Phillies acquire RHP Sam Coonrod from Giants

[nycphils]

When you put this together with the deal for Jose Alvarado, what it tells you is Dombrowski believes in relievers who throw very hard. While I don’t have a ton of confidence that Alvarado will pitch well, and even less that Coonrod will, I agree with the philosophy, and find it a comforting indicator that someone who knows what he is doing is finally in charge. Trading away a guy with TJ and mediocre stuff doesn’t bother me, even if he could turn into something if lightning strikes.

[fish]

While I don’t have a ton of confidence that Alvarado will pitch well, and even less that Coonrod will, I agree with the philosophy, and find it a comforting indicator that someone who knows what he is doing is finally in charge.

The important part is depth. You don't acquire these guys and assign them roles, you acquire them and see what shakes out knowing that some of them won't pan out, or won't last an entire season..

[zambonir]

I assume Coonrod has options (at least one) too.

[LoneStarPhan]

I assume Coonrod has options (at least one) too.

Two options.

Alvarado has two options also.

Hard throwers with options, never have too many.

[jimbomill]

I also agree with the philosophy and you post's points. We have no indication that this will be a Rags-to-riches situation, so I have no qualms with the trade, but we still need a closer.

[andyb]

Trading away a guy with TJ and mediocre stuff doesn’t bother me, even if he could turn into something if lightning strikes.

Ragsdale has potentially good stuff. He was 91-95 in his 4 starts in college in 2020. That and the results were enough to put him in the 4th round legitimately. With his height I easily could see him as a guy throwing consistently in the mid-90s with a little Driveline instruction.

Now whether he will succeed or even get high level minor leaguers out is not a certainty. It was a decent trade for both sides given the uneven record (but present high level velocity) of the guy we got.

[phillychuck]

I actually don't look at this as a good trade at all. I don't mind trading future assets for present-day production, but in this case there really is no present day production to speak of--Coonrod is all projection, and I don't like projecting 28-year-olds to improve. It just doesn't happen very much.

Here I what I would post as the "odds" of the trade:
Good result: Coonrod gives us 3 WAR over 2 or 3 seasons, Ragsdale never makes it 10% chance of +3 WAR
No impact: Coonrod stinks; Ragsdale never makes it-70% chance of ~-1 WAR
Bad result: Coonrod stinks; Ragsdale becomes a serviceable MLB starter 15% chance of -10 WAR or so.
Disaster: Coonrod is irrelevant because Ragsdale actually develops into a good MLB pitcher; 5% chance of -30 WAR or so.

Expected value of the trade is about -8 WAR. Negative WAR trades of future production for present production are only justified if you are a contender. I'm not seeing that as likely right now...

[Austinfan]

They also signed a number of FA college throwers after the draft, so it's possible that Ragsdale simply didn't show that he's recovered velo after his TJ surgery and some others moved ahead of him. It was such a weird draft that some of the FAs were likely better picks than many who were drafted - but you wouldn't find out until instructionals.

I don't think this guy is a racist, rather, if you've actually gone to the BLM website (no, these three women do not speak for the movement, they may have been one of the instigators but there is no formal leadership), it's full of your radical feminist, quasi-Marxist, "graduate sociology student" rhetoric, which would freak out a conservative Christian who isn't familiar with graduate student BS.

[zambonir]

Negative WAR trades of future production for present production are only justified if you are a contender. I'm not seeing that as likely right now...

But that is wishing for the organizational mindset to be something other than it is. They should be either rebuilding or throwing all their chips into the pile, but so long as they are not doing either, little moves like this which may improve the short-term future and don't seriously harm the long-term future are all we have.

Obviously someone in the organization thinks Coonrod has something. We're accustomed to the Phillies not being particularly good at that, and should also assume that the Giants' ability to assess his talent (as well as Ragdale's) might be better than ours. But that's our team.

[Lucky_Beagle]

With a reduction in minor leaguers in the system (at some point this season, correct?) are these type of trades more likely? If Coonrod isn't seen a being a good addition he can easily be cut if they don't want to keep him on the 40 man roster.

[andyb]

Ragsdale was up to 97 in instructionals.

[andyb]

Expected value of the trade is about -8 WAR. Negative WAR trades of future production for present production are only justified if you are a contender.

That is a ridiculous projection. For example, Zach Eflin is at 4.6 WAR after parts of 5 seasons. Hopefully he makes it past 8 WAR before free agency, but it is probably 50-50. So for your statement to be real one would have to assume both that Eflin is the MEDIAN projection for Ragsdale when he probably has a 10%-20% chance to be as good as Eflin. You would also have to assume Coonrod's median projection is below zero WAR.

A real median projection for Ragsdale is probably like 2 WAR with a significant chance (40%) of zero or less. And a 10% chance for 10 WAR or more. Steamer projects Coonrod for 0.2 WAR this year. I imagine his median projection is also 2-3 WAR like Ragsdale. As a reliever with 2 years less time of control he probably has a peak projection of 5 WAR (i.e. his 10% percentile projection). His below zero WAR projection is probably only like 20% also.

Hey, if he is a jerk there are probably better guys in the clubhouse they should have acquired. But Ragsdale was just not a top prospect and the Phillies know more about him than anyone else. At least all teams have seen Coonrod in person and he throws 100. This is probably not a Dombrowski move. I imagine it is one of the offseason strategies started by Klentak and Rice to add hard throwers in the bullpen. We also added Alvarado and Ian Hamilton and Johan Quezada to address this. They had to do it. Everyone else's bullpen threw harder especially after Seranthony went down. With Brogdon and Romero and a few other young arms (Medina as a reliever should be able to throw 96-97 too) we are addressing this weakness. No more horrific Trevor Kelly sightings this season.

[phillychuck]

To get to 8 WAR I multiplied the WAR expectations by the (arbitrary but sensible, I think) % chances I assigned above. I gave Ragsdale a 1 in 20 chance to be an above average starting pitcher, and assigned that 30 WAR over 7 seasons (maybe a bit high in fWAR, but not in bWAR which tends to be kinder to pitchers). Relievers, even good ones, rarely earn more than about 1 WAR in a season. That tends to skew reliever trades against the reliever-end.

I don't give a crap about Coonrod's or Ragsdale's politics--just their fastballs. I tend to be more optimistic about draft picks and minor leaguers than struggling big leaguers, and that affects my evaluation, of course. I still do not like this kind of trade; I'd hold onto the lottery tickets like Ragsdale.

[jimbomill]

Coonrod is all projection

The same statement applies to Ragsdale.

[zambonir]

to get to 8 WAR I multiplied the WAR expectations by the (arbitrary but sensible, I think) % chances I assigned above. I gave Ragsdale a 1 in 20 chance to be an above average starting pitcher, and assigned that 30 WAR over 7 seasons (maybe a bit high in fWAR, but not in bWAR which tends to be kinder to pitchers). Relievers, even good ones, rarely earn more than about 1 WAR in a season. That tends to skew reliever trades against the reliever-end.

Not sure it's really worth drilling down on this, but what in your view (and in Fangraphs) is an "above-average" starting pitcher? I suspect it's someone like Vince Velasquez, someone who gives you 1-1.5 WAR on average. 30 WAR in 7 seasons sounds like a #2 starter to me.

I'm sure it's also true, even though teams are going to figure out a way to carry however many guys they want, that combining last year's 15-pitcher class with whatever the 2021 draft produces does make lower level guys more disposable. It's possible that after Instructional the Phillies already realized that Ragsdale wouldn't crack the Clearwater rotation (the Threshers now being low A) and was of less value to them as a reliever or extended ST guy.

We are traumatized by the last two bullpens, but it's still worth signing proven players and it's also still worth acquiring as many guys like this as you can. Last year was a perfect terrible storm in that there was no time to really let any kids/fungibles rise to the top - or to have patience with the ups and downs of struggling vets.

[David_Criss]

We are traumatized by the last two bullpens,

So true. Part of me wonders if they could or should bring back Workman on the super cheap and see what the new coach can do with him. He was just awful in a very weird season once he was traded to Philly. They don't get that bad that quickly do they? Seems like they do when they come to Philly. So far they have added two hard throwing arms. It is already an improvement.

[zambonir]

Workman was never really that good though, if you look hard at his numbers. He's a middle-of-the road guy who had one good fluke year and one bad fluke year. He's also too similar to Neris.

In any case, they're not done. They've barely started. Dombrowski has made it clear he still believes in the concept of late-inning guys, even if he's also only just now catching up to the fact that you need depth, and guys to get outs in the 6th and 7th. They have got to sign one good free agent, two if you count Alvarez (or they sign someone instead of him). The group they now have competing for all but the top three spots is probably fine, and you hope at least one of them forces his way into the 8th/9th mix.

[andyb]

Forget the math. In rough terms I would say there is a 10% chance that Ragsdale is a decent starter (rather than a AAAA type like Irvin). There is probably close to a 50% chance that Coonrod is a decent reliever though. Guys that throw 100 all have a good chance. A reliever is less valuable than a starter of course, but we just added one of the 10 hardest throwers in MLB. That ain't nothing.

[phillychuck]

Phillychuck: "Coonrod is all projection"

The same statement applies to Ragsdale.

Of course it does; I wasn't arguing it doesn't. It's just that Coonrod is 28 years old and has demonstrated he can't get people out in the big leagues. Honestly, he's never had a decent season as a reliever above high-A ball. If you are giving away a young player whose value is projection, it's dumb to acquire an older player who also only has value based on projection, especially because improvement at age 28 is much less likely than at age 22. If we had acquired a 28-year-old reliever with some (mixed) success in AAA or the majors that would be different. But we gave away what looks like equal stuff in a younger player who plays a more valuable role. The Phils may have some sort of inside information on both players that makes my argument dumb, but it's a strategically bad trade.

[phillychuck]

z, I was thinking about someone like Carlos Carrasco (also recently traded) as an above average pitcher, and he has about 25 fWAR over the last 7 years. Giving Ragsdale a 5% chance of becoming Carrasco is probably too high, but not by much.

Again, the Phils may have a reason to give up on him, but he is a 4th round draft pick who hasn't pitched in a "real" game as a pro. I also suspect that the Giants had a reason to ask for him, which may indicate he has been doing better than initially projected; maybe not.