Part of CSNPhilly.com


« With Golson, fundamentals of hitting must come first | Main | Audio: Vic loves right, but accepts new role in center »

Friday, January 25, 2008

Comments

Are you kidding that I am the first commenter on here?!? Ha!

But seriously, Arbuckle's failure to mention that those dollars went to Utley's long term contract is a serious error on his part.

Satisfied? Four crummy minor leaguers fro Abreu?? But he was a gold glover!! All joking aside, let's hope some of that money can also go to Howard's future contract.

JW-

Damn, gotta hand it to you, you just keep making this blog better and better - and in the off-season, nonetheless. The small installment approach is a wonderful use of the medium, interesting, fun to read, and informative. This has got to be one of the best team blogs out there, in content, style, and discussion. Beerleaguer is a pleasure to read. Thanks for making the off-season interesting; keep up the good work.

Go Phillies.

I agree with the last poster, except fot the Go Phillies part. This is one of the best baseball blogs out there, regardless of your team. I wish there was a Mets blog that was half as good as this one.

Ah, typical Phillies upper management rationalization. Arbuckle conveniently leaves out that the Twins haven't moved Santana under the circumstances.

Arbuckle's expression of satisfaction, through which he is probably speaking for the entirethe organization, is very enlightening.

It explains why this organization has been so abysmal at getting talent in return for their better players.

I guess they're satisfied with the trade of Rolen...Schilling...Polanco...Padilla...

The list goes on. His explanation(excuse) is of the lamest sort because not all of the players they've traded for dreck have been high salary guys.

It also may explain why bad trades for major talent continue to happen with this team:

They're "satisfied" with getting nothing in return.

That should read:

"bad trades *of* major talent"

Arbuckle is a dipsh*t...seriously, we have almost nothing to show for the Abreu trade except for some financial flexibility and even that is miniscule.

Also, his inclusion of Santana in his answer pisses me off. Guaranteed the Twins get a useful package for him...we got Matt "Ball 4" Smith for crying out loud!

Carson, my point is that his attitude is probably pervasive throughout the entire baseball operation.

They're "satisfied".

Here, here PhilliesRed and mets fan in philly.

From the horses mouth to the blog.

I would like to put Arbuckle on that lie detector game show "Moment of Truth" and ask him the same question. At least he didn't say the money was reallocated to help the team win the division in 2007, since it was squandered on Garcia and Eaton. But since Gillick architected the deal, he can't criticize the boss.

ARE YOU KIDDIN' ME?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Arbuckle?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

What's he going to say? "Well, the trade was really about unloading Abreu's contract and those were the only players they'd give us?"

Clout: To get back to your point about Kuroda and Myers, that's laughable. So, you think that the difference between Myers as a closer and Lidge as a closer is so much that it would give Kuroda an advantage over Myers in terms of Wins (which anyway is the most ridiculous stat to judge a pitcher by- I know you know this). Let's say Lidge blows 5 more saves than Myers would over the course of a season (very generous). Odds say that 1 of those would be during a Myers start. Therefore, you think that Myers as a starting pitcher is only equal to or 1 win better than Kuroda? Do you follow my logic here? What you say doesn't make sense. If you wanna argue that the team would be better with Kuroda as a starter, Myers at closer and Lidge at setup, I don't have a disagreement (adding an above-average pitcher like Kuroda always makes a team better). But to think that somehow means Kuroda would get more wins than Myers would in the same situation, or that he would outperform Myers in the starting role, is stupid.

Anyway, JW, great posts. The Abreu trade is a joke, and it's sickening that Arbuckle can rationalize their failure by comparing it to a Santana deal. As Tom Goodman points out, Santana hasn't been moved because they haven't gotten enough back for him. We moved Abreu regardless of what we could get back for him, which is why we missed the playoffs that year. Abreu in that lineup down the stretch easily gives us an extra game, which was all we needed to tie for the wildcard.

As for Golson I don't hold out much hope. 22 is actually pretty old for a prospect who still has no plate discipline, and I wouldn't expect him to magically "get it". If he was 19 I could still hold out hope based on his raw potential, but at this age, I just don't see it.

The_GodfatherSJP: Great point. The question was answered in the only way that it could be. Did anyone really expect Arbuckle to throw his guys under the bus on this one?

Exactly, i am sure Arbuckle is angling for the GM job after Gillick leaves. Of course he is gonna answer the question that way

Come on. Comparing the Bobby Abreu to the forthcoming Johan Santana deal is the only way to answer that question? How about the tiniest bit of honesty that he's disappointed the prospects didn't work out? How about saying that he still thinks Matt Smith can make a positive ocntribution to the team? Give us SOMETHING instead of that 100% total BS answer.

What's the latest on Jesus Sanchez? Is he still in the system or did we get rid of him?

Jack: "If you wanna argue that the team would be better with Kuroda as a starter, Myers at closer and Lidge at setup, I don't have a disagreement."

That's exactly what I've been saying. Kuroda would outperform Myers BECAUSE of the Lidge/Myers backend and Myers would underperform Kuroda BECAUSE of the Gordon/Lidge backend. In other words, Myers is a better closer than Lidge and Lidge is a better setup than Gordon. The backend of the pen can easily save or cost a starter 3 or 4 wins in a given season.

Jack: Sanchez, a good field no-hit catcher, is still with the Phillies.

"The backend of the pen can easily save or cost a starter 3 or 4 wins in a given season."

So the difference between Lidge-Myers and Gordon-Lidge is 15-20 games? I find that VERY hard to believe.

I can't get too upset about Arbuckle's obviously dishonest answer. Has anyone ever heard any member of the front office say, "Yeah, we screwed up on that (trade, draft pick etc.)"? I have never heard the FO ever admit a mistake.

Jack: How many losses were a direct result of the bullpen last season?

Clout: My guess is somewhere around 30-40. Every team in the league, even with the best bullpens, blow probably 20 games a season. So I'm not sure what your point is. That adding Lidge to last year's "dominating" Gordon-Myers combo somehow saves us 20 games? Putting Myers back there, if you found an above-average starter to replace him, I would say very, very generously saves us at best 5-7 games a year. Which of course I would take, but in no way do I think the difference is what you think it is.

Jack: I said the difference (for the Kuroda/Myers spot) is 3 or 4 wins. That doesn't mean its 3 or 4 wins for EVERY spot. Obviously the worse the starter the less chance the bullpen will cost him a win. He will have already lost the game himself.

I'm glad that Arbuckle got asked about the Carlos Monasterios trade.

For me the interesting thing about the comparison is the one thing that Smith is doing with Santana that Gillick did not do with Abreu - get someone MLB ready along with the prospects. There needed to actually be someone in our organization who could play in that package. Then you tack on Carl Henry and Matt Smith and you say "prospects is prospects." (Though you have to wonder what Arbuckle and his staff were doing if Henry was so bad, actually, that he's gone already.) (Or,as it turns out, gone back.) Where is the MLB-ready player from the Abreu divestment who corresponds to the one who needs to be there for both the Santana and Bedard trades to happen?

In re: Golson (last thread)
It is not the 173 Ks by themselves which is so telling. If he also had 120 BBs, with his speed, he might be truly scary. But he had, what, 25 walks? I begin to wonder if any ball he hits into play is partiall (if not mostly) luck. What will happen when he faces pitchers who actually have command and excellent scouting behind them?

As much as we talk about trading Howard while he still has value, the best use of Golson might be to get something for him before he is exposed to major league pitching in front of everyone else's scouts.

As I said in a previous thread; Myers was never hurt when starting but the first year as a closer he missed about 5 weeks. Is his arm suited to the demands of a relief pitcher? Kuroda is a complete unknown who can say what he will produce at this point? Is he better than Lohse? They need to get a true setup man who can also save if Lidge has a rough spot.

In re: the continuing 3B discussion saga from two threads ago -

blah, blah, blah, above average fielding, blah, blah

OTOH blah, blah, blah, .288 liftetime OBP, blah blah

OTOH blah, blah, blah, Helms sucks, blah

OTOH blah, blah, Feliz would make me puke, blah,

OTOH blah, blah, save astronomical amount of runs, blah

OTOH blah, hit into astronomical number of double plays, blah

Or maybe we should spend the money on a really good relief pitcher.

wow - Kongster - I agree with everything you just said.

Mike Arbuckle has nothing to do with the trades. He is the guy who is responsible for evaluating players for the draft and in the low minors. In other words, it wasn't Ed Wade who drafted Utley Howard Rollins Myers Hamels Burrell etc., It was Arbuckle. Wade and Amaro Gillick are the guys who handled the trades and Arbuckle knows he won't get a GM spot if he is the type of guy who will dog his superiors in the media. Don't blame Mike for trade just because he has to agree with it publicly.

P.S. I liked the trade because we had to get rid of that lazy selfish player.

Could it have been a good trade with what they got? maybe, but since the money saved from Abreu was spent on Garcia, Eaton and Barajas it was a disaster!

Did we need to clear Abreu's salary? Yes. 16-18mil/year for a guy who has trouble breaking 25 HR and 25SB every year, and who is going to slow down, is entirely too much. Also, we're talking about another lefty bat. Don't we have 2 of those in Utley and Howard, both of whom put up better numbers at the plate? YES. Abreu was redundant and we needed to move him.

Unfortunately, for his salary and no-trade clause, the choice pretty much was Yankess, Red Sox or bust. Our options were very narrow, the guy was going to cost an additional 18 mil after he was moved, so we weren't GOING to get much in return for the guy. It was a foregone conclusion once he was put on the block. Jeremy Giambi won't get much in return right now if he goes on the block. Most teams won't give up prospects that they can control for far less for 1 player who costs a ton no matter how good.

THAT'S the comparison Arbuckle is making. If Santana was making less than 10mil this year, the Yankees, Sox, or Mets would already have sweetened the pot, AND several more teams would be in the running. But it doesn't speak well for Gillick that we haven't obtained anything worthwhile. If Smith turned into a pretty good reliever, that would be some solace at least.

phil: "I liked the trade because we had to get rid of that lazy selfish player."

Hmmmm, a lazy selfish player whose OPS+ the past 3 seasons has been 126, 126 and 114. It's rare that we get such grossly uninformed, idiotic posts of this magnitude on here, Phil. Congrats.

The point of the Abreu trade wasn't to get talent in return. That was obvious from the minute we found out who changed teams. Since they made the trade by their own volition its probably safe to assume they were happy about it then, and probably happy about it now, too.

Godfather: So SB and HR are the only stats that count? And how did Abreu hit lefties, by the way? Yep, we HAD to dump him. Sheesh, what is it about Abreu that turns otherwise intelligent posters into idiots? Must be personal because it's sure not rational.

to repeat a point I've made before, let's not forget that the Abreu trade also required us to give up a solidly league-average pitcher (something the Phillies desperately need once again this year) in Cory Lidle for the privilege of acquiring the Yankees' prospect trash.

I for one don't believe that had the Phillies kept Abreu that they would have made the playoffs. The platoon of Vic and Dellucci that replaced him did a nice job. Had the money saved from Abreu been used properly it could have been good. Unfortunately this is the Phillies we are talking about.

The point of listing the HR/SB totals was that Abreu was paid money to be a power hitter, which he's demonstrated is not the case. He's a career 300 hitter, with an OBP of around 400, but he also strikes out over 100 times a year. Ryan Howard deserves that kind of money, Soriano maybe, Beltran, Ortiz; big power hitters earn that salary. Abreu did not. Which is why they moved him.

I personally don't think he was lazy. I do think he was grossly overpaid for what he produced offensively. Utley's rise made him redundant, so we cleared his salary from the books. End of story.

Mike Arbuckle has been here 15 years. ZERO playoff wins. That's the bottom line.

"Yeah, I think so. The reality is, when you try to move guys at very high salaries today, you don’t get a king’s ransom in return"

There is a chasm between getting NOTHING OF VALUE in return and a king's ransom.

@Godfather, in no way, shape or means was Bobby Abreu paid to be a POWER HITTER.

The best part of the Abreu trade wasn't freeing up salary, it was ridding us of one of the worst 3 hole hitters in the game. I really don't miss having a guy stand there taking a zillion pitches with SOME power batting 3rd in the lineup. It goes without saying that the lineup got better by leaps and bounds when Utley replaced him there. In retrospect, Abreu would have made a heck of a 2 hitter with his skills.

It's hard to argue that Abreu's not worth his salary when the Yanks, who had lots of other options (basically, more than any other team), decided to pay him this year.

It's also hard to argue that he's a bad 3-hole hitter when he basically hit there all year for the Yanks powerful offense, despite a terrible early-season slump.

And no one in baseball is "paid to be a power hitter", they're paid to produce offensively and defensively, period. OBP is more valuable point-for-point than SLG anyway.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG