Part of

« Madson's move secures highest draft pick since 2001 | Main | Minor news: Bump back on the bump for Phillies »

Wednesday, January 11, 2012




Stinks stinks stinks.

Get a worse pick and stuck with a huge contract for a closer. Well played Amaro.

My daughters were fond of the Baby Mouse books (kind of graphic novels for kids. Baby Mouse's reaction to this kind of thing was: "Typical."

Glad that draft comp mess is finally settled. Rube screwed up.

rabble rabble rabble rabble

How did the Phillies get screwed on both sides of this CBA draft compensation? grumblegrumblegrumble

Stupid rules

Are we all acting like we didn't know this 50 days ago?

the eras cycle
and the phillies still get screwed's typical

Best thing about this offseason so far is that watching/going to one of the various 19 games vs. Nats/Fish should actually be pretty entertaining this year.

BB - No. Just a mix up but it was still poor timing by Amaro.

MG: the best part of the offseason is the 'thought' of going to Fish/Nats games in the future?

You are weird.

Why are the Nats games more interesting this year, b/c they traded for Gio?

BB - Nats on the condition they sign Fielder which I think they will still do.

I really dislike the current schedule format with so many games against NL East teams each year. Given how competitive the NL East should be this year, yeah I am looking to forward to going to more of these games especially the Fish with Guillen as manager & there numerous player upgrades.

Best part of offseason so far: I haven't read the name Freddy Galvis associated with the 2012 Phillies in awhile.

Been a while since there has been a team that Phils had in the division that I really genuinely disliked. '07 Mets probably were the closest because of several guys they had on that team including Wagner, Lo Duca, Reyes, Milledge, etc.

Fish are set up nicely for that role as a team that Phils' fans will actually dislike because of a loud-mouthed manager (Guillen) with little social grace/tact, couple of players who are quite easy to root against including Reyes/H. Ramirez/Morrison, and a scumbag owner in Loria.

I was on the fence before now but I think Rube done screwed up.


I still think it's pretty crazy the new deal was retroactive to the beginning of the FA period which was a week(?) or so before the deal was reached.

Its easy to say that Rube screwed up, and nothing really did work out in his favor here. Except the Phillies did get one of the top closers in baseball (by almost every metric), and people would have been losing their minds if Amaro had waited out the closer market this long. Plus, no one saw Madson, a Boras client, ever accepting this kind of deal until a week or two ago.

Just gotta hop that they win the World Series sometime in the next two years; that'll ease the pain for sure. Or maybe Papelbon won't flame out and we'll get four good years. There's a first time for everything!

"I really dislike the current schedule format with so many games against NL East teams each year."

Why? It seems to me that if a team is playing in a 'division' and need to win it, then they ought to have a greater number of games against divison foes.

Gotta beat the teams you have to beat, no?

(Personally, I'd scrap the division format entirely and just have the top 4 teams in the league seeded by record.)

Anyone interested in Cordero as a setup man?

Last year, the Phillies were 12-6 against the Marlins, 8-10 against the Nats and 12-6 against the Braves. That's 32-22 against these three or a .592 winning percentage. My guess is that the Phils also will have a winning record against these combined three in 2012, no worse than 29-25.

awh - As a partial season ticket holder and a fan, 19 games against each division opponent is an awful lot. I would rather see some more of the other NL clubs instead.

Guess because I like more variety in general.

awh - Wood was too steep for the Phils at $4-5 mil. I don't see Cordero taking less than that.

But yes I would take him if he came on board with a $1-2 mil deal.

Congrats to Madson. He turned himself into a really quality reliever who was almost always money for the Phils in the postseason. Been a big part of their success since '07.

The Phils are now primed for a great run at third place in the NL East

MG: If Madson has a better season than Papelbon this year then you can definitely make the case that Rube screwed up. But then Madson becomes an FA while the Phils will still have Pap for 3 more years. So Mad Dog could end up with a Pap-type contract next season, no?

clout - Madson isn't going to get a 3 yr/$39M contract next year with a possible $13M vesting option for '16 (what Papelbon is owed after this season). He might get 3 yrs but it won't be at $13M a year. My bet is that he would be fortunate to get $10M/year @ 3 years maximum.

Worse thing about the contract with Papelbon is the years and secondarily the AAV. I could understand last year going over the supposed Phils' creed of no contract more than 3 yrs for a pitcher for a starter of Lee's caliber but a 5 years potentially for a closer?

Still would have rather had Nathan/Wood combo than Papelbon alone.

It's 5 years if he's healthy and hits other metrics(?), which would mean he's doing well.

I don't know if Rube did or did not screw up, but this fact is getting glossed over: the Madson contract saga would likely have played out much differently if we hadn't given such a huge contract to Papelbon. You can certainly make a strong case that RAJ should have waited out the closers market a little longer. But I think it's a huge leap to infer that, if only he had waited, he could have gotten Madson on a 1-year deal.

A more likely scenario is that, if Papelbon had ended up signing a more modest deal, Madson/Boras would have been forced to reduce their demands to something that would have actually been affordable to a few teams.

BB - Vesting option is just for finishing 55 games in '15 or 100 games in '14 and '15.

Not tied to quality results although that obviously is a strong health-based component to it.

I noticed too that Baseball Prospectus bought Cot's Contracts & brought Jeff Euston on as a full-time employee. Curious to know what they paid Euston for the website. I would imagine under $20k since he came on board as a full-time employee.

Congrats to Euston on getting Cot's bought out. Took a free blogspot website to a fixture on of the more respected sites in baseball.

Way to pooch the offseason, r00b. Jackass.

The real question is how much would Ryan have made if he would have taken arbitration this year. Lots of pressure on reds this year. Few idiots said they are going to win The NL this year. With the cards losing Albert and juicer for brew crew div wide open

Does that mean that Cot's will no longer be a free site?

Well glad to see he landed on his feet for now. If I was madson, I'd still fire Boras.

Cardinals are still the favorite in the central i think, with the reds a very close 2nd. In reality, the cardinals get to move berkman to 1st and just give more playing time to john jay so they did lose pujols but they can replace 85% of his production(which when were talking about pujols, 85% of that is top 10). Brewers are dead in the water with no fielder, and no braun for 1/3 of the season. Cubs are a giant mess, and houston is houston.

****Does that mean that Cot's will no longer be a free site?

I hope not...its such a great site but its not something I would ever pay for.

Phils weren't ever supposed to get the 1st rd pick from the team signing Madson. When the CBA info came out he was identified as one of the "modified" Type A free agents. What happened to this from MLBTR back on 22 November: "Meanwhile, clubs won't have to surrender a draft pick to sign one of the following six players: Michael Cuddyer, Kelly Johnson, Ryan Madson, Josh Willingham and Francisco Rodriguez. Teams that lose these players after offering arbitration will obtain first round picks in the slot before the signing team plus a supplementary draft pick for a total of two selections." I want that 14th pick!

Great signing for the Reds. They're saving a lot of money by not re-signing Cordero. They'll likely spend it throughout the rest of the bullpen. They've already picked up Mat Latos.
Madson will likely be one and done in Cincinnati.

re Cot's:

its still free now, but agreed, no way I pay for that info(that b-ref has basically captured now anyway).

"Teams that lose these players after offering arbitration will obtain first round picks in the slot before the signing team plus a supplementary draft pick for a total of two selections"

Seriously. That sounds like the Reds get their pick, but it moves to 15 and the Phils get 14. Am I reading that wrong or is MLBTR wrong?

Sadly, I doubt our own front office knows the deal with draft picks, considering how they proceeded this offseason.

The Cot's site is an aggregator, not a generator. If BP puts it behind a paywall another free site with the same info will be up within 48 hours.

Andy: The first 15 picks of the draft are exempt from compensation. Under the new CBA that will go down to first 10 next offseason.

Oops, I see JW has already posted that. Sorry.

***The Cot's site is an aggregator, not a generator. If BP puts it behind a paywall another free site with the same info will be up within 48 hours.***

Yeah but I'll have to change my Favorites listing to match that.

Sucks about not picking 14th...that would have been nice.

Will someone explain to me how this is Amaro's "fault" in any way? The only decision he made was to sign Papelbon instead of Madson and give the latter arbitration. Period.

What, he's supposed to make the Red Sox, Brewers, Angels, or Blue Jays poney up money for the guy instead so he gets a better draft pick? There's a specific legal term that applies to that: collusion .

I see Gtown_Dave is still around to offer zero insight and namecall at every chance he gets.

Godfather: If he'd waited out the market 1) he would have saved a 1st rd pick and 2) he might have noticed that there was a glut of closers still on the market and he didn't need to overpay Papelbon

Sad to see Madson leave, particularly the way the deals(his & Paplebon's) turned out.

It would have been great if the Phils could have gotten him for one year even after the Pap. deal, but if you believe Salisbury's version of the story - Madson would not even talk with the club at that point.

The business side of baseball has some nasty twists and turns to it. And I think Boras vs. Amaro is a match made in negotiations hell.

Amaro didn't have a 'terrible offseason' either. I don't know how anyone would say that including myself.

He resigned JRoll on a deal that was probably about as good as he possibly could, upgraded the bench, and signed the best closer on the market.

I just dislike the Papelbon a ton because of the length & what the Papelbon/JRoll commitments mean over the more intermediate term.

"what the Papelbon/JRoll commitments mean over the more intermediate term."

Means they'll have a very good closer and solid SS?

This probably deserves a full analysis at some point. But my impression of Amaro so far is that he has been particularly savvy at recognizing the ability to get top players via prospect trades given the team's window to win now.

However, he has been particularly ignorant and or tone-deaf when it comes to the market for major-league signings. Ibanez, Howard and Papelbon are now all examples of deals where he significantly overshot the market to sign a guy. A bunch of his smaller deals (Schneider, Baez, and others) were marked by an odd tendency to give out an extra guaranteed year that seemed unnecessary. His best FA signing was obviously Cliff Lee, and if we're being completely honest, that basically came down to Lee saying he wanted to play in Philly no matter what.

So, in very, very general and oversimplified terms, my analysis of Amaro is that he is properly aggressive when it comes to recognizing his team's needs via trade, but pretty awful at navigating the open market for players.

All of which is to say: Amaro seems to be the right GM for right now, when the team is in a window to win right away and will spend whatever is necessary to do so.

If that changes, however, and suddenly the emphasis is on the longer-term and/or the team needs to maintain a competitive roster with a more limited budget, I wonder about Amaro's ability to do those things.

Jack, I agree that RAJ is a great GM when the plan is "win now." I'm not sure that he's the "build for the future" type.

I saw only a post or two about it - is anyone else concerned about this whole notion of trying to sign Hamels for just one year??? Am I missing something?

The Hamels 1 year contract rumor is a win for the Phillies 2015 budget

MG~ You're right. He didn't have a bad off-season. He just forgot to do anything with the offense. But everything else, as you say is ok.

"His best FA signing was obviously Cliff Lee, and if we're being completely honest, that basically came down to Lee saying he wanted to play in Philly no matter what."

Actually, if we're being COMPLETELY honest, it remains to be seen whether this was his best FA signing. Granted, I think Lee has as good a chance as anyone to stay effective into his mid-30s. But, if he doesn't, no one is going to look back on this as a great signing.

If we're talking about FA signings on which judgment can already be rendered, I'd say RAJ's best signings were Contereras (the first time), Park, and Pedro -- all cheap, one-year deals (or, in Pedro's case, less than one year).

"But I think it's a huge leap to infer that, if only he had waited, he could have gotten Madson on a 1-year deal."

bap, we don't often agree, but on that point you are 100% correct.

Those here who want to rip RAJ for "leaping" too early can certainly say he pounced too fast, but they have NO WAY of knowing how the market would have developed if Amaro had acted differently.

They can speculate all they want, but Madson may not have been around.

For instance, suppose the Phils waited, and Papelbon and madson both took deals somewhere else. Sure, they can argue that the Phils were willing to spend more than anyone else, but if their argument is that Ruben OVERPAID, then their advocating that he shouldn't have spent so much. Therefore, if they had not been willing to spend as much - either in AAV or years - on a closer, it's entirely possible that Madson AND Papelbon could have fallen to someone else... even the Fish.

But they only imagine the alternative scenarios that work out they way they envision, because, of course, it fits their narrative.


Forgot? Please. Signing Reyes wasn't an option, and that's the only real upgrade that was available at SS (because you're not gonna get a better shortstop than J-Roll via trade). 3B? Option was Aramis Ramirer, who's old (34), a sub par defender, and overpaid at $13 mil/ yr from Milwaukee, or Michael Cuddyer, who's also a butcher, 32, and really a corner outfielder. LF needs to be kept open for Mayberry/Brown, Pence is entrenched in RF, Vic in Center, Howard at 1B, Utley at 2B, Ruiz at C (and again, not like an upgrade was available).

About the only option open to him for improving the offense was upgrading the bench. Oh wait, he did!

Waiting out the market would have 1) Cost him Papelbon, who's worth more than a 1st round pick and is arguably the best closer in baseball after Rivera (certainly the best on the market), do you really believe the Marlins wouldn't have shot the moon for Papelbon? They gave Bell 3 years at $27 mil and offered Pujols a bigger contract than the Angels did; 2) Losing Madson is the reason we're getting a pick anyway, and I don't think there's that much daylight between pick #31 and a pick that's say #45; 3) There isn't a glut of closers on the market that compared to Papelbon. You've got Madson who's had 1 year of closing experience, Bell who's appreciably older and had dangerous drops in key stats for 2011, and then a stretch of relievers who are really Class "B" and not nearly as good. Rauch, Nathan, Francisco, no one in their right minds would compare these guys to Pap.

It's like saying the Angels shouldn't have signed Pujols in November given the chance: believe me, if they could have made that deal in November, they would have. When you've got a real opportunity to get the best player at his position on the FA market you go for it. As for overpaying, I do not and will never subscribe to the idea that closers should never be given limited deals (2-3 years max) and never over $10 million.

To paraphrase JoePa: GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT, we might state that RAJ handled the closer situation poorly. However, at the time, I think he did just fine. Though, I'd love to know what happened over that weekend from when we though we had Madson re-inked, until that next week when we had Paps.

It's really easy to say that since the Reds got Madson on such a friendly deal that the Phils should have played it differently. Of course, I suspect that it's such a friendly deal because Madson has almost no intentions of being in Cincy past next season and he's just using it as a tactic to improve his value before going through it all again next year. I don't know that he'd have afforded the Phillies that same luxury - and I suspect that RAJ wouldn't have settled for just a 1 commitment to serve as Madson's casting call.

Which is why I wonder what's up with the Hamels single year talk...

godfather: are you saying that it was worth locking up Papelbon at premium dollars than waiting out the market on a counterpart such as Madson?

see Gtown_Dave is still around to offer zero insight and namecall at every chance he gets.

Posted by: RedBurb"

That's why he's a founding member of the Triple P.

What a big surprise! Boras and Rube with different takes on what really happened. Guess we will never know.

Willard: Sure, given the benefit of hindsight it looks bad, and Rube didn't know how the market would shake out.

But the point is that it's Ruben's JOB to anticipate the market and make the right moves. No one knows at the time how things are going to play out--but when you consistently overshoot the market, you can't keep relying on that excuse. The point is that all the GM's are playing something of a waiting game and there are different game theory strategies. It's the job of a GM to be correct in anticipating how the market will play out.

"Godfather: If he'd waited out the market 1) he would have saved a 1st rd pick and 2) he might have noticed that there was a glut of closers still on the market and he didn't need to overpay Papelbon"

Jbird, you don't "know" if #1 is true because he may have signed Papelbon anyway, or maybe Bell - lost pick(even at lower dollars).

Jack, I think I kinda agree with you. I guess where we might see things a little different is that I don't view the Phillies as "in the same boat" as the Reds, when it comes to Madson.

To clarify, let's say Paps signed somewhere else and was off the market. Essentially, that leaves the Phils, who now NEED a closer, in the market for Madson with no other real alternatives. What I'm saying is that I don't think that Madson gives the Phils the option of a 1 year deal. It's only after the Phils are no longer an option at all that Madson resorts to his own "Plan B," which is to sign anywhere else for just a year and play the market again next offseason.

Basically, I don't know that RAJ reacted too early. Either way I think he needs to pony up years and $'s if he wants Madson this offseason, especially if no other options were available. RAJ hedged against being put in that position, however, when he signed Paps, so I guess we won't ever really know.

My issue with Paplebon signing is the timeline of the CBA. In hindsight, Amaro looks silly there. On that note, If the Phils sign Soler, than I'm content that he's our #1pick of sorts.

An argument could be made that BLers were wrong about the market for Madson.

"An argument could be made that BLers were wrong about the market for Madson."

An argument could also be made that Scott Boras was wrong about the market for Madson, which sucks for Madson.

According to Salisbury's article, the Phillies try to strike quickly. I guess they like to make sure they "get their man".

Salisbury also wrote that he believes Madson had 3/30 on the table from the Phillies.

If that is the case, then it was Boras who floated the 4/44 out there to try to jack up the price and years.

If the Phillies were willing to pay Madson $10 MM/year, and the AAV of the Papelbon deal is $12.75 MM, then the annual difference in their cost would have been $2.75MM.

For those of you who have speculated (because that's all it is at this point - speculation) that the Papelbon contract will preclude them from re-signing Hamels, I submit to you that $2.75 MM/year is not likely to be the difference. (And neither is the 4th year because they'd have had to pay for a closer anyway.)

Rather, if they can't re-sign Hamels, it's likely to be for a lot more than that amount of money.

Preacher and Jack, the GM has limited input into the scouting and drafting of high school and college players.

GMs usually rely on the scouting staff to get that done. Yes, they sit in on the meetings and have some input, especially with priorities, but there's no way they have the time to scout every single player who may be available when it's a team's turn to pick in the draft. They just don't have the time.

awh: Of course the Phillies try and strike quickly. That much has been glaringly obvious.

The question isn't whether they do that or not, it's whether that's the right move in every circumstance or not. I would argue that in the cases of Ibanez, Howard and Papelbon, they ended up paying more in years and money than they needed to based on that strategy.

There's no doubt Rube is good at "getting his guy." My question is for how long the Phillies are going to be able to throw buckets of money at "his guys," and if that strategy is really sustainable. But I know you don't believe in questioning our Great Leader.

Basically, we shouldn't count on any player being represented by Boras helping out RAJ anytime soon....

awh: I understand how the drafting and scouting process works (as much any of us can).

I'm not sure what that has to do with what I was talking about, though. What's the context for that?

"I saw only a post or two about it - is anyone else concerned about this whole notion of trying to sign Hamels for just one year??? Am I missing something?"

Yeah, Preacher, you are. Yuo and the rest of the "concerned" folks here are missing the point that it MAY BE HAMELS that has no desire to sign more than a one year contract.

You're also missing a oint Luis brought up earlier:

Hamels is coming off both hernia and elbow surgery. Even if the Phillies are willing to meet him halfway and they can reach an agreement on financial terms for a long term deal, doesn't prudence dictate waiting to see how Hamels responds to the surgery?

If they signed him to a long term deal before the season and he turned into another walking bandaid like Carl Pavano you and many others here would be ripping the FO for acting prematurely.

Admit it, you would.

awh: You're right. The front office has shown its usual prudence in not signing one of its marquee players to a huge deal a year and a half before they hit FA. Something they would obviously never do.


Actually that "premium" would almost certainly had been more money if the Phillies had gotten into a bidding war for Pap's services at the Winter Trade meetings. Why do you think Pujols cost the Angels so much? Or C.J. Wilson? Because the agents were going from team to team stating "FLA is bidding this much, are you gonna up your offer?"

Imagine if the Phillies were dealing with that, but for Papelbon. Guess what happens? It's not 4 years and 50 mil, it becomes 4 years and 60 mil, or 65 mil instead. Contrast that vs. paying a premium immediately: yes, you overpay, but not as much as you would in a bidding war.

That's the logic for signing who you want early. You save money by avoiding a bidding war.

So if you think the market was crazy, imagine how worse it would have been if the Phillies didn't fill the hole immediately. So yes, I'd much rather pay a premium for the best on the market than get into a bidding war for a class B closer, which is where I lump Madson.

Moreover, I'd much rather have Pap as the closer than Madson. Prior to 2011, Madson had established a case that he actually wasn't fit for the role. He was a very different pitcher in the 9th inning prior to 2011: a decidedly mediocre one. I argued prior to the season that I would prefer Contreras in the 9th inning than Madson because Madson wasn't very good prior to 2011.

If you want, I'll dig up the stats. It's the reason he's getting a 1 year deal instead of multi-year: he has a proven track record as a setup man, not a as a closer , and teams were justifiably leery as a result. If you want a drastic overpay, giving Madson 4 years at 44 million is more of an overpay than Pap's deal.

Jack, you and preacher were discussing whether RAJ was a "win now" or build for the future GM.

My point is that the draft is the key element in trying to build for "the longer-term and/or the team needs to maintain a competitive roster with a more limited budget" [your words].

I'm glad we agree. The GM needs a lot of help when it comes to going long and keeping a team competitive.

Jack, I'm assuming you're referring to the Howard contract.

So, you obviously think th eteam has been imprudent, and you are entitled to your opinion.

Therefore, if you think the FO lacks prudence in this area, do you think it's possible that it's Hamels and his team that won't sign an extension right now?

"MG~ You're right. He didn't have a bad off-season. He just forgot to do anything with the offense."

DomP, you're just being silly. He did a lot with the offense - he upgraded the bench.

He wasn't going to sign a LF because Mayberry (and maybe even Brown later in the season) will probably make that redundant. That is, if Mayberry can produce the same OPS (.854) as he did last season over the course of a full year, he'll be in the top half of all MLB OF, and he'll beconst-controlled. You, OTOH, wanted to bring in Cuddyer. Well, it would have cost more than $31.5MM over 3 years to do that.

The only place they could have possibly upgraded offensively is at 3B.

Well, if they had signed ARam they would have basically been pissing away the $6+ MM they owe Polly this season.

And some of the people who complain about the offense on this board are the same people who whine about overspending on Papelbon. So, it's bad to overspend on a closer, but OK to piss away 6 million dollars at 3B?

Sheesh, isn't overspending "overspending", no matter on what position?

Preacher, after reading that espn article and Salisbury's article here:

it's starting to make sense.

It looks to me like the negotiations went like this:

Back and forth until the Phillies offered 3/30.

Boras said "I'll run it by Mad Dog".

Boras gets back to Ruben with "It will take 4/44 to get it done, and simutaeously it leaks to the medis and speculation starts. (Note Boras in the espn article did not say that the Phils agreed to 4/44, nerely that he advised them "we would agree to such a proposal".

Ruben says "Monty has to approve that. I'll get back to you".

After talking with Monty and the other staffers, they accelerate talks with Papelbon/ACES because they calculate Papelbon at 4/50 is a better deal than madson at 4/44.

ACES (Pap's agents) correctly assess (after seeing Borss leak the 4/44) they have a limited window to get a deal done and act very aggressively, closing it in a short period of time.

Ruben didn't get back to Boras because he was pissed about the public leaking.

They agree to terms with Papelbon.

Boras/Madson are caught flat-footed and have no time to react. Madson is pissed because he feels the Phils should have given him more of an opportunity to negotiate (and he probably got sold by Boras on the idea that he'd get him 4/44 in Philly), but he's mostly humbled that the Phils consider Papelbon at 4/50 a better deal than him at 4/44.

He probably felt loyalty should have counted for something (he signed a team friendly extension before), but he should understand that if he's going to leave it up to Boras to negotiate on his behalf, that Boras has a way of pissing off the FO's in MLB (i.e. the Red Sox in the Texiera talks), and that he runs the risk of not getting what he wants.

awh, if RAJ were to go and sign Hamels to a lucrative extension, voiding his remaining arb, I'd actually be quite happy. Something like signing Hamels is precisely what those of us who talk of sustaining a pipeline for the future would prefer. He's an established commodity and shown that he's in the top tier of his position, especially when factoring in his lefthandedness. Personally, I'd commend RAJ for making the move.

Now, if he were to sign and immediately turn into Glass Joe (that's Mike Tyson's Punch Out reference for my fellow thirty somethings), I'd absolutely be more than a bit upset. However, I certainly couldn't fault RAJ, as he acted in the best interest of the team when making the deal. The fact is, injuries happen. I certainly don't fault anyone in the Flyers Front Office for Eric Lindros being a faberge egg, and to this day, I think it was fabulous that they made the investment. I'm not one to start faulting someone for not being a soothsayer.

You're comparing apples to oranges by lumping Hamels into the Howard example. Not the least of which is the significant difference of locking up an elite young pitcher versus a very good 1B. Every team needs at least 5 starting pitchers whereas they need just a single starting 1B. Simple supply and demand economics tell you that you need to pay more for the entity in lesser demand. A legit young left-handed pitcher is something I think you need to commit to.

awh, I suspect you're right on the Madson negotiations.

And if I'm Ryan, I give serious consideration to the three year deal, and I'm probably not especially offended until after Paps gets more years in addition to a bit more money.

At any rate, I can see why Ryan ommitted Boras from his previous negotiations with the Phils.

Knowing the egos involved, I hope Boras doesn't come up on RAJ's radar any time soon.

". But I know you don't believe in questioning our Great Leader."

Jack, that's a patently false, and easily disproved statement.

Go check the archives to see what I've had to say about Amaro in the past. I'm the one who nicknamed him "Liar Liar".

Godfather: "Rauch, Nathan, Francisco, no one in their right minds would compare these guys to Pap."

Wrong! MG is on the record as saying the Phillies would be better off with Nathan than Papelbon.


Seems like a good timeline. Boras leaking the 4 year deal, if true, was a stupid, stupid move. The Phillies have a reputation for keeping things under wraps until the last moment (see Lee, Cliff), so I doubt they'd leak word of 4 years as a done deal.

Boras isn't having a good offseason for the rest of his clients either. See Fielder, Prince.

"You're comparing apples to oranges by lumping Hamels into the Howard example."

Preacher, I didn't bring up Howard, Jack alluded to it. Go take him on.

I agree with the posters who say that Amaro identifies his man and then gets him. He not only doesn't wait for the market to develop, he doesn't give a chit about the market.

As long as Papelbon stays healthy and continues on his track as a HOF closer...I'm okay with the deal.

Yeah, we overpaid but we got the best guy out there and Madson is the one who should be pissed here. He got burned by his agent.

Well clout, some would argue when you have a budget of $180 Million, he honestly shouldnt care about hte market all that much. Do you think Brian Cashman gives a damn about the "market"?

First 7 years in the Majors for WAR:

Mariano Rivera: 15.4
Jonathan Papelbon: 15.1

Just sayin'. Papelbon is underrated if anything.

NEPP: What about Joe Nathan's WAR?

Well, if we're taking the "get your man" approach, as Rube does, he went after the right guy then.

Imagine how up in arms we might be if it was Pap who was signing a one year deal at a bargain rate after we'd already broken the bank for Madson.

@ Clout

2 Things)

1) Then MG is nuts about Papelbon. Nathan is a huge injury liability at this point. And I have no idea why'd you be so much higher on a guy who's A) recovering from Tommy John, B) put up a statline of (ERA/WHIP/K per 9/K to BB) 4.84/1.164/8.7/3.0 in a Pitcher's Park in MIN (Pap's stats last year are much better across the board at a hitter's park in BOS) and C) is 6 years older. Obviously his problem is cost. Well, it's not like Nathan was cheap, either, he signed with Texas for 2 years, 7 mil a year, with a 9 mil option.

2) Nathan actually spent the first 4 years as a middle reliever for SFG. He was out of baseball in 2001. WAR in SFG? 2.3...combined. In MIN? That's when he becomes a closer, in his primer. WAR for his 7 years in MIN? 19.8. This, of course, includes his WAR for 2011...which is ZERO.

Pap's AVERAGE WAR as a closer is 2.65. Nathan's is 3.3. But Nathan's numbers are history: there's very little chance he'll replicate them for a year let alone 3. Pap has every chance of duplicating his best seasons with the Phillies.

@ Clout

If you want the first 7 years, it's 11.8 by the way.

I'm confused- why didn't Papelbon cash in his WAR last year to avoid blowing two saves to Baltimore in the final week to blow the season for his team? Or in his last playoff appearance when he blew a save at home to Anaheim to end his team's season?

With the way Lidge is vilified for one game in 2009 (despite what he did for the Phils in the year prior), if Papelbon keeps up his late season 'heroics,' I'm sure BL will warm to him in no time.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel