The Best Baseball Talk Online™      About | Terms of Service | FAQ | Moderators
29 / 43
Aug 2022

Yeah clearly the HoF goes with last game played not when you officially retire (so long as you don't play).

I do think they are waiting for Chase, and/or still deciding whether to retire the three numbers. And while Burrell (a near lifelong Phillie) and Charlie and Gillick and Halladay are already on, they probably want to do the Big 3 before considering Chooch and Victorino. Werth may be more of a longshot since he's already done it with the Nats.

If none of these things were considerations I would think you just do Lidge first. There was also that one year where Jamie Moyer was on the ballot and then he never was again. I don't know if he fell out with the team once the broadcasting didn't work out or if it was all this other stuff.

And what about Brett Myers?

Do we think Jimmy has the best HOF chances? My data-centric view was more 50% for Chase, 30% for Jimmy, and like 2% for Ryan in terms of their chances of eventually getting in. I could see where Jimmy gets more intangible support from the veteran's committee since he has the counting stats and Gold Gloves, but one would hope the electorate is educated enough these days to see Chase is a little bit ahead on career impact (not too mention peak value).

I wonder whether Chase has some baggage from "the slide." I've heard from some New Yorkers that they still haven't forgiven him.

I blame David Bell if Chase doesn’t get in. He cost Chass at least a year at the height of his abilities I remember taking a sign to a Barons game saying “Free Chase Utley” when they sent him back to AAA for the third year.

David Bell didn't deny Utley that year at second base. I mean, yes, David Bell was selfish, and Utley lost that year in the bigs. But David Bell didn't make that decison; that was spinelessness in the front office, an unwillingness to actually lead, to actually manage. Selfish players have always existed; good organizations do not allow such players to drive their decision-making.

It's interesting to remember that David Bell was actually very good in 2004, a 4.4 WAR season for him. Bell seemed to fall apart right at the time they traded Polanco.

(I'm not arguing that Utley shouldn't have been playing more and earlier, and that he was clearly the future for the Phillies at that time.).

Yeah if anything Bell - while still not personally to blame - cost the Phillies Polanco more than he blocked Utley. Of course you could also blame Rolen for the entire chain of events - but that's also on the team management, not the player.

Perhaps that is why I find the current management so refreshing after years and years of being a Phillies phan. There is no way the Phillies of the past release Familia, Herrera, and Gregorius mid-season.

Well, they did release Michael Saunders back in the day. And Kintzler made a decent chunk of change last year (David Hale did not). With Bell/Polanco they just picked the wrong guy to trade!

It really needs to be Rolen next year.

It would be quite a big deal and they can make themselves look very classy and professional in the process after the Rose stuff this year.

Give him a bobblehead or something, too.

The 2008 guys are not a draw. They are around quite a bit. Alumni weekend used to be a big deal and this year they were outdrawn by an Eagles open practice

I've said many times before that if the Phillies did not sign David Bell and kept Polanco at thirdbase from 2002-12, they win the Rolen trade. And, who knows, considering how narrowly we missed the Postseason in 2005 and 2006 and how good Polanco was in those seasons in Detroit, maybe we would have been talking about a seven year Postseason run.

Plus we may not have had to a sign an almost-washed Polanco as a free agent!

Not only that, but in typical Ed Wade fashion he traded Polanco for a relief pitcher. Then the pitcher Ugueth Urbana gets arrested that off-season for murdering someone back in Venezuela and never pitches again. Ed Wde loved him some relief pitchers.

But you are right, they should have just released Bell, put Polanco at third and brought up Utley. When they finally brought Utley up for good, it took them a week after the trade. I (remember calling in to Ed Wade (rain delay I think) mad asking why they were waiting to bring Chase up.

Utley came up to the majors for good in June 2004. He played only part time that year, but in 2005 he was in the majors all year (he pinch hit on opening day). Charlie Manuel was the new manager and played Utley a lot more than Bowa had. Charlie tried to get creative to get Utley into the lineup, sometimes playing Utley at 1B, and sometimes playing Polanco at 3B (he even started Polanco twice in LF and once at SS). Polanco was traded on June 8, but even before the trade, Chase had started more games than Polanco.

Bell had been much better than Polanco in 2004 (he had even been better than Utley, though Chase wasn't getting a chance to play regularly that year). Bell started slowly in 2005, but in the 21 games before the trade, Bell hit .342 and had an OBP of .407. So it wasn't really a slam dunk that Bell should have been the one to be traded, and releasing him would not have made sense at the time.

In hindsight, we remember that Bell didn't hit after the trade and Polanco hit .338 for the Tigers. But at the time of the trade, it wasn't at all clear that Polanco was better than Bell (and they were both very good defensively).

Now don't go trying to muck this up with facts BR! :slight_smile:

What I remember of it, mostly from the listserv, it was almost purely tribal. Which is to say, fans who preferred young homegrown players didn't want Bell, and fans who liked advanced stats (and especially OBP) rather than intangibles (remember, Bell was celebrated as a great team leader, and was Thome's buddy) didn't want Bell. It actually is startling he was that good in 2004; I think fans who wanted him gone just never forgot 2003 (which was probably also a hard-luck season: .208 BABIP).

Those '03-'04 teams weren't so terrible really. Good thing it all played out the way it did I guess!

To be clear, I am certainly not saying that Utley was handled correctly or that the earlier Bell signing was a good one. Or that they shouldn't have moved on from Bell (or Polanco) earlier to get Utley into the lineup regularly.

And there are other reasons why it might have made more sense to move Bell than Polanco (Bell is a few years older, for one). But at the time of the trade, the Phillies had what seemed to be an excess of good infielders, and it was not clear which one they should move (except of course that moving Utley would have been very bad!).

I think a lot of it - both from the fan side and the team side - had little to do with baseball decisions per se. It was cultural, and symbolic. Of course the Phillies preferred the legacy major leaguer and veteran free agent who "knew how to win" (mostly by being teammates with Barry Bonds) and white guy who was wanted by their franchise player (some things never change) over the promising younger Latin player (who you can move around the field, don't they all?) or the prospect.

To be fair they also tried moving Chase to OF to fit everyone in. Oops.

But also, if memory serves, Polanco wasn't even supposed to be on the 2005 team. Under the CBA at the time he could have refused arbitration and become a free agent. But then after doing so quickly realized his mistake.

The Phillies Wall of Fame is just that, a wall of plaques of those who attained glory in a Phillies uniform. There are a few long service-types honored, but McBride and Reed are exactly the sorts of players the Phillies want to toast on the wall. I guess that's why Rolan isn't in the WOF.