2023 Phillies Regular Season Discussion

[VoteForKalas]

Sorry if I missed an explanation, but what happened to the website yesterday being down due to a bad gateway error? I'm glad to see the website is back up running fine. Thanks

[zambonir]

I would maybe trade one of the three pitchers for another pitcher, but only one who is controllable or extended. Otherwise I think they are untouchable anyway, because you still might need three pitching prospects to end up with one pitcher. Three CFs, OTOH...

It is also really rare for a team to include one of its Top 5 prospects in a deadline deal (though obviously the rankings vary).

We do have to remember that Pache and Marsh are 24 and 25 years old, respectively. Muzziotti is 24. Rojas is almost 23. Crawford is still a kid of course. But I'm not sure any of them are going to be full-time corner OFs (though Marsh certainly seemed to be heading that way in April). By 2025 likely only two of them are still around. Obviously you'd rather trade Muzziotti but also obviously teams would rather have Rojas.

[Sabin]

Sorry if I missed an explanation, but what happened to the website yesterday being down due to a bad gateway error? I'm glad to see the website is back up running fine. Thanks

It was a scheduled off-day for the server. It was needed to pinch hit later, though, so the board was back up by end of day.

[phillychuck]

Sorry if I missed an explanation, but what happened to the website yesterday being down due to a bad gateway error? I'm glad to see the website is back up running fine. Thanks

We had a disk overflow at our server site which Chris fixed (remotely). Thanks to Chris!!

[andyb]

St. Louis could use a CF immediately. They are playing Edman out of position there for the moment. So I guess they might want Muzziotti rather than Rojas since he is more ready.

The extra year of control for Goldschmidt (and only 1 year) does add value though. I guess for the Phillies it might be adding a safer and slightly better version of trying to get Rhys for a 1-year $20 million qualifying offer deal. My 3 prospects are on the high side, but they are going to get a top 5 prospect from somebody's system.

[Austinfan]

If you keep trading away prospects with upside, you'll end up an highly expensive, mediocre team as your 30+ cadre fall prey to the aging curve.

I'd think about Muzzioti b/c he's LH, he's really not a CF, and they have good OFs behind him and Schwarber and Harper in the lineup together for 2 more years. They don't need all their AAA LH hitters, look for a RH platoon hitter who can fill in the rest of the season in LF, but don't overpay.

But forget Rojas, De La Cruz or Crawford, they all have far more upside than what they'd bring back in a trade, and the key to being a top team is producing a few young players with serious upside that create surplus value for a half dozen years. Which one will be that guy? That's why you need to be patient.

[andyb]

Muzziotti IS a CF. They are only playing him at all 3 spots because the job in AAA is to prepare players for the role they might play in a callup. Marsh is very average in CF. No reason to think Muzziotti could not play at that level. Rojas and Pache are better.

It is actually odd that Pache plays LF whenever both he and Marsh are in the game now. I think the Phillies just hope that Marsh plays well enough to play most of the time and Pache's role will be to play in any spot needed. Pache made one play of Friday that I doubt Marsh would have made.

In general though, B level prospects are meant to be traded. They may be B level because they don't have a star upside like Muzziotti. Or B level because there is a strong chance of failure (Rojas). I would trade either one in the right deal if you think Marsh is the CF for the next 3-4 years.

[Austinfan]

Marsh hasn't solidified anything yet, neither has Pache.

Upside isn't balanced by risk, because when you're already a good team, "more of the same" doesn't move the needle, you need a couple young players who are more than 2-3 WAR guys. You can buy patches, but it's really hard to get top flight starters at low cap cost.

So you should keep your high upside guys and trade the more consistent "B" prospects who won't move the needle.
The upside guys you miss on will have less impact than the ones you hit on.

[andyb]

They should have enough information on Marsh to make a decision. That is why they pay DD the big bucks. If they are OK with Marsh then trading a CF is obvious. They clearly have decided Pache is here to stay. The major league roster is fine with 2 options and they are both young. Then you have 2 more young players behind them.

Upside IS balanced by risk. Your more of the same logic is not applicable here. Teams don't decide they are good enough to not upgrade any single position. If Muzziotti has a 50% chance of being a 2 WAR player and Rojas has a 25% chance of being a 3-4 WAR player they have equal trade value. If Marsh fails then a 50% chance of 2 WAR may be better for the Phillies at that time than a 25% chance at more.

The chance of either Rojas or Muzziotti being above average regulars (3+ WAR) is slim. Crawford probably has a better chance now that we have seen he can control the strike zone in Low A at a young age. Teams trade from depth. It is what you do if you want to win.

[Austinfan]

You're not maximizing expected player value, you're maximizing expected portfolio value.

Player A may have a higher expected value due to a high probability of reaching a lower upside, but if that upside doesn't move the needle (significantly better than the player he's replacing) the high upside player will provide a greater increase in expected portfolio value.

[andyb]

But if the high risk player never makes it he does not move any needle. Nick Williams was more highly regarded in AA than Rojas. He amounted to nothing. Teams get value whereever they can. Adding 2 WAR over the final 70 games after the trade deadline might be very well worth multiple prospects with high risk.

You just don't really want to trade any prospects. I get that. It is a viable strategy to win long term. It just is not a great strategy for winning this year.

[zambonir]

Did the last competitive Phillies team actually make even one regrettable win-now trade from 2008 until 2012, in terms of missing out on prospects who would have made them a better team in subsequent years? Happ and Carrasco were both great but wouldn't have been part of many good Phillies teams, and weren't better than the guys the Phillies acquired at the time. Some of the guys in the Pence trade wound up being serviceable but nothing that makes you wish they'd spent their entire career in a Phillies uniform. Yeah, the franchise crashed in part because of all the trades and lost draft picks for FA signings but bad drafting/international signing was the real reason (and then most of the guys they traded for during the rebuild also failed).

The current franchise needs to be more conservative than that one was about preserving its more limited system depth, in order to make sure Turner and Harper continue to play on winning teams beyond 2025. But it also will continue to have far more money to replace players at the major league level if it has too. Right now this is still the Nola/Wheeler/Schwarber/JT window (I'll leave out Castellanos, and of course Hoskins at this point) and the goal is to win a championship more than it is it to preserve the 2027 OF or rotation. Within reason.

[Austinfan]

Let's be realistic about what they'd be trading for, given both the lineup and the "cap" constraints.
DH: Harper, Schwarber
1B: Bohm (Sosa), Harper [Hall], Clemons
LF: Schwarber, [Harrison]

If Harper plays 1B after the All star break, it comes down to DH/LF
If he stays at DH, it comes down to 1B

Clemons/Hall are LH 1B, Muzzioti/Cave LH LF.
So they'd be looking for a platoon RH 1B/LF - who'd have maybe 150 AB the rest of the season, replacing Harrison/Guthrie/Sosa in the lineup (Bohm plays 3B full-time)

If that's the case, you don't want to spend a high upside prospect for a short-term patch.

Next year they figure out where Harper will play (probably 1B) and build the roster around that decision.

What would pry a young OF away would be a SP, but unless you think Nola is going to be pushed down, you're trading for an upgrade at 5th starter, again, how much do you pay for a patch (12 starts, no playoff starts).

[zambonir]

If in fact they trade for a 1B or OF rental, no worries! Ditto a 5th starter rental. The price won't be that high. But you can't rule out a controllable player (such as Goldschmidt, or someone who could play LF next year too). You worry about how all the pieces fit together next year.

I also don't think Harper is "probably" playing 1B next year. He is doing something both unselfish and medically necessary this season (assuming it even happens, and works...which is another reason to still consider just leaving him at DH if you can get a another 1B option, even if it also traps Schwarber in LF). And yeah there are good reasons to move him out of RF. But Nick Castellanos isn't one of them. If Bryce wants to keep playing RF, he will.

I personally don't think Bohm is the 3B for this team over the next two years either. Not so much that I'd make an offer on Nolan Arenado, but I think they will need to consider other options (and Sosa doesn't work due to both his limited bat and his handedness).

Another thing I bet is being discussed during the front office's internal meetings right now: the unfortunate possibility that Matt Strahm is going to end up missing a month or more, whether that's soon or in the playoffs. Either way, the fifth starter (as with Thor last year) still pitches in the playoffs. Heck, even Gibson and Falter did! (I guess technically Thor was the 4th starter, with Suarez having risen to #3 in place of Eflin. And Eflin pitched in the playoffs too!)

[andyb]

Having Pache actually makes Rojas more tradeable. Now I know Pache is out of options and that limits him somewhat, but he basically had the year Rojas is having in AA at age 22 for himself at age 20. Then he missed a pandemic year and got rushed the 2 years after that, but he is also a good young CF that adds value even if he is the last guy on the roster because we'll always need a defensive OF replacement.

None of this says I dislike Rojas as a prospect. I am the guy who tempers enthusiasm on prospects with limited tools (like Haseley and Bergolla). Generally I agree that the high ceiling guys are the most important prospects. But I also trust the Phillies to assess the risk of the prospect making it and make deals when appropriate at the deadline. I was not a fan of trading O'Hoppe for instance, but the risk combined with the fact that we have JT made it a good deal (and it did not really matter for last year whether we got a younger or older CF though it was adding value to get the younger one).

Looking 3-4 years down the line this team definitely has holes. We actually have some CF depth though so it is a place we can trade from. That is why I keep coming back to trusting DD. If he decides Marsh is the guy - we should probably trade a CF since none of these guys likely provides ideal offense from a corner long term. That is where we have to hope that one of De La Cruz, Ortiz, Wilson, or Rincones makes it. We may need all 4 of them to get even one average player though.

[andyb]

Clemons/Hall are LH 1B, Muzzioti/Cave LH LF.
So they'd be looking for a platoon RH 1B/LF - who'd have maybe 150 AB the rest of the season, replacing Harrison/Guthrie/Sosa in the lineup (Bohm plays 3B full-time)

Goldschmidt could add 1-2 WAR to that ensemble depending on how soon they pulled the trigger (and 70 games might mean 300 plate appearances). All but Bohm might not be better than replacement level and Bohm will still play regardless and is still probably below average at either 3B or 1B compared to most regulars.

Harrison getting 50 fewer AB will help the team. Clemens may be more a 700 OPS guy with below average defense. Hall has major questions. Sosa is better as the utility guy. Your high end prospect argument might actually argue for Goldschmidt being needed here!

[allentown]

Even with an owner who's willing to spend, the Phillies are at the point where salary $ value a lot. They've also lost a lot of draft picks/internitonal $ to FA signings. They are an older team. They desperately need some plus younger, cheaper players. Can't trade them and have to bring in a big- or even medium-$ veteran for next year to replace an old guy we acquire for a kid who help us next season. Forget just CF. We have a terrible defensive OF. Not great in CF and bad at both corners. Next season will, hopefully be one of our 3 corner OFs at 1B and a second at DH. There is definitely a starting corner OF spot open next season. Perhaps we go with speed and D in CF and LF and play the best of Rojas/Muzziotti paired with the best of Marsh/Pache, with one of those who don't make the starting role as the 4th OF. Last year was a miracle run. I'm far from convinced that any deadline deal can yield close to a repeat.

[andyb]

There is definitely a starting corner OF spot open next season.

Not definitely. If Harper's arm is fine he could very well man one corner with Castellanos at another and Schwarber at DH or 1B. I could easily see us go get a 1B or bring Hoskins back for a year. Schwarber playing defense is the problem now. He is just another level of awful.

He is the worst defensive player in baseball. And it is REALLY REALLY hard to trail the league in DRS playing LF.
https://fieldingbible.com/DRSLeaderboard

He is literally going to cost us 3-4 games just by not DHing. Schwarber defensively is the problem to solve in the offseason and the number of OF we have may diminish the chances of using any of our young OF.

[allentown]

I wouldn't recommend it, but that's possible. If Harper plays RF, I still play Castellanos at 1B with Schwarber at DH and go with a fast, plus D OF. We need to move the lineup to younger/cheaper, not add a costly 1B, which increases cost and the number of 1B/DHs on the team.

[andyb]

Yes, but I am not sure the Phillies see it that way, especially if bringing Hoskins back was on a 1-year deal. I also am not sure at this point if the Phillies would risk going with a young platoon in the OF somewhere and a 1B learning the position defensively if we have a $250 million payroll and a mandate to win.