Looking ahead to the 2018 draft

Austinfan 2017-09-14 05:04:33 UTC #182

You talk like a financial analyst, reciting what you read in books, building models by painting by numbers, but missing the point.
It's not whether we get the pick or not, it's that the pick is a minor blip in the grand scheme of things.
What matters is what's in front of our eyes, not some hypothetical.
Hoskins IS what you hope from a #1 pick if you're lucky.

Live in the moment, grasshopper.
What is out of our control should be ignored.

Come next June, worry about the draft, in September, revel in the performance of the young players.

tom81 2017-09-14 07:51:12 UTC #183

The baseball world has really taken notice.

Maybe the big prize will notice. The big prize is not the #1 pick it is the Otani sweepstakes. Maybe he decides he wants to play on the team with the winning young guys and with the "Alien!"

This could also impact the way the Marquis free agents see us.

tom81 2017-09-14 08:47:06 UTC #184

You really could go with 3 catchers and 4 OF's if you had a pitcher who could pinch hit, DH, and play some OF.

andyb 2017-09-14 10:32:28 UTC #185

Again you talk in complete non sequitors. I don't think anybody on the board has not suggested we should play young players. Nobody is saying to sit Hoskins.

All this has nothing to do with whether we want to the number one pick. Nothing at all other than you defending a wrong-headed notion that it does not matter. Starting the largely mediocre pitchers we have the rest of the way may be just the ticket to get the number one pick and it has nothing to do with tanking. As the numbers show, the median number one pick is worth about 8 extra WAR over number 2. More over number 3. That is not nothing. It is likely far more important than your strategy which is seemingly led by signing $10,000 international players and hoping to get lucky. In other words not much of a strategy.

bigegypt0417 2017-09-14 12:16:22 UTC #186

The premise he cant argue against and the one you cant either is it would be preferred to have the choice of anyone you want vs. almost anyone you want.

The only person who likes to argue is AF and he'll do so even when he has nothing to support his position.

harrisburghusker 2017-09-14 12:18:40 UTC #187

I have heard an old baseball axiom that you shouldn't use performances in April and September when judging young players and planning for the future

Florida_Sunshine 2017-09-14 12:26:01 UTC #188

I am not arguing that premise. Let me repeat what I said and then realize that I am agreeing it is better to have 1.1 versus 1.3 due to the reasons you stated. AF agrees with that.

Where I think everyone just likes to argue with him is in altering his presentation where he says it is more important for our developing players to improve and win than it is for 1.1. I think it is pretty difficult to get 1.1 if your young developing players are playing with the passion and skill that ours are. Who would have thought that we would feel this good about our present young outfield, 1B, 2B and SS? I think sometimes people tune AF out instead of actually reading what he writes.

He also thinks, over the long haul, the development of our players is more important than 1.1 or 1.3. The only issue I have is that, as AT hammers the point home, is that we missed a golden opportunity in spend in the international market.

Florida_Sunshine 2017-09-14 12:31:32 UTC #189

Andy,

I have not been involved in all the arguments on here but, as a new person looking in, reading and listening with no ax to grind, that really is not what AF argues. I think at times, we can catch a person slip and think that slip proves the point we are trying to make, but AF and you are not as far off as you state.

Florida_Sunshine 2017-09-14 12:32:17 UTC #190

At what point can we acknowledge we have a "star"?

Squire 2017-09-14 12:33:40 UTC #191

Clinched no worse than the #16 pick

allentown 2017-09-14 13:08:14 UTC #192

I see late September games for a team in last place for the first third of the month as almost meaningless. I've seen many promising finishes, in what honestly amounts to garbage time for the Phillies, not carry over at all into the following year. Sometimes there has been carry over, but far more often there has not been.

I agree that the development of our young players is very important. Where I strongly disagree with AF is three points: 1) that we shouldn't care that much about the 1.1, because the person we draft won't arrive until 2021-22; 2) that we already have enough talent on the farm to win before then and 3)that there really is just an almost insignificant difference between picking 1.1 and picking 1.3.

I believe that we will need a top talent in 2021 and that a top college 1.1 can be in the major league by 2020. That talent will be needed either to push us over the top or give legs to a sustained run of success.

I don't think we have enough talent on the farm to go to a WS. I think we are light on pitching, definitely need a 3B whom I don't see on the farm, and likely need a catcher. AF always points to the pitching in the lower farm. I think a couple of those guys will make the majors and delight us, but most won't. Look how we used to think of Pinto and how we think of him today. It is a lot easier to shine in rookie or low-A ball than it is to stay healthy and dominate the high minor leagues and then shine in the majors. I watch a fair number of AA and AAA games and can tell you that both the starting and relief pitching is very spotty. AF says they just need more time to develop. Can't you say that about every team's young pitching.

I think it is big to get the 1.1. Some years it is as stark as you get a Harper or Strasburg, or you don't. Most years it's just a matter of your scouts being 100% certain of getting the guy they want most, having the largest draft pool, and being in position to set your strategy firmly for the start of each of the 3 draft days. AF is correct that the 1.1 is not the best player in the draft more times than not, but the 1.2 is less likely to be the best guy, the 1.3 even less likely and on and on, even though a Hamels, Utley, or Trout can be drafted later in the first round and a Howard or Hoskins in the 5th round. The odds for star 5th rounders are poor, despite the exceptions, far far worse than for the 1.1.

If AF believes that winning a lot of games for the rest of September and drafting 1.3 will be so great for the young players and is likely to carry over into 2018 (and really, if it doesn't carry over with a lineup and rotation of those very same young players, how can it be said to have helped them a lot?), then why is he so vehemently opposed to spending big $ for a primo FA or trade SP this winter.

Can anyone seriously doubt either that we need one or that we have both the revenue stream and vast cap space to afford one. That is what the team needs (plus a cheaper priced #3/4 SP and late-inning RP) if we are to compete next season, even if Nola stays healthy and our lineup is for real. I think a good chance the lineup is for real, Nola stays healthy, Eickhoff is a reliable #3/4 starter, and on of the young starters of the moment emerges as at least a s olid and consistent 4/5.

That's why, IMHO, if AF truly believes what he says about the quality of the current young expanded 25-man roster and the value of winning from now to season's end that he should be clamoring for the owners and Klentak/MacPhail to spend big this winter. If what he says is true, that spending will give us a good chance to seriously contend in 2018, If winning is vital for the young players in late September of a dead season, how much more vital is winning in 2918. AF is just totally inconsistent in this.

Florida_Sunshine 2017-09-14 13:22:30 UTC #193

AT,

Good post, a lot to respond to later.....

I am in the camp that you do not spend just to spend. I do not see a top pitching talent out there via free agency that is worth spending on. I hope Klentak goes after a guy that is on a team that realizes they can't keep him, and that is where our spend goes. Just to spend to spend is silly. Even though it is not our money, does not make it a bright idea to say we need to spend it NOW. We don't know if the owners have a budget that looks out over multi years and profits, etc. Without that, it is not a good argument for the sake of spending now when you know down the road, there will be plenty of opportunities for us to spend. Your constantly preached big miss was on international talent, mine is the potential missed opportunity that the Yankees capitalized on with the A's.

Florida_Sunshine 2017-09-14 13:26:58 UTC #194

Honestly, I think AF just thinks it is more important to develop what we have and not worry so much about getting 1.1 versus 1.3. Would he rather get 1.1? Yes, and he says that. But, and he says this, he is more into the present development of players, that is going far better than we anticipated earlier this season, than it is to fret over the loss of 1.1 when he likely would not arrive for a few years. Maybe 1.3 arrives sooner? Nobody is arguing the ability to set up a draft and have more money at 1.1. I just think his opinion deserves more respect because it has validity on some levels instead of being constantly hammered on here.

Most of these guys never make it to the show let alone become stars. But, nobody is saying to cancel the draft. AF is just saying keep it in perspective.

andyb 2017-09-14 14:07:34 UTC #195

AF does actually argue that it does not mean much. So he is trying to argue both sides at once. Look at his posts. He says that dozens of times. It is not a one-time slip-up. The median WAR for a #1 pick is 8 WAR greater than the #2 pick. The distance to #3 would be even greater.

Yes he tries to back off by saying player development and being smart is more important. But those have absolutely nothing to do with the value of the number one pick. And nobody is suggesting the team suddenly become dumb and inefficient. He is also not responding to anyone suggesting the team should tank to get the pick. Most suggest playing young players and it is unclear whether that helps or hurts in the short term. So again, have no impact on the actual argument.

When I see an argument that is factually wrong or starts to combine items that have nothing to do with the main question, I'm going to call him on it. Enough said on this topic... Hopefully we play young players and still get the number one pick.

andyb 2017-09-14 14:21:33 UTC #196

I agree with that up to a point. No team should spend just to spend. They should spend to make the team better. A creative GM will figure out how to do that and frankly Klentak did not do a great job on that this year. We spent $60 million and got some second and third tier prospects out of it.

Looking at 2018 and beyond is a completely different equation however. As a relatively large market team with a decent TV contract we have extra money to spend, especially with almost no salary commitments in the near future. Plus we have a bunch of young players who do not make big money. Even Nola won't make that much for a couple of years.

We could wait 3 years for our prospects alone to become good enough for the team to contend (because we really have almost no top pitching prospects until Kilome and Sanchez and Medina are ready) or we can use money to contend sooner (or buy more prospects through creative trades that pick up salary). So while no team should spend to spend, if we do not spend any of the extra $150 million we are wasting a valuable resource. We can afford to spend $12 million for WAR even if the value is only $8-$9 million. Because the alternative is zero WAR and potentially putting young pitchers in roles they are not ready for.

So we do need to spend. It could be Darvis, Lynn, Otani, or trades. We should spend smartly of course, but that is the GM's job. We probably could have traded for Grienke last offseason for second tier prospects.

Add 10 WAR through spending some money. Couple that with additional development from young prospects (the everyday lineup is looking pretty good and young these days), and you have a contending team. It is actually reasonable to think this team could win 75 games next year with full years from Crawford, Hoskins, Williams, Altherr, Herrera, and others. 10 more games (2 starters, a couple of relievers, maybe a LH 3B platoon player) and you have a contender in the double wild card era. If a young pitcher or two develops you could have something special. I don't expect it, but Sixto is the type of arm that could easily jump from AA to the majors if the team were contending in August.

Philsmania 2017-09-14 14:37:23 UTC #197

If a year from now the Phillies are closing in on a .500 or better season and the core of that 2018 team credits the opportunity to play and win some games together this month for helping to set the table for that, I won't wring my hands if the 1-1 slips away in the process.

For the record, here's where the race to the bottom stands this morning:

Giants 57-91 -- (11-19)
Phillies 56-89 .5 (13-17)
White Sox 58-87 2.5 (13-17)
Tigers 60-85 4.5 (8-22)
Reds 63-83 7 (14-16)

zambonir 2017-09-14 14:59:31 UTC #198

Well, right. The Phillies are 30-36 since July 1. If they get the pick it will be because of how poorly they played through June, not because the team we are watching now is awful. And if they don't get the pick, July's 13-12 record will be just as much to blame.

But, they were 11-19 in August and 6-6 in September. Does it really matter if they go 10-7, 9-8, 8-9 or 7-10 the rest of the season? I will definitely take the last two options if it's the difference between picking first or not. Nobody's really expecting - or wanting - them to go 2-15.

And, it seems to go without saying and yet can't be said enough, it's not just about the first pick. If there's a guy you want badly in the 10th round, why not have the first pick in that round? If there's someone you want to sign for an extra $200K, may as well actually have that money available.

allentown 2017-09-14 15:16:25 UTC #199

I cannot do more than begin to tell you how much I hate that phrase 'spend just to spend' in this context. If you believe we have a very good young lineup, then spending for top pitchers in 2018, so that young lineup can be a part of a winning team, which makes a legit run for a post-season berth is not 'spending just to spend'. To me, the money spent on mediocre FA and trade pitchers the last few seasons is the definition of 'spending just to spend', because it is spending on a futile season in which it isn't possible to buy even respectability with the guys you are acquiring. 2018 Lieber is indistinguishable from 2018 Hellickson at $17 mill.

Really, I have to doubt your pitcher evaluation ability if you can't recognize Darvish and Lynn as top pitching talent.

Austinfan 2017-09-14 15:54:00 UTC #200

"Top pitching talent"

I'd say Darvish and Lynn are solid #2/#3 starters right now, and probably have 2 good seasons left in them.

Florida_Sunshine 2017-09-14 15:54:23 UTC #201

I just hope we can do better than Darvish on what will likely be a 4-6 year contract. As I have said before, the move the Yankees made for the A's pitcher(Sonny Gray), is great value IMO. I am thinking he will be making big money soon. I would take that guy over Darvish and his contract. And I am not really sold on Lynn, need to look at him more in depth.

The last few years was an attempt to bring in pitching that would allow our young pitchers to develop. Nobody knew Hellickson would fall as far as he did. Plus, we wanted to bring in more talent at the trade deadline. I looked at that as a cost of business.

I do think we are building something special here and just don't want to feel like the money HAS to be spent this year. If the braintrust decides that there will be better opportunities in a year, I am all for that. I do not feel like the money has to be spent this offseason. That is not me saying anything other than spend wisely to improve this team asap.