2017-18 Off-season Trade/Free Agent Speculation

[flyers19rw]

I am not in favor of giving opt outs to players in contracts.When an organization does that, they are in essence, betting against themselves regarding the player's performance. I understand that a player would be reluctant to take a team triggered OO. That being the case, why should ownership jump on the train of giving them to a player? The minute that the player exceeds certain expectations, they're out of there. It will be interesting to see if Kershaw plays that card this fall. However if their performance falls below expectations, the organization is stuck with a bad deal on their hands.
If Arietta was so good, teams would be lining up to get him with a fixed contract. The fact is that he's a pitcher that is in decline over the last two seasons; is at an age where longevity is an issue; has had arm issues in his past and who wants a long term deal. Obviously no organization has stepped up to give him that under his circumstances. At best, an intelligent organization would offer him a short term deal which is probably what the Phillies, and others, have done which he is loathe to accept.
I give credit to Boras for attempting to find a lucrative contract for his client. I also give the Phillies credit for not biting on his offers. After seeing talented pitchers such as Oswald, Holiday and Lee blow up on them at an age similar to Arietta's, the Phillies should be quite gun shy at taking on such a pitcher without some protection on their part. So if OOs are acceptable on the side of the players then management should reserve the same right. If that means that Arietta signs elsewhere then that is what happens.
The Phillies have passed on giving OOs in the past. The Yasmani Thomas's negotiations come to mind.Gillick intervened and rejected Amaro's idea of signing Thomas because of the OOs. That turned out to be the correct move as Thomas has not lived up to the expectations of his contract.
From where I sit today, my evaluation of the present Phillies club is that they are a candidate to vie for the top pick in the '19 amateur draft. The fielding is shaky, the bats have not shown life yet this spring, basic baseball fundamentals look to be a challenge at this point and the pitching is suspect. They're a real work in progress. Like all organizations that are in these straits, one thing that would help them move forward is player stability vis a vis term with the club. I don't see where offering OOs to players in order to get them into the organization does much good.

[phillychuck]

Flyers, you're misreading the Arietta situation with respect to the Phils. Arietta wants a long-term deal at a certain AAV, as does his agent (Boras), and the players' union wants him to get a high-value deal to maintain everyone else's value in the market. The clubs that have enough money to pay him have decided, with the help of analytics, that long-term deals for pitchers his age are not great long-term investments. The Phils are in an ideal position to take advantage of that market inefficiency. They have lots of short-term money they are either going to pay a player or pocket. The ONLY way they can use that money to improve the team is by paying a player. They can actually over-pay Arietta for a short term AND offer him the security of being able to re-open negotiations if he lives up to the contract. THAT'S why an opt-out makes sense. The Nats (or another contending team) will eventually sign Arietta if we don't find a creative way to encourage him to sign with us. An opt-out is a negotiation tool hoping to get him to forego the longer-term deal (and added security). If you offer him a front-loaded contract with opt-outs for him he gets the security he wants and you get the benefit of having him on your roster, not one of the other 29 teams' roster.

A deal that would make sense for Arietta is roughly $30M/$30M/$30M/$15M/$15M with a player opt-out after year 3. That's a deal that wouldn't put the Phils in a bind and would stabilize the staff for the next three years. It would give Arietta the security of a 5-year deal if he declines. And the opt-out would give the Phils the chance to re-sign him if he shows the ability to pitch well in his mid-30s. The opt-out is a sweetener to get Arietta to believe he's getting the kind of deal he thinks he deserves.

Player negotiations are NOT teams making statements about what they think "should be". They are creative ways to get to both sides saying "yes" to each other.

[zambonir]

It will be interesting to see if Kershaw plays that card this fall

Kershaw will likely opt out and then sign a new deal with the Dodgers.

The Phillies have passed on giving OOs in the past. The Yasmani Thomas's negotiations come to mind.Gillick intervened and rejected Amaro's idea of signing Thomas because of the OOs. That turned out to be the correct move as Thomas has not lived up to the expectations of his contract.

We talked a lot about that opt-out being a bad deal for the Phillies which it was because the team wasn't going to be good at the time (or for three years). This year is different. But I think the real reason they didn't sign Tomas was the scouting report. Amaro was willing to overlook to make a big splash and get what he thought was a big bat, but as it got closer, they realized Tomas didn't have a position, which has turned out to be the case.

If you think the Phillies can't win more than 70 or 75 games this year like your post says, then yeah, it would be dumb to sign Arrieta, but it was probably also dumb to sign Santana.

A deal that would make sense for Arietta is roughly $30M/$30M/$30M/$15M/$15M with a player opt-out after year 3. That's a deal that wouldn't put the Phils in a bind and would stabilize the staff for the next three years. It would give Arietta the security of a 5-year deal if he declines. And the opt-out would give the Phils the chance to re-sign him if he shows the ability to pitch well in his mid-30s. The opt-out is a sweetener to get Arietta to believe he's getting the kind of deal he thinks he deserves.

I wouldn't sign him to a five-year deal, even with all that protection. The (unsourced) rumor stated above suggested a three-year deal with immediate opt-outs, and then team options for 4 and 5. Obviously it would be better if the opt-out only came after Year 2,but giving it to him after Year 1 is probably the price of keeping the guaranteed portion of the deal so short. And the team options do give the Phillies what would at that point be a cheap pitcher if he was still good (though that seems unlikely).

[jimbomill]

I hope we don't sign him if he's asking $30M a season, which assumes he walks when his pay halves.

[andyb]

I don't think the offer will be quite $30 million, but what is so bad if he were great for 3 years and then he walked? For him to give away years 4 and 5 it means he is worth more than $15 million per year going into his age 35 contract year. That means he was probably worth at least $20 million a year to the Phillies in 3 years, maybe more.

So if it plays out that we get 3 expensive but solid years from a starter when we can afford it then I take that scenario. And if he gets paid more by someone else at age 35 I am OK with that too.

Opt outs can be a win win. Good for the player that gets more money. And potentially good for the team that is absolved of the older pitcher who is riskier at age 35 than age 32.

[David_Criss]

Does that mean the Phillies can opt out if he stinks up the joint?

[Austinfan]

Front loading has no value on a long-term deal for the Phillies, because cash flow isn't their issue, it's the cap HIT in the out years, which isn't impacted by front loading. Only if the back years are so bad that an Arrieta pitching like a replacement player (which is a good bet by his fourth season) would opt out would it work. And in that case just offer three years.

[andyb]

Front loading can get the player for the Phillies. Also if you front load a contract with opt outs, the back years serve to lessen the AAV of the contract. And if the pitcher opt outs then you have had him for his good years (at a lower AAV).

[zambonir]

Does that mean the Phillies can opt out if he stinks up the joint?

Asked and answered, I'd say

Still waiting to hear where this rumor actually is, haven't seen anything on MLBTR. @phillychuck - Tweets? Article? Radio show? Personal relationship with writers?

[phillychuck]

Heard it speculated twice on the radio, and I did see a tweet, I think. I'll need some time to track it down. So it's a rumor from sources of questionable quality. I might have even heard it second-hand.

[David_Criss]

Story out today about Neil Walker remaining unsigned. PHillies are mentioned a bit down in the write up as a super utility landing spot.

"The Phillies aren’t ready to give up on Maikel Franco just yet, but they don’t need to be in order to clear room for Walker. The Phils are set to carry Tommy Joseph on their bench despite his defensive limitations and his skill set’s redundancies with Rhys Hoskins and Carlos Santana on the roster. Walker could back up Franco, Cesar Hernandez and Santana around the infield, and if Franco’s struggles persist, he could potentially assume a larger role at third."

The Lack Of A Market For Neil Walker Doesn't Make Sense

[phillychuck]

Walker is 32 years old, is 10% or so better than an average regular at this point in his career. With the Phils' other infield options, I really don't want Walker unless he comes with a trade for a really good starting pitcher featuring the displaced infielder.

Walker is probably about a 2.5 WAR regular at 2B, I have no idea what he'd be at 3B or as a super-utility guy.

[bkeich]

Really, it is a question of whether the franchise is thinking that a playoff spot is a credible possibility at this point. Since we are actually DEAD LAST in payroll, I am assuming that the front office is accepting that they are not going to be any better than 70 or so wins and we are still in evaluating young players, so adding a veteran is actually against the plan. I think Santana was added almost as a PR move and because his high OBP matched what they say they want, and not really as a first move to try and sneak into playoff contention this year. We will see, if they Phils can continue the play they had near the end of last year maybe the players can outperform what the FO is assuming is true.

April and May will be more important for this team than probably any other. If we win at a .500 pace maybe the FO will actually try and make moves to ADD WAR. Otherwise it is just another "we are evaluating" and we will be having the same conversations next year.

[allentown]

I am all for the Phillies signing FAs and getting to a more normal payroll, but I want them to do it with guys who fill holes and are going to help beyond this season. I don't think Walker addresses a need. I'd rather go with a cheap/younger guy like Valentin as our IF spare. I most definitely do not want Walker competing with Hernandez/Kingery/Crawford/Franco for playing time. What we need is SP. Whatever $/lost draft picks we pay from here on to upgrade the team should be above average SPs. That is the team's weakness. After Nola, we really have ifs. We have a lot of advanced ifs, so unless we are snakebit, one or two will answer the questions and be fine SPs for us, but the baseball gods would have to give the Phillies a triple blessing for 4 good SPs to emerge from our large number of ifs. It would take a blessing from the baseball gods for 4 even ok SPs to emerge from our advanced prospects. Adding a quality SP upgrades the team for this year and next and leaves plenty of innings for the kids to audition and for the ones who are going to make it to emerge.

Walker was a 1.5 WAR player last season for $17 million. I suspect he is only getting minor league offers, because he is asking too much for an MLB contract.

If bargains are emerging, I'm also happy for the Phillies to sign an average or slightly below average pitcher for a bargain price. I'd certainly take a bargain 3B who is an upgrade on Franco. I don't think that is Neil Walker at this point in his career.

[andyb]

Main reason I have no interest in Walker is that we have both Cesar Hernandez and Scott Kingery. The whole Walker contract saga has shown the current market for 2B is not robust. Injuries and poor performances may change that, but at the moment we have no apparent trade path for Cesar. So Walker with the Phillies would impact Kingery's potential playing time and development.

I want to add free agent pitching because I don't think we can rely on our starters yet. With infielders though we actually do have depth and options if we don't trade Cesar. And I am fine with a month of Adam Rosales if that is what we need to get through to call up Kingery.

[tom81]

The Phils are set to carry Tommy Joseph on their bench despite his defensive limitations and his skill set’s redundancies with Rhys Hoskins and Carlos Santana on the roster.

This is just wrong IMO.

[andyb]

Not sure we are set to carry Joseph on our bench. There has been very little indication of that and I think the real question is whether they want to option him to AAA if there are no trade options. Just because some reporter might buy that line does not make it likely.

How many times has the team emphasized flexibility for their bench and alluded to going with a short bench (4 as opposed to 5) at times. No matter how many positions they try Joseph at I don't think flexibility will ever be part of his resume. Carrying 3 catchers probably makes more sense than carrying Joseph since Knapp and Alfaro are probably more credible in the OF than Joseph. And I don't think they are considering that.

[Austinfan]

I'm not excited about adding SPs because I think we can rely on our young pitchers - we have 6 young pitchers vying for 4 spots, all of whom have some ML experience (and most young SPs struggle their first time in the Show).
We also have a deep bullpen, which means if we have two SPs averaging 6 IP, then the other three just have to go 5 innings a start, which means they don't even have to get through the lineup three times most starts.

I'm just not sold on any of the three, and don't want to give them more than 3 years at a decent price.
Next year we're going to have a second wave of young pitchers competing for starting jobs in ST, and a deep Lehigh rotation. By the end of this year, the Lehigh rotation may be Anderson, Kilome, De Los Santos, Irvin, Waguespack with a Reading rotation of El Garcia, Romero, Sanchez, Medina, Howard and Suarez. Guys like Eshelman, Tavares, etc. will face an "up or out" situation.

So while we have 6 competing for 4 spots this year, we may have 6 competing for 2 spots next year.
This isn't the bad old days when we'd have one or two legitimate pitching prospects in AAA ball and we'd cross our fingers and hope they'd be able to pitch at the ML level.

Lehigh - past rotations
2008 - Happ, [Mazone, Blackley, Walrond, Knotts, Benson]
2009 - Carrasco, Carpenter, Kendrick, [Lehr, Chacin, Lopez]
2010 - Savery, Duckworth [Mazone, Carpenter, Bump]
2011 - Mathieson [Bass, Bump, Feierabend, Edell, Gordon]
2012 - Cloyd [Elarton, Cochran, Misch, Bush, Hyatt] (Pettibone 7 starts)
2013 - Morgan [Martin, Cochran, Cloyd, Smith, Valdes, Minor]
2014 - [Smith, O'Sullivan, Lincoln, Enright] (Buchanan 12 starts)
2015 - S Gonzalez, Aumont, Rodriquez, Morgan, Buchanan [Vasquez, Berken] (Nola 6 starts)
2016 - Thompson, Lively, Eflin, Buchanan [Russell, Vasquez, Klein] (Pivetta 5 starts, Asher 4 starts)
2017 - Eshelman, Thompson, Lively, Appel, Leibrandt, Pinto [C Ramos] (Tavares 7 starts)

As the young depth improved, they phased out the veteran pitchers, then upgraded the young pitchers over the last three years. Young pitchers who couldn't cut the grade were moved to the pen, traded or waived.

[David_Criss]

I'd be shocked if Joseph made the team. You have to root for the guy and his power is impressive, especially given that he had to learn a totally brand new position basically at the Major League level. He has options. To me it is a no brainer - Joseph to Lehigh Valley to work on his defense and to make adjustments and possibly learn to play a little 3B or LF. If he could be a backup catcher then it is a whole different conversation.

Does Franco have any options remaining? I wonder if he'd be claimed if he were to be waived. But if one had to be removed from the 40-man, Joseph is a safer bet to pass through.

[nycphils]

Guarantee Franco is claimed if waived.