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

andyb 2019-01-12 23:27:08 UTC #228

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 2019-01-13 01:16:43 UTC #229

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.

Reserve System/ Player Salaries (non-Phillies discussion)

zambonir 2019-01-13 01:32:16 UTC #230

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

kmc1019 2019-01-13 15:06:56 UTC #231

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:

Florida_Sunshine 2019-01-13 15:27:47 UTC #232

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 2019-01-13 18:27:15 UTC #233

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 2019-01-13 19:27:52 UTC #234

kmc1019 2019-01-13 19:28:06 UTC #235

Agent smokescreen? We shall see..

andyb 2019-01-13 19:46:11 UTC #236

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 2019-01-13 19:53:06 UTC #237

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 2019-01-13 19:59:12 UTC #238

AT,

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

andyb 2019-01-13 20:04:58 UTC #239

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 2019-01-13 20:16:57 UTC #240

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

Florida_Sunshine 2019-01-13 20:17:48 UTC #241

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

andyb 2019-01-13 20:18:22 UTC #242

I imagine opt outs are part of any serious offer. Not sure if we need higher early salaries though with the market today.

andyb 2019-01-13 20:20:18 UTC #243

The source of that article was Cot's and they have updated it with all the arbitration agreements from the past few days. (but you were right and I was wrong since I had been looking at BR which does not do the AAV calc) The table on the right is the most current public AAV calculation:

LoneStarPhan 2019-01-13 21:09:17 UTC #244

It is nice to see some positive thinking but of course, until a player is signed, it is still just speculation. I do think the Phillies will sign one of the big two.

My thinking of which player is the most important to sign has shifted over the past month. I am now thinking Harper makes the most sense. He provides them the needed big bat for the middle of the lineup and gives them the needed LH hitter. I like his high OBP and hope his fielding is at least average for right field. If they sign Harper and not Machado, they avoid the certain negative issues that surely come with him. The money that would go to Manny can be used to sign shorter deals with a third baseman (Moustakis ?) and another pitcher for the rotation. Then the Phillies can work on trading a couple players no longer needed to save some payroll. Such trades might be for prospects and/or lottery tickets to add to the organization but not the 40 man roster at this time.

Hopefully, Harper and Machado will sign soon and the Phillies can concentrate on the final off season moves they need to make. I do still see the possibility that the Phillies sign both Harper and Machado. We will see.

zambonir 2019-01-13 21:20:13 UTC #245

I don't really think Harper's negatives are higher than Machado's, if such negatives even exist. They both have the potential to get ripped on WIP as being primadonnas or bad in the clubhouse (of course, anybody does, by that standard). It's just that Manny got all the attention this past season (in part because he was in the World Series).

The reasons to prefer Manny, for me, are the same as ever: no draft pick compensation and more positional value (and more positional value for longer, Harper's headed for 1B). Plus the Phillies have more acceptable OF options - some combination of Herrera, Quinn and Williams in RF sounds better to me than Franco, and if they go external it is cheaper/easier to get a 4th OF than a new 3B.

Both would certainly be fun, I have trouble believing the market has collapsed to that extent. Nightengale (who's certainly not infallible) flat-out said Harper to Phils and Machado to White Sox, we shall see. As far as agents planting stories, be interesting to see what Heyman tweets about Harper (he has also tweeted there's a third team in on Manny).

xogfog 2019-01-14 01:11:57 UTC #246

I think the Phillies can and should sign Harper and Machado. That would take the town by storm. Comcast's ratings go through the roof. Attendance goes through the roof, as mentioned, they can shed salary elsewhere and even still sign another pitcher. They would still be able to be under the luxury tax and if they are creative with the contracts, they might be able to stay under for a few years, meanwhile, they'd be making money hand over fist.

julio 2019-01-14 01:20:25 UTC #247

Heh. You have the potential to get ripped on WIP. I have the potential to get ripped on WIP. Jesus of Nazareth has the potential to get ripped on WIP.

The existence of WIP has to be one of the factors that free agents considering Philadelphia as a destination (in any sport) take into account. We're talking about the city's leading sports radio outlet deliberately exploiting bias and dislike as a way to make money. WIP is the FOX News of Philadelphia sports media - its principal currency is poison.

I'm probably an outlier, in that I don't worship money above all else... but if I had a choice between $20 million/year in an environment where I'd be treated with respect, and $35 million/year in an environment where I would be mocked, my family might be mocked, etc., well.... Pay me $20 million/year for five years, and I'm literally set for life; I literally have no use for more money than that. At some point, a lot of professional athletes are going to figure this out.