Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Baseball America: Phils ink Tracy, Cervenak to deals | Main | Dominican update: Bastardo shines in latest offering »

Friday, November 28, 2008

Comments

Thanks to Clout for doing the legwork on Koplove during the last thread. In its own small way, the Koplove signing is an encouraging sign that perhaps the Phils will have a better crop of invitees to look at now that they're elite.

The WFC Phillies attract the elite. Jason wrote it, it shall be so. Let's see more!

Woohoo! Another coup for Ruben Amaro Jr!!!

Why does it seem that the AAA team is older than the Major league team?

Whoa, it improves the minor league team? Is our goal now to have a great minor league team with only a few young prospects vailable for the majors?

This guy was one of the best ROOGYs to be found in the minors in 08. For the 51s against righties in 08 Koplove had a 1.52 ERA; struck out 22 in 29.2 innings; his GO/A0 was 2.00 and they hit only .187 with one homer against him. Seems like a good guy to have on the mound against a righthanded hitter when Charlie would need a DP or a strike out in the middle innings when the other side is not likely to bring in or does not have a lefthanded bat to face him.

Dull definitely wins the award for Most Quintessential Beerleager Post of the week. At what other website could one expect to learn that the thorougly obscure Mike Koplove is actually the perfect pitcher to bring into the game in the middle innings, against a right-handed batter, when there are fewer than 2 outs, and the opposing manager would likely be discinlined to burn a left-handed bat off his bench?

I read where the Phils have some interest in Vernon Wells? I can't believe that. He has six years and about 122 million left on his contract with a 4th year exit if he so desires. The Phils will never pay that. Nor should they. That's outlandish. He is a good player but not 126 million dollars worth particularly in Philly.

No they will come up with a second tier right handed outfielder to platoon with Jeff Jenkins who could produce Burrell numbers for 7 million. Then they will carry maybe Jeremy Slayden as a bench player. I can't see them spending money for new players when they have so many of their own to take care of.

(Hopefully) Gone are the days of the Randal Simons' and the Antonio Alfonsecas. Even our trash is legitimately another man's treasure these days.

Sam- don't be so quick to dismiss 6-Finger Ant, as he carried the Phils bullpen during times in '07.

Beerleaguer favorite Justin Germano signs with the SoftBank Hawks of Japan.

Just one month ago the Phils resumed World Series Game 5.5 and defeated the Rays to become World F**kin' Champions.

Saw Mike when he was with the Dbacks. A great addition. Rather see $$ go here than 75 m to Lowe or Burnett for 5 years. Lowe is getting old and Burnett is injury prone. Can't imagine why you would give either a 5 year contract.Of course the Phils probably are just blowing their usual smoke with these two.

I agree with jr. Koplove is definitely a better signing that Derek Lowe for 5 years. In fact, I say we sign 25 Mike Koploves. We might not win 40 games but, with payroll under $7.5M, we'll have all kinds of money to spend if we should ever feel like doing so.

BAP: I would argue that jr's post is the quintessential Beerleaguer post. On what other Web site would a poster argue that a fringe Triple A player is a better signing than one of the best pitchers in baseball because he's so much cheaper? Sometimes I think the Buck Brothers post here.

Can someone tell me why we are not going after Kerry Wood?

Dull: I think every team needs a ROOGY who can't get out lefties but is perfect for the middle innings when the other manager won't burn a lefty off the bench, but even better would be a righty who gets out lefties who have no more than gap power in the early innings of a blowout loss against teams that are short on righty hitters who hit righties.

RK: $$$$$$$$$

Joey: I predict Jeremy Slayden gets taken in the Rule 5 draft.

Germano was a soft-tossing back-end of rotation guy who had one decent year with the Padres, but in exchange for him at least we got...um...

RK, we don't need Kerry Wood. Our bullpen is fairly solid, and he would simply be a very expensive fifth wheel.

bap/clout: jr is simply making the case that the Phillies fill in around the edges rather than make the "big splash" that other posters need to feel warm and fuzzy*, but may hamper our ability to keep core guys like Hamels/Howard/Werth/Vic down the road. Probably bc he lives in the real world of limited resources, as opposed to the BL world of dishonest and condescending arguments.

*bc apparently winning the WS wasn't good enough for that

We already have/had Clay Condrey for that role of innings eater. Though I believe he's in arbitration years now so probably isn't worth keeping around.

This makes me miss Swindle all over again.

The Phillies just can't compete with top end organizations like the Milwaukee Brewers when it comes to signing those elite free agents like Swindle.

I don't think we can count on Lidge having another stellar year, Rollins didn't and look what happene to Utley. Nor can we count on Madson, Romero and the others to repeat. I think Wood is cheaper than some others and is a quality pitcher

Brian G: So you agree that you'd "Rather see $$ go here than 75 m to Lowe or Burnett for 5 years."

Interesting.

Brian G: Since you're so interested in helping the Phillies budget, what should their payroll be for 2009?

In Brian G's world, winning the WS means it's OK if we have to wait another 28 years. You shouldn't want the team to improve.

clout: You're becoming less efficient. It took you three posts to prove my point for me instead of just one.

RK: You think Kerry Wood and his injuries in 4 of the last 5 years is more of a sure thing than the bullpen parts we have? That's bold.

clout: I know you're prone to overstating other's arguments... but there is a middle ground between overspending for questionable free agents and no spending anything at all.

CJ: I agree. What I don't get is how Brian G and jr can say that signing Koplove is better than signing Lowe.

clout, didn't the Phillies leave Justin Germano off their 40 man roster during spring training and the San Itary Pads picked him off waivers for...nothing??

Bailey wrote: "Why does it seem that the AAA team is older than the Major league team?"

I think one of baseball's dirty little secrets is that all the good players are at AA. The AAA is where you park over age fringe players.

LF: That's correct. The Phils got zero in return.

It's funny to me how many of the posters who believe it would be too risky to give a 5-year deal to AJ Burnett or Derek Lowe are the very same posters who believe it's absolutely imperative to bring back 46-year old Jamie Moyer even if it means giving him a 2 or 3-year contract.

BAP, sounds like solid logic to me.

Sounds logical to me. I mean I can think of tons of pitchers who had great seasons at age 46 and 47.

Satchel Paige
Phil Niekro
Hoyt Wilhelm
Nolan Ryan
Charlie Hough

Yeah, that's about it. Unless anyone else can think of a late 40's pitcher. I don't even want to give Moyer a 2 year deal but would do so on the understanding that the Phillies would likely be paying for a very expensive pitching coach in that 2nd year of the deal.

Jack Quinn is another late 40's pitcher. One thing I'm having trouble finding is a 46 year old pitcher who pitched over 100 innings in that season...

Paige, Hough, and Niekro all did but that's about it. There really are no comparables when it comes to age 47 pitchers having a good year. The odds are heavily stacked against Moyer even repeating his Age 45 performance in 09. Personally I dont think its gonna happen...but you can chalk me up as a pessimist.

BAP: IMO the posters are hesitant about Lowe and Burnett due to the overall cost of the contract. I believe their thinking is that if Moyer proves to be a bad signing, his contract would at least be small enough (in comparison to what AJ or Lowe would cost) that the Phils wouldn't be hamstrung by the deal. If either Lowe or Burnett didn't work out it would be an albatross type contract for this team and would hinder their ability to make future moves. This is mostly due to the FO unwillingness to eat money (Eaton) or spend more money if prior moves don't work out.

I share your opinion about Moyer. I wouldn't give him anymore than a year. I also share the other posters hesitation about giving Burnett or Lowe 4-5 years. I could be talked into 4 years, but not 5. That's alot of dollars and years to be putting into a pitcher with an injury history (Burnett) and one that would be almost 40 by the end of the deal. Of the two I would take Lowe, groundball pitchers fit our park well.

I'd rather give Moyer's money to Derek Lowe personally. Its debatable whether or not Lowe will have the better 2009 season but the odds greatly increase that he'd have the better 2010 and 2011 seasons.

Postscript: I wouldn't give either AJ or Lowe a 5 year deal and I doubt any other teams will either...especially AJ.

NEPP: What do you think of Lowe or Burnett?
BTW, excellent research on the ancient pitchers, I have never heard the name Jack Quinn.

NEPP: You beat me to it.

Not like they would ever spend the dollars to get either guy anyway.

I think Lowe will pitch more innings in the next 4 seasons than AJ Burnett. I also think he'll win more games.

Given Lowe's age & Burnett's injury history, a 5-year deal for either of these guys is nuts. But just because their agents are asking for 5 years does not mean they're going to get it. The only team I could imagine giving 5 years to Derek Lowe would be the Yankees – and that’s only because Hank Steinbrenner is so desperate to build an instant winner that he might be willing to eat about 2 to 3 years of a $15M per year contract to get 2 to 3 years of productive starting pitching. But unless the Yankees are willing to pony up a 5-year deal to get Lowe, I would be dumbfounded if anyone else did. Burnett is younger and could plausibly get a 5-year deal somewhere but, again, I’d say the odds are somewhat against it.

If the Phillies were to make a serious 3-year offer on Lowe or Burnett, but lose out because some other team offers 5 years, then so be it. But I reserve the right to be pissed if either guy ends up signing somewhere on a 3-year deal – as I believe at least one of them probably will. On a 3-year deal, either Lowe or Burnett would be much better risks than even a one-year deal for 46-year old Jamie Moyer.

Given Lowe's age & Burnett's injury history, a 5-year deal for either of these guys is nuts. If someone wants to offer up such a deal, I would accept the fact that we lose out. But just because their agents are asking for 5 years does not mean they're going to get it. The only team I could imagine giving 5 years to Derek Lowe would be the Yankees – and that’s only because Hank Steinbrenner is so desperate to build an instant winner that he might be willing to eat about 2 to 3 years of a $15M per year contract to get 2 to 3 years of productive starting pitching. But unless the Yankees are willing to pony up a 5-year deal to get Lowe, I would be dumbfounded if anyone else did. Burnett is younger and could plausibly get a 5-year deal somewhere but, again, I’d say the odds are somewhat against it.

The bottom line is that just because these guys are asking for 5 years does not mean they’re going to get it. If the Phillies were to make a serious 3-year offer, but lose out because some other team offers 5 years, then so be it. But I reserve the right to be pissed if either guy ends up signing somewhere on a 3-year deal – as I believe at least one of them probably will. On a 3-year deal, either Lowe or Burnett would be much better risks than even a one-year deal for 46-year old Jamie Moyer.

Sorry for the double post.

On NEPP's list, he identifies 6 pitchers -- 4 starters & 2 relievers -- who had "great seasons" at age 46. But of the 4 starters, none had "great seasons" by any criterion & 2 were downright terrible.

Quinn pitched in the 1920s, an era of baseball so different from today's game that comparisons are virtually useless. Nonetheless, it's worth noting that, while he still managed to win 18 games at age 46, his ERA+ dropped by 31 points from the previous season -- from 138 to 107.

Nolan Ryan pitched 157.1 innings at age 45 and had a 103 ERA+. At age 46, he managed only 66.1 innings & had an ERA+ of 85. After that, he retired.

At 45, Charlie Hough pitched 204 innings and had a 100 ERA+. At 46, he pitched 113.2 and had an ERA+ of 84. After that, he retired.

Even Phil Niekro -- the best late 40s starter in modern times -- had a big drop-off in ERA+ (from 123 to 98) between his age 45 season and his age 46 season. Niekro's age 45 season was very similar to Moyer's and his age 46 season probably represents the best case scenario for Moyer -- and probably the most likely one, as well.

BAP - I agree with you. I thought reality was going to catch up with Moyer this year. Figure it has to be at least 50/50 that he breaks down/struggles next year.

I wouldn't mind the Phils bringing back Moyer on a 2-yr deal if they structured it so that he had a decent base next year (say $5-$6M with incentive potential up to $7M or so) and a 2-yr with a low-base ($2M with a ton of upside potential).

Peter Gammons is saying the Mets might get K-Rod now since there are no other takers and they can get away with offering him 3 years. For some reason I'm not worried or scared of K-Rod. I think the Angels used him up last year.

I wouldn't say I'm scared of K-Rod either, but if the Mets did sign him there's no denying that makes them a much stronger team heading into '09.

Based on Philadelphia's feelings, in general, about law enforcement, I would say this in an appropriate acquisition. We can always use a little more Koplove.

Actually, b-a-p, if I were to try to make the quintessential BL post on a thread about Koplove it might go like this:


Koplove???

Off-season=Over

-----------------------------

Posted by: THe DUde

{Disclaimer: I am not changing my handle, nor, actually using someone else's, but simply indicating that that particular handle affixed to above lampoon post is vital to it's minimal humor.}

Just read that the Phils will offer Moyer arbitration but likely not Burrell. So it appears not only will Burrell not be returning, but we also will not be getting any draft picks for him either like we all had hoped for. Very discouraging...

Andy - good stuff!

Carson: I really hope that's not true. It would be the stupidest possible decision: It would make Burrell more attractive to other teams and it would cost the Phils 2 1st round draft picks. All to save $18M? What do they think they can get for that $18M that would both replace Burrell and improve the team elsewhere? Kevin Mench and Nick Punto?

Todd Zolecki tells me that "It is less likely that he Phillies will offer Burrell arbitration, especially if they can find a better player in left field (they already have expressed interest in free agents Raul Ibanez and Rocco Baldelli)."

More Zolecki: "The risk in offering arbitration to Burrell, who is also a Type A free agent, is that if he accepted he would be signed for 2009 and likely would receive a raise from the 14 million he made this year."

From this we can gather two things: 1) that Ibanez and Baldelli are superior players to Burrell; and 2) that the worst possible outcome to the process is Burrell accepting arbitration.

This raises a few questions. Namely, does Zolecki actually believe that, and if he doesn't, what is his editorial responsibility? (Or, if he does, why is he an employed baseball writer?) Is he purely a stenographer? If the Phillies FO told Zolecki that the team considered TJ Bohn a better player than Burrell, is Zolecki obliged to print it as though it were so? If the FO told Zolecki that the best possible outcome to the Burrell situation would be Burrell's declining arbitration, as it would allow the Phillies to employ a two man outfield, is Zolecki permitted to register any kind of incredulity at all? Does Zolecki have a duty to the reader or is his paramount obligation to be "unbiased" or whatever?

If the Phillies do not offer Burrell arbitration, it doesn't seem like a very good decision on the surface. The assumption seems to be that Burrell will sign as a FA with someone and the Phillies then get 2 draft picks. IF they don't offer arbitration, they get nothing when he walks. True enough, if he walks.

There are other scenarios that might not make arbitration such a good strategy from the FO point of view.

There are two key questions to ask: how much would Burrell get in arbitration? How high/low is demand for PB on the FA market?

If you were an arbitrator, how much would you consider Burrell to be worth? For example, if PB asks for $18 mil and the Phillies offered $13m, who wins?

Whatever value they feel the arbitrator will attach to PB is the key to the Phillies' decision-making here. As far as I know (and I may be wrong on this) arbitrators do not consider the current state of the FA market when choosing which offer to award. They weigh the two choices based on history, previous salary, rankings and statistics, etc.

If the FA market is soft, PB could very well accept arbitration, and the Phillies might end up paying more than market price for him. While the team could still negotiate with PB even after offering arbitration, Burrell would have no reason to do so if he thought he'd get more from an arbitrator than from the Phillies (unless the Phillies or someone else offer multiple years).
If the Phillies thought demand was low, and they didn't offer arbitration, they could perhaps still re-sign PB at a lower price, gambling that other teams were not very interested. Or they might be able to replace his production for equal or less $$ in a soft FA market. PB accepting arbitration kills any chance of that unless the Phillies significantly increase their overall payroll, or not sign some other players.

If demand is high, then the Phillies offer arbitration and not offer PB any meaningful contract, assuming they don't want to re-sign him for more than $X dollars. They then get their draft picks when he departs.

So it would seem the Phillies are betting there's not much demand out there for PB, and they can sign him or an equivalent replacement for less than what an arbitrator would cost them.

If they're wrong, they lose two draft picks (and save the money). If they're right, they get PB or an equivalent player at a better price.

If you are the arbitrator, what value do you place on PB?

I should note that I think this type of thinking only works if the Phillies already have PB's replacement identified or feel confident they can sign PB for less. As was pointed out, sitting there with a pile of $$ and no LF doesn't do you much good.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG