2018-19 Phillies Off-Season News/Notes/Discussion

[allentown]

I'd give Williams the opportunity to grow into the job. Facing mostly RHP should help him. He hits well enough against RHP: .780 OPS last year, .838 in 2017. Haseley should be in Philly in 2020 to add a LH OF bat. Hernandez is your #2 hitter.

[nycphils]

Quinn is a superstar in the making...if he can ever stay healthy, which is a major question. Basically Billy Hamilton who can hit. Can he stay on the field is the only Q.

[jimbomill]

ouch - the ghost of Xmas past. Randolph haunts some more.

[bkox]

https://sports.yahoo.com/bryce-harper-manny-machado-reportedly-dont-like-idea-playing-philadelphia-024356728.html

[Austinfan]

ITYS. Philly just isn't a premier destination.

And they might prefer to take a 5 year deal where they want to play, then hit the market at 31 where unless they totally collapse, can expect another 5 year deal similar to the back end of a ten year deal signed now.

Whereas if they sign a 10 year deal here, they'd be hard to trade and might be stuck here for the decade.
And if they're doing to do an opt out, they can just do a shorter deal instead.
It's really not in the Phillies' hands (unless they want to grossly overpay, and even then?).
It's more a matter of other teams in preferred destinations not wanting to make a decent offer.

I mean once you get the first hundred million, it's just play money after that, how many houses can you buy, cars . . .

[Patchmk88]

This is BS from the agents to get Philly to bid against themselves.

[tom81]

Here is Sherman’s article: https://nypost.com/2018/12/26/manny-machado-bryce-harper-are-staring-at-same-money-decision/

What either article fail to mention is that Philly can also offer stupid money on a short term deal, or several opt outs on a long term deal, so that either of those two can get the most money and not lock them in to Philly for a lifetime. They might rather go to another team but decide to go for the money and the flexibility.

[andyb]

This is BS from the agents to get Philly to bid against themselves.

Or whispers planted by other teams to try to tilt the playing field away from Philly. I really do not put much stock in these types of articles.

The big question to me is whether Philly is a destination where top free agents think they can win. There was a pretty telling comment on a Fangraphs chat a couple of days ago that the young core currently in Philly is not good enough to win and the farm system is not really good enough to put us over the top. We need major free agents to win.

That alone is not an advertisement of an organization that is attractive to an outsider.

Ozzie Ozzie Albies Free: If the Phils don’t get Manny or Bryce, and the fail to land Arrenado, do you think their farm is remotely good enough to make them contenders during 2020-2023?
_ _
Kiley McDaniel: And we’ve reached our pessimistic fan question of the day. No, the farm isn’t currently good enough to just keep everything internal and make a contender. But the reason people think the Phillies will be much better is they have the money to sign one or two of these types…so they will. Factor one or even two 4-5 WAR players into what your farm has and things get a lot easier to imagine being playoff caliber.

Kiley McDaniel Holiday Chat – 12/26/18 | FanGraphs Baseball

[kmc1019]

Amen to the Phillies being the team to blow others away on AAV over the next 5 years with opt-outs and lower guaranteed money after. We want Machado and Harper for their most productive years, not the inevitable decline at 32 and beyond.

Dare any team to match or beat:
-35 guaranteed for each of next 5 years
-5 to 10 million more in attainable incentives
-20-25 million base in years 6 to 10 plus attainable incentives , with opt outs starting after year 5

This would put max possible payout at 400 million, but Phillies only on hook for guaranteed 175 million over next 5. I would offer to both players.

[allentown]

That's the sort of deal I've been advocating, but I the worst case where the player gets severely injured during the first 5 years or performance is poor by year 5, we are still on the hook for the base salary in years 6-10, so your deal would cost us $300 million. I think it's a good structure for a deal, but avoiding the later years' hit requires that the player exercise the opt-out, which requires that his expected performance in years 6-10 looks good enough that somebody is willing to pay, or at least the player expects that some team will be willing to pay, more than your $25 million base for those 5 seasons. It's the best shot at a deal, but it isn't risk free.

[Jazzhead]

Neither Machado or Harper is worth the money they are seeking. And the downside of having $300 million tied up in a single player who is injured, or sullen, or who won't hustle, or who ends up resenting the Philly phanbase, is not to be discounted.

I will not shed a tear if they sign elsewhere. The moves we have made so far make sense. I'd explore signing Pollack, perhaps to a two-year deal at a high AAV, looking ahead to 2020 and the possibility of landing Trout. But even without another big signing, I am content to begin the season and watch our young players who WANT to be in Philly.

[andyb]

Neither Machado or Harper is worth the money they are seeking.

Worth is relative. If they are "worth" 75% of their contract the deals might be worth doing simply because the Phillies could not add another 4+ WAR player potentially from the available group of players without giving up our better prospects.

There is risk and downside to any large contracts. There is also a pretty good history of long contracts that are given to players in their mid to late 20s. This means risk is diminished compared to contracts given to older players.

The moves we have made so far are decent. We overpaid for McCutchen but we can afford it. Moving Santana was the right thing to do to correct a big mistake and overpay from last year. Segura will help win now though we give up some margin for the future with Crawford.

These moves alone make us a .500 team though. We are likely to get some regression from our starters. We really need young hitters to get better to even be .500. It is just hard to see any move outside of Harper and Machado moving the needle on this team enough to make it a playoff contender. The Braves beat us last year and have better young players and a better prospect pipeline. We have more money in comparison. That is our advantage and we need to use it.

[zambonir]

The term "worth" carries a lot of baggage. Worth the production they actually provide? Worth the star power? Worth the symbolic impact and the ripple effect that might have on both attendance and the perception of the team leaguewide? Worth it because record-breaking contracts still don't actually keep up with baseball's revenue growth (and the players' smaller share). To me they check off all those boxes. And while it's true signing such a player could backfire in Philadelphia it's also true that if you let that affect your moves the Phillies simply won't have an elite player for the next five years, because there aren't any in the hopper.

Also, our young players don't truly "want" to be in Philadelphia, they just don't get any choice in the matter (technically, Herrera is the only player who has made a decision to be here past free agency, not that anybody appreciates him for that).

[Austinfan]

The mistake would be to focus on Machado and Harper to the detriment of pursuing other, more feasible options.

I never expected either to sign here, and the only way it happens is they get low balled by their preferred destination, which will not only make the Phillies offer look better, but maybe create the kind of resentment that makes them want to sign here and show up the (Yankees, Dodgers). But that's a long shot. Both teams have the money, Phillies are being used to raise the price.

The idea they'll just take the most money is a vestige of the days when the money was good, but not ridiculous.
They don't feel they owe anything to the union or to their agents, they'll make the best decision for themselves, which will balance money, ego, the team and location. The money is so large it become meaningless.

So I hope Klentak has plan B and C lined up, and is even looking to buy some players to deal some other players (pitchers) for prospects and deepen the farm system.

[tom81]

The money is so large it become meaningless.

Does it? If the Yankees and/or Dodgers offered 3 years $90 million and we offered 3 years $120-135 million I think both Harper and Machado would find it meaningful. More so if it was where the opt out on a longer term contract was.

[Austinfan]

The money will be much larger than 3yr/$90M.
More like 5yr/$150M v 10yr/$325M.

If you offer an opt out on a long-term deal, the money has to be less, because the upside benefit goes to the player (if he outperforms he opts out and gets a bigger back end deal) and the downside risk to the team (if he under performs/is injured he keeps the guaranteed back end money).

[Patchmk88]

The only reason we are not preferable to these guys is because our team has stunk for the past 10 years. That’s why getting a big name guy is important. We have to change our perception around the league.

[andyb]

So I hope Klentak has plan B and C lined up, and is even looking to buy some players to deal some other players (pitchers) for prospects and deepen the farm system.

Whenever you criticize a potential free agent signing you keep mentioning there must be other lower cost options. It is easy to complain about one thing when you don't have a solution for the problem, which to me is adding a big, middle-of-the-order bat without giving up prospects. Machado and Harper solve that problem with money (Harper would cost a pick too).

Our team is not good enough to win now as constructed. The prospects are not good enough to suggest 2-3 years from now would be much better. Machado or Harper is a solution to this problem with largely money. That would buy time and let prospects mature. It might even get us a prospect in a Franco or Williams trade that would follow.

Give me a solution that is better than that with lower cost and less risk. I would go for such a solution if it existed.

[zambonir]

We've only stunk for seven years.

(I might even argue five - 2012 was a .500 team that was sunk by injuries - albeit predictably - and the 2018 team didn't stink.)

There are certainly other things the Phillies can do, and Machado and Harper are worth the wait/risk of missing out on other guys, but it doesn't get any easier if they don't get one of them. At that point you are doing things that, to me, are actually more unappealling than giving out a mega contract - like giving up a draft pick for AJ Pollock, or overpaying for Dallas Keuchel, or giving up three players in a trade.

The Phillies have gotten better - adding Segura and McCutchen and all those relievers and moving Hoskins' position is not nothing - but other teams have gotten better too.

[Patchmk88]

Yea I was exaggerating a bit but was trying to convey the fact that these other teams are more attractive because they are proven winners over the past few years. If we were similar to the 2008-2010 Phillies then I don’t think you’d here things like, “Harper and Machado would prefer somewhere else if everything was equal”.

All the other great points you mentioned are why we need to overspend a little if it makes it possible to get one of them. We aren’t spending draftpicks or prospects to get one of the two. Instead we are only spending money and it isn’t my money.