2017-18 Offseason Non-Phillies News/Notes/Discussion

[California_Dreamin]

I simply don't think the Phils are going to end up with any of the three [thought Lynn was the most likely] and that the Phils will regret not acquiring one of them when they were so obviously sitting in the cat birds seat.

They don't seem particularly interested in Cobb and I will always believe Arrieta ends up in Washington unless/until he doesn't. I also believe if he was coming to Philadelphia he would already be there.

For all this talk about being financially aggressive and having all this money to spend [and an owner who wants to spend it supposedly] I still believe McPhail's old school conservative ways permeate the way they run their business. Its almost like he had a plan when he took the job and has refused to allow the Phillies accelerated growth talent wise to move him forward.

Its like he is mentally saying, "I didn't believe we would content until 2019 and darned if I am going to change my mind!" Big mistake in my opinion, this Phillie team is on the cusp and could challenge for a wild card berth with just a little prodding.

[zambonir]

They're either confident they can get Arrieta or they don't like Lynn enough to care if they miss out on him (which will also be true of Cobb). Just like they turned out to be uninterested in Vargas Garcia etc. I don't think they are "sticking to the plan" because they wouldn't have signed Santana or overpaid for relief pitchers if so.

I don't see why "if he was coming to Philadelphia he'd already be there" doesn't apply just as much if not more so to the Nats. Clearly Boras has not been willing to accept the existing offer from either team. Seems like the dam will break now.

This is still Klentak believing in the new-school rebuild and the analytics, not MacPhail being conservative (or thrifty). I mean, geez, of course they could/should sign a veteran pitcher to a one-year deal for less than they paid Hellickson last year! Unless they think they can get a better one or truly think he isn't better than what they have.

I don't think contending this year is the reason to do it, either. Being more respectable, yeah. Allowing the team to show more progress for PR reasons (including to free agents) absolutely. But the fantasy that they can catch the Nats or even finish ahead of the Mets or wild card teams in the division is not something I'd make policy on.

[California_Dreamin]

zambonir....disagree with you on your premise that Boras views the situation with Washington and Philadelphia are the same and that if he wanted to be in Washington he would already be there, as I feel would be the case with the Phillies.

Boras has shown countless times that if/when he and his clients have a particular team in mind he will play the long and patient game and he has shown in the past that this works with Lerner, the owner of the Nats.

I still maintain if Arrieta wanted to come to Philadelphia he would already be there since he knows he would be A] counted on to be at worst the #2 starter and B] would be signing a short term deal. With the Nats I think he realizes he still might get a longer deal if he waits long enough and that he will be viewed as at best their #3 starter and maybe even their #4.

[Austinfan]

Catch 22 - the only way the Philies contend this year is some young SPs step up, and if that happens, Lynn or Cobb would be your #4 starters or so and just blocking other young pitchers from getting a chance.

I don't think Arrieta wants to come here, he's at the end of his career. Boras would want to use Klentak to drive up the price to Washington, something Klentak might want to do in principle, but since numbers get leaked, may not want to do and raise the baseline for negotiations with players who are sincerely interested in coming here.

[California_Dreamin]

AF...I agree. I just don't think Arrieta wants to come to the Phillies and never did. He wants Washington but if that doesn't work he will go to Milwaukee. I also believe Boras is holding out hope that another contender might suffer a pitching injury this spring and reach out to Arrieta.

I simply believe that if he was coming to Philadelphia he would be there.

[zambonir]

Well, the obvious thing is that these guys don't want to sign a one-year contract with a team that's coming off a 66-win season when they can sign with a team that's coming off an 85-win season. Or, sure, the Nats. And they no longer want to sign more than a one-year deal because they want to try free agency again with no QO attached. Should the Phillies have offered Lance Lynn a $20 million one-year deal? It's only money, but who knows if he would have even taken it and if they just don't like him that much why would they?

We shall see about Arrieta. If the Nats do step up with a four-year deal I won't be sad. In fact, I'll be happy.

[California_Dreamin]

I would have offered Lynn a 1/15 deal or 2/25. The Phils have talked at length over the past couple of months that they "would" sign a pitcher, even Middleton acknowledged it. If they don't, deservedly or not, the talk will once again venture into the Phils are cheap category. In fact, I have already read it on several other sites. I do not believe this but do believe perception trumps reality and the perception will be that the Phils could/should have signed one of the eligible hurlers out there.

[allentown]

In fact, I have already read it on several other sites. I do not believe this but do believe perception trumps reality and the perception will be that the Phils could/should have signed one of the eligible hurlers out there.

Seeing what Lynn signed for, if the Phillies aren't going to get Arrieta, it seems clear to me that in fact the Phillies could have and should have signed Lynn. I agree with AF that some of the young pitchers need to step forward this year. However, even if Lynn is signed and the Phillies have the sort of miraculously injury-free season in which only 5 SP are required, that still leaves room for 3 of the young SPs to step forward and do well in the rotation. I include Eickhoff in the 3, since he had a poor 2017 in which his walk rate doubled from 2016. Both years he has given up well more than his fair share of HRs. IMHO it is asking way more than reasonable to expect 3 of the young SPs to make that step forward this year, let alone for 4 to do so, if we don't sign a SP. So, IMHO not signing a quality SP for this year is the equivalent of foolishly writing off another season. We needed a good SP a lot more than we needed Santana. If what we have is the rotation we are going to go with, then I remain distinctly unimpressed by Klentak/MacPhail.

[California_Dreamin]

allentown..yep! I agree 100%. I am convinced Middleton wants to spend, he has now negotiated a deal with his sister that seems to have ended that cloud and was a first hand witness to the success of the Eagles.

I continue to believe McPhail is simply too old school conservative and that Klentak is influenced greatly by that. It seems almost foolish to me that they would bring in Santana, which screams of an accelerated pace, and then let all of these free agent hurlers sign deals that we know the Phils could dwarf.

One more thing needs to be acknowledged also...its quite possible that Klentak simply is not very good and painting a picture to free agents of a Phillie revival. This is a skill that is so often undervalued. I still recall the story of Epstein selling Curt Schilling of the Red Sox vision over Thanksgiving dinner when everyone and his mother knew that Schilling wanted to come back to Philadelphia.

Epstein is a master, so far Klentak not so much. Lynn was there for the taking, 2/25 gets it done.

[julio]

1. Nobody here knows - or could know - whether Lance Lynn was willing to come to Philadelphia,uner any circumstances...so saying "...in fact the Phillies could have and should have signed Lynn" is asserting something unknowable as if it were fact. That you wanted the Phillies to do something doesn't make it a "fact" that they "could have and should have" done that thing.

2. "...the talk will once again venture into the Phils are cheap category. In fact, I have already read it on several other sites. I do not believe this but do believe perception trumps reality and the perception will be ..." There's no better way to promulgate things you "don't believe" than to repeat them. It's like gossip; reporting what has appeared "on several other sites" just puts the idea out there again.

Just my personal opinion here, but I see these kind of comments as poisoning the waters. I don't get it.

[zambonir]

To me it's far more "obvious" that Lynn wasn't willing to sign here - even for more years/money - or the Phillies just don't think he's good (and there's good reason to think that). Every team makes a list of players they would like to target in free agency and in trade. Not every available player is actually on it.

The guy they actually missed out on way back when, according to reports, was Chatwood. And now that looks pretty smart that they didn't outbid the Cubs for him, not that there would have been any real harm in it.

I just don't think the season is going to play out in such a way that the lack of pitcher - assuming, it bears saying, still, that they don't get one - is going to make or break the first half of the season. These guys are still only worth 1 or 2 wins, tops, in the first 81 games.They can get a pitcher as good as Lynn - heck, possibly Lynn himself - in July, whether they are contending, or even if they are not contending but need to upgrade, because I think they will be looking to make both long and short-term deals in July.

I choose to be more optimistic that the Phillies' apparent consistent focus on Arrieta and MacPhail's history with him counts just as much as the Nats' history with Boras. Does it count just as much as the fact that the Nats (or Brewers) have a chance to go to the World Series and the Phillies don't? No, but there's not much the Phillies can do about that, especially on a one-year deal, and we can't assume more money or a second year would have helped (a second year might have even been a hindrance). And Lynn is not Schilling or Jon Lester, if you don't want the player that badly and the player's not a star, why would you hard-sell? Klentak already successfully sold Santana and Hunter (Neshek I'll grant you was easy).

If the position players and the bullpen don't deliver on the most optimistic projections, the lack of a veteran starting pitcher won't matter. And that will also be true if they do deliver. Because then, not only will they be able to go get one, but they'll have one or two quality major league players available in trade.

It's not going to bother me if this team only wins 78 or 81 games this season so we really won't be able to say what they did or didn't do right until a year from now (when we not only know how the 2018 team did, but also who they acquired between now and then).

[andyb]

The argument that any free agent starter only adds a win or two is not a great argument. Then why did the team bother to sign Santana since that is also a move that only moves the needle 1 or 2 WAR (especially counting the likely negative defense from Hoskins)?

Adding a good pitcher might increase the team's playoff odds from something like 15% to 25%-30%. That is what 1-2 wins will do for a projection already in the 74-78 win range (low end is Fangraphs, high end is Baseball Prospectus). That is why signing Arrieta is important, especially if the collapse of the market gets them a potential bargain. The value of WAR is not really going down as the market goes down. That number is also dependent on revenues which are decidedly not going down.

[zambonir]

Because they really liked Santana - so much that they were willing to move Hoskins and lose a pick - and he was signable. Obviously that was not true of Lance Lynn, because obviously he's still objectively better than whoever the 5th starter is. But not enough to make them fall in love (and lose a less valuable pick).

I'm not saying making the team better is inherently bad, only that you don't have to do it at all costs and under any circumstances.

Though I also think the team isn't really truly trying to make the playoffs. I know everybody's tired of losing but they are closer to being the 2014 Cubs/Astros than the 2015 Cubs/Astros (or rather, right in the middle of those two extremes).

But I also choose to believe they are trying hard to get Arrieta and that's always been their goal. To do it, you have to sell him on what the team will be for the next three years, and it's probably still true that he would also get an opt-out. If this team ends up drafting 12th instead of 20th I'm not sure the GM would be heartbroken. Though conversely, if you do sign him and can make a run at 85 wins it will hurt less to give up two 20th picks than one 12th pick.

And if they don't get him, I don't know that I'm prepared to say they should have aggressively pursued a pitcher they didn't really want just as a hedge against not getting him.

I'm not sure the trade market is done either. Supposedly teams are still calling about Archer and Duffy every day though I can't imagine anyone will make a good enough offer, especially with both those teams trying to stay respectable to start the season. But I bet you the Phillies have made more phone calls to those GMs than to Lance Lynn's agent.

[HopeSpringsEternal]

Salisbury is reporting that Phillies have signed Arrieta: http://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/phillies/phillies-agree-multi-year-deal-jake-arrieta

Nightengale saying 3-years, $75 million: https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/972944579115696128

[julio]

This is "Non-Phillies" News?

[HopeSpringsEternal]

Sorry - had been reading all the Arrietta postings earlier today and didn't realize there was another thread on his signing.

[julio]

Sorry - had been reading all the Arrietta postings earlier today and didn't realize there was another thread on his signing.

No biggee. We all went ballistic when the Arrieta news (the real news, not the rumors) broke!

[Lawman]

This is a phenomenal idea:

https://sports.yahoo.com/orioles-letting-kids-9-younger-attend-games-free-180414369.html

The Baltimore Orioles have introduced a new initiative to try and combat that problem and get more families — and kids in general — out to the ballpark. It’s called “Kids Cheer Free.” When an adult buys a regularly priced upper deck ticket at Camden Yards, they can add up to two free upper deck tickets for kids age nine and under. Tickets will be available on a rolling basis throughout the season.

Looking at the numbers, that’s a stellar deal. For example, when the Orioles play the Cleveland Indians on Saturday, April 21, upper deck tickets are priced between $15 and $27. A family of two adults and two kids age 9 and under would save between $30 and $54. And if both adults bought “Kids Cheer Free” tickets, each kid could bring a friend with no extra ticket cost. That’s tangible savings for any baseball-loving family with young kids.

[donaldorc]

The Baltimore Orioles have introduced a new initiative to try and combat that problem and get more families — and kids in general — out to the ballpark. It’s called “Kids Cheer Free.” When an adult buys a regularly priced upper deck ticket at Camden Yards, they can add up to two free upper deck tickets for kids age nine and under. Tickets will be available on a rolling basis throughout the season.

Looking at the numbers, that’s a stellar deal. For example, when the Orioles play the Cleveland Indians on Saturday, April 21, upper deck tickets are priced between $15 and $27. A family of two adults and two kids age 9 and under would save between $30 and $54. And if both adults bought “Kids Cheer Free” tickets, each kid could bring a friend with no extra ticket cost. That’s tangible savings for any baseball-loving family with young kids.

Agreed that this is a great idea.

[nycphils]

Make the kids fans early. I think it’s great.