Phillies 2016-2017 offseason Discussion

[schillingfan]

It’s what the sabermetrics boys can’t measure, or really understand.

You don't have to use advanced analytics, or care much about them... but this kind of demeaning language is kind of out of place here, I think. "sabermetrics boys"? I think we can do better than this.

I'm assuming there are more sabremetric women these days. Back at their beginnings the best woman was a transgender. Nothing that says women can't be smart about crunching numbers. I'd like to believe that the sabermetric community could care less whether the analysis comes from a man or a woman.

[zambonir]

Zolecki speculates that the Phillies may explore trading Velasquez this winter.

m.phillies.mlb.com/news/article/206598000/phillies-fans-inquire-about-possible-trades/

On the one hand, yes, they have to explore all avenues to add valuable assets and building blocks. On the other hand, health permitting, Velasquez is more of a building block worth holding on to.

I posted that a few pages/days ago. Since we keep talking about the Cubs, also recall Murphy's column (pretty sure it was his) in which he suggested Velasquez could be the Cashner to someone else's Rizzo. Would have to find the Rizzo though. For all we know Nick Williams might already be that (well, not exactly, he is struggling at AAA whereas Rizzo was flopping in the bigs).

[andyb]

I tend to agree with you on this one, though I understand where AndyB is coming from. I would definitely not want to trade Kilome or even Sanchez at this point.

The instincts that make you NOT want to trade them make them good trade prospects potentially. They are prospects that have had success with lots of projection or development in front of them. They can easily fail because essentially they are pitchers. Hence they may be overvalued in the trade market.

There are no dump all your second tier prospects and get a top prospect trades out there. We need to trade something real to get something real. If we have a prospect coming off a good year they may be valued at more than their actual talent. That is why you think of trading a Kilome. Because he is good and might be great. If our scouts tell me that he WILL be great or has a high probability - then maybe you don't deal. But if a scout says it is 50-50 then I think about it. The trades AF wants just don't exist. That is why I am open to trading anyone at almost any time. We should deal where we have redundancy and potentially better replacements. That is why dealing Galvis and maybe Rupp makes sense. We also can't fall in love with prospects because they are OUR prospects. A Cozens may never be more valuable than he is this offseason. I love him as a prospect but I also realize there is a high chance of failure with him. He has trade value though. We need to trade something to get something generally. So all prospects with real value (our top 10 basically) really need to be evaluated as potential trade assets.

[LoneStarPhan]

I think you just keep active in talks with all the other clubs and look for value. Sometimes an amazing opportunity comes along that no one saw coming. But even if it doesn't, look to improve the organization talent in all the ways possible: free agents, minor league free agents, waiver pick ups, non-tendered free agents, rule 5 draft, and trades. My hope is that by spring training, several new potential contributors are on the roster. We will see. Bring on the off-season wheeling and dealing.

[Austinfan]

The other thing you need is patience, Kluber is a perfect example, at age 24 he was having a solid season in AA when he got traded to the Indians, basically a second tier prospect with limited upside. At 25, a so-so season in AAA ball (4.53 FIP), pitched better in AAA ball the next season and got promoted into the Indian rotation and became one of their starters in 2013 at age 27.

His FB/sinker has always been pounded, when he came up his slider was his only plus pitch, a solid curve which he rarely threw, and a changeup that was a work in progress. The last fews years the sinker improved slightly, but what really made the difference for him was the curve, which went from an afterthought to an out pitch along with his slider.

Point is you stockpile young pitchers and provide them with excellent coaching, because mastering two secondary pitches along with locating a decent FB is all you need to be dominant, curve, slider, changeup or even a split finger. Master one and you can be a dominant RP, master two a top of the rotation starter. We saw this with Cliff Lee.

[Philsmania]

[size=150]The other thing you need is patience[/size], Kluber is a perfect example, at age 24 he was having a solid season in AA when he got traded to the Indians, basically a second tier prospect with limited upside. At 25, a so-so season in AAA ball (4.53 FIP), pitched better in AAA ball the next season and got promoted into the Indian rotation and became one of their starters in 2013 at age 27.

His FB/sinker has always been pounded, when he came up his slider was his only plus pitch, a solid curve which he rarely threw, and a changeup that was a work in progress. The last fews years the sinker improved slightly, but what really made the difference for him was the curve, which went from an afterthought to an out pitch along with his slider.

Point is you stockpile young pitchers and provide them with excellent coaching, because mastering two secondary pitches along with locating a decent FB is all you need to be dominant, curve, slider, changeup or even a split finger. Master one and you can be a dominant RP, master two a top of the rotation starter. We saw this with Cliff Lee.

You also need a player/pitcher who is willing to work hard to refine his talents while being receptive to good coaching, instruction and advice and, maybe, just a little bit of luck, too.

[Slinging_Southpaw]

Buy very low candidate. Jason Heyward.
Not starting game 2 of the World Series.
Cubs would have to eat a ton of cash to move him.

[andyb]

Buy very low candidate. Jason Heyward.
Not starting game 2 of the World Series.
Cubs would have to eat a ton of cash to move him.

Take him down to $15 million a year and I might be interested. Still had a 1.5 WAR year even though he was awful. 266 BABIP so some probably due to luck.

[EDmuch]

NOOOOOOOOOOOO Jason Heyward. Please. He stinks. His offense has been pedestrian for a couple of years now.

[zambonir]

I don't think the Cubs will bail on Heyward. He's still pretty young and is just having a bad year. Benching him now, while high-profile, is not a white flag, just a short-term reality, that the team needs someone who might hit more than it needs defense. They didn't sign him expecting him to smack the ball like he used to, they wanted defense and OBP.

They will have to fix him. I don't think a trade would be good for anybody right now, Cubs might eat money but they'd want an actual return if so, it's not like he's 30.

I could certainly see Klentak liking him, for the same reason Epstein and Hoyer did, and his age mitigates the term (not completely, but he's not a guy who will necessarily be cooked by 2020. Assuming he bounces back).

[Slinging_Southpaw]

I don't think the Cubs will bail on Heyward. He's still pretty young and is just having a bad year. Benching him now, while high-profile, is not a white flag, just a short-term reality, that the team needs someone who might hit more than it needs defense. They didn't sign him expecting him to smack the ball like he used to, they wanted defense and OBP.

They will have to fix him. I don't think a trade would be good for anybody right now, Cubs might eat money but they'd want an actual return if so, it's not like he's 30.

I could certainly see Klentak liking him, for the same reason Epstein and Hoyer did, and his age mitigates the term (not completely, but he's not a guy who will necessarily be cooked by 2020. Assuming he bounces back).

I don't agree on the return, he has an opt-out after the 2018 and 2019 seasons, so I doubt anyone would make a significant offer in prospects.
The Cubs also have a log-jam of talent at the Major League level, so they will need to make some moves.

[zambonir]

I don't think the Cubs will bail on Heyward. He's still pretty young and is just having a bad year. Benching him now, while high-profile, is not a white flag, just a short-term reality, that the team needs someone who might hit more than it needs defense. They didn't sign him expecting him to smack the ball like he used to, they wanted defense and OBP.

They will have to fix him. I don't think a trade would be good for anybody right now, Cubs might eat money but they'd want an actual return if so, it's not like he's 30.

I could certainly see Klentak liking him, for the same reason Epstein and Hoyer did, and his age mitigates the term (not completely, but he's not a guy who will necessarily be cooked by 2020. Assuming he bounces back).

I don't agree on the return, he has an opt-out after the 2018 and 2019 seasons, so I doubt anyone would make a significant offer in prospects.
The Cubs also have a log-jam of talent at the Major League level, so they will need to make some moves.

Opt-outs are weird. For a lot of teams that would make him more attractive. Much more attractive, IMO. Two years of one of the best defensive OFs in the league has a lot of value (though probably not as much to the Phillies). Also means the Cubs don't have to put up as much money (or it would be conditional).

He's not going anywhere. Logjam or no logjam, this is his first season with with the Cubs and despite his poor bat he played a more than solid role in their success. So who else can the Phillies get from them, and for what?

[Austinfan]

Opt out puts all the risk on the team, reward on the player, because if he's underplaying his contract, he won't opt out.

[andyb]

Opt out puts all the risk on the team, reward on the player, because if he's underplaying his contract, he won't opt out.

Not necessarily. The player gives up the guaranteed money too. So as you say he is less likely to opt out anyway since he would not personally want to risk giving up the money if he were not guaranteed more. Frankly it would not be the worst thing to have in the event he played well next year as by that time the Phillies will know more about Williams and Cozens and whether they can be decent major league starting corner outfielders.

[Philsmania]

Opt out puts all the risk on the team, reward on the player, because if he's underplaying his contract, he won't opt out.

Not necessarily. The player gives up the guaranteed money too. So as you say he is less likely to opt out anyway since he would not personally want to risk giving up the money if he were not guaranteed more. Frankly it would not be the worst thing to have in the event he played well next year as by that time the Phillies will know more about Williams and Cozens and whether they can be decent major league starting corner outfielders.

I used to think that opt-outs were unfair for the team but another way to look at the opt-out is that it potentially gets the team off the hook for the brutal back end of the contract if the player lives up to or exceeds expectations during the early years of the contract and seeks an even richer deal elsewhere. Team ends up enjoying the best years of the deal while not being burdened by the worst, a potential best of both worlds situation. The sucker ends up being the other team which signs the player after the opt-out. I'm sure the folks in Chavez Ravine are having a good chuckle at the Diamondbacks' expense.

Aside from ARod and the Yankees, has any prominent opt-out guy ever stayed with the organization he opted out from? I could be forgetting somebody but it seems like they typically move on elsewhere.

[andyb]

I think Sabathia used the opt out to stay with the Yankees too. I am sure there are a couple of others.

[julio]

Opt out puts all the risk on the team, reward on the player, because if he's underplaying his contract, he won't opt out.

Not necessarily. The player gives up the guaranteed money too. So as you say he is less likely to opt out anyway since he would not personally want to risk giving up the money if he were not guaranteed more. Frankly it would not be the worst thing to have in the event he played well next year as by that time the Phillies will know more about Williams and Cozens and whether they can be decent major league starting corner outfielders.

I used to think that opt-outs were unfair for the team but another way to look at the opt-out is that it potentially gets the team off the hook for the brutal back end of the contract if the player lives up to or exceeds expectations during the early years of the contract and seeks an even richer deal elsewhere. Team ends up enjoying the best years of the deal while not being burdened by the worst.

Aside from ARod and the Yankees, has any prominent opt-out guy ever stayed with the organization he opted out from? I could be forgetting somebody but it seems like they typically move on elsewhere.

My thought on opt-outs: Intelligent GMs - the successful ones, the ones fans want their teams to recruit - don't seem to have a problem with opt-outs in contracts. This is a strong indicator, to me at least, that fans who find the opt-outs objectionable...probably don't know what they're talking about.

[Austinfan]

Opt outs are based on the expectations of ever rising salaries, which is based on the false assumption that what goes up, must keep going up, which is the trigger for "bubbles."

Sports are financed primarily through TV advertising revenues, TV has overpaid for sports because it's one of the few products that seemed immune to audience splitting, but the decline in NFL ratings this year may be a harbinger of peak interest in sports - there are so many entertainment options available that at some point sports would have to plateau in interest - and thus advertising revenue. The WS may get a "Cubbie" boost (the novelty effect) this year, but don't count on sustained interest. Premium boxes, etc. have been maxed out, ticket prices are now at a point where only the 5% can afford to go on a regular basis. If Millenials are less interested in sports, and ethnics gravitate to sports like soccer, then the traditional sports in the US (other than maybe basketball, which has worldwide interest) are in trouble.

Which means if baseball revenues flatline in the near future, agents will look at opt outs as insurance policies more than an opportunity to negotiate bigger deals. An opt out is an option, the player pays for it supposedly with a discount on the contract (if the GM is a good negotiator). However, if the GM assumes revenue will rise (increasing the probability the opt out will be exercised) and they flat line, the GM won't drive a hard enough bargain.

[EastFallowfield]

Galvis and Herrera are gold glove finalists in the NL.

[Philsmania]

Galvis and Herrera are gold glove finalists in the NL.

Herrera?!?!?!?! That would be like Abreu winning one in 2005.