Phillies

Transactions & Such

Winter leagues

Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Game chat: Dodgers ready to sample Phillies' menu | Main | Transaction: Phillies outright Sanches to minors »

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Comments

repost:

Fatal is right, and I'll add that if the Phillies truly valued Hamels as a must-have player, he'd already be signed.

When has Amaro not "got his guy?"? They made a pretty conscious decision that having Cliff Lee in 2011-2015 is more important than Cole Hamels in 2013-2017. Its a pretty defendable decision, especially if it turns into Cliff Lee from 2011-2015 + Mike Olt(an example) from 2013-2018. I personally disagree, but i could easily see the other side of it.

I'd like to talk to the GM who thinks that Blanton is worth a trade after 8 innings of 2 run ball yesterday, despite his 83 ERA+ since 2010, and his current season 83 ERA+.

Blanton is a bad pitcher who had a good game. You know what they call a bad pitcher who never has a good game like Blanton did yesterday? A pitcher that doesn't pitch in the majors anymore. Even awful MLB pitchers can still throw a good game every once in a while, and they have to do it every once in a while to justify even keeping them on the roster.

I don't think Blanton's trade value changed even negligibly after yesterday's outing.

The Phillies couldn't contend in 2012 if they bought, let alone sold.

Gotta agree with lorecore. They've dug too big a hole.

repost:

It would be disastrous for this team if they don't trade Hamels and he doesn't re-sign here. The team has shown a much more balanced and conventional approach to the last 2 drafts than they did in the past. However, this is a team that needs cheap young talent on the field in Philadelphia to offset the super-star level salaries they are paying at other spots. Using Hamels' comp picks to get a guy or two who are 3-5 years away won't cut it.

How much time will the GM need to evaluate where the team is now that they are somewhat healthy? 2 weeks?

There's only 71 games left...they'd have to go something like 50-21 to even have an outside shot at the 2nd WC...and even that would rely on pretty much every team above them crashing and burning.


Not gonna happen.

There is no contending in 2012. That's obvious.

As for the idea of trading Rollins, people really need to get it through their head that Rollins is a very good ML SS. He's top 10 among all SSs in the majors in virtually every advanced offensive metric...OPS, OPS+, WRC, wOBA, WPA, ISO, etc, etc, etc. Defensively, he's slipped from his peak as THE best in baseball, but he's still above-average.

He's definitely having a better season than Jose Reyes, whom people anointed the savior of this offense in the off-season. He's signed to a very reasonable contract. And there are exactly ZERO viable replacements for him on the roster or available in the off-season. People need to stop being disappointed that the 2007 Rollins isn't walking through the door and be happy they have one of the 5 best overall SSs in the majors.

Jimmy is 3rd in the majors in WAR among shortstops. He's doing his job fine, and he's probably the last, or second to last reason*, we're so far out of contention this year.


*Michael Martinez being sent down is the last reason.

I'd like to talk to the GM who thinks that Blanton is worth a trade after 8 innings of 2 run ball yesterday, despite his 83 ERA+ since 2010, and his current season 83 ERA+.

Blanton is a bad pitcher who had a good game. You know what they call a bad pitcher who never has a good game like Blanton did yesterday? A pitcher that doesn't pitch in the majors anymore. Even awful MLB pitchers can still throw a good game every once in a while, and they have to do it every once in a while to justify even keeping them on the roster.

I don't think Blanton's trade value changed even negligibly after yesterday's outing.

Posted by: Fatalotti

He wasn't worth a trade to Amaro, Jr. but he sure was worth 3 years and $24M!

I believe 2012 is a lost cause as far as a possible playoff slot. Whatever moves are made should focus on 2013-2014 when there still remains a window of opportunity to make a run at a world championship. As such, I think EVERYONE on the roster could be considered available in a trade, but RAJ must be careful not to have a fire sale. J-Roll can be traded - but who'll replace him at ss? Galvis? More importantly, how will the Phils' re-tool their outfield? Trading Vic and/or Pence leaves huge holes. I'd let Poly go in a heartbeat for a prospect or a reliever. Again, 2012 may be lost but a fire sale is inappropriate. Hamels MUST be signed if for no other reason than to pacify the fan base and maintain a revenue stream - i.e sell tickets!

Too many teams ahead of the Phils, and the Phils are too far back to make the playoffs. Just don't see it happening. Not with this bullpen.

I'd love to keep Hamels, but he's going to test free agency, so why not trade him now, get some uber-prospect, then attempt to re-sign him in the offseason.

Also, Polly for anything would be fine by me. His glove is the only thing of value anymore, his bat is atrocious.

Goodbye Vic. Goodbye Pierre. Goodbye Blanton. Goodbye Wiggy if someone wants him.

I say goodbye, because the Phils need some young cheap talent, which the upper minors are barren of aside from a couple players.

The deal they are offering Hamels is a joke.

I keep hearing how Cliff Lee's 5 year 120M deal is a benchmark for Hamels deal. Cliff Lee was 33 when he signed the deal. Its not even remotely comparable. Hamels is 29.

Johan Santana got 6 years at age 29. Sabathia got 7 years at 29. This has nothing to do with average salary and everything to do with years.

There is no chance that Cole Hamels takes the same deal as Cliff Lee. I don't care if the money is guaranteed. Hamels has 2 months to exist before he gets 1 or 2 extra years. There is immense pressure for him to max out the contract, otherwise he will get killed by the players union and be looked at like a fool.

Do you mean to tell me that the Phillies haven't even offered Hamels the same contract as Lee at this point? THAT DEAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE TABLE MONTHS AGO.

The Phils have to know this. I can only think of a couple reasons, after looking at the above analysis as to why the Phillies would even bother with this. Either this is to try and get a number back from Hamels as to exactly what he would sign for right this moment or they are publicly floating these contract talks in order to let the fans know they made a reasonable offer in order to resign him.

Again, there is ZERO chance Hamels takes this offer.

This will be worst thing right now. They win 8 of 10 get say 5 games at deadline and we do nothing. That's an albatross

You know, I shouldn't say its a joke. 5 yrs 120 is a lot of money and a long commitment. However, at this point and this late in the game, to only have 5 years out there is still ridiculous. Matt Cains deal was 6 years.

This is the first time they offered 5 years? They can't be serious about getting him back right now. This offer is more about saving face with the fans.

It's called a negotiation Five-4-One

13-2 after the break was my absolute cutoff for believing they can contend. Here's to hoping...

or they are publicly floating these contract talks in order to let the fans know they made a reasonable offer in order to resign him.

IMO, this is exactly what's happening. The Phils know there will be a fan backlash for letting Hamels go, so they want it well-known that they are offering a high AAV, and Hamels is declining, before they deal him. There is no other explanation for the massive amount of PR about the offer from an organization that's usually pretty tight-lipped about contract negotiations.

NEPP: Yesterday you made a comment about how the Dodgers have a poor system and nothing to offer - were you replying to the like of a Hamels trade or a Victorino one?

If you mean Hamels, then i'd agree - but if you mean Victorino than I think they match up very well. They have a surplus of MLB ready bullpens arms that would be very helpful to the Phils.

Jansen(not trading)
Bellasario(likely not)
Elbert
Lindbolm
Guerra

I actually liked their starter last nite a lot - Eovaldi. He's out of Vic's league probably, but if they made a push for Hamels he would have to be involved along with a ton more.

***It's called a negotiation Five-4-One***

That's the offer you put out there 5-6 months ago...not as a final offer. Its not as if they just started talking numbers. The Phillies have known for months exactly what Cole wants to stay in years/money.

chris: agree 100%

I want $1 billion over 15 years. Anything less is unacceptable.

***Yesterday you made a comment about how the Dodgers have a poor system and nothing to offer - were you replying to the like of a Hamels trade or a Victorino one?***

Hamels...and just an overall comment on their system. They have a very weak system outside of those bullpen arms.

***There is no other explanation for the massive amount of PR about the offer from an organization that's usually pretty tight-lipped about contract negotiations.***

Exactly.

***This is the first time they offered 5 years? They can't be serious about getting him back right now. This offer is more about saving face with the fans.***

Makes you wonder what their previous offer was...I'd bet it was something like 5 years, $100 million and they feel this is a big jump to show they're serious. And to show the fans that hey, they tried but that greedy Cole Hamels wanted to move on.

or that its not the real offer in anyway... and purely speculation...

As much as I would love a Hamels trade and resign, I don't think we can really bet on that. I do think that a 6 year deal for Hamels is reasonable. He's on the younger side of established aces but more importantly he's never been a blow people away FB guy. Yes his FB is above average but his bread and butter has always been his change up. The use of a cutter in recent seasons has given him 3 plus pitches that don't put a lot of mileage on arms (compared to sliders or split finger fast balls). Pitchers who are mostly change up specialists tend to age well which is why I would be more willing to take that risk on a Hamels age 29-35 seasons than guys like Verlander (I recognize that Verlander is a beast but talking purely from a risk perspective)

I think we can get our cheap solution to CF in house in Victorino. Would be glad to sign him to a cheaper extension with his down year lowering his value a bit. I think at least offering him an extension is a no brainer.

I just want to remind people of something. I am not saying that they didn't offer Hamels a 120 million dollar deal as others are saying.

I am saying though that Jon Heyman is the only one who is reporting that and he and Buster Olney are like bottom of the barrel when it comes to national baseball writers.

Also, it should be noted that Heyman's actual report was the Phillies are expected to offer AT LEAST 120 million dollars. Since some people need the help apparently, that means the lowest amount they will give him is 120. They could go 150, 170, or even 200 but it is expected they will not offer less than 120 million dollars.

The 120 number comes from Cliff Lee's deal but I think at minimum they are going to have to match Johan Santana's deal with the Mets which was 6/137.

Also 541- Matt Cain's deal was technically for 5 years. The 6th year was them redoing the last year of his previous contract. He was always signed for 2012 so actually his new contract starts in 2013.

No but they aren't going to contend anyway at this point. It will just make it hard to get back to .500 this season (if that means anything).

Floor starts at the Cain deal for resigning Hamels. Probably tack on another guaranteed year too.

I've always liked Jerry Sands. He's never really gotten a shot in LA.

I see 2 reasons/explanations for making a highly publicized contract offer that will be almost assuredly declined.

1. It tells the fans, hey we tried.

2. If they offer 6 years, and Hamels turns it down, and it becomes public, suddenly they have now set the market for Hamels with many months left to free agency. Then the market to try and resign gets worse. If Hamels is going to wait and see, then the only reason for that is a bidding war. If the Phils offer 6 and he turns it down, he immediately becomes a 7 year contract offer away from leaving.

One more thing on the Heyman report. I honestly am skeptical because the Phillies front office is very good about keeping their negotiations under wraps. Think about when they signed Cliff Lee. For weeks it was only Rangers and Yankees and then about an hour before he signs a "third team" pops up. Do you really think the Phillies just called him in the midnight hour and said, "Hey, how about resigning here Cliff?"

I know people like to rag the front office for not being forthcoming about certain things but laying low on negotiations and keeping your name out of the headlines is a really good trait because you don't end up in a bidding war. You end up bidding on final offers which is better leverage overall.

On the national writers thing- I don't know where others would rank him among national writers but usually once Jayson Stark starts reporting things then it is time to take notice. He seems to have an inside track to what they are doing- not surprising considering he spent quite a bit of time with the Inquirer covering the Phillies. My guess is he still has sources either from his time there or that have been passed down through regimes.

Good to see some truth "injected" on the Hamels "offer".

I knew all along the Hamels "offer" was a smoke job. 5 for 120 was where the conversation should have started the day Matt Cain was extended. Hamels is out of here.

As for contending, this team is not contending. I don't care if they sweep LA. The hole they dug is way too big to realistically dig out of. If they go on a run that's nice, but I expect the postseason about as much as I expect the Mayan apocalypse.

What this team has now with a few hot games around the trade deadline is an even bigger question:

Can they sell and still market the team?

TTI, Jon Heyman is bottom of the barrel? I'm not a huge Olney fan, but I totally disagree with the comment about Heyman.

I'm curious to understand why you think that?

TTI - Agreed about Heyman and the story about the Lee extension. Sounds like he is just throwing someone loose out there without a 2nd source.

As for Blanton, he has very little trade value. Any team that picks him up owes him nearly $3M for the final 2 months of the season. Given that fact and his alarmingly propensity to give up HRs, that limits his market. Can't imagine an AL-team would be that crazy about trading for him. Dodgers are a possible fit. Maybe the Mets.

If the Phils scuffle, I imagine Amaro just tries to dump Blanton at the deadline basically in a salary dump. Might even kick in $500k-$1M to say the extra $1.75M-$2M.

Heyman's awful. Gets abused by front offices.

Expendable players:

Blanton, Victorino, Pierre. Of the latter 2, you've got to keep one and sell the other.

With Hamels, it depends on signing the extension. If they do, obviously you keep him. If they don't, sell him.

Rollins is old and not trade-able with that contract. You'll have an easier time moving Wigginton than Rollins.

I'd sell Blanton and Victorino. Regardless of performance Pierre will still be cheap next year and makes a good 4th outfielder for any team. Blanton is a number 5 starter.

As for a hole in CF next year, here's the Top 5 CF free agents available:
1) Michael Bourn
2) Melky Cabrera
3) Shane Victorino
4) Angel Pagan
5) B.J. Upton


And here are the RF/LF available
1) Josh Hamilton
2) Nick Swisher
3) Carlos Quentin
4) Cody Ross
5) Jonny Gomes

That's a pretty good OF free agent crop if you ask me. Offensively, of the 10 guys I'd 5 or 6 on that list, and I think you replace Victorino's production with Pagan's and not lose much at all (Pagan's making 4.85 million, presumably his free agent contract would be less than Vic's, which was 3 years, 22 million).

I seem to remember Jayson Stark floating some pretty dubious rumors in the past.

I'd have to go back and try doing some research, but I don't know if I'd say that Stark is more in the know than Heyman.

Heyman has at times, been the absolute first to break stories. In general, CBS sports guys including Knobler have been pretty much on top of it. I've seen plenty of times when a CBS guy has completely scooped the ESPN guys.

As far as publicity and the Phillies goes, I feel that they tend to use it when they want to. For instance, they allowed it to be well known what they were offering Madson to come back, so that everyone knew that it was Madson and Boras's fault that he didn't come back. This whole charade with Cole Hamels is not to create animosity with Hamels, but to add a talking point into the conversation when and if Hamels is no longer a Philly.

541: It's like BB said- he gets conflicting reports from front offices and runs with it as facts. He never seems to have consistent information either and never reports things with second sources. I do think he is better than Olney though- so at least he has that going for him.

He did get into a pretty funny Twitter war with Buster this off-season though which led the Internet to find out that Buster has him blocked on Twitter.

I'm shocked a business would stoop to using media/marketing to get the story/image they want out.

I'm going to go back and retract my statements about the Hamels offer.

I just read the Heyman article and nowhere in the article does Heyman "guarantee" that the offer will be 5 120. All he says is that a person with Phillies ties suspects that they would go 5 years 120. He does however imply that the max that has been offered to hamels so far is 5/85, which is what Jered Weaver got from the Angels.

I'm actually a little miffed with MLBTradeRumors.com for crappy reporting on this one. I'm starting to find that they have been overstating headlines and sources and I'm a little miffed.

That being said, IF the Phils have yet to offer more than 5/85 and IF they plan to offer 5/120, than they are not serious about signing Hamels prior to the deadline, or ever for that matter at terms that are what he will get. He will absolutely get 6 years at a minimum and they have to know that. If they planned on offering 6 years, I think they would have done that already. The only reason that I can think that they wouldn't, is that they are worried that their 6 year offer would go public, especially if it was turned down.

Godfather: I've always thought Angel Pagan was an underrated player. But his career slash line is .280/.331/.417, and his 2012 slash line is very close to that. If the idea is to replace Vic's 2012 production, then Angel Pagan will do just fine. But he certainly won't replace Vic's production of the 5 seasons before that. Not to mention that his defense is fairly terrible.

My problem is that Heyman quoted someone who guessed 5 yrs 120.

Everyone else on the interwebs and blogs and rumors sites are quoting Heyman as saying that is the offer.

Its shoddy reporting, and regardless of how you feel about Heyman, quite unfair.

Believe it or not, I do read Beerleaguer & I'm none too happy about all the heat I've taken from some of the posters. So I'm here to settle some things once and for all.

The Phillies will offer Hamels at least 5 years, $120M. But it might be more than that. That's all I know.

The Dodgers have been scouting Jimmy Rollins.

The Phillies would like to improve their bullpen.

Vic, Polanco, Blanton, and Pierre could be traded.

That's all I know.

That 11:23 post was actually me, posting under a fake name just for sh*ts and giggles. Now I'm back to posting under my real birth name, bay_area_phan.

I was waiting for Clout to announce who that poster was using the 2nd name.

I believe DPatrone's source is the Blue Agave plant.

i thought we established DPatrone's source was The Sports Authority.


Side note- on Saturday the Phillies-Giants game (a game I will be at) is the 4 pm FOX game with the announce team of TMac and Mitch Williams. Sad to be missing out on that.

@ Bay Area Phan

Actually, when looking at the defensive stats available on Baseball-reference.com, they seem to have similar statistics. Pagan has more errors (21 over 7 seasons while Vic has 5 over 9), and less assists, so his arm isn;t as good, but Pagan has a better range factor and Rtot values (meaning he saves more runs in the field). I think that means he covers the field better than Vic. Speed numbers (SB, etc.) are comparable too, in fact they're nearly identical over 162 games.

As for the production line, Pagan has put up those lines playing predominantly in Citi Field and AT&T park (both huge pitcher's parks), while Vic has put up a career .775 OPS playing in a hitters park for his entire career. .748 OPS in a pitchers park vs. a .775 OPS in a hitters park puts both of them on the same level if you ask me. Both have the same career OPS+ of 103, which adjusts for this.

best case: Vic shines for the next few weeks, gets traded for a legit bullpen arm or at least a cheap back of rotation option/position player.

Vic cools off with new team, maybe even hits his annual DL stint late in the season, his FA stock drops and Phils pick him up for a ~2yr/$15M deal after the rest of league overspends on bourn, upton, melky, etc.

Godfather: Despite playing in pitchers' parks mainly, Pagan has a pretty severe home/road OPS split (.817 OPS at home, .649 OPS on the road). So it's tough to evaluate that.

Pagan would be a downgrade from Vic, but not as much as people think (because Victorino has played his career on winning teams, while Pagan has not). If the difference was signing Victorino for 3 years and $33 million and Pagan for 2 years and $14 million, then yeah, I'd probably take Pagan and invest money elsewhere, particularly if you can re-sign Hamels.

Godfather: I'm not a believer in defensive stats. They are hugely (if not predominantly) affected by the types of pitchers on the guy's team. The argument in favor of defensive stats goes, "Sure, they are flawed, but they are better than nothing." To which I say, "BS." If they don't remotely measure what they're supposed to measure, then they are NOT better than nothing. They are worse than nothing, because they: (a) have the trappings of scientific validity; and (b) can be, and often are, affirmatively misleading. Remember when UZR said that Pat Burrell was one of the 2 or 3 best defensive left fielders in baseball?

As for Pagan's defense, I can tell you only that he has a reputation among Giants fans for frequent Hunter Pence-like defensive gaffes. He had the exact same reputation among Mets bloggers last year.

They need to do something silly in the first 20 games after the all star game to compete. They need to go 16-4 or better. If that happens, I will buy it...but unfortunately there aren't 20 games before July 31. Get someone to pay the rest of Blanton's salary, dump Vic, don't trade Pence or Hamels unless you get something stupid in return.

There is hope for 2013.

To the topic of JW's post:

My belief is that Victorino and Hamels are the only guys on the trade block who you couldn't trade and still hope to contend. If you can get anything for Pierre, Polanco, Blanton, Wigginton, etc., then you do it, regardless of whether you are trying to contend or not.

And no, I don't consider Rollins to be on the trade block. It's not happening.

Stark has buried the 2012 Phillies in a chat today on ESPN:

"Phils are 10 games out of the wild card... Winners of 3 in a row (for the first time since May).... All the big names are now back and ready to roll....tell me they can make a run..."

"Jayson Stark
(12:06 PM)

I don't see it, Travis. They haven't won a series against a team that isn't now in last place since May. I know they're getting healthier, but they'd have to play at just about an insane pace to pass seven teams. As I said on Mike and Mike this morning, to get to 91 wins, they'd have to go 51-20. They've just come off a stretch where they went EIGHT and 20. So it's just not realistic. Sorry."

Fataloti:

Blanton not a major league pitcher? It would be nice if all of our Iron Pigs could lead the league in K/BB ratio. The idea that there won't be a interested in him is silly.

I dont appreciate Jayson Stark stealing my 51-20 line.

Jerk.

@ Bay Area Phan

In other words, the alternative for examining defense is word of mouth. The words of bloggers mean nothing to me unless there's data to back it up. Word of mouth is worse than nothing, it's a subjective opinion and it's based on plays a person has personally seen. To this day my uncle continues to insist Chase Utley is a bad fielder because of some errors he made in a few years ago (2006 I think). Despite being one of the better defensive infielders the Phillies have ever had.

At least defensive metrics is an attempt to quantify defense, which will be figured out ultimately. And baseball-reference doesn't use UZR in its defensive stats. The Rtotal numbers they use are a statistical analysis of every defensive play made by the fielder in every game. So this is far more comprehensive than what's used elsewhere.

Pence, by the way, is classified as a below average RF according to the baseball-reference system. Not awful, he costs you on average 3 runs a year, but not good.

Reported by Tim Brown at Yahoo:

"The White Sox, Angels, Rangers, Braves, Orioles, Red Sox, Dodgers, Diamondbacks, Pirates, Cardinals and Tigers are among the teams that are currently seeking starting pitching, Brown writes."

MG: I wouldn't call that burying. He is just kinda stating teh obvious.

Also, UZR had Dom Brown as one of the worst defensive players in all of baseball during his time in Philly.

So clearly the stats manage to get some things right.

I dont think anyone needed UZR to tell them Brown sucked defensively.

NEPP, you got to that comment before I could.

I think the multitude of horrendous errors made UZR somewhat irrelevant.

sneed, where the hell did I say that Blanton wasn't a major league pitcher? I said,

"Blanton is a bad pitcher who had a good game. You know what they call a bad pitcher who never has a good game like Blanton did yesterday? A pitcher that doesn't pitch in the majors anymore. Even awful MLB pitchers can still throw a good game every once in a while, and they have to do it every once in a while to justify even keeping them on the roster."

Point being, if a pitcher can never twirl a "gem" like Blanton did yesterday, they don't survive in the majors very long. Since Blanton has had an ERA+ in the high 70s, low 80s the last 3 years, it stands to reason that we should expect him to have a game like last night every once in a while. If he never had games like that, and if his best games were of the 6 IP, 4 ER variety, with garbage outings tossed in there, he'd have been cut a long time ago.

His game last night should not have changed anyone's opinion of him, just like his CGSO against the Braves earlier this year shouldn't have, either. He's a bad pitcher.

Since 2009, he has an ERA+ of 90, and for being an "innings eater", he hasn't pitched over 200 innings since 2007. Teams will be "interested" in the sense that they will take a low-risk flyer on him, and that means they'll take him from us for nothing. You'll get nothing of value for him, as you shouldn't.

You can't use an obviously terrible player to prove that a stat works.

Thats like saying "Stat A" which says RA Dickey is a better pitcher than Cole Hamels is accurate because "Stat A" also says Kyle Kendrick sucks.

Blanton is a 5th starter. He has performed as such since 2009.

I don't think that was Blanton's best game this season.

The Phillies are no longer contenders this season, period.

Now watch as r00b deludes himself into believing the Phillies are still contenders, fails to move moveable players as a result, & screws 2013 in the process.

NEPP, he's not been paid like a 5th starter.

Blanton was pai like a #3 starter. He has never performed as such - prior or during his contract extension.

***NEPP, he's not been paid like a 5th starter.***

That's on Rube. Blanton cant help it if an idiot GM decided to pay him like a 3rd starter when he's never been more than a 4/5 guy in his career.

NEPP, I don't think the deal for Blanton was that unreasonable. He had a really awesome stretch in 2009, and a decent enough season in 2009. The fact is, Blanton has underwhelmed, and has had the benefit on being on a team loaded with SP for the last couple years to where he's become a 5th starter by default. If that weren't the case, he'd get a lot more sh!t in this town.

Blanton's deal was a big reason we dumped Lee the first time....it was brutal.

NEPP, I'm going to blame the Moyer deal more than the Blanton one for that. Moyer was making $8 M in 2010 (Doc's first year). That hampered us more than the Blanton deal, because any sane GM would rather have Blanton at $8M and Doc then Moyer at $8 M and Doc.

A 3yr $24M deal isn't big enough to draw outrage, but it was surely a well criticized move. And anyone who did so was a smarter person than Ruben Amaro for that time being.

That's what's amazing about Clout and others who argue that salaries are irrelevant.

The team obviously has a budget. They traded Lee in 2009 because they couldn't fit all the salaries in the budget. Moyer and Blanton's deals, among others, blocked it.

So just stop with this crap that salaries don't matter because the team has no budget and a player being overpaid has never caused a problem.

2010, I mean.

I'm not completely defending RAJ for the move, but it wasn't unreasonable to think that Blanton could have lived up to that deal. It's easy to just pin blame on RAJ for everything, but Blanton deserves to be criticized for how poorly he's pitched in this extension. He was never a great pitcher, but these three years (all in the extension) have easily been the worst 3 of his career. Yes, he's been injured, but even when he's been healthy, he's not done his job. Let's just call a spade a spade.

A pitcher has kept a K/BB ratio above 6 for a full season and qualified for an ERA title 26 times going into 2012.

The lowest ERA+ of any pitcher ever to do so is 120. Joe Blanton's is 83.

BAP on Pagan: "But he certainly won't replace Vic's production of the 5 seasons before that. Not to mention that his defense is fairly terrible."

No problem- we'll have Pence and Brown beside him to make up for it.

Oh, and Blanton's 31 years old. Signing a pitcher who had been above average and had pitched around 200 IP a season pretty much his whole career to a 3 year/$24M deal during his age 29-31 seasons, you should expect to get at least league average production out of the guy for around 180-200 IP a year.

Hasn't even come close. Blanton has basically sh!t the bed in this extension.

Fata: I actually don't think it was an unreasonable deal, at all. Given how he had pitched, I thought a 3 year/$24 million made sense for a pitcher like Blanton.

It was the timing of it that didn't make sense--choosing to give Blanton that deal while trading Lee in order to save the same amount of money. You know?

As a fan, I will always think they have a chance. I wouldn't watch otherwise. Isn't that why we're fans? To watch for years and years and years, only to have something like 2007 happen and make it all worth it. And in reality, they do have a microscopic chance.

But GMs should not operate like fans. It would be incompetence to sit back like a fan and think they can go on a historic run.

Jack, it's still the Moyer deal that gets me. Why you're not going year to year with a pitcher in his late 40s, but instead chose to give him 2 years at an AAV of $7.5 still befuddles me. That $8 he was making that year would have basically covered the $9.5 M that Lee was scheduled to make in 2010. So instead of keeping a SP around who would been an absolute steal at $9.5 in Lee, we were stuck with a guy at market value in Blanton and a guy who was being well overpaid in Moyer.

Actually its only been done 25 times in MLB history, Colby Lewis of TEX is also on pace this season.

FYI - Curt Schilling currently holds the lowest ERA+ in history during a season with a K/BB ratio over 6.

additional FYI - b-ref play index isn't requiring a subscription right now?! If I knew any of you I'd be embarrassed of how giddy I am about the thought of running queries for the rest of the day.

Blanton has value if he pitches in a park tough to hit HRs. Elevated HR rate has been the primary reason (1.4 HR/9 since he became a Phils' starter) is why his ERA has been so much higher than his xFIP.

You move him to a park like Petco in SD, AT&T in SF, Dodger Stadium in LA, or PNC in Pittsburgh and you get him on a reasonable contract and he could provide nice value for a team.

Moyer extension was one of the dumber deals Amaro has done hands down. Other team that was primarily interested in him was the Mets and they were only offering 1-year guaranteed with an option.

Amaro has been very good at identifying and getting the player he wants in FA. His ability to find value in the FA market though and make shrewd deals has been a mixed bag at best.

MG, that's a good point. If Righetti got a hold of him (a pitching coach renowned for keeping HR/FB% down for his starters, even on the road), Blanton could have a bit of a career renaissance.

Moyer deal (dollars aside) was even dumber than the Howard deal. Amaro basically bid against himself to sign him a 45-year old to a multi-year deal.

No maybe the Mets offered Moyer more than $6.5M the Phils were offering in '09 but there is no way they offered anywhere near the $14.5M guaranteed the Phils did. For the 'cost certainty' and assurance he would have Moyer back in '09, Amaro paid $8M to a guy who was going to be 47?! in '10.

It was really dumb remember even guys like Stark wondering why the Phils signed him to a multiyear deal instead of a 1-yr deal with an option.

A bigger park will equal less HRs, but it just means more and more hits he'll give up. Blanton's H/9 numbers are way high already.

Fat - Yeah but the only team that needs a starter in the NL with pitcher-friendly park is the Dodgers.

If I am was Colletti, I would try to pick up Blanton on the cheap and possibility looking at him as a cheap option if they aren't able to sign a Greinke/Hamels this offseason. Something similiar to what Capuano (2 yrs/$10M) or Harang got (2 yrs/$12M).

Dodgers are paying Harang and Capuano just $3M this year. Blanton won't exactly be swimming in offers this year. Colletti could easy structure a similar 2 yr for Blanton that is backloaded and only pays him $3M-$3.5M next year while giving him a proven starter for '14.

Todd Zolecki ‏@ToddZolecki
Roy Halladay activated. RHP Brian Sanches outrighted to Lehigh Valley (AAA).


Blanton has saved this season for the Phillies, after being injured last year his 8-8 record this year has kept the Phillies from having the worst record in MLB.

lorecore - It was under 0.8 HR/9 while he was in Oakland. No because Blanton has lost that much velocity on his fastball over the years either which really does affect HR/9 rates.

Big reason why his ERA+ was 101 as an A's vs. 91 for the Phils despite playing in the AL.

Phils have scored 43 runs in those 8 wins Blanton has (5.4 R/G). Blanton hasn't saved anything this year.

He's been a serviceable backend starter. Not much more.

It was shocking to see so many empty seats at Dodger Stadium last night. That's a notoriously lame fan base but they used to buy tickets no matter what. That is a good young team that has spent much of the year in first place. That's piss poor attendance. They paid 2 billion for that? Man I bet they come out swinging in free agency. Hamels, Hamilton etc. They could probably afford to buy them all, luxury tax be damned.

A three year deal at that number was never a "market deal" for Blanton. And in combination with the way Moyer bent Rube over and extracted two years out of him, I said at the time, and continue to say: Rube is the worst negotiator in baseball.

Howard
Blanton
Moyer
Polanco
Ibanez


All got too many years at too much money. And to balance that, Chooch, Doc, Vic. All good contracts. JRoll? Reasonable contract.

If the Phillies lose Cole, all you have to do is look at the unnecessary, over-generous, downright insane contract given to Howard two years before it was necessary. And that's Rube's legacy right there.

Oh, and he made one great trade. Four of nothing for Cliff Lee. Any good ones since then?

Wayne: What you mean to say is Blanton has pitched just well enough to prevent his team from receiving the No. 1 overall pick in the next draft.

If Colletti did sign Blanton and put them with Capuano & Harang, he would have 3 veteran starters at just $16-$17M total.

Not sexy but those are the kind of moves a smart GM makes to allow him to spend what have been limited resources for the Dodgers the past few years in other areas.

Not going to argue the Dodgers certainly would be much better off with a Hamels/Greinke but it will also cost them a prety penny (at least $20M AAV and probably a bit more) to do so.

Someone made the comment the other night, after Sanches long ball outing that we were witnessing his last MLB pitching spot.

For the moment, that is correct.

See what happens for the rest of the year, but he has to be low on the call up list.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

SHOP CSN


Advertisements


Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG