Part of

« Friday: Perlozzo added to Phillies' coaching staff | Main | Monday: NL MVP to be announced at 2 p.m. today »

Friday, November 14, 2008


This is good. The Phils have an ace, 2-3-4 starters whose combined ERA+ should be comfortably north of 100. That's real good. Presumably Happ as the 5th starter, with Kendrick as the early season injury fill-in and Carrasco as the late-season fill-in, yeah that works.

So if the Moyer deal happens, the starting rotation, including depth, is set. And there are only 1 or 2 bullpen openings.

That leaves a RH Value Village LFer, maybe a utility IF, maybe a second tier catcher.

Its shaping up to be a boring hot stove season.

Edmundo - That is still assuming that all of the Phils starters (Hamels, Myers, Blanton, Moyer) all stay healthy and effective. That likely isn't the case but agreed for a change the Phils actually do have some starting pitching alternatives going into spring training.

From a couple of threads back:

"When you hear the Phillies mentioned in the Matt Holliday & Garrett Atkins sweepstakes, it's because someone in the FO told this to the press."

Not necessarily. Agents are sometimes the sources on trade rumors, particularly when one team or another is "showing interest" in someone.

Jody Mac was talking about that the other day. He said, in his/father's experience, a HUGE amount of rumors are the reporters reading into things that aren't even close to seriously being considered. "X will be a good fit in Philly", doesn't mean "X is talking to Phillies GM Amaro".

MG, the "healthy" is always at issue, you're right, nothing is guaranteed there. 3 injuries later and we're watching Les Walrond or his doppleganger making key starts.
I think that there will be enough effectiveness/limited uneffectiveness with the 3 of them that their combined value will be solid.
Injuries withstanding. :)

Usually I don't get too wrapped up in the whole sentimental "we need to bring this guy back" movements but I would be diasspointed to see Moyer in another uniform next year.

Frankly too bad Moyer didn't get a chance to send more of his career in Philly because he would have gone down as a legend in this team due to his effort (give it all out on the field and always in excellent shape) and his attitude (takes personal responsbility and is very low-key.)

Damn it. Pete Orr really would have re-energized this fan base.

JW: so true - as long as the Nats, Marlins, etc. exist, Jamie Moyer will be an above average regular season starter.

The majority of the majors is filled with mediocre hitters who thrive on looking for fastballs in fastball counts, and swing for the fences more often than not. And the number of those players are increasing every year, as the obsession with power continues to overshadow plate discipline in young players.

Moyer will eat these players alive, until he probably is 50 and he knows it. Thats why Moyer is great as a regular season pitcher. If/when you reach the postseason and face the cream of the crop, thats when you hope the rest of your rotiation steps up, just as they did in 2008.

Here's my minority view that I've stated before. Moyer's a great guy and had an incredible year. But sentimentality has no place in personnel decisions. The odds of Moyer repeating his 2008 season are slim and none. The odds of his losing it completely or having a serious injury are not insubstantial. And the odds of his being no better than the "good" version of Kyle Kendrick are extremely high. Much is made of all the teaching he does to our younger pitchers and, while I don't doubt that's true, attempting to assign a value to it is even more speculative than attempting to calculate how many runs Pedro Feliz's defense saves us as compared to Greg Dobbs.

Resigning Moyer means our starting rotation is set with 1 ace, 3 back-end starters, and Myers, who fits into his own special category for which I don't have a ready description. I don't see that rotation being good enough.

I was lamenting the lost opportunity to acquire Nick Swisher. Then I saw his salary - he's owed $22MM over the next three years. That's too much. He had an off year in 2008 and should perform better going forward...but still...

BAP - It likely is going to be around league average again which is ok. The real issue is the bullpen going to be as "solid" as last year. That is the real area of concern and likely that a few guys (Lidge, Condrey, Durbin) don't pitch as well/nearly as well. Plus, there isn't a ton of depth here either or guys ready to emerge to fill some of those slots.

One of Arbuckle's biggest failures was an ability to draft/develop pitchers that the Phils could use to round out the pen. Last year the Phils developed who stuck in the pen were Geary & Condrey.

Ah... to be called a blind optimist by bap. I supppose... when compared to bap... most fans are blind optimists :-)

bap, like many, seem to confuse spending money with actual success. Just ask the Yankees how much success their record payrolls have provided. Just as the Mets how well their payroll has done the past two seasons.

What bap fails to recognize is that the Phils proved, as have many other teams in recent history, that it's about spending smarter... not spending more.

It's amusing to see him rail on the Phils for not signing anyone even though the offseason has just started... while also awarding the Mets multiple high-profile free agents, even though the offseason has just started.

As I've been labeled a blind-optimist, bap's post wins for most fatalistic of the day. The woe is me attitude is laughable, especially on the heels of a World F-in Championship.

Let's let things play out before we declare the Ruben Amaro era complete failure. 2008 was quite a "I told you so" season for us blind optimists. Not so much for the fatalists.

BAP, I think you somewhat undervalue Blanton. The average ERA+ for starters is 95. That roughly equates to an average #3 as having a 95. Blanton is higher than that career-wise (101, maybe?), so that puts him in the "solid-to-good 3" range.
Moyer could fall off of a cliff -- for him, it would almost have to be that his control deserts him. It will happen but there were no bad signs in 2008. If we get Moyer.2007 or slightly worse, sure, things won't be so rosy. But with the contracts and budget, he's a pretty good signing with perhaps, more than usual risk.

CJ - This team played very well for a 4-week stretch and won a World Series. It was a great story/lots of fun but BAP makes a valid point that with losing Burrell and not adequatley replacing him it likely puts this team in the "playoff contender" category with 86-88 wins.

Now maybe they overacheive slightly and wind up winding 90-92 games again to make the playoffs but in most years since the wildcard was introduced in 1995, if you only win 87-88 games you are home come Oct. 1.

I want to bring back Moyer but hope we don't go a guaranteed two years with him.

Also, with the crazy revenue they pulled in from the 3.5 million fans that showed up during the season, as well as the revenue that comes with winning the championship, AND THEN finding out they will be raising ticket prices next year.. the excuses for not bumping the payroll up another 15-20 mil are running out. I'm not asking them to go crazy and commit to that type of payroll for the next 4-5 years by chasing Sabathia or someone like that, but resigning Moyer and Burrell fits perfectly with the idea of a short term payroll uptick based on the financial success that came from last season.

Where's this talk coming from about getting a veteran backstop? Ruiz is the starter, whether you like it or not, Coste is a damn fine backup, Marson will be ready to start within a year likely, and Jaramillo is still waiting at Triple A (although he's likely no more than a backup himself). One thing the Phils do have is catching depth, no need to add a Paul Bako or Javier Valentine or anyone of that ilk.

Well I would have to do some math but it looks like Phils' raised ticket prices about 10-15% this year depending upon the seat.

They are taking full-advantage of the World Series win to squeeze out the profit margin but in an economy that is going to be in the crapper for 2009 this is a kind of an FU to fans. I still bet walk-up ticket sales are down though as unemployment hits at least 8-9% by next summer.

Philly budget is in really bad shape and Nutter is already going to the Treasury seeking money from TARP. At least the Phils' management is getting theirs and lately that is what it is all about.

"Philadelphia Phillies Raise Ticket Prices For 2009
PHILADELPHIA (AP) ― The Philadelphia Phillies are raising ticket prices next year.

Fresh off their 2008 World Series win, the Phils say they'll boost the price of most tickets by $2 or $3 in 2009.

The really premium seats, the 100-level infield seats, will cost $6 to $50 more.

Phillies ticket manager John Weber tells the Philadelphia Daily News that season ticketholders should be receiving their invoices by the middle of next week. Prices range from just over $1,300 to $4,100."

By the way, I keep reading various reports that the Phils may be bringing Tom Gordon back on a minor league deal. Not sure what to think about that, but it is intriguing if nonguaranteed.

I wonder if Hank Steinbrenners' early season comments about wanting Mussina to be more like Jaime Moyer, has the Phillies thinking the Yankees could make an offer to him... Maybe thats the reason they are trying to sign him so early... Moyer's value may be higher than most fans think.

CJ: I know the off-season has just started. I'm just reading the rumor wires, but surely these rumors are coming from somewhere. Besides, everything about the teams' recent past tells us that the Mets will be active & spend lots of money & the Phillies won't.

I DO recognize that spending smarter can trump spending more. I acknowledged in my post that the reason the Phillies have beaten out the Mets is because they spent smarter.

What you fail to recognize, however, is that, if you want a big bat to replace Burrell, you're a hell of a lot more likely to find one by spending $20M on Manny Ramirez than by spending $500,000 on some journeyman or cast-off player and hoping you get lucky. It's funny that you should use the Yankeees as the example to prove your point. Seems to me that 13 straight playoff appearances & 4 World Series titles is a pretty strong indication that, if you grossly outspend all the competition, it's very tough to fail.

MG: I'm shocked, SHOCKED, to see you jump on the fatalistic bandwagon! ;-)

You're right... the Phils weren't the better team. They just happened to get hot at the right time. Sorry, that's just what the fatalists believe. This team NEVER put it all together and still won the World Series. They are a great team, whether some want to believe it or not.

I'm not discounting bap's concerns. But he takes it a bit further than that. He's already declaring this upcoming season a loss because he apparently has a crystal ball telling him how this offseason will pan out.

Those who were so wrong about the 2008 team should probably avoid these kind of crazy predictions on the first full day of free agency. All I'm preaching is a little patience. There will be plenty of time to belly-ache over actualy moves the team makes. Why bother belly-aching over your own predictions?

Also, I don't buy this idea that Moyer can pitch til he's 50 because he's such a smart pitcher. Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine were incredibly smart pitchers too. Eventually father time catches up with you. Moyer has cheated biology longer than just about anyone, but to bet on him to cheat it again is just foolish when there are other options out there.

bap: The Yankees had one of the highest payroll in baseball history last year... and missed the playoffs.

They haven't won a World Series since 2000 despite having the highest payroll in baseball every year since then.

Teams that have a World Series since then:
Philadelphia, Boston, St. Louis, Chicago WS, Florida, Anaheim and Arizona.

The Yankees have spent more than $175M each of the last five years and they don't even have a World Series appearance to show for it, let alone a World F-in Championship.

So you tell me if money buys happiness.

bap: The greatest indictor of success for a baseball player is the previous year's success.

But, you're right... why don't the Phils just sign CC, Lowe and Manny and win the next 5 World Series!?!?!

Carson - You're right - the Phils will probably not pursue a catcher. But it is not outrageous to concur with some or all of the following statements:
* Ruiz is below average
* Coste is done
* Marson is not quite ready
* Jamarillo will never quite be ready

If the Phils FO agree with even one of these statements, then acquiring a catcher is a possibility.

Ugh, it's depressing to read the "lost Burrell and not replacing him" posts have begun.

1. Burrell is still available.
2. They haven't brought in his replacement yet. Relax.

Coste: I think he's "toast" with this team. Good story while it lasted, but I wouldn't be surprised if they bring a veteran in, so Marson can play full time in AAA.

(remove "read" and insert "see" above)

The doom and gloom that some guys have at the thought of losing Pat Burrell amuses me. Pat Burrell isnt an all-star. He can be replaced by a half decent platoon... And before one of his groupies bring up his ops, don't give me that. I don't need my #5 hitter trying to get walks, while not being able to run the bases... Werth will bat 5th and a warm body and Dobbs will replace Burrell.

CJ: Agreed. This blog is and always will be all about spirited debate about what is best for the team, but the "woe is me" attitude is ridiculous considering the Phillies just accomplished the one goal that being a fan is all about.. winning a championship.

I was checking out Charlie Manuel's managing career and in the 7 seasons he's managed in the Majors (4 with Philly, 3 with Cleveland) he has a 574-484 record (.543 winning %) and has finished 1st 3 times, 2nd 3 times, and 3rd once. Pretty damn good.

CJ - How is saying this team will be a "playoff contender" fatalistic?

mikes77phillies: Well, you're wrong in so many ways, but it's been talked about 100 times before.

Oh... and as you're platooning Dobbs in LF, are you starting Feliz against RHP every day?

MG: You said losing Burrell and not adequately replacing him (whatever that means) makes the Phils a 86-88 win team and that teams that win 88 games or fewer are home on Oct. 1st.

But other than that, you're a fountain of optimism about the Phils in 2009!!

GM-Carson: Manuel is a product of awesome talent overcoming his obvious inability to make in-game decisions. Don't start citing long-term success as a way of changing that narrative. Many on this list wouldn't be able to handle it!

Carson - Charlie's a genius what'd you expect?

re Ticket prices: if you're shocked and apalled that tickets are going up $2-$3 then you need to revaluate your views on life and the world we live in. We like to make comments on how stupid management is for some of their decision, but if they DIDNT raise prices they'd be a lot more stupid than anyone has ever thought.

Yes I'd like to pay less for a ticket, but we all knew it was happening.

Dont be surprised if your Tony Luke's cheesesteak is up another 25¢ too.

CJ: You say "Manuel is a product of awesome talent overcoming his obvious inability to make in-game decisions."

I'm pretty sure the Phils were said to be underdogs on paper against prtty much all of the teams in the playoffs. So I think there is more to ust awesome talent. And as Carson stated - its for his career not just last year.

He made so many moves this year that put the Phils over top, that a sabermetric whiz or beerleaguer expert would not have.

Ah, I forgot to include Brian G. when I was listing the blind optimists.

Look here's the deal. I never said that money guarantees success, let alone a World Series title. Nor did I say that a lack of spending guarantees failure. I DID say that a team which spends 40% more than its competitors has a huge advantage on a year-to-year basis. The Yankees are Exhibit A to prove my point. They made the playoffs 13 years in a row (what happens after the playoffs start is largely a matter of who gets hot at the right time). The Mets, in their own way, are an even better example. As has been pointed out on this blog repeatedly, Omar Minaya's personnel decisions have not exactly been brilliant. Yet the Mets have still been good enough to win the division going away in 2006 and just missed in 2007 and 2008. Their spending alone is what has kept them in contention, and it probably always will.

thephaitful: You need to get your sarcasm meter fixed :-)

bap: Well, if just being in playoff contention is enough for you (as pointed out in your Mets example), then you are obviously happy with the Phillies over the last 5 years.

Here's my point... why don't you wait to see what "terrible" moves the Phillies make before belly-aching about them. Why is patience such a bad thing?

UC finished 2nd in the NL manager of the year voting. Thus logically he is currently the 2nd best manager in all of the NL. Right?

Randy Miller on 610. Quick hits:

*Phils talking with Moyer. SOME hesitation about multi-year deal.

*Phils still considering Burrell, but hoping to get a discount.

*Baldelli is not likely. Rays still want him.

*Instead, look for Rivera or Kapler to be RH bat targeted.

*Stairs will get some LF ABs.

*Wildcard-If Moyer/Burrell both are gone, they could go for a big $ free agent.

*Brocail is being considered.

*Jimy Williams wanted too much money to come back. May be positioning himself for Braves job.

*Utley was hurt (hip). Will be fine.

*Phils unsure about Myers long time, but winning the WS has really changed him (whatever that means).

Bed Beard: Pretty standard news there. The LF situation will come down to what is offered to Burrell in free agency. Newsday predicts he'll go to Toronto for three years and $35M. If that's where the market drops to, I gotta imagine the Phils getting back involved.

I do think it's amusing, however, that a player savaged on this board for the last few years is now the difference between competing and not competing in 2009.

Randy Miller was just on WIP. He seems to have a pretty good pipeline to the FO.
Here are the hilites of what he said.
* Phils will probably not pursue a catcher. They would like Marson to stay in AAA. Miller expects Ruiz to have a better offensive year.
* Moyer is likely to be signed
* Burrell will only be signed if there is a huge hometown discount. Stairs platooning with a cheap RH OF bat is most likely.
* For bullpen arms, Phils are only looking at middle inning relievers.
* Phils will talk to UC re extension.
* Jimy Williams left because he asked for too much money.
* Long term contracts will be discussed with Howard, Hamels, etc., but it is likely that the asking prices will be too much for the Phils - especially in Howard's case.

No surprises is these comments.

In other news, CJ Henry will play for the Memphis basketball team this year.

Yes that CJ Henry

sorry for the repeat - Bed Beard was quicker than me.....

Beat you to it Bonehead. Forgot about the Ruiz item, though.

Miller said his mom was sick all last season(still?) and his head wasn't there. Was always on the phone with her and was finding it hard to concentrate. Wasn't the same guy.

CJ: Does that mean I'm allowed to say I-told-you-so about the Phillies making thr playoffs thru winning the division but not the wild card?

BB's post sounds pretty much like the standard Phillies offseason line: yeah, we might kick the tires on some good players, but don't count on it. instead we'll make a big stack of retreads, aging vets, and long shots and hope they pan out.

fortunately I am still safely in my World Series afterglow period and don't actually care that much that the next season is probably going to be a big disappointment.

In Beerleaguer World, Feliz is better than Atkins and Dye is better than Burrell.

I picture CJ wearing big Horace Grant-style Rec Specs when he plays basketball.

As usual, Jason is on the money about Moyer. Posters who want to learn a thing or two should assume that Jason is always right.

clout: When has anything ever stopped you from saying "I told you so." ;-)

ae: Your comment at the top of this page was out of context for me, so I had to back up to find out you were talking about CJ Henry and not me.

Another safe assumption for you newbies: mikes77 is almost always wrong.

CJ Henry!!! Slowly, I turned.....

Marson to AAA doesn't make sense to me. The guy just experienced the rush of a World Series run, and now they want him taking busses to Scranton. That could dampen a guys killer instinct. Let him learn the staff of the big club, while catching twice a week. If he does well, and Ruiz does poorly - maybe he can steal the job.

If yo consider "fatalistic" then fine. I still think the Phils even if they don't resign Burrell can make the playoffs again but it is less likely.

People seem to act like this team has some kind of dramatic upside potential. They are what they have been the last few years - a good, very good team that will be very viable playoff contender. This wasn't some team that steamrolled through the regular season with 97 or 98 wins or is planning on dramatically upgrading their roster via FA/trade it appears.

CJ: As we all know, the best team in baseball doesn't always win the World Series. But the don't give trophies for Best Team. IMHO, the 1977 Phillies are the best team in franchise history. Comfortably better than the 1980 team.

When you take defense into consideration, Dye and Burrell are pretty close in value. Dye has been more erratic and has had some injury history.

Has a good player (Dye) ever been traded for more crap? (Courtesy of BaseballReference)

March 27, 1997: Traded by the Atlanta Braves with Jamie Walker to the Kansas City Royals for Keith Lockhart and Michael Tucker.

July 25, 2001: Traded by the Kansas City Royals to the Colorado Rockies for Neifi Perez.

July 25, 2001: Traded by the Colorado Rockies to the Oakland Athletics for Todd Belitz, Mario Encarnacion, and Jose Ortiz.

Dye's comps, courtesy of BaseballReference again. The comps are not the end-all and be-all but they can be fun. The numbers represent how closely they match, with 1000 being the top of the scale.

Tim Salmon (950)
David Justice (936)
Carlos Lee (934)
Ryan Klesko (932)
Raul Mondesi (931)
Reggie Sanders (928)
Rudy York (928)
George Bell (922)
Greg Luzinski (919)
Jeromy Burnitz (918)

For Grins, Pat Burrell's comps from the same source:
Tony Clark (927)
Jesse Barfield (923)
Matt Stairs (923)
Bob Allison (916)
Danny Tartabull (915)
Gus Zernial (912)
Hank Sauer (911)
Geoff Jenkins (908)
Tony Armas (904)
Dean Palmer (902)

Just to make my point perfectly clear: The goal is not to be the Best Team. It is to win the World Series. Obviously if you're the best team, you have a leg up.

I'd say a World Series win is pretty dramatic upside.

Edmundo: Dye is 4 years older than Burrell. We can certainly debate whether Dye at his peak is better than Burrell at his peak but I'd love to see you try to defend your premise that Dye today is better than Burrell.

ah yes, that 1977 team. Loved that team.
Agree that they were the franchise's best ever.
They, also, IMO, were MLB's best team that year.

"Posters who want to learn a thing or two should assume that Jason is always right."

Can someone please forward this to my wife, family, coworkers, superiors, etc.

On the very good Blanton thread from yesterday, I agree with the optimists who say the Blanton trade was a good one. Regardless of what Carrasco and Outman do, the Blanton trade was worth it.

That is a very different question from this: Who got the better of the trade? See John Smoltz for a great example of a Blanton-type trade.

Teams don't always win championships with their "best" team. The 2004 and 2005 Cardinals were infinitely better than the 2006 squad that won it all. The championship team had a weaker record than the Phillies, who didn't make the playoffs. In fact, the 2005 team was probably better than the 2004 who at least made the Series.

"I'd love to see you try to defend your premise that Dye today is better than Burrell."

You sure like to put words in people's mouths. Point to where I said that.

I know that Dye is older but I don't want either guy long term. I'd be happy with Burrell back; I'd be happy with Dye if Burrell wants too much.

"I'd say a World Series win is pretty dramatic upside."

I think MG means upside in the sense of regular season win totals, and I tend to agree with him. I don't think we can expect improvements from the core players that would elevate the team into the 95+ win range--that is, make the team a playoff lock. As situated the team is merely a contender and with ill luck and good competition could find itself in second or third and sitting at home come Oct.

BTW, I have no problem at all with a GM whose goal is to win 88-90 wins a year for as long as possible. It puts you in a position to catch lightning in a bottle as the Phils did this year. But that plan won't work unless you scout smart and keep your best kids, while dealing the lesser ones (Maloney, Costanzo etc.)

You have to love the anecdote in this story about Victorino. I'm not sure what his plan was if the Phils didn't win Game 5...

Edmundo: Your statements are pretty fuzzy. You implied you thought Dye was better than Burrell right now. If you think Burrell is better, come out and say it. If you don't, man up.

And it's getting to the playoffs that's key, obviously, because if you're a 89-93 win team which happens to be playing well towards seasons end than reaching the World Series becomes a real possibility.

If the best that Burrell gets offered is the $35M for 3 yrs from Toronto, then he will be a Phillie next season.

The Phils had a damn good team this year, with some guys doing better than expected, and other guys who still could have been better (Utley with his injury, for example).

I'm putting words in your mouth, but I feel like there's a number of posters who are basically saying last year was luck so their pessmistic arguments can have some sway.

Perhaps 2 weeks was too long for some people, but i'm still feeling good being a World F*****g Champion.

Klaus - Thank you. That is the point I was trying to illustrate. This team isn't going to suddenly turn into a 94 or 95 win team and be guaranteed to make the playoffs.

The last two years they won 89 and 92 games respectively. Due to a slightly weaker NL East, both years it was good enough to win the division and make the plaoyffs.

If you go back and look, most years 92 wins will make the playoffs but 89 wins most years since the wildcard format was introduced in 1995 leaves would leave the Phils home come Oct. 1.

Could this team win 92 games again next year? Yeah sure but they easily could skip a bit and win 87-88 games which likely leaves them a bit short. That was my only point.

Jermaine Dye is a better player than Pat Burrell and it isnt even close. He's a better hitter plain and simple. Plus he makes less money. No pitcher in the league is afraid to pitch around Howard to get to Pat Burrell. Burrell hits .400 one month a season, then hits .200 the rest of the year. And guys want to pay him 40 mil for 3 years... Ridiculous.

Your statements are pretty fuzzy. You implied you thought Dye was better than Burrell right now. If you think Burrell is better, come out and say it.

Close in value means close in value, what's so fuzzy about that? You inferred that I thought Dye was better -- you inferred incorrectly. But don't ever acknowledge that you may have read too quickly or anything.

If you don't, man up.
So this is what it is about for you? I understand now what I'm dealing with.

Clout is on fire today folks.

For those that still want to argue the point hopefully this simple sentence will help you out.

*****Pat Burell is a better option than Jermaine Dye.***** It's not even close.

I'll go one step further. I don't think Dye is a good replacement for Burrell either. I don't think he is necessarily worth what you would have to give up for him. He is much closer to the downside of his career than he is to the frontside. We already have two outfielders like that on the roster- not looking for a third.

Also, if Burrell walks the Phillies will move Werth to left, and sign a Value Village guy to platoon with Jenkins. He is cheap and they don't have to give anything for him. That's the obvious answer.

why would the Phillies move Werth to left and play Jenkins in right? Jenkins is a poor RF and a good LF while Werth is a good RF.

The 80 Phils had a better closer (in the second half of the season) and I think Ruthven was a better #2 than Christenson, but other than that, the 1977 Phillies were a superior team to the 80 Champs.

That's what I thought. Please remember to close your italics if you're going to use them. Or, if you want to emphasize a word, surround it with symbols, like so.

{{{----!!!!CJ HENRY!!!!----}}}

Edmundo: This is what I mean by fuzzy words: "close in value" Does that mean you think Burrell is better but only slightly? Is it because you know you can't defend your opinion? Be specific. Do you believe Burrell better or not? Yes or no will suffice.

This should close it.

wait, no!

mikes77 keeps his record intact I see.

Truth Injection: Dammit, now you've given away the answer!

so Arbuckle is off to Kansas City. good for him, I hope he does well there and turns that franchise around. always liked/felt sorry for the Royals.

"I'm putting words in your mouth, but I feel like there's a number of posters who are basically saying last year was luck so their pessimistic arguments can have some sway."

I agree that the Phillies were/are a good team. Towards the top of the league in a number of important categories. Hardly lucky--in fact, it would have been a serious disappointment had they not made the playoffs. But there are good reasons for thinking that 92 give or take is the ceiling. Which is fine in the sense that 92 in the 2009 NL East will likely get it done, but naturally worrisome in the sense that there isn't a great deal of cushion should the team underperform or experience significant misfortune.

I don't think

I still believe Burrell is the best LF option for the Phils. But they obviously do not or he would have been signed by now. I said yesterday that I see no compromise from the Phils here. And I don't want anyone who's older than Pat coming in.

But what I feared the most is happening. They made a ton of money by winning the WS. But this ownership group will NEVER change its spots. I don''t wnat players who are aging and/or cheap. I want players who can play.

yeah that's it, I don't think...

DPatrone: "I still believe Burrell is the best LF option for the Phils. But they obviously do not or he would have been signed by now."

Wow, that's a bizarre statement. Wouldn't a smart GM wait and see what the market is? Otherwise he ends up bidding against himself, no?

First of all, I apologize for the Italics Problem. I'll stick to quotes. :(

"*****Pat Burell is a better option than Jermaine Dye.***** It's not even close. "

Based on talent and expected value in 2009? That's what I was referring to.

"I don't think he is necessarily worth what you would have to give up for him."

I agree that you don't want to give up very much for Dye.

"He is much closer to the downside of his career than he is to the frontside."
Very true -- it's a matter of what's left in the tank. He had a nice year last year. Burrell could regress very quickly too, but I'm strictly looking for 1-2 years max from either.

clout: I agree... I think the Newsday guy is crazy.

I'll repeat, once again... if the difference between us and another team is just a couple million dollars per year, than Burrell will come home because he'll be getting 5&10 treatment and for a guy like PtB, a FNTC is worth millions.

"This is what I mean by fuzzy words: "close in value" Does that mean you think Burrell is better but only slightly? Is it because you know you can't defend your opinion? Be specific. Do you believe Burrell better or not? Yes or no will suffice."

Why does it matter so much to you? What is the big deal?

Neither of us knows who WILL contribute more next year. That's the fun of it, seeing what unravels during the year.

I keep seeing posters talk about how there's no guarantee that the Phils can get 92 wins with the team as currently constructed. Well... there's no guarantee that a Phils team with CC Sabathia can get 92 wins either.

This team struggled mightily, and uncharacteristicly with the bat, before and after the All-Star break... and they still won 92 games. It's not unreasonable to suggest they could have been 5 wins better... or, with breaks going the other way, 5 wins worse. But that's how baseball works. Signing top free agents guarantees nothing. Spend smart, not lots.

FO and Burrell obviously disagree on what the market is going to be for his services. If they had a similar view, then he would be signed. As it is, we are all hoping the market is low for him and we can match or come close to matching a deal.

Do you think the FO would have signed PTB if he came to them a week ago and said 3 years 40 million gets it done?

"Why don't you wait to see what "terrible" moves the Phillies make before belly-aching about them?"

Because then I wouldn't have anything to complain about for a few more weeks.

bap: Fair enough :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel