Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Report: Phillies throw hat in ring for Padres' Peavy | Main | Beerleaguer Vegas VIP lounge open for speculation »

Monday, December 08, 2008

Comments

Clout: Just a repeat from last thread.
1. I don't want Moyer for $10 mil. 1/$8 mil or take a hike.
2. I was stating I thought Happ's trade value would be higher. I guess I was wrong. Wins is the bottom line. The only line.

I really, really do hope that DeRosa comes back here, but I just don't think it will happen.

Kid C asked whether I thought Happ & Coste for Marquis & Cedeno makes the Phillies better. I do, for 2009. Again, Marquis was 11-9, 4.53 in 167 IP last year and 12-9, 4.60 in 192 IP in 2007. Those are not bad numbers for a rotation back-ender. I am not sure that Happ could deliver those numbers at CBP (although he very well could at Petco) in his first full year in the rotation.

Cedeno is a very good fielder, still only 25 years old and a solid upgrade over Bruntlett. He actually does have some upside although I don't ever see him being an everyday player.

I love Moyer and was all for bringing him back. But not for $10 mil/year and not for 2 years. It would suck to see him retire in another uni, but that might be the the way it has to be.

Hit post to soon.
3. I think Marquis sucks at any price.

Now I'm done.

Cubs are going to have a sick pitching staff.

If the Cubs are waiting for New owner before making the deal, I can not see the Phils waiting to make any kind of trade with Cubs.

To seal that deal, though, I'd insist the Cubs take Eaton.

Marquis' been a pretty steady back-end guy the last two seasons. I have a pretty negative impression of him so I needed to look it up, but it's true. Marquis, 30 and due $9.8M, is a perfectly fine alternative to Moyer, 46 and seeking $10M.

Fair points, clout...I do worry about the additional salary limiting the Phils even more this offseason.

Also, from the last thread: why would the Phils take on such a ridiculous salary for an average pitcher?

Plus, Cedeno types are not quite a dime a dozen, but fairly close. Unless DeRosa is involved, this trade is insane.

Von: Again, Marquis was 11-9, 4.53 in 167 IP last year and 12-9, 4.60 in 192 IP in 2007.

If that "sucks" in your word, then what does this line do for you: 10-13, 4.55 in 190 IP?

pblunts: If Cedeno types are a dime a dozen why is Bruntlett the Phillies utility infielder?

Marquis ERA last three years 6.02, 4.53, 4.60. ERA+ 74, 101, 99. WHIP: 1.52, 1.38, 1.44. Lots of IP: 194, 191, 167. He does take the ball.

Marquis, 30 and due $9.8M, is a perfectly fine alternative to Moyer, 46 and seeking $10M.

But getting Moyer is not costing Phils any players. I hate to see Happ go. I myself think this kid will turnout to be one heck of a pitcher

Clout: I give. Who are those numbers for?

More powerful than a speeding locomotive; able to leap the Ben Franklin Bridge in a single bound; Look in the Phillies starting rotation -- It's a bird, it's a plane, it's.. Jason Marquis!

Von: Brett Myers

fljerry: I like Happ too. I adore his curveball. But he's unproven and finesse lefties have little margin for error.

Don't forget last year at this time we all loved Michael Bourn too.

Clout: You must have missed me posting how dissapointing I thought Brett Myers was a few threads ago. Both this year and for his career overall. I don't believe he is a #2 starter. In all honesty I think he's borderline as a #3. Especially with numbers like those you just posted.

clout, if Cedeno is a solid upgrade over Bruntlett, then it must be defensively.

In comparing their stats, he only hits for slightly more power, doesn't get on base as much, has a worse SB/CS %, and strikes out slightly more.

The only advantage offensively he seems to have is that eh is younger and could ostensibly improve.


So, the Phillies, for all their talk of budget constraints, would essentially be giving up Happ for Marquis and his $9MM salary (I'm not sure I'd do that), and Coste for Cedeno (a backup catcher for a backup infielder, which I'd probably do if I thought it made my team better).


If you ask me, it's really more a sideways move than a move forward.

Clout- I give up, please enlighten me as to how this would deal makes sense-Marquis' averaage stats notwithstanding- even if Cedeno is an upgrade over Bruntlett.

We got Brad Lidge for Bourn. I know....Ed Wade.

Good news: The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that the Padres have looked into getting Mark DeRosa from the Cubs to give to the Phillies in a Jake Peavy deal.

If this is true, it is interesting to see them cutting bait with the Geezer so soon. Young Amaro evidently has a ruthless streak. I guess the FO choked on that 2nd (or 3rd) year, as would I.

Clout
Weitzel says Marquis is better bargain than Moyer for the money. Which I agree, but losing Happ to get Marquis I do not agree. We could have both Moyer and Happ for alittle bit more money.

pblunts: Who are the 4th and 5th starters for the Phillies in 2009?

fjerry: True, but when does Moyer hit the wall?

curt: More likely it was the $10M that choked them.

Getting DeRosa to play what? Left Field? Feliz is at third, are we making Feliz a bench player to fill in defense? If we lose Happ we will be a few pitchers short.

Yeah, that too.

One other additional note I posted from the last thread: by being the third or fourth team in on this deal and making it economically palatable for the Cubs by taking an average pitcher's salary in Marquis, you now have in theory helped the Cubs become a legit WS threat, if they weren't already. And the last time I checked, the Cubs still play in the NL. So there is another stupid reason to make this trade.

fljerry: As much as I'd love DeRosa to replace Feliz, my guess is that he would replace Burrell.

Marquis doesn't excite me. I know Happ isn't thought to have tremendous upside (I haven't read any where that his ceiling is above a back of the rotation), but Happ is a cheap big league ready pitcher. I thought that would hold more value in this economic climate.

I was hoping that if we traded him it would be in a package thought brought a better player. Who that player would be I don't know... (Dye, D. Young, player yet to surface as on the trading block)..

If we got DeRosa who would fill in nicely for Utley or Feliz if in fact they aren't ready to start the season & then move to platooning in the OF I would be happy with moving Happ. DeRosa would also serve as a nice backup 2nd basemen to give Utley a couple more days off during the season once he comes back.

Let me get this straight...

We're trading Happ and Coste for Marquis, Cedeno and DeRosa?

DeRosa would, what... become our starting LF? Cedeno would be our utility infielder in place of Bruntlett? Marquis would become our 4th or 5th starter and we'd still have a hole in our rotation?

DeRosa is making $5.5M in the final year of a three year deal. Marquis is making $9.875 in teh final year of a three year deal. Ronny Cedeno will likely be tendered about 500K. That's about $16M total.

Am I getting all this right?

"I am not sure that Happ could deliver those numbers at CBP"


Yes, clout, but are you sure he could NOT?

"fljerry: I like Happ too. I adore his curveball. But he's unproven and finesse lefties have little margin for error."


clout, based on his minor league stats, what does Happ project to at the MLB level?

Unless Jr. has something else up his sleeve, I'm not sure I like this potential trade.

It is essentially replacing Moyer and Happ with Marquis, roughly the same money.


Of course this could all be a ruse. The Phillies could be bluffing Moyer to get his price down.

Does anyone have the potential breakdown of this Peavy rumor? As I doubled back, I wondered why the Phils couldn't get Peavy. The Pods are getting Vitters, Olson, Happ, Coste? What would it cost to get Olson and a similar young slugger for that matter? 27 yr old Peavy only makes 8 mill next year, and a reasonable 15, 16, and 17 in the following years considering Marcels has him as a 3.22 ERA w/ 169 IP next year. Plus, Myers, Blanton and Eaton are off the books in '10.

Clout: "pblunts: Who are the 4th and 5th starters for the Phillies in 2009?"

Well, we all know the internal options. I'd sure hate to think that as of December 9 or whatever the hell today's date is that we can't find a better option between now and ST than to give up Happ as part of a deal to get Jason Marquis for 9M.

CJ: Not all three. Some combination. Actually, between the Orioles, Cubs, Padres and Phillies, they could talk all week and come up with different packages that make sense.

sorry thought = that (in second paragraph)

it appears i am up too late chasing these mlb rumore.

You have to love the winter meetings

Who exactly are the cubs giving up besides DeRosa, Cedeno, and Marquis in order to land Peavy? And no thanks to Jason Marquis with Eaton still on the payroll. I like Moyer (but even 1 yr/8 mil seems high) and Lowe/Burnett aren't realistic, but we gotta be able to do better than Marquis, especially at his salary, and furthermoreso if it costs us a young lefty like Happ.

AWH: Every scouting report I've seen on Happ project him as a back of rotation starter, assuming he makes it at all. I think he will make it and be a back of rotation starter. I am very much less confident that he can give the Phils 175 IP and a 4.60 ERA next season. I like Marquis' chances of doing that far better.

pblunts: Well, without Moyer your 4 and 5 right now are Happ and Kendrick. You pretty confident they can deliver another pennant?

I remember when the Cubs got Harden & Gaudin that all the Cubs fans were begging for Marquis to get the boot out of the rotation. The negative reaction to him was almost on the Adam Eaton level.

This seems like a sideways move to me and I don't really see the point of giving up on Happ and creating a need for a backup catcher (unless Marson is ready).

If Derosa was in the deal then that might be another story. He could gives you some versatility and could fill any number of holes.

I would not be happy with just a Marquis addition to the rotation though.

Clout is right about Eaton too. We should be able to dump him in that deal.

correction - Peavy makes 11 mill next year. still a bargain. of course, he has that no trade thingy. how can the phils win a world series and STILL be a hated pitchers destination?

lekh: You left out the 2 most valuable properties: The Cubs are also giving up Vitters and Pie.

If we got Marquis I doubt we would be paying the full $9 million plus. It seems like the Cubs really want to get rid of him (they wanted to trade him for Aaron Heilman!) and wouldn't mind paying for some of his salary.

Jason: It all sounds very weird to me. Ignore all the rest...

Are we really trading JA Happ and Chris Coste for Mark DeRosa?

MAS: Give it up. In no report and under no scenario is Peavy coming to the Phillies.

PBlunts also eluded to the notion that facilitating the acquisition of Peavy for the Cubs is a direct impediment to the Phillies chances of emerging from the pack in the NL once again this year. To provide such assistance in addition to giving up Happ for Marquis would be disgusting, for DeRosa it would be tolerable/decent. We could absolutely put up a better deal for Peavy than what's on the table now, especially helpful is the Padres fancy for Happ, and without Moyer's salary and with Eaton/Myers/Feliz coming off the books...oh yeah, no trade clause.

philsphan: Exactly right. With Peavy on board the Cubs have no need for Marquis. I agree it's likely they'd pay part of his salary. Just for grins let's say they kick in $2M. The Phils then have a choice: Pay $7M for 1 year of Marquis or $20M for 2 years of Moyer.

From Jon Heyman:

"LAS VEGAS -- The world champion Phillies are trying hard to improve their rotation and are simultaneously pursuing free agent pitchers Derek Lowe and Jamie Moyer, the longtime Phillie.

New Phillies GM Ruben Amaro is being "very aggressive," according to someone familiar with their dealings."

It sounds like Towers and Amaro kicked the tires on a direct trade for Peavy, but only while this other deal gets sorted out. Not much, but it counts.

lekh: "We could absolutely put up a better deal for Peavy than what's on the table now."

I'd love to hear it. Here's what you have to beat: Olson, Vitters, Happ, Coste.

clout: Moyer ain't gettin' 2 yrs/20 mil from us, and he ain't gettin' it from nobody else.

clout, to put my 2 cents in on your question to pblunts:

No, I'm not confident H & K could deliver another pennant at 4 & 5.

However, that's not the only choice if Moyer isn't re-signed.

There are other FA pitchers available who could be signed as the #4.

Now, would they cost less than Moyer? I don't know, but if they are younger, even at the same price Moyer is asking there would seem to be significantly age based risk.


As I said above.............sideways.

CJ: I definitely agree with sentiment that this seems weird. I think that mainly comes from 4 teams possibly being involved and lots of names tossed out.

Jason Marquis to the Phillies makes the least sense. Rosenthal's report said they tried to sell the Phillies on Marquis, but the Phillies didn't want that. DeRosa for Coste and Happ probably isn't ideal, but seems a bit more justifiable.

If I am following the BL treads correctly it looks like to me Ruben will subtract Burrell, Moyer, Happ and Coste from the 08 WSC team and add DeRosa to replace Burrell, Marquis to replace Moyer and Marson will replace Coste. The 5th starter will come from 3 instead of 4 options Kendrick, Carrasco or Carpenter.

Clout - If we are just trading Happ for Marquis. (hopefully thats all we are giving up) and only those 2 involved I suppose its not that bad of deal. But nothing has been said along those lines and where does DeRosa come in on this deal?

The more I think about it the less I like the trade.

Whoever said this strengthens the Cubs too much is right. I wouldn't want to face Zambrano, Peavy, Harden & Dempster in a 7 game series. Although knowing the Cubs they'll all suddenly lose control and walk home 5 runs in each game once they reach the playoffs.

I also don't see how this really improve the Phils.

On the Marquis vs. Moyer argument, I would much rather have Moyer. First of all, Marquis is nothing special. Secondly, it is good having Moyer around for his influence on the other pitchers and leadership, especially our ace Cole Hamels.

If I was Amaro I would force the Padres or Cubs to take Eaton, although I wouldn't make them pay anything besides the ML minimum. Getting rid of Eaton would help improve this deal, whatever it turns out to be.

lekh: Just to help, Vitters was the best HS hitting prospect in the nation in 2007 and Olson is a 25-year-old LHP who was terrible in his debut last year but projects as a #2 or #3 starter down the road. Happ & Coste you already know.

Happ is a marginal prospect. He won't be wowing anyone in this league for long. If he's all we lose to replace Grandpa, no sweat. This team will be over the hill real soon, so we're in win now mode. One kid in the rotation will be plenty.

lekh: Those are Moyer's current terms.

I could see some team out there foolish enough to give Moyer a 3 yr $27 million.

Here's one thing I'm not all that concerned about... how much this improves the Cubs or any other team.

The Phils need to be worried about the Phils. What may appear to be the greatest starting rotation off all time may not be anything close to that by the end of the season. Who cares who the Cubs have?

Make the Phils better. Period.

Clout: considering how long the Pads will be rebuilding, they are likely more attracted to younger high ceiling players than another team might be. Clearly, we have no player in this regard who comes close to Josh Vitters, but a package including Happ, Carrasco, D'Arnaud, and Brown wouldn't be that far off...not that I would necessarily make that trade.

curt: Amazingly, I agree with every word you wrote.

lekh: That's a very nice package, actually,

Does anybody remember when the Phillies were considering signing either Mark DeRosa or Wes Helms to play 3rd Base?

clout: It is... but if the Phils ever made that deal (and it will NEVER happen for any number of reasons), but if they made that deal, they'd have to get a world title out of it because the future would be significantly damaged.

clout: seriously?

These 3-way trades almost never take place because of the complexity but still interesting to talk shop.

If the Phils can get DeRosa, than it is worth parting with Coste and Happ. Surprised people have acted like DeRosa wouldn't have a place to play next year.

Phils need a right-handed bat in LF, Utley is a question mark for the first month or two of the season, and I don't have confidence that Feliz will be healthy/productive next season. DeRosa could be the super-utility guy who Cholly could juggle in a few positions.

Plus, DeRosa is exactly the type of hitter the Phils need in their lineup. A right-handed contact hitter who hits for average, gets on base, and has moderate power. Could drop him in the No. 2 spot or No. 6 spot. Hell, I wouldn't even mind seeing him hit in the No. 5 spot either.

As for Marquis, the only advantage in getting him would be that Phils aren't locked into Moyer for a 2nd yr at large dollars. Basically a guy who will take the mound and give the Phils an ERA between 4.50-5.00.

Depends on how Marquis control (generally average/below average) and ability to keep the ball in CBP would be. If Marquis struggles with his control and experiences a slight uptick in his HR/9 rate, he would have an ERA north of 5 in CBP.

MG: It appears as though the Cubs would be willing to kick in as much as $4M of the $8.75M Marquis is owed. If we can get Marquis for $5M and DeRosa for Happ and Coste, I'd likely go for that deal.

Peavy to the Cubs. Marquis/Cedeno to the Phils for Happ/Coste. As previously stated, I can live with it. Cedeno is a cheap defensive utility who would be under our control for a while. Next year, Marquis is likely to be more useful than Happ and could equal Moyer's production for less money. Moyer's not likely coming back at 2 yr/20 mill. In this scenario, a lot of SP's (Myers, Blanton, Marquis, Eaton(LOL)) are off the books in 2010. I only see Carrasco in the upper levels to replace them. Do we extend any of them now? More importantly, can we bolster our bullpen to maintain our dominance?

CJ - I would make that deal with hesitation then. I just don't think the Phils would get DeRosa for the likes of Happ and Coste.

If the Phils just get Marquis for Happ and Coste, I guess that wouldn't be a bad move either. Just don't see how it is much more than a lateral move at best.

MAS: I think there's little chance the deal is for Marquis and Cedeno. I think the Phils only do this if DeRosa is involved.

Doesn't it suck though that the Phils' fans have to be somehow excited about the likes of Marquis being the primary offseason acquisition?

MG: But we're not getting DeRosa for Happ and Coste. We're getting DeRosa for facilitating a deal between the Cubs and Padres for Jake Peavy. It's a different dynamic.

One last point - If the Phils don't want to pay Moyer $10M next year (and 2 yr either), why would take on Marquis' $10M salary? Don't see them making this trade unless they get the Cubs to chip in for a portion of Marquis' salary.

MG: That's what I was pointing out... the Cubs have apparently made it known they'd be willing to kick in $4M of the $8.75M Marquis is owed next year.

And, I agree that DeRosa is intriguing for similar reasons as stated by MG that I posted in the last thread. I just think that it makes sense that the Phils have interest in Marquis, particularly at the discounted rate, to replace Moyer if Moyer does want 2 yr/20 mill. The problem that I envision is that it is unlikely that we are able to trade Happ/Coste for DeRosa/Marquis. So, if DeRosa was acquired w/o Marquis, and if Moyer is not resigned, then who will be the 4 & 5th starters? Jon Garland and Carrasco?

Clout you are delusional. You bash our prospects while you fawn over Vitters. Latest minor league prospect rankings have Carrasco ranked better than Vitters.

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/news/top50/y2008/profile.jsp?t=p_top&pid=519388

Hence we can build a package that is competitive with the one the Cubs are offering. Donald, Carrasco, and Marson is superior to anything being offered right now. But ofcourse you will reply that the Peavy has too much VALUE for that trade to happen.

Just to remind everyone: We won the World Series.

Carry on.

LA- Let's not be content with one.

If the Phils only have to part with Happ/Coste for a package of Marquis/DeRosa/Cedeno, then it really is a no-brainer for the Phils.

Stinks the Cubs would get Peavy but this trade would address a couple of issues for the Phils and allow them to go out/acquire another legit bullpen arm.

This whole thing is pretty interesting. I'm glad it got cleared up that Vitters is going to end up in San Diego, not here. As much I wish that to be the case, there's no way the Padres are giving up Peavy and not getting Vitters back as the centerpiece to the deal.

At first glance, I'm kind of against the deal, as Happ is a guy who I like and who I'd like to see get a shot here. However, it makes some sense for 2009, as Marquis will most likely give you similar numbers to Happ, and is a known quantity, and if he's being paid for by the Cubs, well then that works too. Coste for Derosa is a no-brainer. Derosa as a part-time LF doesn't inspire much, but the guy will give you a .360+ OBP and 20 HRs in this park, so as a supersub, Chone Figgins type of guy, he's a good piece.

I'm sort of torn. I've been advocating holding on to the young guys and trying to develop a young core, and trading prospects for a glorified utility guy and Jason "league average at best" Marquis doesn't really work with that. But Happ isn't one of our top prospects, and doesn't project to be a whole lot better than Marquis anyway. His advantages are that he's younger, giving a possibility for improvement, and cheap, which the Cubs picking up part of Marquis' salary sort of mitigates.

So, I suppose, I'll give it my tepid seal of approval if it happens. I hope this isn't our big move of the offseason. In fact, I'm probably gonna only spend this post on it, because we won the World Series, and I don't need to waste a whole lot of time debating Jason Marquis.

Gion: They have updated the rankings after the 2008 season. The link you posted was after the 2007 season.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/prospects/y2009/

CJ: I agree, we can't worry about whether the deal helps out the Cubs. We should work to improve our club. If the Padres/Cubs are as intent as they seem to be on making this trade happen the cubs will end up with Peavy with or without the Phils.

Kind of funny how i figured Marquis would be involved before the rumor came through the wire. Probably because I live in chicago...

As is stands the cubs parent company filed for bankruptcy today, largely because they haven't been able to sell the cubs as of yet. Essentially the next two debt payments for the tribune should have come from the proceeds of the cubs sale. As is stands currently the trib has to come up with a billion dollars a year for the next 7 years to get themselves straight with their creditors.

Without peavy, the cubs will have no chance of acquiring any top tier Free agent talent for the next few years simply due to payroll constaints. anyone who lays out a billion dollars to buy the cubs and wrigley field, will probably not be able to exceed 125 million in payroll even if revenue is double the payroll.

Really, I don't see how any team in the NL can facilitate this trade. I don't think Derosa or Marquis are really enough to justify losing ground and losing prospects. Considering baring a no trade clause, and a last year contract near all-star, theres no reason why the phils couldn't acquire peavy directly under different circumstances. I'm much more interested in acquiring a young cf, and a reliable pitcher. I see the need for a improvement in utiity for brunlett. But there's plenty of guys who only cost cash who can do the same thing.

I'd rather be talking to the twins about delmon young.

Seems to be a minority view, but I don't get this trade at all. We can't even get Jamie Moyer resigned and we're going to give up Happ? For a one-year stop-gap who is really getting up there in age? I like DeRosa but this trade makes little sense for the short-term and absolutely NO sense for the long-term.

Kevmac thanks for the pointing that out. Vitters isn't even in the top 50 prospect rankings anymore. Lou Marson is also ranked higher than Vitters now.

bap, I tend to agree with you. I see it as a sideways move, with, at best marginal improvement.

Even if Marquis '09 equals Moyer '09, it's very unlikely he'll equal Moyer '08.

So, it's really a sideways talent move, only at a lower cost.

Even if they get Cedeno and DeRosa, it begs the question of whether they'll produce as much a Burrell and Bruntlett.

Sideways, gentlemen............sideways.

MG: "Doesn't it suck though that the Phils' fans have to be somehow excited about the likes of Marquis being the primary offseason acquisition?"
Or we can be somehow excited that we just won the World Series. I'm sure a lot of other fans would love to be in our position.

bap: I agree somewhat. But if we're getting Marquis AND Derosa then I'm ok with it, bc it solidifies our rotation as well as giving us an ultimate backup plan for 2b, 3b, and LF, which may all need them at some point next year.

Finally, one thing to consider in the Happ vs. Marquis debate. Marquis is a much surer bet than Happ next year, but we'd be trading 6 years of Happ for 1 year of Marquis. You need to think of it that way.

kevmac: Yes, Peavy is going to the Cubs pretty much for sure anyway. We'd be foolish not to benefit off of that if we can.

AWH: Sideways is putting it nicely. Assuming the trade involves Marquis (a big if), the net effect would be:

Out with Moyer, Happ, and Burrell.
In with Marquis, Kendrick (in the 5th starter's spot), and DeRosa. Moyer is better than Marquis. Happ is better than Kendrick. Burrell is better than DeRosa. That's a serious step backward.

I just don't get how a team with 10 arbitration eligible players, and 2 gaping holes to fill, can be trading a major league ready starter who is going to play for near minimum salary. And I especially don't understand it, when all we're getting is a one-year stop-gap. Come this time next year, we are going to be in a huge mess, with needs all over the place and little money to fill those needs. Having Happ & Carrasco in our 2010 starting rotation would be a huge economic benefit which would allow us to pursue some of these other areas of need after this coming season.

The Brew Crew nmay look to trade Bill Hall if they sign Mike Lamb.


Hmmmm, how good would he look at 3B for the Phillies?

Brian G: I'm a believer in upside. Happ has some. Marquis has none. Trading for Jason Marquis is like marrying your current girlfriend for no other reason except that you're 40 years old and it's time to get married. You're just accepting that mediocrity is the best you can do.

The Phillies will not repeat as division champs unless someone in their rotation is able to replicate Moyer's 2008 performance. With Jason Marquis in the fold, that's one spot in the rotation that has NO chance of doing that.

BAP - But how is committing 2 yr/$20M to Moyer not going to compound the Phils issues with payroll after the 2009 season and you are making a huge assumption that Happ can be a MLB-caliber starter.

BTY - The Phils are going to have some tough choices to make but they have a bunch of money coming off the table next year including every bad contract they have right now including Eaton, Jenkins, and Feliz (although with the Thome money finally be finished).

The reality is this - unless the Phils' FO is committed to upgrading their payroll to the $125M-$130M range, they aren't going to be players in FA and likely won't have a team that was as strong that finished the season.

MG: I don't really see 5 million to feliz as bad money. I do see 7 million to jenkins as bad money

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG