Part of

« 40 homers for Howard? A Beerleaguer can dream | Main | Ugueth Urbina wants to return to the majors »

Friday, December 28, 2012


Love to see the Phils go all-in on Bourn for a 1-year deal with him in CF and batting leadoff.

Put Revere in RF and this team has a better defensive OF than even the '08 team that had Vic in CF and Werth in RF.

Imagine Texas or Seattle would any offer the Phils would make though on a 1-year deal.

Bourn's a difference-maker though & I would hope the Phils would break the piggie bank to sign him.

Ben Revere in RF is not an upgrade to me. Bourn over Revere is a marginal upgrade and Revere is a downgrade to any of our platoons.

His defensive ability in a corner is so diminished that his poor offensive numbers are no longer accounted for.

You spelled Bourne wrong.

In all seriousness, however, I do think Bourn will find a taker on a multi-year deal. I agree with the point that taking a one year deal might actually be detrimental. I think he will follow more along the lines of what he did in the second half of 2012 going forward.

awh - Howard was a league average hitter with 2 strikes who had a slightly lower average but above average power numbers through '10. The last two years though, he has struggled more than the MLB average (which includes pitchers too) though.

Howard splits vs MLB average (2 strike counts)

2007: .147/.228/.364 (.592 OPS) vs. .556
2008: .142/.233/.313 (.546 OPS) vs. .549
2009: .160/.256/.307 (.563 OPS) vs. .541
2010: .172/.248/.308 (.557 OPS) vs. .526
2011: .150/.230/.238 (.468 OPS) vs. .519
2012: .139/.185/.295 (.481 OPS) vs. .517

Here are the numbers for when the pitcher is ahead. Howard was unbelievably good in '07 but has been league average/better every year except '08.

Howard splits vs MLB average splits

2007: .213/.221/.479 (.700 OPS) vs. .548
2008: .165/.165/.364 (.528 OPS) vs. .539
2009: .194/.208/.356 (.563 OPS) vs. .526
2010: .182/.205/.312 (.516 OPS) vs. .517
2011: .178/.201/.337 (.539 OPS) vs. .517
2012: .178/.181/.333 (.514 OPS) vs. .514

I would love to see what pitchers Howard saw vs MLB average in those 2 circumstances especially the last 2 years.

Doesn't Revere have no arm at all? I'd put him in left and Brown in right. Hell, or leave Revere in center and put Bourn in right.

Just don't think Revere should be in right with his lack of an arm

lorecore - It depends on how well Brown hits especially from a power perspective. If Brown hits .250 with a .400 SLG pct, it isn't much of an offensive upgrade.

Defensively, Revere would be a huge upgrade even with his subpar arm. Get to a lot more balls and make a lot more outs than Brown's strong arm would.

Putting Revere in LF is an interesting idea. Yankees did that with Gardner in '10 and '11 and enjoy tremendous value because of Gardner's ridiculous range in LF.

over the last two seasons, i think Bourn Revere Utley Howard Rollins Brown all have a OPS under .700 vs LHP. If you totaled them up it mgiht actually be under .650

MG, what's your point?

You've proved nothing and wasted a lot of time. Meaningless.

Your orignal post stated that Howard was "horrendous" with two strikes.

I showed that all of MLB is "horrendous" with two strikes.

Split a bunch of meaningless hairs if you like, but the simple fact is almost every player on the face of the planet not named Albert Pujols sucks when he gets two strikes.


Won't happen. They would almost certainly have to exceed he luxury tax even for one year of Bourn, and they seem loathe to do that. And why would they trade an actual major league starting pitcher and a good prospect for a centerfielder, then turn around and sign Bourn and lose their first round pick?

If Bourne would sign a contract for less than the number that takes them over the luxury tax (pure fantasy) they still wouldn't sign him. Except for one possibility. They trade a mid grade prospect to Cleveland, have Cleveland sign Bourn, then send him to the Phillies. The prospect would have to be worth more than Cleveland's third round pick, which is what they'd lose for Bourn.

Of course, this is pure fantasy. It simply will not happen.

This team wouldn't be able to hit one out of Williamsport let alone CBP if they added Bourn.

Yeah all players struggle with two strikes but the last 2 years he has been worse than MLB average. Those numbers include pitchers too.

Here are the AL-only numbers the past two years (no pitchers):

.535 OPS
.531 OPS

There is a notable gap in Howard's numbers vs. those that is about 80 pts lower than the MLB average. That's a statistically significant difference.

It might have been because Howard was hurt but I would need more data and analysis to dig into the numbers.

I can't see any move that will take away playing time from Revere (sarcasm).

Revere was a corner outfielder in Minnesota, so he can ably move into a platoon.

The problem is that the Phillies only have 10mil under the luxury tax threshold, which they would be loath to exceed.

Also, FWIW, signing Bourn would make cutting ties with Nix or Mayberry necessary or relegating Ruf or Brown to the minor leagues.

The major intangible is that I seriously doubt the Phillies FO will be a party to anything which could be viewed as beneficial to Boras and enhances his strategy to reorder baseball in ways that suit him. It would have to be a huge win-win for both sides, mostly the Phillies, and such a deal as discussed here isn't that deal. And Rollins not hitting lead off? That's another subjective factor this team must deal with, in other words, not going to happen (successfully).

I wouldn't do it and I don't think the Phils will.

Despite MG's declaration that Bourn is a "difference maker", on this team he wouldn't be.

The last 4 seasons his OPS+ has been 98.

That won't make a difference on the Phillies, won't on almost every team, and it's why Bourn is still unsigned despite having "Superagent Scottie" out there hawking his wares.

I expect Howard would be better than MLB average hitter too with 2 strikes too simply due to his raw power numbers and that he would hit a couple of more HRs over the course of the year in those spots than the MLB average.

Howard did exactly that too through '10 in his career.

Ben Revere actually played almost 3x's as many games in RF then center last year, with really no drop-off in defensive rating.

Like I said last summer, when the usual BL geniuses were hoping the Phils would pay Bourn $75+ million, there's no chance in h*ll the Phils are going to pay Bourn (specifically, his agent), unless, perhaps, they get a chance to embarrass him.

If you are a superstar, Boras is the man for you. If not...well just ask Mad Dog.

This idea is still bourn.

This idea is still bourn.

Posted by: limoguy | Friday, December 28, 2012 at 01:42 PM


Bourn is probably the best defensive CF in baseball, has put up slightly above average numbers in CF the past two years, and gives the Phils the leadoff hitter they have been looking for so they can rightly move JRoll down to the 6th spot.

Bourn would be a difference-maker on this team next year as the everyday starter in CF.

The only 2 drawbacks are that he bats left-handed and the Phils would have to give up their first-round pick.

The entire reason that teams have avoided Bourn so far is that giving him a 4 or 5 year deal at $15M/season would be nuts. Signing a guy on a 1-year deal in his prime is entirely a different situation.

Still think Boras get the payday for Bourn from the Mariners or Rangers though who both feel pressured to make a significant move.

Just a question of whether Bourn gets that the 5 guaranteed years or not.

The more I think about it, the more I think more than one FO would like to see a major Boras client fail in free agency. It almost happened last year with Fielder. Maybe this is the year.

Does Bourn have to make more than, for example, Vic if late January rolls around and there is no one foolish enough to overpay for too many years like Detroit did with Fielder?

Never got this FO vs. Scott Boras chatter on here. What's the evidence?

Texas is one thing, but Seattle is another. Bourn going long term with the Mariners? Time to start planning the next phase of his life. Unfortunately, his situation would be mostly irrelevant. So, Texas can play hardball with him, if they really feel pressured.

The 11:46 post from the last post was not me phans. Bourn would make us contenders again like I said before.

"Never got this FO vs. Scott Boras chatter on here. What's the evidence?"

There isn't any Fats. It's all just conjecture. But it wouldn't surprise me. There almost has to be some bad blood after the Madson debacle, though there shouldn't be enough to torpedo a deal that would be good for both sides. Having said that, I'm sure Rube wouldn't mind seeing Boras with a little egg on his face.

The evidence is anecdotal, because FOs are necessarily secretive and professional on such matters, but sign with Boras and your Phillies days are over. He's a revolutionary, like M Miller, who is changing the game in ways management doesn't always like.

Think J D Drew, Werth and Madson....

Revere would obvoiusly be a great defensive corner OF, im not doubting that. Its the value of doing it compared to CF is my issue.

Think J D Drew, Werth and Madson....

Posted by: RR | Friday, December 28, 2012 at 02:04 PM

It's been said in the past, but Boras, as an agent, has to do what his clients want. So the blame for the whole JD Drew thing was probably JD Drew. Werth was completely and utterly blown away by an offer from the Nationals that no team should have matched, and was thus, not scorned by the Phils.

Whether there was a deal on the table for Madson, and how much, is not concrete, and Madson held out for more, the Phils went another direction, and Madson had to settle for a pillow contract.

I just don't see the historic bad blood between the parties. Boras tries to get rich deals for his clients. Big whoop. He's an agent; that's his friggin job. If the Phils take issue with that, the problem is on their side, but I don't think they take issue with that.

RR: That may be a bit over the top, but I'm sure there are a lot of front offices that don't like the guy. If a Boras client is a fit for the Phillies, I doubt that Rube would blackball the guy because of his agent. If it's a coin toss between two players (which I can't imagine happens too often) maybe Rube goes the other way first. But even then it would most likely all come down to dollars.

I believe RAJ has said he would deal with Boras (re: Madson), and there was no issue there. Yes, I'm sure some FO folks (in all Cities) would be happy if Boras gets screwed, but I don't think they purposefully work against him. It's a business.

Put it this way, business people can't afford to be petulant to that degree. Blackballing players because they are Boras clients would be very irresponsible. And dumb.

limoguy wins this thread with his pun. Amaro got his CF this offseason and even if Bourn takes a one-year deal somewhere it won't be here.


I'm also confused by curt's comment about all the people on BL who were wanting to pay Bourn $75mil+. I don't think there was 1 person who was excited about that possibility.

BedBeard: There was probably one or two. That's the same as all of us.

Love to see an OF though Brown, Bourn, Revere and Ruf & Mayberry off the bench and as spot starters vs LHP. Dump Nix in that scenario for any team willing to take his salary.

Like to see Revere used more as a part-time role too in the early going with Ruf & Mayberry supplying more power vs LHP too and Brown getting a shot everyday in RF.

If Brown turns out to be a zero in the 1st half vs LHP, Cholly can always go with a lineup of Revere in LF, Bourn in CF, and Mayberry in RF with Brown & Ruf off the bench vs LHP.

MG: Revere doesn't have the arm to play RF.

Also, this statement: "Put Revere in RF and this team has a better defensive OF than even the '08 team that had Vic in CF and Werth in RF" depends on who the starting LFer is, no?

If it's Mayberry, you have a case. If it's Ruf, you don't. Burrell in 2008 could still move a bit and he had a good arm.

clout - Burrell was a statue in '08. He just caught the stuff he got to and had a good arm.

Your probably right about Revere and the Phils will almost certainly want Brown to start everday.

Go with a lineup of Revere in LF, Bourn in CF, Brown in RF vs RHP and insert Ruf or Mayberry vs LHP in LF for more power or to break out up some of the LH hitters in the lineup.

I believe Boras overplayed his hand, as he sometimes does, with regards to Bourn. But there is no way in hell he's going to sink to the level that would interest the Phillies. Somebody will give him a multi year deal at decent $$.

Defensive liability? Pfft! Just wait until the secret RuField cannon is revealed in Spring Training...

Agreed about petulance, but It's still business. This problem goes more to his impact on the draft than individual deals. At any rate, subjectivity enters into business all the time. In publishing we avoid certain authors and agents, because there are more than enough others we can work with and who will help us reach our goals. Some agents are more trouble than they're worth. Did the Phillies have to have Madson? No. JP was available. Was Werth worth the money Boras wanted? No. Find another OF. Boras is easily avoided while still conducting solid business. Do the Phillies need Bourn? No. So why get into it with him? And if you don't like the influence he has on the game--that Drew business really stung--then why help him attain his goals when he's done nothing to help you attain yours?

Fata: I believe years ago I read an article in SI about Boras where there were comments from GM's that said they didn't care for his style of negotiating. Boras has a rep for a reason. But he does get his players good money normally.

TTI, I don't doubt that there are GMs who find his tactics distasteful, but I doubt that any would avoid doing business with him tot he detriment of their team.

And even if teams did that, I just don't see the evidence that the Phils would be/are one of those teams.

Give up a top 20 draft pick for one year of Bourn? I don't see that happening and it takes away most of the appeal of a short contract.

I agree with Bed's Beard. Hard to imagine a BL'er that wanted the Phils to sign Bourn for 5/75.

"If you are a superstar, Boras is the man for you."

donc, posted the above quote, and it is probably true.

The question I have is this:

Does Boras perform any better for his clients who are not superstars than other agents do for their non-superstars?

I would wager to say that the answer is "probably not".

BB - There were literally hundreds of posts calling Bourn this past July and August. It is possible that they were all written by the same few folks. I just went back to the trade deadline (July 31) and found this example:

"On Bourn:

When you give him the 4 year/$60 milllion deal (that I'd give him) or the 5 year, $75 million deal (that Iceman said he'd give him...or was it $71 M?)

Which Bourn are we expecting? The .776 OPS guy he is this year or the .721 OPS guy he was the 3 years prior to that.

I bet he's the guy from those 3 years but with less speed as he enters his 30s. I dont see him as a 60 SB guy going forward...more like a 40 SB guy (which is still pretty good but not ridiculous good).

Posted by: NEPP | Tuesday, July 31, 2012 at 05:50 PM

If you don't like working with a guy, and you feel he's a negative force in your industry, always wants way too much, then you avoid him when and if you can. Mostly, given the availability of talent and mostly positive relationships with agents, he's avoidable. WSH, which has no "Drew" in its short history, but has a lot of money, has embraced him and his tactics.

One example of a team avoiding him to their detriment was PIT when it passed on drafting Matt Wieters because he was a Boras client.

awh: Jayson Werth begs to differ.

Also, Edwin Jackson just pulled in 4 years, $52 million after a 1-year deal worth $11 million. So he basically ended up as a free agent with a 5-year, $63 million deal. That's not bad for a #3 starter, I would say. See also Kyle Lohse and Adrian Beltre.

My point is that there's just as much anecdotal evidence of Boras getting great deals for mid-level players as there are examples of him not getting great deals for mid-level players (Madson). On the whole, he seems to do just fine for his clients. Certainly players keep hiring him as their agent.

Mike Gonzalez signs with the Brewers.

So far, the Nats have lost Burnett, Gorzelanny, and Gonzalez, all of whom gave them significant innings from the left side, and all of whom were used to help neutralize the Phillies LHH.

Who's left in the Nats bullpen from the left side? Zack Duke?

I have to think that Boras puts on the full court press to sign all his clients and then hands most of them off to some underling like BAP. I'll bet you he's very involved in everything pertaining to Aroid or Prince Fielder. Bourn not so much, and Madson was probably represented by the janitor. No way of knowing this of cours, just a hunch.

BTW, jk BAP. You would probably be handling #3-#4 starter types and nonfungible relievers.

RR, using the Pirates as evidence of what a normal baseball team does could be detrimental to your health.

awh: thats a good point, Nats seem loogy-less.

Jack, the question was not does he do "well" for his clients.

To quote myself with added EMPHASIS:

"Does Boras perform any BETTER for his clients who are not superstars than OTHER AGENTS do for their non-superstars?"

Methinks you have a reading comprehension problem.

Look, Boras and JD Drew embarrassed the FO 15 years ago, and they have never forgotten. You can say that it is coincidence that the Phils employ zero Boras clients, or have never given a Boras client a big payday, but it was pretty obvious that Werth was gone when he hired Boras, and that Bourn wasn't coming.

The only positive experience the Phils have had with a Boras client was when Madson, apparently overruling Boras' objections, signed his previous three year contract with the Phillies. It was incentive laden, and he did quite well with it. But for a guy of Madson's talents, it turned out to be a tad below market in the end. But a nice deal for both sides at the time.

Other than that, I can't think of a single deal of any consequence the Phillies have made with Boras. And they appear to shy away from his free agents for whatever reason. Beltre would be the best example of a player they could have used badly and didn't seriously go after.

awh: I have no idea, and I'm not sure how you could quantify the answer to that question. Which is why the anecdotal evidence is all we have.

And as a purely anecdotal matter, plenty of mid-level clients continue to sign with Scott Boras. At the least, that tells us that a certain number of very interested individuals with millions of dollars on the line believe he is the right agent for them.

He also gets plenty of prospective draft picks to sign with him. Most of these players know that they won't receive a "star" contract, and if they do, it won't be for another 6-10 years. Yet they continue to hire him to negotiate their once chance at guaranteed money with whatever team drafts them. That also speaks as loudly as any other evidence you could muster.

Do I know how good Boras is for his clients compared to an average agent? No, and I don't think we can know. But do I think he is, on the whole, pretty good at his job, and pretty good at serving his clients' needs? Yeah, I do. Not sure what argument there is against that.

And I certainly cannot understand why any baseball fan would actually want their team to have a ban on Scott Boras clients.

I don't care if Adrian Beltre uses Satan himself as an agent if it means the Phillies could've had him at third base the last few seasons.

I bet he's the guy from those 3 years but with less speed as he enters his 30s. I dont see him as a 60 SB guy going forward...more like a 40 SB guy (which is still pretty good but not ridiculous good).

Posted by: NEPP | Tuesday, July 31, 2012 at 05:50 PM

I stand by that assessment

There is no argument if you're a player. Strasbourg and Harper were multi-millionaires before they ever played a MLB game. Management in some places takes a different view.

Jack, I know for a FACT that RAJ refuses to do business with Satan.

But that's because he grew up Catholic. Nothing business or baseball related.

Gonzalez at 1 year, $2.25 M is a bargain.

2nd tier Relief pitching seems to be almost undervalued this winter, its a shame Rube hasn't picked up another reliever to compliment Adams.

And Beltre stands at the crux of where this team's future was decided: the 2009 off season.

and RAJ's got 0 rings... better dial him up.

Jack - I think the Phillies could have had him, but Boras tends to wring every last dollar from the teams and the Phillies don't do business that way.

The Phillies don't appear to be averse to market level deals on most occasions. But Boras is always trying to adjust the market skyward. Thus, no Beltre. Sure would have been nice to have him at third instead of Polanco the last three years, though.

NEPP: There are plenty helpful guys left, I think Ruben gets 1.

RR, what you're arguing is different than what I hear on here, though.

What you're arguing is not using Jim's car sale lot because his markups are ridiculous, vs. using Jon's car sale lot because his prices are more reasonable. What I see on here is not using Jim's car sale lot because he screwed you over years ago, and you're still holding a grudge.

Certainly teams might be swayed in their aggressiveness toward pursuing a player based on the nature of that player's agent's dealings. That's trivial. What I see on here a lot is the notion that the Phillies revile Boras, and won't do business with him, even if they can get a reasonable deal on a client.

THAT position is completely unsubstantiated, in my opinion.

I just read over my last post and now I'm scratching my head over the Papelbon signing, in which the Phillies blew everyone out of the water, including themselves.

I suspect he will too, lorecore.

Oh, and Jack, Werth was the best all-around OF avaialble in his free agents class. Superstar? Maybe not by a fan's definition, but he was in the top 5 in OPS the two years prior to his FA year.

That put him at the top of the class.

So even a LOOGY like Gonzalez got a $2.25M base with some decent incentive upside potential.

Choate got 3/$7.5M so I guess the going FA market rate now for healthy, established LOOGYs is around $2-$2.5M.

Hard to see there being a lot of value in the relievers that are left then.

" the Phillies blew everyone out of the water, including themselves."

That requires impressive flexibility and questionable morals.

NEPP - It depends especially depending upon what Soriano & KRod make and how that affects some of the guys who are slightly in the next tier down including Lyon.

"What I see on here a lot is the notion that the Phillies revile Boras, and won't do business with him, even if they can get a reasonable deal on a client."

No one is saying that, because they obviously did extend Madson on a very reasonable deal.

" the Phillies blew everyone out of the water, including themselves."

That requires impressive flexibility and questionable morals.

Posted by: donc | Friday, December 28, 2012 at 03:27 PM

Risque Ruben and Malleable Montgomery.

"they obviously did extend Madson on a very reasonable deal" which, according to reports at the time, was made at Madson's insistence and over Boras's objection.

aksmith: That's an odd argument to make, given the last few years. The Phils thought Ryan Howard was worth $125 million, Papelbon worth $50 million, Ibanez and Polanco worth 3-year deals, Cole Hamels worth $153 million, and on and on.

All of those deals, at the time they were signed, represented the top of the market.

It would seem odd and counter-productive for the Phils to be averse to large contracts for *only* Boras clients, while handing out those other deals left and right.

MG: I cant stand that you keep talking
Krod in the same class at Soriano.

Krod sucks, why do you like him so much? He was almost flat out released last year by the Brewers after going through a horrible stretch the same time Axford was.

And also, you act like Mike Gonzalez @ $2.25M is an overpay - how?

Be nice to have Bourn but Montgomery Is not about to dance with Boras Bourn would be too expensive also.

Jack - You are correct. I wrote that, then remembered we're dealing with Amaro's tenure here and his decision making is not the previous regime's cost effective type management.

And looks where that's gotten him: fans crying for Polanco and Ibanez to leave town by the time their contracts were over. And tons of handwringing over Howard's extension. Hopefully, Hamels and Papelbon turn out to be better performers. It appears likely they will be. But Rube's performance on longer than expected/or big dollar deals is mixed at best.

This is not your grandfathers' Phillies. But the day they give out a ten year contract to anyone, will be the day they deal with Boras and that hasn't happened yet.

List of FA relievers left

R. Ramirez
B. Penny

There is a lot more relievers out there yet than I thought even a few additional guys (Lowe) that I didn't add who can still help a MLB club as a reliever.

If Amaro is only going to make very minor signings yet, I hope he signs another RHP reliever depending upon who it is. Among that list, I would like to see Lyon, Lindstrom, Myers, or Howell on a 1-yr deal at $2-3M as a base with some incentive upside (say $500K). Give the bullpen a bit more depth & still allow the Phils plenty of payroll flexibility below the luxury tax threshold.

Love to see Amaro to sign 1 or 2 of these guys to a minor league deal if possible especially R. Ramirez who had all kinds of mechanical issues last year but could be a nice bounce back guy.

Also love to see Lowe on a really low base (say $1M or $1.25m) with incentive upside. He was effective for the Yanks out of the bullpen over the last 2 months as a reliever getting ground balls at a pretty high rate (~56%), getting his share of hit & miss (10%), still pretty tough on RHB, and capable of giving you more than 1 IP if necessary.

I thought Satan was in hockey, not baseball.

lorecore - It's not an overpay but just the salary creep you have seen across the board. Gonzalez at 1 yr is certainly a lot better than Choate at 3 yrs.

Soriano is a better pitcher than KRod. Soriano just isn't as good as he was last year and KRod wasn't as bad as he was/erratic.

Unfortunately, it might take decades to get someone like Amaro to talk honestly about the team's relationship with Boras. What we have is anecdotal evidence.

1) This ownership group was embarrassed by Boras in 1997 in the Drew deal. It was a glimpse of things to come, as Boras attempted to revise how drafts were conducted. While beneficial to players and to Boras, ownership was not as keen. Teams like the Pirates drafted duds rather than pay Boras's ransom. Wieters is a case in point. Under criticism from doing so, they eventually relented by signing Alvarez. Keep in mind that before this golden era the Phillies viewed themselves as a smaller market, no matter how ludicrous that looks now. At any rate, if you have money to burn on super-prospects, like Washington, then he doesn't bother you as much. So, old school ownership sees him as detrimental, but at the same time some teams seem to be getting over it.

2) In part because of #1, the Phillies don't conduct much business with Boras between 1997 and the mid-2000s. Boras is growing his empire.

3) Boras always wants more than the Phillies are willing to pay. They've never gone in for the huge lengthy deals, that is, until they tried to right a wrong by bringing Lee back.

4) Lohse: Gillick offered three years, which Boras rejected, taking one year from STL. In the end, he took a comparable deal from STL.

5) Guilt by association: signing with Boras signals you're a certain type of player. Werth comes off as a tool. So does Drew. Probably because they are.

So, I think this: the FO doesn't like his impact on the draft and definitely haven't forgotten the Drew incident; moreover, except for Lee, they don't like long-term deals, especially the mega deals, so they're poor partners for that reason. Case in point: Werth, Beltre. Mainly, they prefer not to deal with him. They will avoid it when and if possible, because unlike many agents he's not concerned about your goals, just his.

MG: agreed, sign one of the top 5-6 names on your list for the $2-3M range, and then take as many others on league min as you can get.

Back in the day this would've warranted a headline:

Nationals signed INF Mike Costanzo to a minor league contract.

Circa 2008, he was to Beerleaguer then what Cody Asche is to Beerleaguer now: The Phillies next starting thirdbaseman.

If you think, like I do, that the Phillies are done making any bigger type moves then cheaply fortifying the bullpen is a no-brainer. Failure to do so will most likely haunt Rube.

Mike Costanzo likely struck out 3 times in the time it took you to write that post, clout.

"Nationals signed INF Mike Costanzo to a minor league contract."

Didn't his brother used to work in the Yankees FO?

Yeah, donc, and if I'm not mistaken I used to see him order calzones from a local joint down the street from the stadium everyday.

"Teams like the Pirates drafted duds rather than pay Boras's ransom. Wieters is a case in point."

This is basically example A, B, C, D, etc. on why I can't fathom fans who side with the front office over a guy like Boras.

Is there a single Pirates fan in the world who is happy they drafted and signed Daniel Moskos instead of Matt Wieters because Scott Boras is a jerk?


clout, while usually exaggerating, is dead on about this one. Every single person who starts to type how Asche is likely the 2014 starter should acquaint themselves with Costanzo.

From 1973 to 1982, I ate the exact same lunch every day. Turkey chili in a bowl made out of bread. Bread bowl, NEPP! First you eat the chili, then you eat the bowl. There's nothing more satisfying than looking down after lunch and seeing nothing but a table.

lorecore, I don't know what you or clout are talking about. I STILL think Mike Costanzo is the Phils future third baseman.

Costanzo's career OPS+ is -59...yes, -59.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel