2018-19 Phillies Off-Season Discussion (2019 version)

[tom81]

MLBTR’s projection system spit out a $6.6MM figure for Nola. If I’m the team i do everything you can to work out a deal for Nola. If that fails I tell the arbitrator that the team made a mistake and go with the players numbers. In this environment with the players it doesn’t make sense to build up any more ill will before the next collective bargaining agreement.

Unresolved 2019 Arbitration Cases

[Patchmk88]

Jake Arrieta on Twitter

Jake isn’t happy with the FA situation.

[David_Criss]

6.75 mil for Nola is a B A I R G A N. Dear God Neshek and Hunter are marking 9 mil each. Don't upset him over 2 mil.

[zambonir]

Jake's right. They need to get their act together before the next CBA, and the players who are over 26 need to think about helping the players who will be coming up after them, rather than just getting theirs now, since what they are getting now (and as they age) is obviously not going to be what it used to be.

Not that he's suffering, especially if the Phillies pick up his option. But he made less than $4 million in his Cy Young season. Neither side should actually want a system that rips you off when you are performing and then overpays you when you're broken.

[allentown]

Neither side should actually want a system that rips you off when you are performing and then overpays you when you're broken.

Yes, we presently have a very seniority-based system. That has been carried to extreme and when that happens, over time, there will simply be fewer seniors.

[Austinfan]

Seniors vote, minor leaguers, no matter how bright their future, don't vote.
So the system will always avoid making it too tempting to cut seniors in favor of kids, but also ensuring that most of the money goes to established players - a tough balance to maintain.
One thing is certain, young players just starting out will get underpaid.

However, one reason is simply because there is no reliable pipeline other than minor league development, even colleges rarely produce ML ready players (unlike say the NFL). So teams won't invest in development if they can't underpay young players for some extent of time.

The combination of vested interests by established players and team incentives to continue developing talent will limit how much the system can be changed.

[andyb]

The problem is that the players concentrated on small things rather than the bigger financial picture in the last collective bargaining agreement. The MLB system was always based on seniority and that is not completely wrong because lots of industries do that. It is less of a problem when there was a functional free agent system where teams spent money.

Now the teams have figured out how to game the system. Most players get called up a year later than necessary because of service time manipulation. Analytics dictate that younger players are better, but there is no mechanism to pay the younger players adequately. An honest look at the finances after last year and this year would clearly show the players with a smaller share of revenue than in the past, even as clubs continually shield revenue from the players.

This will lead to a strike, potentially a bad one, unless owners make large concessions. Unfortunately I do not expect that to happen.

[phillychuck]

An honest look at the finances after last year and this year would clearly show the players with a smaller share of revenue than in the past, even as clubs continually shield revenue from the players.

I really don't know that this is true. I think Forbes reported that the players' share was steady. I guess it could have been a dishonest look, but I don't know enough to decide that without a lot more information than I'm going to get. Given the information the average fan gets, I think we just believe what we're inclined to believe. Me, I'd rather the players in the minors got a lot more, but nobody with any power wants that outcome.

[zambonir]

(I'm moving my reply to this to the other thread).

[kmc1019]

Maybe the Phillies franchise over the past 5+ years has just turned me pessimistic, but the headline of "we are confident we will sign one of Harper or Machado" at this stage has me thinking they will land up with neither:

Phillies' meeting with Bryce Harper ends without a deal, but optimism builds...

[Florida_Sunshine]

I just do not think the Phillies went out to Vegas with anything other than the desire to sign both, and they made it be known with numbers that could make both work. I think their fallback is if unable to get both to accept, they sign just one. But, I just have a hard time thinking the Phils went out there merely to put pressure on Machado.

[Austinfan]

I think they've made legitimate offers to both players, and are willing to sign both if possible.

I also think that Klentak has educated Middleton on the consequences of overpaying for the long term health of the franchise, which means that the offers are probably reasonable, if slight overpays. Hopefully, the Phillies aren't bidding against themselves or allowing agents to use them merely to drive up the prices for their eventual destinations.

[bkox]

Todd Zolecki (ToddZolecki)

[kmc1019]

Agent smokescreen? We shall see..

Philadelphia Phillies emerge as clear-cut favorite to land Bryce Harper after...

[andyb]

This would seem the epitome of an agent-planted story.

Of course, the Phillies' chances appear to have increased in the past few weeks, though that is more because potential suitors other than the Nats are dropping out.

[allentown]

It could equally be a Phillies-planted story to give Machado a push: decide within a week or risk Harper grabbing the great offer we are prepared to give him. Either way, it probably is a true report. The Phillies have been on the fence: Machado vs Harper vs both and it is not surprising that they came away very impressed by Harper, especially given Manny's proclivity to place foot in mouth.

[Florida_Sunshine]

AT,

Funny how our mood changes when we feel good about getting one or both, versus two weeks ago, and getting zero.

[andyb]

I am actually wondering now if we could get both. The Phillies might be taking advantage of the analytically-induced collusion in the free agent market. Efficiency under the luxury cap seems to be the goal here. So that is taking the competition away. The proper goal though might be efficiency versus profits. The profit line for a big market club is likely above the luxury tax line. And if the penalties are only cash (and not draft picks), then there is not much penalty for being occasionally over the cap.

We also DO have a path to sign both players and still get under the luxury tax line. We would be $10-15 million over most likely but signing both players might let us trade players such as Franco, Herrera, and we still probably want to shed a reliever like Hunter or Neshek (even picking up half the salary). We can shed $15 million pretty easily.

Cot's contracts has us $54 million under putting in a $5.6 million number for Nola today. Players that could be dealt are Franco ($5.2), Herrera ($6.1), Hernandez ($7.7), Hunter ($9.0) and Neshek ($8.1).

[Florida_Sunshine]

Outline a plan to both with higher salaries in first few years with opt outs as you and AT have advocated.

[Florida_Sunshine]

Use the numbers I gave you before and does it work then?