Part of

« Phillies set coaching staff, Samuel to coach third | Main | Phillies' recent success bodes well for Bonine »

Thursday, November 11, 2010


Ken Rosenthal says Jermaine Dye is an outfield option for the Phils:!/Ken_Rosenthal/status/2825789913432064

Hey, Ruben, a piece of advice: If the choices are Franceour or Dye, don't bother. Just let Dom Brown play!

Drew Rundle is an OF, not a P.

Just what we needed, another lefty.

Since an earlier thread was devoted to the topic of Utley's possible decline, I thought I'd post this, from Keith Law's chat today. I assume everyone will now bash Law and talk about how much he obviously hates the Phillies. Enjoy:

Gerry (PA)
Do you believe, as others do, that Utley, Rollins, & Howard are on the downside? I don't believe 30-34 is old.

(1:23 PM)
You can't just lump those three guys together as if they're all cut from the same cloth. Howard is clearly on the downside and his body type and skill set is one that doesn't age well. Rollins and Utley are athletic enough to remain productive longer, but both are having problems staying healthy, a completely different reason why some players decline early.

On Keith Law: I don't particularly like hearing this, but I don't believe in shooting messengers (at least most of the time), and I'm not so sure there is not some validity to it. Perhaps the past season was just an exception for all of them and we can all laugh next summer about how we were all Eeyores for even worrying about it.

But I also remember there were some people who talked about how the Giants'could be brutal for the Phillies in the playoffs, and I think some of that was written off as needless pessimism since the Phillies were clearly the better team by any logical measure.

The multiple BLers that catergorize Howard's "body type" as a sign of decline are pretty funny. He's often cited as overweight and unathletic. But the fact remains, he's extremely athletic, in great shape, and built like an NFL defensive end.

I'll start.

I'd like to know what numbers Law is looking at to decide that Howard is "clearly on the decline" - cause I'm not seein' it.

Also I find the comments "You can't just lump those three guys together" and "Howard...body type and skill set is one that doesn't age well." a wee bit ironic

mobyred: What numbers are you looking at? Howard posted his career lows or close to them in virtually every major category this year. Or you could just compare his numbers the last three years to his numbers in 2006-2007.

I'm willing to buy that we can write off a good amount of Howard's numbers last year as injury-influenced (moreso perhaps than Law and most anaylsts). But let's not lie to ourselves and pretend like Howard had a good season.

And I love that Howard has worked his way into great shape--but as you get older, that it takes more and more work to get the same or even diminishing results (as I'm sure every male on this board can attest to). Which is why where he started from matters.

Jermaine Dye seems like the kind of guy you'd go after if you knew yout team needed a power-hitting right-handed outfielder & you knew that the likes of Rowand, Francoeur, Hall & Diaz were inadequate, but you didn't want to spring for Magglio Ordonez.

In fairness, Dye has been a good hitter over his career & his 2009 numbers are a lot better than the 4 guys I just named. It's surprising that he was unable to land a job last year. Of course, he'd be a very high-risk acquisition given his age, the year off, & uncertainty about his ability to play defense.

Not surprised Jack jumped into refute mobyred's reasonable comment about Howard.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Phils roll the dice on Dye, if they have reason to believe (a) he didn't lose his stroke during his year off, (b) he could perform at least semi-adequately in a corner OF spot, and (c) he won't grouse about having to share playing time. I have no idea what to think about those conditions, of course. Plus, they can't take too much of a financial risk on him. Considering that he sat out because he thought he was worth more than any team offered him (at least, that's my understanding of it), I have my doubts whether the Phils could get him to agree to a deal commensurate with the risks involved.

I think KLaw is a smart guy and does a good job, but, sometimes, he is wrong.

He was wrong about Burrell v. Ibanez, but is reluctant to admit it.

He's also wrong about Howard. Howard is a conscientious guy who works hard to improve and to be in shape. His conditioning is much better than guys like Ortiz and, certainly, the much younger Fielder.

Law is also wrong about Howard's performance. He is not in decline. Howard's numbers were down in 2010 for two reasons: 1) the ankle injury and 2) the decline in offense all around baseball.

Bed's Beard: What numbers are you looking at where Howard has improved?

Howard is a very good player.

But he's not the player he was in 2006-2007, he's unlikey to ever get back to that level, and he's not worth the contract in dollars or years that he received. That's more on the Phillies, though, than him, for overvaluing his performance. He's more likely to be in decline than he is to return to the level that would justify that contract.

He's a very good player, though.

The 2010 Howard was not a very good player and Jack is right that Howard will never again approach the '06-'07 numbers he put up. He hasn't for 3 straight years.

The real question is whether Howard can bounce back to his offensive numbers in 2009 or he is somewhere closer to 2008/10. My bet is that he is somewhere closer to '09 next year but not quite as good.

What also needs to improve is his defense. Yeah, the injury hindered him alot after his return. His defense wasn't very consistent before that though. My bet is that the Phils expect Howard to be a good defensive 1B. Nor do I bet that he can throw well to his right. They do expect him though to be a good enough defensive player so he isn't a clear liability out there either.

Get Inexpensive Tickets for the Philadelphia Eagles. Home and Away Games available for the rest of the 2010 season

MG obviously hates Howard.

Jack, I guess it matters how you value his performance. Are you a fan who will always hold it against him because he'll make $25 mil/yr? I could care less how much he makes. If Howard puts up 30-35 HR & 110-125 RBI for the next 5 yrs, then I want him to do it on the Phillies. If the Phillies want to pay him $125 mil to do it, who cares?

quincy: If the team commits to an unlimited budget, yeah, for sure. I don't really care what they pay him then.

Unfortunately, this is the real world, and the team has a budget. Massively overpaying a guy drains resources that could be used elsewhere, and it also creates opportunity costs down the line. For instance, if the team has the opportunity to obtain a stud 2nd baseman, and it would make sense to move Utley to 1st, except... Howard and his huge contract ain't going anywhere. Or, if you have a stud 1B prospect ready to come up, but you have so much invested in Howard that you can't do anything with the kid, or you're forced to trade Howard for 20 cents on the dollar. You might remember that particular situation with Thome/Howard.

I'll go out on a limb here--by 2013, not a single poster on here will bother with defending the Howard contract.

quincy is baiting you jack, dont bite

I love minor league deal, especially when you stockpile AAA with a bunch of has-beens, almost-weres, and wannabes. Gotta have depth.

And on Dye, well, if the deal is right, it could be a good thing.

On Jermaine Dye, are we trying to field the worst corner outfield defense in baseball?

Yeah, Vic's a gold glover but he'd be running quite a bit with Dye and Ibanez manning the corners

That said, he's a good bat.

"Howard's numbers were down in 2010 for two reasons: 1) the ankle injury and 2) the decline in offense all around baseball."

The league-wide decline in offense is an effect, not a cause. There may well be legitimate causes for that league-wide decline and those underlying causes may well apply more to some players than others. But Ryan Howard's numbers did not decline because other players' numbers declined.

What makes everyone think Mags or Dye are possibilities? Only if they would play for us on the cheap. If either one of these guys sign it would be a good move but it would probably be only for one year. So in 2012, we'd have the same problem with no RH pop in the lineup. Yes we'd have Raul's and J-Roll's contract coming off the books, but that doesn't sign the problem.

We have payroll issues phans. Ad for that reason, I have a feeling RAJ will bring in Francouer. At 26 we'd certainly get younger in RF. Could Brown move to LF in 2012?

Look at this another way, Remeber when Werth was signed? He was coming off a major wrist injury and we were pessimistic about him right? Well he turned into a helluva player to the point where he's gonna cash in. Good for him. But he's gone unless a miracle happens. You take Werth's money and you upgrade the 'pen. Francouer finished 2nd to Howard for ROY. Why can't he develop into another offensive Werth? I like the risk. It could turn out well if he comes in. The same thing happened with Vic being a Rule 5 pick. We didn't know what we were getting and now look. Most of you don't like a potential Francouer signing, and with some good reasons, like the K's. But Werth K'd a lot too. Let's just all be patient and see how things play out for RF and then judge.

MG: "The 2010 Howard was not a very good player.

What pct. of MLB players had an OPS+ of 128 or higher?

Presumably everyone below 128 is "not a very good player."

MG, sometimes you just run right off the tracks and over the cliff in your comments.

Clout: MG probably meant relative to position.

Howard ranked 7th out of 13 qualifying NL 1B in OPS.

A 128 OPS+ player is very good by definition. A 128 OPS+ 1B is good but nothing special.

That said, I think its unfair to rate Howard's season simply by that considering he played on a bum ankle for the final 3 months.

He's not Mo Vaughn. He's not out of shape and he'll likely bounce back better in 2011.

Additionally, a guy with a 120 OPS+ (or even 110 OPS+) but good defense at an important position is obviously a better player than a bad defensive 1B with a 128 OPS+.

You do understand how that works, right Clout?

NEPP: That's totally fair, and I'm willing to buy, for now, that he had a down year because of injuries.

But let's not pretend like he had a very good season. That's all I'm asking.

Howard posted a wOBA of .367 in 2010. Among 1B with at least 400 PA, he ranked 13th...tied with Mark Teixeira (a decent bat but known more for his glove obviously). So he's in the top half of the Majors. Of course, he also was just 8 points higher than Daric Barton in 2011...not so impressive when you think about it. His career average is .391.

I don't know that I can attribute Howard's down year to injury. The drop off in power was there all year long. He had 1 HR every 17.7 AB on the year; one every 17.9 after he returned from injury. He has declined in that stat every year since his monster season in '06 but, the drop-off in '10 was somewhat drastic. With that said, Howard's season is a disappointment only in relation to the expectation that he have an MVP caliber year, every year.

I don't think it's age related decline. Howard will be 31 a week from tomorrow. He's not old. He takes good care of himself. Through '09, I tended to believe the slight decline in his HR totals, in particular, and the decline in walks in the face of static K totals was a product of NL pitchers getting the book on Howard. I thought last year's relative struggles were an indication that Howard is trying to change that book - that his down year was a product of him trying to change his own approach, make more contact, swing a little easier on balls away. Unfortunately, I think the biggest factor in his struggles is his lack of a good eye for the strike zone and his inability to "guess right" because, I think he's a big-time guesser when it comes to pitch selection. I don't know if that will change but, what I saw last year is a guy who is working on his approach. I'm optimistic that the short-term results are not indicative of a long-term trend.

Hugh: So less HRs will result in an improved Howard? Interesting, considering Howard's biggest strength, and what he's always been defended on, is his massive power.

Most people would say that a drop in that power would make him a worse player. A .290 singles hitter batting cleanup isn't exactly what the Phils were hoping for when they signed him to the $125 million deal, I'm guessing.

I would take Dye over Francouer any day of the century, even if he'd been out of baseball for five seasons.

I'm thrilled Juan Samuel is back with the team, but puzzled like many others as to why he's at 3B. Perlozzo has years and years of experience over on that side of the diamond.

On Utley: this guy needs to learn how to use the whole field again, period. He's way too good of a hitter to be in the .270s. Maybe he's wearing down, maybe he's hurt. All I know is he needs to lose the dead-pull approach if he's interested in how he can best help the team. That's one aspect of his decline which can be controlled.

RIP to a guy many here might not know, Dave Niehaus. He was the Mariners' (and Northwest's) Harry Kalas, a very personable and passionate broadcaster who was with that team since its inception.

Juan Samuel has tons of experience as a 3B coach too.

Samuel is a bigger hand waving target.

Haven't been around for a while but I see nothing changes.

Jack's still posting about how much he "loves" me, even as he fill post after post criticizing me.

And it hurts so much because after all of Jack's criticism about how I hit too many home runs, I tried to hit for average this season instead.

The problem with using this year as evidence for Howard is people are not counting for the fact that he missed time with an injury and then was off for a little time before he came back.

Also, I know body type is a discussion people always want to have but Howard has actually lost weight from his 2006-2007 years and does not have the same body as a Mo Vaughn type who is usually pointed to as the comparison.

The stuff about Howard having a bad body type is just lazy journalism. It's the same sort of crap that keeps Santa Claus stories rolling out of pens and mouths every time someone mentions Philly sports. As for suspicions of Howard's demise, I'm fairly confident that a healthy Ryno will post 40+ homers in 2011. The guy works hard, has loads of talent, and even in his worst year so far posted respectable numbers. I'm a helluva lot more worried about lots of things other than Howard. Right off the top of my head: J-Roll, Utley's hip, the Domonator's progression, what BenFran will look like with with 300 ABs, and how the middle relief will pan out.

Which expires first, Ryno's contract or the complaints about said contract?

RSB~ Not disagreeing with you on Dye over Francouer. Just saying that he's younger, has some pop and plays RF adequately.RAJ said he wants his team to get younger and this is a way he could do it. But yes Dye is a much better hitter. I wouldn't even mid Matt Diaz in a platoon role but even he's 32.

But the big key is Brown. He'll have to hit when he's in there, no matter whi is pitching.

On Howard: I think his biggest problem is that he doesn't make adustments at the plate. I think he needs to close his stance a little and move a little closer to the plate. At times to me his swing looked slow.
He needs to be more aggressive. I wonder if maybe needs glasses at the plate.

But really the entire lineup takes too many pitches that they should swing at.

NEPP: Exactly. Someone who just makes that comparison is a dummy.

DP: I can see how Francouer's age may seem appealing, and that Dye would just be making the team that much older. But Francoeur also just makes the offense that much more strikeout-prone. I don't think he plays the game with a very intelligent approach. Yes, he'd be somewhat dangerous against LHP and an asset in RF, but I'm sort of biased against the type of hitter he has shown himself to be.

"So less HRs will result in an improved Howard?"

The answer to that is obviously no. But I do think that, in the long run, a Ryan Howard who puts more balls in play will be a better player than a Ryan Howard who strikes out 195 times. Howard is at his best when, instead of trying to kill every pitch, he just takes it the oppposite way. When he follows that approach, his strikeouts go down, his average goes up and, over time, the homeruns will take care of themselves.

"The league-wide decline in offense is an effect, not a cause."

BAP - You are right. I stand corrected. I should have said that Howard's ankle injury caused a decline in Howard's performance. Otherwise, relative to the rest of the players in baseball, Howard's 2010 season would have been a typical Howard season in terms of wOBA and OPS+.

On July 27, Howard's OPS was .910. Had he finished the season that way, Howard's OPS+ would have been very close to 141, his career OPS+ through the 2009 season.

Given Howard's usual late season performance in August and September, had he matched his August and September career norms (less 5% to account for the league-wide decline in offense), Howard would have hit 40 HRs and his 2010 OPS+ and wOBA would have been normal.

Instead, what happened was this:

In the first three game after July 27, Howard went 0 for 13 with 8 strikeouts. His next game was August 1, when Howard hurt his ankle. Howard returned on August 21 and put up an atrocious .386 OPS in 42 PAs for the month of August (compared to his .818 career August OPS average).

Howard bounced back in September with a .977 OPS, but still 100 points lower than his career September average.

In sum, I don't think Howard's 2010 season showed diminished skills, just the effects of the ankle injury.

Correction: Howard's career August OPS is .918.

RE: KLaw - "Howard is clearly on the downside"

One year does not constitute a trend, and a trend is what is needed to conclude that Howard is on the downside.

He had a monster first year (when pitchers pitched him much differently then they did subsequently, according to fangraphs).

Since then, I see no evidence of a trend one way or another.Obviously as he moves forward, the numbers he averages will probably begin to trend downward, as they do for the vast majority of players not on peds. I see no evidence to suggest that they will decline at any preciptous rate, as KLaw implies.

moby: right. "clearly" is not so clear at this point.

Clout - It was to other 1B in the NL and AL. Probably the guy I can think who had a similar disappointing offensive year at 1B offensively was Teixeira. Difference though was that Teixeria didn't get injured and missed time. He was just awful the first 6 weeks of the year and really faded down the stretch/into the playoffs before injury finally did finish his season. He did win a GG though too. He took just as much flack and probably more in NY this year than Howard did in Philly.

I have never cared that much about Howard's Ks, hitting into the shift, his 'body type' and even his defense. What is a bit disconcerting is that his K/BB ratio has continued to erode a bit over time and that his % BB rate has decreased nearly as much as his % K rate has.

Don't mind if Howard is at .255-.260 if he is taking his share of BBs and hitting ~45 HRs.

Just from looking at the numbers and seeing alot of Howard this year, it seems like he liked to make more contact this year. Numbers show he did but in order to do so he swung at more pitches especially out of the strike zone. Resulted in him hitting more ground balls than the previous year and having a drop on HR/FB ratio.

Sure that having that ankle injury though hurt his ability to drive the ball later in the year too considering his he has a ridiculous HR every 11.1 ABs in Sept/Oct in his career. My bet is that if Howard is healthy all year, he hits 40+ HRs again.

What was disappointing this year was his defensive gaffes/lapses. He actually made some very spectacular plays this season but way too often he just had simple mental lapses/gaffes defensively. Not exactly sure how you get over something like expect to take a ton of GBs this winter.

Howard has a 'monster' 1st half?:

.294/.350/.509 (.859 OPS) with 17 HRs and 65 RBIs in 87 G

.248/.358/.500 (.858 OPS) with 14 HRs and 43 RBIs in 56 G

Reason his average was so large in the 1st half was a .346 BABIP vs. just .303. Little luck.

Howard actually hit a bit better in April this year than he normally does but had kind of a lackluster May, a month he has generally hit very well.

It was a decent 1st half but far from being a 'monster' one.

Ibanez in LF and Dye in RF? It really would be a 'Beerleague' defensively in the gaps and down the corners. Probably would be the worst corner OF defense in MLB.

Jack: "So less HRs will result in an improved Howard? Interesting, considering Howard's biggest strength, and what he's always been defended on, is his massive power."

Sorry I didn't stick around to catch this one. No. I'm optimistic that he'll reverse the trend. It's a short term issue. He is still capable of popping 50 HR a year for several years. The league knows what he can hit and what he can't right now. He's adjusting to what he's seeing and, when he does, the league will have to adjust to him. Sorry if I was unclear. The kid isn't old. Hopefully, he's still maturing as a hitter. I don't care to engage in the debate over his contract. I just think it's very premature to declare him over the hill.

I love when MG does that thing where he responds to a statement that no one said.

Not a single person in this thread mentioned Howard having a monster first half but MG questions that statement and then offers evidence. Always amusing.

Where's Francouer this morning? Kansas City or Pittsburgh?

RSB~ Like I said, not disagreeing. I wonder though if Cholly can help a guy like him with his hitting. He does have holes. We just have to wait and see what they do.

What kind of deal does Frenchy expect to receive? Could he end up with a minor league contract?

Trivial season
when a boat with a bad oar
beats one with a gnome.

Didn't Beerleaguer already have a Pete Orr thread either last year or two years ago? I almost swear the Phils signed or spinrg-invited him at some point in the past.

Todd: Dye is a RHB.

Keith Law won't lump Howard in with Utley and Rollins, but lumps Utley and Rollins together. In what way are Ultey and Rollins comparable as far as skill set and/or body type?

From Red Sox HotStove:

"Boras recently compared his client, outfielder Jayson Werth to former Red Sox outfielder Dwight Evans, as the Sox have been rumored to show interest in the former Phillies' slugger.And Boras didn't stop there.Third baseman Adrian Beltre, another Boras client seeking big bucks this offsesaon, was compared to Hall of Famers Mike Schmidt, Paul Molitor and George Brett. By the sound of it, Beltre doesn't even need such ridiculous comparisons, as Boras explained the incredible level of interest in Beltre already this offseason."

TTI - I thought mobyred said 'first half' and not 'first year.'

well i'll be damned, I was right:

Pete Orr's First Thead 11-4-08

Boras is being Boras but Beltre is going to get vastly overpaid by some stupid team on 4 year deal. My bet is something like 4 yr/~60-65M for someone who likely hits .260-.270 with 20-25 HRs next year with declining offense and defense.

Not to mention that fact that Beltre has always had a reputation of being a guy who doesn't necessarily play 100% especially in a non-contract year.

And now its official, Pete Orr on BL for three years straight:

Pete Orr's other minor mention 11-11-09

Magglio Ordonez was old and one of best hitters in '08 also.

Meyer: Hah that is the first thing I noticed as well.

Two years ago we laughed at Pete Orr and debated Magglio Ordonez over Pat Burrell, now today we sit and laugh at Pete Orr and debate Magglio over Ibanez.

I think it's more of Boras trying to overcompensate a brutal crop of free agents this off-season. Whether he is still as successful as always remains to be seen. This is the thinnest offensive year for free agents I've seen in a long time.

Whether Boras is being Boras or not, the bottom line is that the owners pay the money. If they decide not to pay outlandish dollars, then prices come down.

The thing with Boras is that he thinks his clients are the best in the world and everybody else's suck.

I knew immediately after Werth hired him that we'd have no chance of bringing him back.

And Beltre, he turned down 3/24 from the Phils last year and accepted Boston's 1-year offer with an option, knowing full well that the option would be turned down if he had a good year so he could go back into the market and get a bigger contract. Well now after this year, the owners would be wise to offer no more than 3/18. I know this is collusion, but it's the only way to stop Boras from playing his games.

One can only wonder if Werth really turned down 4/44 or 5/66 or even if the offers were made at all. If RAJ really wanted him back, it would have been better to get him before he switched agents. Now there's no way.

DPatrone - Why should Beltre only get 3/$18M? in free agency. Understand your frustration with Boras, but I go would side with the players 100% of the time vs. the owners in an issue of collusion.


What I'm saying is things have gotten to a ridiculous point. I like Jason Werth. I think he's better than Holliday. But to pay him Holliday money? I'm not aginst players getting all they can (within reason), but I am aginst agents playing games to drive salaries up.

We are either going to have a Brown/Francisco platoon or an older guy playing RF. I'm not crazy about Mags, Dye or Francoueur, but at least Frency is young.

Look at our 'pen. Contreras will re-sign. He's 39 (???). We can't get young flame throwers because they want too much. We could use Durbin back too, but at what price? There just isn't that much out there. Where is the line going to be drawn? If our payroll winds up being 155 million, everyone will ask why it couldn't be stretched for Werth.

Now I know Jeter will and will re-sign with the Yanks. But at 45 - 60 million? What happens when it's J-Rolls turn or Tulo's?

A player shouldn't be allowed to purposely turn down a option (in Beltre's case) and go back on the market. It's Boston's problem but now they have to find another 3B-man because of that. It may a John Doe type player. Now if you're a Bosox fan, would you be happy with that?

Jeter and NY are in a whole different world compared to Rollins and Philly.

Despite all the hopelessness I still say Werth either winds up in Boston or Philly. His options are more limited than people think.

There have been mixed reports that the Bosox were in on Dejesus to fill their OF need, rather than go for the pricier Free Agent OFers. DeJesus went elsewhere, but maybe they have their eye on someone else, rather than Werth.

BB~ I wasn't comparing Jeter and the Yanks to Rollis and Philly. Merely saying that Mega-contracts skew the prices up for everyone.

Werth: Boras says the dialogue between He and the Phils continues. So? And you're right, the market for Werth could be a lot more limited than we think. It's is the player's right to test the market. But I still believe that if Werth and the Phils wanted to stay married for a while longer it should have been done already. Each side knows what the other side can/can't do. It shouldn't have gotten to this point. Werth is a perfect fit on this team and in this lineup. Agreed?

Today's first mention of a desire for illegal conclusion came before noon!

Yay for billionaire owners getting to keep their money instead of paying the players who actually provide the product!

"A player shouldn't be allowed to purposely turn down a option (in Beltre's case) and go back on the market"

Isn't that what an option is: a binding offer that you can accept or turn down? No one forced the RedSox to include the option.

DeJesus went to the A's and supposedly Beane is considering moving some of their young pitching talent to get a hitter that lineup desperately needs.

A's are going to be one of the more interesting teams to watch at the Winter Meetings because they have some good young arms and some payroll flexibility because they finally got out of the terrible Chavez deal and Sheet is a FA. If the Rangers don't resign Lee, the AL West is wide open with 87-88 games getting a team into the postseason next year.

bap: Players shouldn't be allowed to choose teams either. They should re-instate the reserve clause.

Then finally the Phils could sign Curt Flood.

****A player shouldn't be allowed to purposely turn down a option (in Beltre's case) and go back on the market.****

That's possibly the dumbest thing that has ever been written on this site.

Dye is going to want too much money. The only comments we keep seeing about him: he wants to play for a winner and about low contracts "I ain't playing for that". How much would you pay an old player who everybody ignored last year? The guy sounds like a head case or something. He definitely overvalues himself. There is no way Rube gives him $5 mil.

Supposedly the money isnt a major issue this time around...he just wants an MLB guaranteed deal.

Maybe 1 year, $1 million gets it done.

NEPP and everybody else,
Go look him up online. I believe his most recent whacko quites come from MLBtraderumors. $1 mil is not going to do it. The worst part is, he is his own agent. So there is no reasoning with "his client".

NEPP and everybody else,
Go look him up online. I believe his most recent whacko quotes come from MLBtraderumors. $1 mil is not going to do it. The worst part is, he is his own agent. So there is no reasoning with "his client".

I can't see dye signing a 1 year $1mil deal, after skipping a year b/c he wanted to play for more money.

This is from last year...
"Salk says Dye would be willing to take less than a full-time role with the Mariners, and guesses that he'd sign for $3-4MM.  Dye turned down a $3MM offer from the Cubs a few months ago and recently rejected an unknown offer from the Nationals.  He also had talks with the Brewers in late March.  Dye suggested to's Bill Ladson that many of his offers were in the $1MM range, which he seemed to find insulting"

I'm sure the Red Sox included the option year for Beltre's contract on their own. They probably weren't forced. But if they don't put it in, Beltre hit the market anyway. That's my whole point. The team has no leverage in a situation like that. So my comment may have been "dumb" but the point was made. And I assure you, it wasn't the dumbest comment ever posted on this site. We wouldn't be too happy if that were the situation with Werth would we?

And of course Boras is saying he and the Phils are communicating. What else is he gonna say? But isn't there some creedence in what Stark wrote the other day about Werth's chances of returning? Werth will only be back here is no one else gives him what he wants and 100 million is way too much.

"I'm sure the Red Sox included the option year for Beltre's contract on their own. They probably weren't forced. But if they don't put it in, Beltre hit the market anyway."

Huh? Beltre and the RS agreed to include the option as part of the negotiation. Beltre wanted it as some kind of insurance policy in case he crapped out the year or got hurt. Beltre would have wanted even more money to sign the original contract without the player option. The player option is a compromise and a hedge by both parties.

DPatrone: "The team has no leverage in a situation like that."

Who cares? They gave up their leverage in exchange for getting Beltre on a 1-year deal at reasonable money. This is how a market works.

All the points you make about Boras goes the same with every agent worth their salt. If they don't think their players are the best and can't represent them as such and make a killing for them, they need to get into another business pronto.
The market is the same everywhere. Without a cap, the market players pay what the market bears. If there was not a Sox or Yankee ownership which wouldn't pay Werth or Lee big green they would be making whatever we wanted to pay them.

A salary cap wouldn't be the worst idea in the world, but I don't see it happening in MLB.

"We wouldn't be too happy if that were the situation with Werth would we?"

True. If Werth's contract with the Phillies had included a player option, he could have exercised that option & he'd be a free agent right now. We would have been completely screwed.

A salary cap would be a good way of taking money from the players and putting it back in billionaire owners' pockets.

MLB is awash with revenue. There is no need at all for a salary cap. What there is a need for is owners who are willing to re-invest revenues into on-field products, and a need for teams to be located in markets which will support baseball.

Jack, it's easy to express that opinion as a fan of afranchise that can compete on the unlevel economic playing field of MLB. what would you do with markets that don't generate revenues commensurate with the Yankees, Sox, Phils, Mets, etc., but whose franchises are among the founding members of the league and whose taxpaying residents have forked over hundreds of millions of dollars to build stadiums in response to MLB demands that they do so if they want the franchise to stay in their city? Tell them tough sh!t? Without these 'have not' franchises, the league and the big market teams would not have achieved the economic strength they have today.

Phillies sign Eddie Bonine

Bonine? Is that a major league deal? Yikes.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel