2019-2020 Phillies Offseason News and Speculation

[Austinfan]

LA prospects who get $500-$1M are not "top prospects," they're the #25-50 guys.
What you don't see are guys getting $2-4M succeeding at much higher rates than guys getting $500K.
It's just a lot more risk in giving big money to 16 year olds than 18-19 year olds, much less college juniors.

[andyb]

There are like 3 guys a year who get $2 million to $4 million. When there are 30 major league teams, guys that rank 25-50 are top guys. Your whole point is that big spending in Latin America is not worth it. My point is that it is. And when you hit at a 10% or so rate on the really expensive guys, that is just as good a rate as you see with $2 to $4 million players in the draft all the time. Cornelius Randolph got $3.23 million. There are lots of guys that fail with that sort of bonus in the draft every single year.

You just fail to realize these kids are not getting big money. They are getting a fraction of what they are worth and per dollar there is probably a better return than in the draft because these dollars are so limited. The Phillies need to sign more million bonus guys. And more $500K guys. And more $300K guys. The big thing is we seem to be losing out on the best players to other organizations. That is a problem. We spent $850K last year on the Australian kid last year who probably was at best a $300K bonus guy simply because we failed to sign players earlier in the period and had nowhere left to spend it on. And even the money we spent on him was probably worth it in the long run.

[Austinfan]

Actually, we have similar approaches, ignore the big money guys if you can't properly identify the ones worth that money and focus on a portfolio of signings based on upside, not current production (i.e. figure out the types most likely to improve and sign as many as possible).

We have two DSL and 2 GCL teams, use them to develop and sort out players, if you have room for numerous college undrafted free agents, you have room for LA fliers.

[bigegypt0417]

He averages over 6 innings a start...I mean in most circles that's a bit of a workhorse.

I think it would be better if you just said based on his country of origin, he would be better off in LA or Seattle because no one of his particular origin has ever pitched outside of those areas?

Does Philadelphia not have an established Asian community?

The entirety of your post is anecdote.

Averages 6 innings a start...and over his career 20 starts a year. Not a workhorse.

Ryu has had a couple of years with injuries but in his other years you'd consider him an innings eater and a very effective one at that.

[andyb]

The concern with Asian pitchers is that they are not used to a 5-man rotation. While they often pitch deeper in games, they also often go only once a week. Here it is a mix of 4 and 5 day rests rather than 6. Ryu fits the profile of a pitcher that can go deep in games but has trouble when you try to have him make 32 starts a year. The Dodgers were a good spot for him because they often work extra starters into the rotation along with 10-day DL breaks during the year.

[Philsmania]

our top LA prospects rarely pan out.

FIFY above

[xogfog]

Jim Bowden has a article in The Atlantic regarding potential trades for Francisco Lindor, he lists the Phillies as a landing spot, with the trade being Bohm, Stott and Irvin. Lindor just turned 26, so very much in his prime, I'd have to consider that, though if moving those assets, I'd probably want a ace pitcher back, unless they sign Cole, in which case I'd be for it, but I don't know if they could afford Cole, Harper, Lindor, Nola, Realmuto and Hoskins going forward.

[flyers19rw]

Bohm, Stott and Irvin

Before anything gets done with anyone this fall/winter, the JT situation needs to be resolved. After that a trade for Lindor would be sweet. I like Bohm a lot and would be loathe to give him up in a deal but Bohm, Stott and Irvin for Lindor is a move that I would make IF he would come with a long term deal. He's as good as any young player in the game.

[schillingfan]

Actually, we have similar approaches, ignore the big money guys if you can't properly identify the ones worth that money and focus on a portfolio of signings based on upside, not current production (i.e. figure out the types most likely to improve)

You put in a qualifier of if you can’t properly identify the ones worth the money
No reason to accept that we can’t do so. Aren’t is different from can’t. We could also focus on getting the staff who can instead of just giving up on trying.

[zambonir]

That's probably not going to happen though. Particularly with the indication that the Phillies don't want JT's extension to count against this year's luxury tax, which means it can't (officially) happen until spring. But either way, those sort of extensions tend to get done late in the off-season (as with Arenado and Trout last year). It also won't happen until Grandal signs.

[fish]

Jim Bowden has a article in The Atlantic regarding potential trades for Francisco Lindor, he lists the Phillies as a landing spot, with the trade being Bohm, Stott and Irvin.

Bowden was in left field with some of those names, Cole Irvin is more likely to get released than be included in a Lindor trade- that third piece is going to have be something that hurts to give up. If they can buy pitching and keep Howard, I’d back the truck up do a Lindor deal. They’d have to like Bohm and Stott as much as I do though.

Deivi Garcia is has electric stuff, but a 5’9” pitcher isn’t going to headline a Lindor trade. Andújar feels right as a big part of a deal but I don’t know how much shoulder surgery concerns people.

Now the dodgers and Lux makes a lot of sense, and he astutely recognizes “I don’ t think Lux would get Lindor straight up”- duh. The Dodgers could use another star to lead the future with Bellinger with some of their other guys getting older.

[allentown]

No reason to accept that we can’t do so. Aren’t is different from can’t. We could also focus on getting the staff who can instead of just giving up on trying.

I think you are both right. The people and scouting protocols we have now have failed miserably in finding the top young position players. we do better on young pitchers. We even seem to do ok on college position players. Our record is dismal on under age-20-primo-bonus position players. We are doing something seriously wrong. Do we look for the wrong things? Are we not able to gauge the impact of physical maturation or, as AF asks, to distinguish and make proper age/maturation for the younger/slimmer/still-growing-but-shorter guys in the international or H.S. draft class. We have done exceptionally badly at evaluating young OFs. Until we bring on board the right scouts, or adopt and validate a more accurate scouting methodology/metric, we need to stop using very large bonuses on H.S. and young international position players, particularly OF/1B. SF is correct that we shouldn't simply give up on high-$ young H.S. and international position players. That's where the highest WARS among the young guys come from. Also, we need a complete, quality staff of baseball-side specialists and management. We can't be successful with such a large organizational gap. Our goal should be to close that gap. The analytical department can help. Sal can help. Staying the course is a path to disaster. Rather than decide we've found the solution and dive in, we need to test it first on lower-$ bonuses -- $500K international guys and 2nd and 3rd round draftees. In the meanwhile, focus our big $ where we have had success: First is college players in the draft, second is international medium- and low-priced pitchers -- although I think we have done well enough in these categories that we should be very close to ready to draft high $ pitchers. Young position players are last and we should follow AF's volume vs high $ approach -- for now. We've done as well on lower-round H.S. OFs as we have on primo picks. Brown and Altherr were as good, actually better, than the expensive high-round guys. Moniak may surpass him, but he hasn't done so yet. If the new MLB proposed rules go into effect, AFs mass #s/low $ approach will be crippled. There really is no alternative to learning to identify the top young international position players. Our deficiency is harming us.

[philsphan67]

I think Rhys Hoskins is a terrific human being, but I have no desire to sign him to a big $$ contract. He is an avg defensive first basemen at best and Boras is not negotiating a team friendly deal. I am interested to see what the Phillies analytics do with Hoskins.

[zambonir]

I don't think Hoskins is much of a concern. I mean, he's a concern right now, but assuming he returns to form - but no better - he'll be in the American League before his last two, higher-$ arbitration years. Perhaps Boras does an extension w/o giving up any free agency years (which I don't think the Phillies should want anyway). Perhaps the NL gets the DH (probably).

With or without Hoskins paying for Harper, a new Lindor contract, Gerrit Cole and JT would be a lot. I think there is little chance of getting Lindor + an extension though. Another team will gladly pay a high price for just two years and the Phillies would have to consider it too.

[BostonRoss]

I think Bowden just makes stuff up.

[zambonir]

I don't think he's claiming to have any sources. Just things that make sense to him as a so-called expert. His criteria was specifically three teams that could also afford to extend Lindor (which he says would take $30 million AAV). He also thinks the Indians should sign him.

[BostonRoss]

I don't think he's claiming to have any sources. Just things that make sense to him as a so-called expert.

Then we agree!

I can’t base this feeling on an analysis, but my impression is that Bowden is usually wrong. I guess everyone who spreads these kinds of rumors usually is wrong, but Bowden seems more wrong than most. Maybe he just puts out more random thoughts than most.

[zambonir]

We do agree, but he can't be wrong if it's just an opinion! Not rumors. He's literally writing speculative fiction in this case.

[BostonRoss]

I think opinions can be wrong. If my opinion is that it will rain tomorrow and it doesn't, I am wrong!

That said, I didn't read the original article and had assumed that Bowden was saying the Phillies are interested in Lindor. That isn't the same thing as him saying that it makes sense for the Phillies to consider trading for him. He could be wrong about the first thing, but if he said the second, then that can't be right or wrong. So I jumped to a conclusion based on my impressions of Bowden (which may or may not be wrong!)

That said, I'd love for the Phillies to get Lindor, and I'd be willing to pay a fairly steep price including Bohm and Stott. I doubt it will happen, though, and so I don't want to spend much time thinking about it.

[andyb]

The problem with a deal for Lindor is that it is for 2 years. And those years will probably cost $40 million. Like with Realmuto is it worth acquiring a really good player for 2 years if the subsequent free agent signing after that is fully valued. That might be 6 years and $200 million for Lindor.

So is it worth Bohm and Stott and something else to get Lindor for 8 years and $240 million?

At some point we need our own young players to make up a relatively inexpensive core so we can spend money to supplement that. If we had 8 top 100 prospects I might think differently, but when we have 3 at most, do I really want to trade 2 of them?