitcher (after the 3 years).

          So, look at all the top 25 lists that you want and break down stupid percentages of failure rates. I’ll be realistic and look at this team an know that there is no chance for another 3-4 years, and that timeframe is strictly to again have hope! No way we’re competing in that timeframe. It will be something to look forward to at least.

          Point is, STOP CLINGING TO THESE PLAYERS! It will get us nowhere and only slow down the rebuilding/re-tooling process. TRADE EVERYONE!

          Like

          1. And why is that? because I have a realistic view of the state of the team and organization? If you want to believe that you are making some sort of revelation that prospects have a high rate of failure, be my guest. Meanwhile, any “true” major league players currently on the roster, ala Hamels and Utley, will rot for the next couple of years on this non-competitive team. But thats ok right? Because we’ll still get to watch these guys play for a team that wins 70 games every year?

            BY the way, name’s Chris

            Like

          2. The “trade everyone” comment is a petulant and misguided reaction for sure.

            That said, I am, despite all my pessimism about the trade value of our veterans, an advocate of being aggressive on the trade front. But, even setting aside the untradeability of several players (because of 5&10 rights, contract provisions restricting trade possibilities, and untradeable contracts), the strongest advocates of an aggressive trading strategy ironically provide the strongest reasons to believe that few if an deals will happen. Above someone suggests an optimisitic return for Hamels – basically the same as the return Shields got 1 1/2 years ago (Pederson roughly equals Myers, and a “3 or 4 starting pitcher” is a bit better than Odorizzi was at the time – he was a 3/4 but not quite major league ready). Now, don’t get me wrong, that kind of deal could could happen. But, given that the talent/age is very comparable, the contract for Hamels on balance a bit worse than Shields at the time (more years of control but much higher AAV) unless the Phillies kick in a ton of money, and the deal regarded as an overpay by KC, that’s probably the best you’re going to get for Hamels.

            And the propsoed deal was roasted by fans as not nearly enough for Hamels – ironically, mostly by commenters who are big advocates of trading veterans. People made the same point that V1 is making here – prospects are risky, Pederson is far from a sure thing.

            But that’s the market – that’s a very good return for a guy like Hamels. Enough IMO to do the deal, because it is indeed true that the chance that Hamels will be an ace when the team is ready to contend again is low.

            However, put yourself in Amaro’s shoes – he makes that kind of deal (IF he can) and imagine the fan reaction. Which MATTERS. I’d do the deal anyway, but Amaro won’t unless he gets a ridiculous overpay. Which he won’t.

            Like

    3. Thanks for the interesting look back. It shows how much individual adaptations and the desire to perform mean to future success. All these guys were very good.

      Like

    4. How about a trade for an ace where the team getting the ace had to give up two top-25 prospects and another top-75 riser.

      Kyle Drabek, Michael Taylor, and Travis D’Arnaud.

      That was prior to the 2010 season. So here we are in 2014. None of them have made a ‘splash’ in the majors. Taylor has been sideways in the minors, Drabek has had surgeries and is in AAA this year. D’Arnaud is getting a chance as a full-time catcher (having a decent start to July), but has to put together a longer stretch.

      Prospects are prospects. No matter how highly touted they are there’s no guarantee. If the Phillies get two top-25 guys (rated by Baseball America, MLB.com/whatever) and another top-75 in a Cole Hamels trade it would look like a good haul… still doesn’t mean any of them will ever do anything worthwhile in the bigs.

      Like

      1. So hang on to Hamels and get nowhere with a team that has NO CHANCE. My God i can’t take it anymore.

        Like

    5. Well, you get prospects for an ace, but you also increase likelihood of higher drafts picks sooner.

      Like

  26. Factoid……64 TJ surgeries so far this year….120 over last two years.
    Best to draft an ambidex pitcher.

    Like

    1. Where is Greg Harris when you need him.

      I would be interested in seeing comparisons between Japanese pitchers and US pitchers. Is TJ much more common here, and if so, wonder why (I would assume fewer TJs in Japan – slower throwers, fewer innings?)

      Like

      1. Japan does play fewer games overall(144 game reg season), but the season actually starts similar to MLB and the championship series is mid to late oct when it starts so more off-days. Most pitchers actually pitch on a 6 or 7-days rest. So Tanaka’s arm once he came to the MLB doesn’t have as much recovery between starts as pitching in Japan.

        Of course when he was in High School his team was in the national tournament and he threw over 500 pitches over 3 starts in 4 or 5 days(combined) So either back to back or 1 day rest mixed in.

        Like

  29. Off topic a little but are the Phillies done signing draft picks or do they have a little left for a late signing. The deadline is this Friday is there a chance of a late deal.

    Like

    1. I’d say there’s a chance for a bigger money surprise for one of the more highly regarded guys, up to the 5% tax number, (Murray is who everyone hopes, though I am convinced he’s not signing since he said pretty quickly that he was not, and I don’t think ~$550k changes his mind. Gamble might be more likely than Murray, but still a longshot). More likely they’ll tag a single or pair of the less thought of guys and try to give them each $100k+ or give one guy up to $200k to one of them and be done with it. Which of the guys left on the board that would be is anyone’s guess, IMO.

      Like

    1. If you are looking for OFers for Paps from the Dodgers you probably are not going to get a Joc Pederson, but rather someone like Scott Schebler, who still could be a very serviceable MLB player at some point.

      Like

      1. Well since Joc is on the way I’d take Kemp for Paps straight up and bet that he returns to a closer version of his MVP form than what he has been of late. At just 29 he should still have some very productive years ahead of him. That is if the Dodgers are feeling like they should get out of that contract and want to dump salary.

        Like

        1. Wow….Kemp is still owed over $100M until 2019.
          Of course, money does not scare Ruben, so i guess that would be a done deal.
          With Paps coming off the books….it is about an $80M differential…I assume.

          Like

          1. Omg Kemp for 100 million. shoot me if Ruben goes near him. Dmar I am shocked you would do that deal.

            Like

            1. LOL some times (in my best Tim McCarver voice) you have to take a chance. and as Romus says swapping the money of Papelbon it looks a bit more more palatable.

              But just to appease your more logical side he is a career .291/.349/837 and how old was Werth when he signed is 7/$128?

              Like

            2. Kemp’s DWAR is worse then Revere’s from what i understand.
              If that is all that possible!
              Is his shoulder healed and is he healthy?

              Like

            3. You are not wrong his dWar has not been good and scouts have said he has looked bad out there but I think he is still on the mend from the ankle and the shoulder.

              It would be a bit risky but I’m attracted to the offensive upside and his average is really climbing over his last 40-50 PA’s. I expect him to be back to form offensively maybe as a defender he is no longer a CF but easily plays up at either corner.

              Like

  31. Anyone take a look @ Mitch Rupert’s Top-30 Prospect list? Posted it on Twitter last night. Pretty interesting take on things.

    Like

      1. They really did a good job. I can’t think of a single quibble on the entire list greater than a couple spots.

        Like

      2. Good article and list.
        My only issue is how low Pullin and Cozens are…..and that Sandberg, IMO, would replace Tocci at his slotting,, who I see in the 11-15 range

        Like

  33. I was driving to Cape Cod yesterday and picked up WEEI (the Boston Sports Station). Discussion turned to Lester signing and what happens if Boston doesn’t sign him. The Sox #2 option, after signing Lester, is trading for Hamels. The talking heads were concerned about giving up 3 top prospects for Hamels. They felt he was worth it but letting Lester walk and getting only a supplemental 1st rounder in return was the dumb move. Lester would cost more than Hamels but they were convinced that signing Lester was the best possible solution. The Sox are sending a lot of scouts to every start Hamels has. They are also looking at Byrd. They think that Hamels could be had after the season and probably won’t want him during the season.

    Interesting discussion came after that. The commentators thought the Sox should save the 3 prospects and use them to get Stanton. One guy said the Phils would probably use the Sox prospects to get Stanton so why not keep them and go after Stanton themselves. Interesting perspective from another team’s view.

    Like

    1. Yeah, sports talk “journalists” are great sources for trade rumors.

      I’ve been pretty dogmatic about Hamels not getting us three top prospects. But I’ll concede that it’s possible (albeit extremely unlikely) that one of the relatively few organizations that (a) tends to place lower values on prospects, (b) is contending, (c) could afford the contract, and (d) needs a top of the rotation starting pitcher could indeed massively overpay for Hamels. Stranger things have happened (though not often).

      But Boston is 100% certain not to do such a deal. Oh, I beleive they are scouting him, and might make an offer. But it’s going to be well short of three top prospects. (And of coruse part of the reason for that is that, as even the talk radio idiots realize, resigning Lester, even if it’s for more money than they would like, is a FAR better option).

      Like

      1. In this context, the two teams most likely to overpay for Hamels are probably Baltimore and Toronto. But not even a whiff of a rumor about either team.

        Like

  34. I will say this – part of the problem is very much Amaro’s fault but not in the way that many posters here believe. Byrd would be gone, except that the one team that wants him is one of 4 teams on his no trade list, and he won’t approve the trade unless his thrid year is guarenteed, which the Mariners won’t do (this is based on a combination of rumors and inferences from known facts, but seems to be the reason why the Mariners are no longer interested). Why was he given ANY no trade protection?

    Papelbon of course has a horrible contract. Ironically, my so called pessimism about his trade value is looking like over optimism – I thought there would be a market for him, albeit at a low return, but that doesn’t appear to be the case. And don’t get me started on the Howard contract.

    Like

    1. This is the perfect time for the Phils to eat half of the 2016 guarantee on Byrd to get a prospect worth gambling on. I don’t know who that may be, there have been a half a dozen names mentioned. It is not a lot of $, compared to what they have to eat on Pap, and if that is the hold up with Seattle, they should do it.

      Like

    2. We really won’t have a true fix on this until after the 25th – teams get very desperate at that time. The market for Paps should be better, especially since I think the Phils are ready to absorb much of the contract cost. I cannot stand the personna, but he’s made a very unusual set of adjustments that most relief pitchers can only dream about. When he first lost velocity I thought he was through, but he’s adjusted, capitalized on his excellent command and developed other pitches. Somebody should want him but I think they’re just as focused on reliever velocity as we were and, hey, he is a jerk, no question about that.

      Like

      1. I hope you are right. The biggest reason that I think you may be wrong is the availability of at least 4 more attractive relievers on the market (more attractive because of value or contract or both).

        Like

  35. That is how the Phillies level the playing field on paps by eating some money. But don’t know if the they will. They will spend on fa but cheap in other areas which we have talked about a lot.

    Like

    1. Yeah, but the problem is that the contract is SO out of line that even if they pay a ton of money, it is STILL worse than some of the options.

      Same goes to some extent for proposals for Hamels and Lee. I think the Phillies could throw in some money, but likely not as much as the 25/30 million propsoed by some. Maybe that makes them “cheap” (I don’t think so, but assume I am wrong for the sake of argument), but it’s still silly to waste time speculating about what will not happen. (The second of several reasons I stopped trying to debate Derrick; the biggest being pure lack of time. Really, I shouldn’t even be making this series of comments – need to get back to work.)

      Like

Comments are closed.