Phillies 2016-2017 offseason Discussion

VoteForKalas 2016-12-08 03:30:23 UTC #659

Amen allentown. Let the talent develop. If we have more than one good option at a position, that is a GOOD "problem" to have.

julio 2016-12-08 04:07:46 UTC #660

I think it depends on how quickly the pitching matures. If Klentak finds himself with an honest-to-god major-league rotation, and a system stacked with prospects, then it will arguably be time to look for some "compression" trades - turning a handful of prospects into a real major-league hitter or two, to join that core and win some games.

I'm not advocating doing this to move from 70 wins to 80 wins - to be "entertaining." But if the pitching is there - when the pitching is there - to contend, then selectively trade some prospects (generally not your top prospects, notwithstanding what Mike Rizzo did today) to fill offensive holes.

BtownFan 2016-12-08 12:45:53 UTC #661

As is generally the case at this time of year on this board, it is tough to militate against against the logic thrown up here. I lost track and didn't realize The Phils had lost rights to Ellis who is now with the Marlins.

allentown 2016-12-08 14:07:21 UTC #662

I don't mid the loss of Ellis. I'm happy to go with Knapp as our major league backup catcher. If I thought he had the potential to develop into an MLB starter in a year or two, I'd consider whether or not promoting him now might retard his development, but since I think his ceiling is a backup and since he has had a year of AAA, I think he learns more as an MLB backup than as a AAA backup.

I do not subscribe to the theory that a team in general, and a team with young pitching in particular, needs a veteran catcher. Yes, the young pitchers need to be told what individual hitters can and can't hit, but that is what the coaches should be doing. Rupp is no longer a rookie. He caught a lot last year and has first-hand experience with the opposing hitters and the strengths and weaknesses of the Phillies pitcher.

I think it more important that the young pitchers grow up with the young catchers they will be working with for the next half dozen seasons.

One of my team-building philosophies is that it is better to gel a growing core by having guys on the 25-man who have a chance to be here 3 years from now, than to take space with vets who are just passing through and will be gone by the end of the year or even by the trade deadline. Too rapid a turnover of the roster seems detrimental to team building.

donaldorc 2016-12-08 14:51:41 UTC #663

allentown:

I don't mid the loss of Ellis. I'm happy to go with Knapp as our major league backup catcher. If I thought he had the potential to develop into an MLB starter in a year or two, I'd consider whether or not promoting him now might retard his development, but since I think his ceiling is a backup and since he has had a year of AAA, I think he learns more as an MLB backup than as a AAA backup.

I do not subscribe to the theory that a team in general, and a team with young pitching in particular, needs a veteran catcher. Yes, the young pitchers need to be told what individual hitters can and can't hit, but that is what the coaches should be doing. Rupp is no longer a rookie. He caught a lot last year and has first-hand experience with the opposing hitters and the strengths and weaknesses of the Phillies pitcher.

I think it more important that the young pitchers grow up with the young catchers they will be working with for the next half dozen seasons.

One of my team-building philosophies is that it is better to gel a growing core by having guys on the 25-man who have a chance to be here 3 years from now, than to take space with vets who are just passing through and will be gone by the end of the year or even by the trade deadline. Too rapid a turnover of the roster seems detrimental to team building.

Agree completely. Phillies have had way too much veteranosity over the years.

Austinfan 2016-12-08 18:13:18 UTC #664

The bullpen is the best spot for veterans, since they're so variable anyway, the cast is constantly changing.
You want your starting 8 and top starting pitchers to grow together.
The bench can have its share of veterans, because young prospects are better off paying everyday in AAA ball than once a week in the majors.

julio 2016-12-08 20:16:11 UTC #665

The Phils are going to have to clear a couple more roster spots at some point. As of now, they have only five infielders on the roster (the four presumed starters plus Jes Valentin, who is almost certainly headed for AAA), and seven outfielders - but four of those outfielders could open at AAA (Cozens, Goeddel, Quinn, Williams).

They need a backup shortstop/middle infielder. They need a fourth outfielder (and maybe a fifth), and a swing guy (corner OF/IF type). At least.

To make room, failing long-term injuries in the spring (60-day DL assignments before Opening Day), they'll need to trim the roster by about three spots. I see Luis Garcia, Sev Gonzalez, Phil Klein (at least) as on the bubble. If he clears waivers, Luis Garcia will be eligible for minor league FA, and could opt for that.

Possible internal candidates: for the backup shortstop, I don't see one. Featherston, I guess, is a possibility.

For the outfield, Roman Quinn is a possibility (and on the roster), if they think he's ready to share time with Altherr. Cam Perkins? Andrew Pullin (bat's left-handed, which could help)?

For the swing guy, Brock Stassi probably has a shot, if he has a good spring. He bats lefty, which increases his appeal.

I would think they're in the market, quietly, for a left-handed outfield bat.

andyb 2016-12-08 20:28:55 UTC #666

Klentak has mentioned Valentin in the same vein as Knapp as being in the mix for the major league bench. He can play a decent SS. Better than Hernandez at any rate. We even had him there for 9 games at Reading last year. There were just few opportunities to do so with Crawford hanging around.

With Valentin you would be resigning yourself to a 600 OPS guy with only average defense off the bench. Blanco was clearly better, but I wonder if Crawford coming up in the near future they really see this role as Galvis' ultimate destination.

julio 2016-12-08 20:41:35 UTC #667

The Phillies won a World Series in 2008 with that. Not a prediction concerning 2017 - and that 2008 team didn't need much offense off the bench. But still...

andyb 2016-12-08 20:56:40 UTC #668

Realistically this is going to be another offensively challenged team. Little power in the OF is why Saunders is a good fit. Way too right-handed also in our better hitters. That is part of the reason a more offensive-oriented bench piece or two would be a good thing.

Valentin will not be a great middle infield backup, but it is not as if his profile is a lot different than Andres Blanco was 5 years ago. I always hoped he would add some power like his dad, though it has not happened yet. The decision with Valentin could be a little like Knapp in that the Phillies probably like the lower level prospect (Alfaro or Kingery) more. There is less of a reason to push Valentin now like they might with Knapp because Kingery probably starts back in AA.

Austinfan 2016-12-08 23:57:49 UTC #669

Valentin was as high of a pick as Kingery, and his minor league career matches up favorably. Let 'em play it out before jumping to any conclusions.

The key to the offense will be Franco bouncing back, Altherr getting back to his end of 2015 form, and finding a LH bat for LF. If you have a lineup of
Hernandez
Herrera
Franco
Joseph
LH power bat
Rupp
Altherr
Galvis
that wouldn't be a bad start, with Crawford pushing his way in at some point.
Franco could be a .900 OPS guy if he got his head on straight, Altherr could be a solid .750 with great defense in RF, just need that LH bat.

andyb 2016-12-09 01:29:24 UTC #670

It does not really matter where Valentin was drafted. His pro career has not been quite as good as Kingery even though he has been a little younger at each level. Kingery has a little more OBP potential and more usable speed. Probably seen as a little better defensively also. It is subtle differences but it is more how scouts perceive that each of their tools developed. Valentin really has not shown the power that he was projected to have and is simply not as good an athlete as Kingery.

Of course we let them play it out. But what I am saying is that the Phillies really seem to be grooming Valentin for more of a backup/utility role and see Kingery as having a better chance of being the long term starter. This is inferred from their comments on the players and how they have used them role-wise in the minors.

Austinfan 2016-12-09 15:52:31 UTC #671

I don't see any evidence that the Phillies have given up on Valentin, he lost a year due to that domestic violence incident, otherwise his career matches up as well or better than Kingery.

Valentin, 23 in May, 107 RC+ in AA, 105 RC+ in AAA (but a BABIP decline of 27 ponts, which is most of his BA decline. Att age 20, RC+ 123 in high A.
Knigery, 23 in April, 128 RC+ in high A, 64 RC+ in AA (BABIP decline from .334 to .306).

Kingery may be the better athlete, but Valentin has outperformed him at the SAME AGE.
So if age is really that important, Valentin is the better prospect.

julio 2016-12-09 16:56:26 UTC #672

Projecting the development of a young prospect involves looking at more than just past performance.

allentown 2016-12-09 17:09:06 UTC #673

Although once they've played in AA/AAA, performance (if age appropriate) needs to be considered seriously. What does that mean to me? It means that if an appropriately young kid does well at AA/AAA then, whatever his scouting reports say, you have to anoint him as at least an honorary prospect and keep giving him chances up the line, including the MLB team, until he stops producing. Otherwise you are going to miss out on good major league players, as we did with Moss. A lot of scouting-report-based evaluations severely downgrade guys for not being sufficiently athletic. John Kruk wasn't athletic. Scouting reports are predictors. At some organizational level/performance, I think you have to credit performance above scouting projections. At least you have to do that if you are an organization which professes to be even moderately a modern-stats-focused organization. A great scouting report should give a guy additional chances to perform in the minors, before being shunted to the bench, but it shouldn't be a ticket to MLB if the stats are lacking.

I would not award our future starting 2B job to Kingery over Valentin just yet. I don't have a strong favorite at this point. I also wouldn't rule out Galvis or Hernandez. We can watch all of these guys for the first half of 2017, see how they perform, and make assignments accordingly. If everyone is doing well, we can trade Galvis and/or Hernandez, and promote Crawford and Valentin to Philly. I think Kingery needs the full year in the minors.

flyers19rw 2016-12-09 17:19:43 UTC #674

I'm taking it as a given that a corner OF bat will fall into the hands of the Phillies over this winter. It may be Bruce from the financially strapped Mets; J.D. Martinez from the Tigers or somewhere else. There are many possibilities out there. Lets just see where the market is once the pricey FAs find their homes.

Austinfan 2016-12-09 17:32:40 UTC #675

I think performance at AA/AAA is the key, before then it's all supposition because he's not facing ML caliber pitching, at AA you see ML caliber fastballs, weeding out slow bat speed guys, at AAA you see ML caliber breaking balls, which will be the test for Cozens, in the majors of course you see both, combined with better command.

As far as age appropriate, that to me is less important than experience appropriate, by that I mean once you've had a couple years in AAA ball, and a cup of coffee or two in the majors, a lot of guys tear it up at age 28 or 29, less because of age than having seen everything pitchers at that level can throw at them.

So to me given the different trajectories of HS and college players, whether you're 23 or 25 in Lehigh is less important than your career trajectory, if you are so-so in Reading then tear it up in Lehigh you're worthy of a look, but if you tear it up at Reading, then struggle for a couple years in Lehigh before turning it on, red flag.

Some players do it on sheer talent, others have adjustment lags at higher levels before they turn it up. But there is a sub-group of ML players who didn't blossom until 25-27.

andyb 2016-12-09 17:58:43 UTC #676

The only time Kingery has had a large sample of performance in one place is that 128 number (and again I caution against using that stat because it is not park adjusted). Kingery's high A performance was the best of any performance from either player in the last couple of years and the usage patterns from the Phillies show that they know that. High OBP. Good defense and SB rate. All things Kingery is arguably better at than Valentin.

As I keep saying, there is not a world of difference but the Phillies seem to like Kingery more. Scouting rankings also seem to like Kingery more. This is because TOOLS MATTER. Players without tools tend not to do well at upper levels of the minors and Valentin's performance has stalled a bit. Now I would hope that Kingery has an 800+ OPS in a more sustained exposure in Reading this year to prove my point. He'll pick up some cheap home runs to help his slugging percentage and he'll have the time to adapt to the level.

It is not really a slam at Valentin to rank Kingery higher. That ranking is based on the tools as the performance has been close. I might reverse that if Kingery does not improve his performance this year. But at the moment Kingery appears the better of the two prospects. Valentin looks more of a candidate to be a reserve middle infielder. I don't care too much if they try to push him there at the beginning of the season, but if Kingery is the better prospect he'll be pushing for a promotion to LHV by midseason and a decision will have to be made at that time.

andyb 2016-12-09 18:04:47 UTC #677

I don't disagree with any of this. But if forced to rank them I think Kingery is the best long term prospect at 2B between the two. Frankly I am not sure any of them (Kingery, Valentin, Galvis, Hernandez) is a good 2B long term. Kingery and Valentin are both B or C-level prospects. Not sure they will be average major league starters long term. Galvis is not a great hitter and his defense is less valuable at 2B. Hernandez might not be as good defensively as the stats said last time and may be more of a below average starter (though it is pretty clear he is a starter now).

Trading Hernandez or Galvis does still make sense for the future but more because of Crawford and not Kingery/Valentin. Kingery or Valentin might end up being the below average starter at 2B in the long term. Crawford is the only one of the bunch that has a legit shot to be an above average regular.

julio 2016-12-09 18:23:57 UTC #678

I don't think the Phils have "awarded" the 2B job to anybody. The thing is, the Phils' professional evaluators have been doing just what you advocate - watching all of these guys. If they've begun to form conclusions about who among them is likely to be most productive at 2B in the future...we would expect them to now begin (continue) making assignments accordingly.

And that is, in fact, exactly what they've been doing. They have prioritized Kingery's opportunities (and level of play) over that of some other prospects. If they choose to use Jes Valentin as a major-league bench/utility guy this spring, and place Kingery in AAA as the everyday second baseman there, that is just a continuation of the same process - they're making assignments on the basis of what they have seen (a combination of scouting projection/evaluations, and performance).

My comment in reply to Austinfan was simply a reply to an evaluation that looked only at performance. It wasn't a suggestion that performance doesn't matter; just that, with young prospects, performance isn't the only thing that matters. I didn't think I was being subtle...