Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Need for bullpen, spare closer, can’t be taken lightly | Main | Breaking news: Eric Bruntlett, four others, set free »

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Comments

NEPP: I don't know if Moyer is done-I assume he won't be bought out and he'll get every chance in spring. The real concern is how a 47 year old recovers from 2 surgeries. He seems to be a guy who takes good care of himself, but at some point, age catches up

Amaro, Jr. harlfheartedly threw a bunch of darts at the target last ST when it came to the bench. Cairo, Marcus Giles, Mayberry, Bruntlett. I don't mind his low-risk strategy, it just didn't work at all. Perhaps this year he can find something in between a washed up vet. and a toolsy "prospect" with no plate discipline. Both the bench and 3B should be easy upgrades but only because they were terrible last year.

The money for Moyer is already committed, and he pitched well out of the 'pen prior to his injury, albeit in a miniscule number of innings. If nothing else, he could play a similar, probably more limited, role in 2010. Moyer ended up throwing 162 IP last year.

143.1 IP, .294/.348/.488 (.301 BAbip), 1.444 WHIP, 1.95 SO/BB, 5.34 ERA
18.2 IP, .152/.200/.242 (.184 BAbip), .696 WHIP, 5.33 SO/BB, 1.93 ERA

throw Coste in that bench equation as well. He completely fell of a cliff sometime in 2008. 85 games into the season he was batting .317/.376/.549! He finished the year .205/.269/.288. Probably could have seen his ineffectual 2009 coming.

Sophist brings up a name that I hadn't thought about for a while. John Mayberry Jr. I am an absolute sucker for big athletic guys with raw power, but for the life of me I can't see this guy ever making any kind of contribution to any major league team. He can't hit righthanders at all and at the major league level he could barely handle even mediocre lefthanders. It seems to me that he can potentially hit about 10% of major league pitchers. Unscientific I know and small sample size to be sure, but I just don't see this guy as a major leaguer. And he also seemed to loaf in the outfield a few times too. I'd cut bait with him.

If we could get a similar effort out of Moyer (150+ IP), I would take it at this point.

Mayberry is gonna have a hell of a season in 2010. I predict 20+ HR, .280 AVG, and maybe even 80 RBI for the IronPigs.

Sophist, I must disagree.

3B wasn't "terrible" (and before you freak out I'm not saying he was great, either). The regular starter actually DID drive in 82 runs, while hitting .336 with RISP. And he played pretty good defense to boot.

Obviously, the high RISP number can be view as an anomoly and unrepeatable, and is probably why they feel they can upgrade.

The problem is that he didn't do much of anything when there was no one on base and didn't help turn over the lineup or get on base for the guys at the top of the order.

NEPP: All well and good but I don't think he'll ever be a major league hitter. And when I said I'd cut bait with him, I mispoke. I wouldn't give up on him, but I sure wouldn't count on him either. I remember there was a guy posting here in ST how he'd be contributing big time for the big club this year based on seeing him play 3 or 4 games in Clearwater against AA pitching. The guy was guaranteeing it and he got completely slammed for it. I think his name was Doc and he disappeared quickly. Wonder what he thinks now.

Neither do I. I think he is a AAAA player at best.

One would hope Mayberry, for his own sake, will figure it out.
He seems like a real nice guy.
He certainly seems to have the physical "tools".

Jaime Moyer is this team's Wakefield.

And, since we're all bnored on this non=baseball rainy afternoon: AN interlude with a animated video about http://www.fark.com/cgi/vidplayer.pl?IDLink=4768309>Doc Ellis's Tripping No Hitter

Its really well done, in my opinion.

awh - we're probably splitting hairs here. A .694 OPS (.625 in the second half) is something - terrible is closer than adequate. Who knows what explains a .577 OPS with no one on vs .848 with anyone on.

My point was just that, when it comes to looking what needs improvement given that BA w/RISP is nothing more than randomness with mixed the normal skill of getting a hit, it should be pretty easy to improve on a sub .700 OPS from 3B.

Allowing for arbitration raises for Blanton, Victorino and Ruiz, the Phils currently have approximately 123 mil committed for next year. Ultimately, I believe the Phils payroll this year will top out in the upper 140's. So how should Ruben break up his 20 to 25 mil?

3rd base - 4 mil unless named Figgens then up to 9, no more

Relief - 5-7 mil on Lidge backup, 5-7 mil on Park/Eyre/Durbin or their upgrades.

Bench 2-3 mil on Bruntlett upgrades, 1 mil or less each on Stairs/Bako upgrades

June/July flexibilty - 5 mil

I think there's a little more involved with hitting with RISP then "randomness", although that is a large part of it. Its also about experience, knowing what the pitcher is likely to do in that situation, not trying to do to much. It might also be that he sees more fastballs in that situation. Personally, I lean towards viewing Feliz as adequate, not aweful. Especially if we can get him on the cheap.

Ahh...fark. The bane of my work productivity along with BL.

I will be surprised if our payroll exceeds $140 million to start the season. Rube and Co may add payroll during the season but I doubt they'll go into the year at such a high level.

Sophist, don't get me wrong, we agree that there is plenty of room for improvement.

My disagreement was with your use of the term "terrible".

"Sub-par" is probably a better term.

It's not like the guy did next to nothing, which would fit my definition of "terrible".

Feliz earned his $5 million this year, if barely. Reserve terms like "terrible" for the Bruntletts of the world.

I don't disagree. So given the numbers, where do you think Amaro should or will skimp.

It depends. IF we get a top 3B, I think the bench will be a bargain bin effort again. If we get a moderately priced 3B, I think there's a chance we get a decent reserve IF to go with him. I see us closer to the $10 million on the BP and no more at best.

I see:

Mathieson - 400 K
Bastardo - 400 K
Eyre - $2 million
Park - $3 millionish
Legit late reliever - $4 million tops

The Phillies are to be congratulated for raising their payroll to meet the talent they've groomed / acquired. We all remember the days when the ownership group (through Ed Wade) said they were a small market team who couldn't compete with the big boys. Once they got the talent, and the team stepped up to the plate and paid to keep them, we became a championship caliber team. It's been refreshingly awesome.

This off season's moves have yet to be revealed. I for one don't believe they are bound to a "cap" of 140 million. They can afford to get anyone they want. They get 100 million just on tickets (without this years' raise) plus the money for local TV, internet, radio, network TV, merchandise, food, drinks, etc. Add to that, some of the owners are worth Billions. If they really want another WFC, they can get whomever they want. If they hold to a limit of 140 M (or whatever) and settle for lesser players b/c of it, then they are not trying their best to get back to the top.

I believe the team has a real chance to win it all in 2010...if they make the right moves. After that, it will be difficult. They will probably lose Lee, Werth, and Blanton. They will probably have to trade Howard, Cole and Jimmy sometime in 2011 or lose Them for nothing. The future after 2010 is very cloudy for sure so I hope they truly try everything they can to win it in 2010.

John Middleton is worth something like $2.2 Billion. However, he is powerless to add money to the pool with the current 5 member group setup. I would quite happy if they had Middleton buy out Claire Betz and gain a controlling ownership on the team as he is supposedly an actual fan and was the guy that pushed us to start spending like a real team starting with Thome.


In demoralizing news, Stephen A Smith will be returning to the Philadelphia Inquirere as a columnist.

How long till the Inquirer goes under anyway? Not exactly a great career move the way things are going for newspapers.

How much would Jamey Carroll cost as a utility infielder? He's a good defender at 2B and 3B and can even hit somewhat decently. He'd be a good option if we went the platoon route at 3B again.

He even played SS regularly as recently as 2007.

If Amaro finds a legit late reliever for under 5 mil, my hats off to him. Maybe in July. And if Eyre is contemplating retirement, why not Rodger Clemmons him? Offer him $1 mil to come back for August and the postseason. Until then see what Romaro, Bastardo and KK can do.

And while our starters have potential, they also have a lot of question marks. Hamels?? Happ?? Moyer???

It's gonna be interesting.

Edgardo Alfonzo would like to return to the majors and feels he has 2-3 good years left in him.

We could sign him to play third.


:)

Breaking: Tampa Bay Rays sign R.J. Swindle!

Eyre stated that he wants to play in 2010 and only for the Phillies. All Rube has to do is make him an offer. As he was our only reliable LHP out of the pen last year and Romero is a huge question mark, we should jump on it.


Good for Swindle!

NEPP - Carroll made 2.5M this past season. If the rumors are to be believed, seven or eight teams are interested in him, including the Dodgers. If they end up signing him, does this mean they won't re-sign Belliard, and if so, do we want him for a utility guy? I think Carroll would be the better option though.

I'm hoping for Scutaro as the Phillies super sub in 2010. I'd say DeRosa if I thought for a second he'd go for that.
Perhaps I'd be more impressed with DeRosa if he'd have played QB for the TEMPLE OWLS. (8-2!)

SteveW - If Feliz has a legit skill for hitting with men on, how do you explain his numbers in that category from year to year? He hit 245/.325/.364 with RISP in 2008. Here they are:

03: .271/.321/.643
04: .246/.276/.347
05: .219/.257/.406
06: .262/.314/.482
07: .310/.357/.558
08: .245/.325/.364
09: .336/.384/.486

Random. Is this a skill he gains and loses every other year? Is this is a skill he just mastered last year? His career with RISP is .262/.310/.439. He's a career .254/.293/.422 hitter, so that's what you'd expect (given that most players hit slightly better with RISP).

Feliz' OPS was 18/20 among MLB 3B. You don't want to call it terrible. Fine. Awful, way below league average. Whatever. He was bad.

Here's the link: http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/position/3b/sort/OPS/order/true

Bruntlett isn't a starter in MLB. He's on a different scale. "Sub-par" is the same as below average. If Feliz managed to be 12/20 3B in OPS then, yeah, maybe "sub-par." Although we have to remember how friendly CBP is. He was 18/20.

I work with a guy from South Korea. He's always talking about Chan Ho. Today he tells me he read in a South Korean paper that Chan Ho wants to go to a really bad team so he can start. For what it's worth. (If it's true, that's weak on Chan Ho's part.)

BobbyD - why is that weak? He's always said that he likes to be a starter over a BP guy. Guy can do whatever he wants

Carroll (or someone similar) would be a perfect fit for us. A legit reserve IF that we could actually start at 3B and 2B if need be and not lose too much defensively.

The Phillies apparently have the best medical staff in baseball: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9763

NEPP: I'm curious. Eyre signed for $2M last year at age 37, coming off a $3.8M contract. He's now 38 and coming off a 30 IP season due to injuries. Why in the world do you think it would take $2M to sign him again?

BTW, there are a ton of FA relievers this off-season and more to come at arbitration deadline. The argument that we can't get a bench and bullpen upgrade if we sign a decent 3B is nonsense.

Because he was the most reliable LHP we had in the pen. If he signs for less, great. If not, I'd be fine giving him the same amount again.

I think any fair amount would make him come back.

It wasn't very hard to be the Phils most reliable LHP in the 'pen last year.

NEPP, take a look at some of Eyre's historical stats from year to year. Take a look at some of the periferals as well.

His WHIP has varied widely from year to year, as has his BB/9 and K/9.

I like Eyre and would like to see the Phils re-sign him, but I'm not under any illusion that he can keep pitching to a sub - 2.00 ERA the way he has since he joined the Phils.

What makes you think he's cured himself of the season-to-season variations in performance that most relief pitcher's have, particularly when his WHIP was 1.796 as recently as 2007, and 1.676 during his short stint with the Cubs last season?

Eyre was actually the most reliable reliever in our pen, period. But that doesn't mean that the Phillies should reflexively rush to resign him. There are many good reasons to tread cautiously with Eyre, including his age, injury issues, and erratic recent history. Also, with a limited budget, lots of other needs, a deep FA reliever class, & Bastardo, Escalona, Romero & Moyer already our own property, LOOGY is not an area where I would be anxious to spend a lot of money.

I dont quite understand the money issue..phils made @ $60 mill in playoff & W Series tickets and they have an extra $ 20 mill in expiring contracts, jenkins, eaton and Thome. That's $ 80 mill without even talking about their part of the concessions for all those games. For God's sake,I dont want to hear ONE WORD OF salaries exceeding $ 140 million..Do what needs to be done NOW !!

dick, I posted on a previous thread, it's not the money that matters.

The AMOUNT of money is completely arbitrary. Completely.

What matters is how and WHO they spend it on.......

and what kind of PERFORMANCE they get for it.

You noted two instances where they spent a significant amount of money and got very, very little: Eaton and Jenkins.

They also spent very little money in a couple of areas and got a huge bang for their buck.

All teams make payroll "mistakes" - that is, no team is immune to a bad contract.

Even the Yankees make mistakes, they just have the money to eat them (Carl Pavano, anyone?), whereas the small market teams don't.

The Phillies are a big market team (I sincerely believe even Bill Giles would acknowledge this now), and thus, have the ability to make mistakes like Eaton and Jenkins and still win a WFC.

I seriously doubt a team like Pittsburgh would be able to do the same thing.

So, I don't care ***HOW MUCH*** money the Phillies spend. (And neither should anyone else - it's the wrong focus.)


I care ***HOW THEY SPEND IT.***


So, with regard to Eyre, I'd like to have him back because he's been a pretty good pitcher the last couple of seasons for them.

And I don't care HOW MUCH they pay him.

That's irrelevant.

What's irrelevant is how well he performs, and as bap so duly noted, age and injury issues need to be considered.

And then, of course, his track record indicates he's capable of a down year - even when healthy.

And I am not singling out Scott Eyre out.

It's true of the vast majority of relief pitchers.

Joel Sherman of the NY Post has a column linked on MLBTR.

For those who are worried about the Mets reemerging next season, perhaps we need to see what happens.

Sherman had this qoute from and agenst:

“The Mets are not a destination spot right now, especially if you are a hitter. You would be going to a questionable team playing in a huge park. So if you’re Jason Bay, why would you leave the Red Sox for the Mets unless you were blown away (financially), or if you were Matt Holliday, why would you leave St. Louis for the Mets unless you were blown away?”

Spitz: If an athlete chooses to go to the Nationals so he can start, instead of the Phillies where he'd be a reliever, than he's a loser; a non-competitor.

Given Lidge's terrible season and cloudy future with the team, does anyone get a bad taste in their mouth when they think about how Michael Bourn has come on for the Astros? Or is that moot because of 2008 and the WFC?

How can the Phils most reliable reliever be a guy who only threw 30 IP?

Cliff, I think the point is moot exactly for the reasons you cited. I'm happy for Michael Bourn, and I liked him too - his youth, speed and enthusiasm - but we have pretty good OF'ers, too. As Theo Epstein said this summer after letting Smoltz go to the Cardinals, you hope that someone will do well after they leave your team, since ideally the trade will work out well for both teams.

moot

Yes, that is completely moot. The 2008 WFC and Lidge's part in it completely make up for giving up Michael Bourn. And I really am a fan of Michael Bourn. Without Lidge there simply is no WFC in 2008.

The worst part of that trade is that Ed Wade may turn out not to be a complete moron. And that would destroy one of my most important illusions.

ditto: MOOT!!! VERY VERY VERY MOOT!

"you hope that someone will do well after they leave your team, since ideally the trade will work out well for both teams."

The added benefit of that is team's are more apt to view a team's prospects favorably.

I rate the Lidge/Bourn trade a win/win.

In the and both teams will have done well, and "dumb old Ed Wade" doesn't look so dumb anymore.

sophist: I actually had no idea he threw so few innings. Still, that number was a product of how he was used and, in the capacity that he was used, the stats pretty clearly say that he was the Phils' most reliable reliever last year. As a predictor of 2010 performance, however, his strong 2009 numbers should be treated with significant caution. The small number of IP is just another reason why this is so -- along with all the other reasons I already listed.

BAP - The number is also a product of being old and injured, fairly unreliable traits. It's funny we're talking about a guy who made two more outs than Jack Taschner as the most trustworthy reliever on the whole staff. 7 relievers threw more IP than he did.

Ryan Madson threw almost 50 more IP, probably against tougher competition, recording more outs at a time, with a lower WHIP, half the BB/9, and a significantly higher SO/9. Besides his ERA, largely a result of his few IP and a dubious indicator of reliever "reliability" or anything else of value, I'm not sure what stats you are looking at.

Yeah, I guess I agree on Bourn/Lidge. I'd have a completely different outlook if Lidge had been lights-out this past season.

Bill James 2010 Major league projectionn for Michael Taylor

Michael Taylor, COF, 5.89, 285/350/462
Physically speaking, Taylor’s almost the same size as former Pitt basketball standout DeJuan Blair. As such, you probably won’t be suprised to learn that, at 6-foot-6 and 250 pounds, Taylor has some natural power. But he’s got some other, more interesting features. According to John Sickels, he’s got basically all the baseball tools you want, plus developing plate discipline, plus the sort of intelligence you’d expect from a Stanford guy.

Dude, if Taylor comes up and posts those kinds of numbers next season he'll be a pretty decent reserve OF.

Eyre only wants to play for the Phils. I think he would sign for the minimum w/incentives for appearances/innings.

sophist: I think we are definining "reliability" differently. You are defining it by looking at indexes which are most predictive of future performance. I am defining it by just looking at the frequency with which each pitcher performed the task that he was supposed to perform.

WHIP & strikeout/walk ratio are very predictive of what will happen over the long term. But, ultimately, a reliever's job is not to have a low WHIP or a good strikeout/walk ratio. His job is to not allow runs. If he does that, he has done well -- and saying that he's unlikely to do well again does not change the fact that he did well.

Eyre allowed 0 runs in 38 of his 42 outings (90%). Madson only did it in 58 out of 79 of his outings(73.4%). So, Eyre did what he was supposed to do more often than Madson did. There are many good reasons to believe that Eyre's performance can't possibly be repeated, & Amaro should keep all those reasons in mind when he goes to negotiate a contract with Eyre. But, in my book, the guy who performed his job 90% of the time was a more reliable pitcher last year than the guy who only performed his job 73.4% of the time.

GBrett, aksmith, awh: Actually, it's pretty easy to tell who got the better end of a trade eventually. And someone almost always does.

The idea that "it was win win" after 2 years just because the Phillies won a championship is laughable. If Bourn turns out to be a supertsar (which I doubt) who would've led the Phillies to 5 championships, then it certainly wasn't "win, win."

Unless you think Doyle Alexander for John Smoltz was "win, win."

I think JW benefitted most from that trade. It's given him 2 yrs. of heavy traffic on Lidge & Bruntlett.

bap: That's a little disingenuous. Only 25 of Eyre's 42 appearances did Eyre actually face more than 2 hitters. It's a lot easier to avoid giving up a run when you only face 1 or 2 hitters.

Madson, on the other hand, faced 2 or fewer batters in only 8 of his 79 appearances.

To suggest Eyre was "more reliable" is to stretch the meaning of those words to the absolute limit.

Are you suggesting that you'd rather have Scott Eyre in the game than Ryan Madson?

CJ: I thought the exact same thing when bap posted, but Eyre's job is usually to get just 1 or 2 guys out, while Madson's is to pitch a shutdown inning or more. I don't think you can compare them directly by runs allowed.

Also...

Scott Eyre allowed a run to score in 7 of his 42 appearances. That's a 83% success rate. I'm not sure where you got your numbers from.

And Madson allowed a run to score in 18 of 79 outings. That's a 77% success rate.

Considering Madson generally pitched in higher-leverage situations. Pitched in almost twice as many games. And pitched to significantly more batters... that 6% doesn't seem like that much of a difference.

So because Eyre only wants to play for the Phillies, he'd be willing to take a 75% pay cut??

There's a thing called pride too and you don't lowball a guy like that. He'd probably tell Rube where to stick it if that were the case. If he's back, he'll get a minimum of $1 million and likely more.

And for the record, I called Eyre our most reliable LH reliever, not reliever period. There is a huge difference.

****The idea that "it was win win" after 2 years just because the Phillies won a championship is laughable. If Bourn turns out to be a supertsar (which I doubt) who would've led the Phillies to 5 championships, then it certainly wasn't "win, win."****

No matter what, we won a WS out of it. Bourn could be a perennial all-star and gold-glover and that trade was still "worth" it.

And Doyle Alexander did help carry his team to the playoffs (9-0, 1.88 ERA for the Tigers in 1987). Granted, he got killed twice in the ALCS that year but he did what the Tigers wanted which was give them a shot to make the WS. How many people would have said in 1987 that John Smoltz would be a 1st ballot HOF? Even if it looks lopsided now, at the time it was a fair deal.

There are such things as win-win trades. The Beckett/Lowell for Hanley Ramirez trade is a perfect example of one such deal. I guarantee both teams would do that deal again with no questions. The Red Sox got an Ace, legit 3B and a WS win while the Marlins got a franchise player (who still has attitude issues...a major reason the BoSox were willing to dump him despite his talent level). It was definitely win-win as both teams filled needs.

Correction to previous post: Alexander had a 1.53 ERA with DET in 1987, not 1.88. They also got 2 more years of him (about 500 more IP actually)

NEPP: I'm not trying to undervalue him, I think an incentive loaded contract would enable him to easally make that much, but protect the team if he is inefective or on the DL alot.

I'm sure Rube would love that but I doubt Eyre would go for it. Maybe a higher base than the minimum (say $1 million) with some incentives to make it up to $2 million would be more likely.

Yep...

Michael Bourn could be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, rivaling Rickey Henderson as the greatest lead-off hitter off all time, and the trade was still a win for the Phillies.

Brad Lidge was perfect in a World Series-winning season.

Additionally, Bourn still would have been a 4th OF last year, this year and at least next year so holding on to him would have been an absolute waste considering what we got for him.

Oh... I forgot... we also got a World-Series-winning run scored and an unnassisted triple play. That alone would have made the deal a win ;-)

Breaking news from the Hot Stove! Phillies sign Andy Ashby! Again!

clout, LMAO!!!

I usually don't lower myself to name calling or belittling people the way you do, but that was a silly post worthy of Sir Alden Trio consideration.

You must be trying to merely provoke people because that was just about the dumbest, blank, empty, vacant and most irrelevant thing I've ever seen you post.

Stupid. Just plain ignorant and stupid.

(And if you need an explanation it merely proves my point.)

I'll bite on Clout's spin:

- The Phils did win a World Series last year with a vital contribution from Lidge but I they made the World Series this year largely in spite of Lidge (who had a horrendous regular season).

Now if Bourn does go on to become a superstar (again unlikely) and Lidge is largely ineffective and injured the next 2 years for the Phils significantly hampering their chances of winning another World Series.

What will your take on the trade be then?

NEPP - BAP called him the most reliable reliever period in a follow up to your post. As I said before, being the Phils most reliable LHP reliever isn't much to brag about considering the competition (assuming you throw Moyer and Happ out): Bastardo and Taschner.

To MG: Yes, yes yes yes. I would do the trade a million times.

Your scenario is more of a criticism of the Lidge extension than anything. The Phillies could have let him walk and collected draft pick/s (I dont' recall if Lidge would have been a Type A or not after 2008).

That trade directly won us a WS.

The Lidge trade really is a gift that keeps on giving for Beerleaguer. The "would've led the Phils to five championships" is beyond an absurdity. Pujols and Bonds in their primes have not produced "five championships" occupying the cleanup spot for their teams and I doubt Bourn or any other player will do that either. Individual contributions can only do so much.

Lidge's individual contribution last year was enormous. And, the trade looked like a masterstroke at the time with the benefit of moving Myers back to the rotation in exchange for a bench player who was not clearly going to hit. I believe the results on Lidge are in now. Aren't those two years remaining the result of a contract extension by the Phillies? Right now, I think the verdict has to be the Phillies got what they wanted - a championship. The rest is speculation. With all that said, I wonder where they'd be in hte next few years with Bourn as a potential answer in the leadoff spot and money to spend for a closer.

NEPP: I agree that there are "win-win" trades (and Hanley/Beckett-Lowell is a pretty good example although we'll have a better picture in a few years). I also agree that no one could've forecast what a great star Smoltz would become. But what a trade "looked like" at the time it happened is irrelevant. Even if Alexander had led the Tigers to a championship, no rational person could argue that the Tigers got equal value (win-win).

The notion that the Phils got the better end (or equal end) of the Bourne-Lidge trade comes from the same silly mindset as "they won the World Series with (pick a name) so they don't need to upgrade." Or the usual response to when a bad Pat Gillick move is mentioned, "Well, he won a World Series" as if that's relevant to the specific move being discussed.

The reality is, you can't truly judge a trade in a year or two. You need to see the totality of the impact and that probably means 5 years or more.

awh: I wasn't belittling you. I was belittling your comment, which was much-deserving of being belittled.

NEPP: My initial point about your prediction of a $2M salary for Eyre was that given his age, limited IP last season, injury history and available alternatives, there's no way he'll get $2M for 2010. I see you've now lowered your prediction to $1M and I think that's about right.

Lidge was PERFECT during a WS season and playoffs. Without him, we likely don't win. Its not like a "Well Feliz won a WS with us as a 3B, so he's a good 3B". Its a direct correlation. Phillies games were automatic wins after the 8th inning in 2008. You can't overstate that.

A WS win is a bigger boon for the Phillies than anything Michael Bourn ever would have done for us.

Well, I think you have to judge the trade from the Phillies point of view based on short term results if only because it was intended to produce short term results. When you're trading a young player for an established vet, you do it knowing the young guy could produce much longer moving forward.

I don't think that you can say for certain hte Phils wouldn't have won the series without Lidge but, the argument can be made. It's not equivalent arguing that the trade for Ivan DeJesus was a good one because the Phils won the pennant in his second year.

****I see you've now lowered your prediction to $1M and I think that's about right.****

I used that as the minimum of what I think he'll be offered...with incentives that make it worth $2 million if he stays healthy. Either way, I'd be comfortable paying him $2 million in 2010.

MG: "The Phils did win a World Series last year with a vital contribution from Lidge but they made the World Series this year largely in spite of Lidge (who had a horrendous regular season).

Now if Bourn does go on to become a superstar (again unlikely) and Lidge is largely ineffective and injured the next 2 years for the Phils significantly hampering their chances of winning another World Series.
What will your take on the trade be then?"

MG: They could not have won the World Series without Lidge in 2008. But didn't Lidge blow a game in the World Series of 2009? If that hadn't happened and we went to a Game 7 could the Phils have won the World Series?

Under your hypothetical: That Lidge is awful again for the next 2 seasons and Bourn becomes a superstar, then the answer is obvious: The Astros got the better of the deal.

****Under your hypothetical: That Lidge is awful again for the next 2 seasons and Bourn becomes a superstar, then the answer is obvious: The Astros got the better of the deal.****

Even so, it'd still be win-win as both teams got something they needed. The Phillies have 3 AS outfielders in 2009...Bourn wouldn't have started regardless. We traded something we didn't need for something we did need. It was win-win.

Interesting debate on NL vs AL re: getting free agents....

http://bases.nbcsports.com/2009/11/the-gap-between-the-leagues-grows-wider.html.php

NEPP: I understand the mindset: "Lidge helped us win the WS so it doesn't matter what Bourn does for the rest of his career. It was a great trade for the Phils." I just think that mindset is illogical.

Think about the logic of it. If the Phils had 2 prospects named Lincecum and Hanson and dealt them for Joe Blanton, to be logically consistent you'd have to say that was a great trade for the Phils because they couldn't have won the WS without Blanton.

I think that's irrelevant. You'd have to see what Lincecum and Hanson did going forward before you could judge the trade. And you have to do that with Bourn/Lidge.

NEPP: I'd be comfortable paying him $2M too, because it's not my money. But I guarantee he won't be paid $2M. Not at his age, with his history and the available alternatives.

Stangely, clout, coming from you, I don't feel remorely belittled.

As I said....vacuously stupid.

LOL!

awh: You didn't read my post. You shouldn't feel belittled. I wasn't belittling you. You're a fine fellow and I have great affection and respect for you. But sometimes you post something that's idiotic. That's what I was responding to, your post, not you.

The entire point of baseball is to win the World Series. Considering we're not the Yankees, we don't get that many shots at it. We won one (only our 2nd all time) as a direct result of the deal. You can't trade hypothetical panning out of players as a downside to a deal. What if Lincecum blows out his elbow (a possibility given his delivery) next year? What if Hanson never realizes his potential? Even if both did and helped the team traded too to a WS, we don't know what would have happened had we held onto them. I'll take a guaranteed WS win over a possible hypothetical in judging the deal.

We might have a worse record in 2013 as a result of not having Bourn but the shortterm gain far outweighs not winning as many games 3-4 years down the line.

A perfect example is the Lee deal: What if Jason Knapp realizes his potential and becomes a #1/#2 starter for the Indians while Carrasco is a solid 3/4 guy (both possibilities but not nearly guarantees). What if Marson is a steady catcher and Donald is a solid reserve bench guy for them?

Was getting Lee (and making it to a Game 6 against the Yankees) worth it? I'd say yes. Without Lee, we likely don't make it past Colorado. He was our only reliable starter in the playoffs. Because of that deal, the Phillies won back-to-back Pennants and are a favorite in 2010. No matter what happens with the guys we gave up, it was still a good trade.

NEPP: Had they kept Bourn, they would indeed have had 4 OFs. That's called a trading chip. And if they traded Vic for a good closer and installed Bourn in CF, how would the 2009 season have turned out?

You're creating imaginary constraints to defend a trade that really can't be judged yet.

We have no idea, clout. We do know what happened in 2008 though and that makes it a good deal for both teams.

NEPP: Again you're creating a false scenario. Because the Phillies won a WS with Lidge, you are saying that's all that matters. As if they couldn't possibly have won the WS with any other combination. As if, for example, they couldn't have won the WS this year with Bourn in CF and Madson closing. As if they couldn't reel off 3 straight WS appearances with Knapp, Marson, Donald, Carrasco. You have no clue. Neither do I. But we will have a clue once we see how those players turn out. (Although I like the Phillies side of that trade right now, especially if they sign Lee to an extension.)

"The reality is, you can't truly judge a trade in a year or two. You need to see the totality of the impact and that probably means 5 years or more."

clout, if you truly believe this then why comment at all.

What you're saying is that YOU can't or don't have an opinion RIGHT NOW, and therefore no one should or can.

I didn't realize you were the self-appointed "BL Opinion Police" ("BLOP").

But, unless people allow you police their opinions here, they are free to express them as they see fit.

Your point that I quoted above is so blatantly obvious, that you get the *MOTO of the Year Award*.

Yet, somehow, you're still wrong. I can judge a trade anytime I want to, and re-judge it later on.....and re-judge it again if I see fit.

I stand by my opinion that the Bourne/Lidge trade was win/win.

Oh, and yes it's OBVIOUSLY an opinion based on things as they now stand.

And, yes, I, and I'm sure I speak for everyone else who expressed one, reserve the right to CHANGE my view or opinion if circumstances merit.

Do you really think I or anyone else need you to point out that things might change, LMOA!

MOTO, my friend......MOTO!

Vacuously MOTO!

****NEPP: Again you're creating a false scenario. Because the Phillies won a WS with Lidge, you are saying that's all that matters. As if they couldn't possibly have won the WS with any other combination. As if, for example, they couldn't have won the WS this year with Bourn in CF and Madson closing.****

I was with you till the "Madson closing" part. We tried that. He's not a closer. He showed that this year. He's a great reliever who mentally can't close. I hate to use that as I'm pretty SABR oriented but sometimes our eyes don't lie. Madson in the 9th was a disaster waiting to happen.

awh: I don't seek to police the board. Anyone can post anything they like. You have a right to make the stupidest, most ill-informed posts you can. And I have a right to call you out on them. That's what makes Beerleaguer fun.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/is-jimmy-rollins-overrated

Interesting article on Jimmy Rollins on Fangraphs.

re: Lidge trade

Bourne was traded for 1 season of Lidge(2008), so to throw in his 2009 numbers is an incorrect way to value the trade.

Whatever Bourne's numbers are, you have to compare them to Victorino, or another OF if you contend that both Bourne and Vic would start.

Bourne's value to the Phillies would have been a 4th OF, as the phillies have 3 allstar outfielders. We got one of the best closing performances in baseball history for a full seasons out of a guy who wouldn't have even started on our team in 2008-2010(and maybe more).

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG