Discussion

zambonir 2017-11-04 17:03:03 UTC #241

Well, we know they want Machado. I guess the question is what sort of consolation prizes will be out there (be it a trade or FA) if that doesn't happen. But I do think it is always on their mind. They are ready to pay, including with players if they can get him early, and maybe all those ex-Orioles guys have reason to feel optimistic.If they can't get him at the deadline they just have to hope he goes somewhere that can't afford him going forward (a la the Dodgers and Yu this year).

andyb 2017-11-04 18:58:35 UTC #242

Seat of the pants as there are lots of factors, but I don't think I am that off. Since Franco is not a high OBP guy his OWAR is probably close to Nick Williams without the baserunning speed contribution. Williams had an 811 OPS which gave him an OWAR of 1.4 in half a season. So Franco at 800 OPS is probably a 2.5-3.0 OWAR player over a full season. Franco's last 3 seasons of defense (DWAR) were -0.8, -0.4, and -0.2. Maybe he is getting better, but he is clearly a negative still.

Galvis had an OWAR of 1.8 last year on a 690 OPS. On defense he was a small positive (no idea why his overall WAR went down - probably negative baserunning value), but one could say that as a 3B he would be way above average defensively since it is an easier position. So if Galvis adds more than 0.5 DWAR he is likely the better player.

Franco being the better player might require his to have an 850 OPS while getting his OBP over .300. That is a 30-40 HR guy most likely. He could still do that. I just would not count on it.

allentown 2017-11-04 20:40:42 UTC #243

I think a lot of us fell in love with the idea of Maikel Franco as a minor leaguer and as a rookie. But best to set that emotion aside and stick with logic and stats. Even in his very good rookie year, Maikel was only +1.7 WAR, which translates to +3 WAR for a full year. In 2016 he played a full season, but logged only a +1.2 WAR. This past season, he also played a full season and posted a -0,2 WAR. Unless he drastically improves he is basically a replacement level player. At best, he is +3 WAR for the short time until his body slows down and his defense declines farther. He has had a whole year of Matt Stairs teaching an OBP approach and this impacted his performance not one whit. His OBP dropped below his very inadequate 2016 OBP. I seriously wonder what it will take to reach Maikel and get him to follow a more productive approach to hitting. Perhaps it is just an inadequate skill set and he is a mistake/guess hitter, whom pitchers have learned to handle, and who is not capable of adequate adjustment. After 2016, I thought 2017 was his do or die year, but it looks like he may get another half season to turn things around. If there is any interest, he might be a guy who benefits from plying his trade in another city. He certainly is the farthest from a Klentak player on our 40-man, and he is moving in the wrong direction.

zambonir 2017-11-04 21:11:44 UTC #244

A change of scenery might be called for no matter what, but unless he gets you something in a deal (most likely a package deal) working with him for five more months (ST and the first half of the season) seems like a good idea, especially when winning games is really still not the top priority. He had a strong July and September (over-.800 OPS) sandwiched around a terrible August, but still a .730 OPS in the second half.

And some of his flaws are just weird - the extra-poor BA in favorable counts, for instance. I don't know if that means he's fixable, or just the opposite. His power is good too obviously, though that's not as precious a commodity these days.

At least the Galvis etc. situation does give them options.

And I agree the phans fell in love with him, mostly because there was no one else at the time.

flyers19rw 2017-11-04 21:46:25 UTC #245

It wouldn't surprise me at all if Kingery was the starting 2B on opening day. He seems to be the high energy, pedal to the metal type of guy that matches Kapler's personality. Kingery has been compared to Utley who is Kapler's guy. Kingery's numbers at LV weren't outstanding but they were still good. We saw several players come up from LV and improve on their performance here in Philly. Kingery might be able to do that as well. Starting Kingery would also send a message to the players in the system as to how they need to play in order to make the grade in this organization.

Philsmania 2017-11-04 22:03:29 UTC #246

Kingery could bat .400 with an OPS over 1.000 in Clearwater but I still don't think he'll be on the Opening Day roster, not with the trigger on his service time clock an issue.

zambonir 2017-11-04 22:03:29 UTC #247

I'd bet big against that. Analytics-driven organizations (like the Cubs, Astros and Dodgers) tend to be even more aggressive about service time manipulation/exploitation than we've been accustomed to with the Phillies. He'd have to really explode in ST and even then it might not matter. Especially given he doesn't even have to be on the 40.

phillychuck 2017-11-05 00:41:42 UTC #248

Back to the Hernandez to 3B discussion. I've read several posters who believe that Cesar doesn't have the arm to play 3B. It's not that much of a necessity. Ron Cey, who probably had the worst arm in the Dodgers' infield at that time (behind Lopes and Russell) played 3B. Pete Rose played 3B when he could barely get the ball to 1B in the air. Edwin Encarnacion allegedly played 3B although he was a really erratic thrower. Bobby Bonilla was probably less accurate than Encarnacion. Finally, batting champion Bill Madlock played 3B for years with a rag arm and almost no range. Not every player on a team is going to be a gold glove player and post a 900 OPS. Cesar at 3B would add a lot offensively, and allow Kingery to play his natural position.

flyers19rw 2017-11-05 02:17:49 UTC #249

Pederson, Seager and Bellinger came up quickly and so have others for the Dodgers. If a player could produce, they've been brought up.

zambonir 2017-11-05 03:08:05 UTC #250

You would have to convince me that Kingery is actually comparable to those guys. He's got 63 games at AAA and sub.-800 OPS. Bellinger didn't make the Dodgers out of ST. Certainly if Kingery puts up a 1.000 OPS in April at Lehigh Valley (or even in ST) it would be something to consider. I guess he is more comparable to Seager who didn't set AAA on fire but Seager plays a more defensive position. The real issue is whether the Phillies can and will trade both Galvis and Hernandez (or bench Franco, which would basically mean his Phillies career is over and so is his trade value). If not, they don't need Kingery yet (or even have room for him on the 40 though obviously these things shake out more easily once the season starts). The other difference is the Dodgers were repeated division champions who thought their young players could help them win (and replace older, more expensive players). The Phillies don't have to rush anyone yet.

Regarding Cesar's arm, I am not sure those examples would hold up in 2017, when there is more of premium on defense. But it seems to me that any argument you can make for tolerating Cesar at 3B could also be made for Kingery. It's just a question of comfort level. But the really good players who were asked to switch positions as rookies continued to be really good players.

julio 2017-11-05 03:08:46 UTC #251

Brought up quickly - but not one of them made his debut on, or near Opening Day. Two (Pederson and Seager) were September call-ups (think J.P. Crawford in 2017); Bellinger debuted on April 25th this past season. So Philsmania's point seems valid - there are good reasons why Kingery will probably not be on the 25 man roster on Opening Day, even if he goes wild in spring training.

andyb 2017-11-05 14:09:37 UTC #252

It just makes so much sense for a lot of reasons to have Kingery go to LHV for 2 months. Not just arbitration, but as others have noted, his BB/K ratio could use some improvement and it is his pattern that he does improve in that area after a few months.

Plus we have to move 2 starting infielders to play him. Pretty sure we will move one of Galvis or Hernandez to accommodate Crawford, but it is less likely we move both. While you could maybe make the team marginally better by playing Hernandez or Galvis or even Crawford at 3B it would be a MARGINAL improvement. So everybody that argues that the team should not invest in top free agents like Darvish because another 4 WAR will not make us contenders, why would we play a middle infielder at 3B (and potentially hurt prospect development) for a measly 1 WAR gain.

Playing a middle infielder at 3B is a move a contender would make for an extra win, not a move a rebuilding team would make that is trying to move its prospects into their best position for the future.

Dirk41 2017-11-05 14:33:18 UTC #253

Would the O's move Gausman?

tom81 2017-11-05 14:38:01 UTC #254

To quote Frank Zappa this is the "crux of the biscuit."

I think that the team has a shot to be wild card contenders this year so I think they owe it to the long suffering fans to spend some money on top talent and utilize the talent we have to try to get to the playoffs. If it becomes obvious once we start playing the games that we have no shot at the playoffs then start selling. We only have an estimated $101.5 million committed to 2022. We can certainly spend some money now to improve short term and also entertain the masses without jeopardizing our ability to add talent when the consensus here thinks we will be competitive. It would also improve our image with next years free agent class if we improve now.

allentown 2017-11-05 15:44:08 UTC #255

That doesn't really compute. The planned middle infield of the future is Crawford at SS and Kingery at 2B. Galvis won't be a long-term member of the Phillies, so having him play the first half of the season at 3B doesn't hurt anybody's development. Of course, the cleanest approach is to trade Hernandez over the winter, put Crawford at SS and Galvis at 2B, until Kingery comes up a little later in the season, but if Hernandez isn't traded, then Galvis at 3B may be the next, best solution.

allentown 2017-11-05 15:47:31 UTC #256

And only $87 mill committed for 2021, and less than $70 million for 2020, which is why I prefer a big signing, with all the $ crunched into 4 years, on the assumption that AF is correct and the big names won't be worth anything in 2021 anyway.

andyb 2017-11-05 16:16:44 UTC #257

I don't disagree with that sentiment but it also does not go strategically to my contention of playing a middle infielder at 3B for little gain. I do think we will get significant improvements from our young players, especially having full seasons of Crawford and Hoskins. Hopefully improvement in the OF as well especially if Altherr is healthy. Getting an extra win out of 3B is not the path to contention however. That path is something like this:

Sign/trade for 2 free agent starting pitchers and one back end bullpen piece
Upgrade 3B also either through trade or free agent
Trade Hernandez

Any trades beyond Hernandez would involve top prospects if we want difference-makers like Archer. We should consider this but we also need to consider laying out cash to get top free agents like Darvish or even Arrietta. Cash is the resource we have in unlimited proportions. We have prospect depth but few certain stars which makes me unwilling to want to deal guys like Sixto or even Kingery at this point.

Major point - if we want to contend one of the things we need is a serious upgrade at 3B. I would trade a huge boatload of prospects (Sixto, either Moniak or Haseley, another second tier pitcher, plus Franco) for Machado if there were a guarantee he signs a long term deal. I am less enamored with the free agent 3B options this year. Maybe a Hernandez deal could be done for a 3B to get equal value but with someone whose offense better fits the position. But bottom line is that a contending Phillies team probably needs a 3B upgrade since to be a contender we will need to improve by 2+ wins at a half dozen different positions or roster slots.

EDmuch 2017-11-05 16:17:38 UTC #258

I really do not see us being able to sign any of the big 2018 UFA's unless we play at least close to .500 ball in 2018. Otherwise, Harper, Machado et all will go to contenders who have money in their pockets, such as the Yankees who appear to be making progress on significant reductions in their payroll.

EDmuch 2017-11-05 16:21:05 UTC #259

Archer's contract fits so perfectly into the Rays' limited financial structure that it would take a Kingery's ransom (see how I snuck that in there) to get him: at least 3 of our top prospects.

andyb 2017-11-05 16:30:04 UTC #260

Completely agree there. One of the things I want to see this offseason is signing Nola to a contract like Archer's. The longer we wait, the more we will pay. We also have the money where an overpay early won't kill us financially if he ever got hurt.

One of the reasons I keep pushing top free agents is that the good young pitchers in their late 20s seem to all have favorable contracts (Archer but also someone like Carrasco). Stroman is only arbitration, which might end up more expensive, so he is probably a better target than Archer if we are realistic about cost.