Phillies

Transactions & Such

Winter leagues

Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Lannan dominates Nats, Phils take opener | Main | Game 91: Hamels goes for back-to-back wins »

Tuesday, July 09, 2013

Comments

Definitely not happening for Young & Ruiz. This deal only makes sense for the Phillies if its MYoung for Joba straight up. Even then I'm not sure if Joba is what we need, but no way they get anything in addition to MYoung.

The best part of any such deal would be that M.Young and Chooch would immediately rediscover their bats and hit .900 OPS and .950 OPS respectively with plus defense at the hot corner and behind the plate.

It happens pretty much any time the Yankees trade for an aging veteran for the stretch run. Look at Ichiro last year as a perfect example of this phenomenon or Abreu's numbers after his trade.

Trading Michael Young for a reliever makes sense, if he nets someone decent, because at least IMHO their isn't much drop-off from Young to Frandsen. Given the huge need in the bullpen that move makes sense.

I am surprised though at the willingness to part with Ruiz. Who are you going to replace him with if you don't resign him next year? He has been a huge part of this team's success.

Just think of the number of Slingblade references we could make if Joba were on our club...dude is a dead ringer for Billy Bob Thorton in Slingblade.

The Phillies should not be looking for prospects in a MYoung trade. The Phillies will get a useless garbage prospect for 3 months of MYoung. They should be looking to trade him for for a reliever that can help them this year. With Frandsen on the roster, and Joba wanting out of NY, this could be a win-win for both teams.

A reliever like Lindbomb?

Joba Chamerlain 2012-2013: 5.05 ERA, 83 ERA+, 1.659 WHIP

I'm missing the part of how this would be an improvement on our current options.

'I threw im a snapper, I reckun. Most folks call it a slider, I calls it a snapper.'

"a rental reliever serves no purpose" - Corey Seidman

Not true. It serves the purpose of contending this year.

@Jake -- At the expense of 1 or 2 starting position players, yea, a rental reliever serves no purpose.

Also disagree with the notion that the Phils shouldn't be looking for prospects for Young and/or Ruiz.

Yeah, they're both rentals, but the Phillies have a lot of leverage over the Yankees, who are starting David Adams and Chris Stewart at those positions and have so little depth in the event A-Rod doesn't come back strong.

I agree w/r/t to Ruiz.

But losing Michael Young is not really a big deal. He's a "starter" in name, but not really in quality.

Anyone want to bet on how Michael Young performs in the second half? I'll bet he hits worse than he did in the first half, and combined with his terrible defense, that makes him replacement-level or below.

You don't need him to win. Sure, Frandseon is replacement-level as well. But the point is there's no real downgrade there.

some text

and

some text

Plus it doesn't hurt to get a looksee at Asche in the bigs. Just to see what kind of player he is at this level.

Corey - That's assuming you can get 1 or 2 starting position players for MYoung. I don't see that happening.

Jake: What are you talking about?

Corey was saying trading 2 starting position players (Young and Ruiz) for a rental reliever makes no sense.

I would do it for Young. But Ruiz Is too important to our pitching staff. I think Frandsen could turn it up if he took over starting duties.

I want to thank NEPP for bringing statistics into this conversation. All, please read below and wonder, why the phillies have interest in that bum, regardless of the price the phillies are "reportedly" willing to pay. The NYY leak this crap every year when they are remotely interested in a player...

Joba Chamerlain 2012-2013: 5.05 ERA, 83 ERA+, 1.659 WHIP

I'm missing the part of how this would be an improvement on our current options.

Posted by: NEPP | Tuesday, July 09, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Why do they insist on playing Delmon over John Mayberry.. that just blows my mind..

I completely fail to see the point of trading a rental 3rd baseman for a rental reliever. Joba might not even be better than the drek we already have in the bullpen. And, much as Michael Young's defense infuriates, I'm pretty confident that he's a better player than Frandsen, as he can hit both RHP & LHP & their defense is about equally terrible. So it would be a probable short-term downgrade at a starting position in exchange for a possible short-term upgrade at one bullpen spot. Even if you think the Phillies should be buyers, that seems like an ill-conceived move. And, if you think they should be sellers, it's worse yet, as you will have given Young away for absolutely nothing that can even potentially help us in the long-term.

I should also note that I think this whole conversation will prove moot. By the end of the week, they'll be 8 games out again & few on Beerleaguer will be talking about being buyers.

I'd much rather trade sole mid level prospect for Joba. Oh, wait. I'd much rather not acquire Joba.

If the Phils are concerned solely about winning after the All-Star break, then why trade Young or Ruiz to begin with?
****************
Why trade Michael Young if you're concerned with winning?

The answer is obvious, if not a lock to occur: it's a reasonable bet that the difference Chamberlain provides the bullpen for a couple of months is greater than whatever is lost by playing Frandsen/Galvis or Frandsen/whomever at third base.

Of course, Chamberlain could be bad and then you're out Michael Young. I'll roll the dice, particularly given Young's expected decline (by me) and how Frandsen has hit this year.

And this is from someone who thinks the bullpen will get better on its own. Nothing wrong with adding a fresh arm changing leagues.

All of this is premised on the unlikelihood Young would bring more than a low-level prospect if we straight sell. He's not valuable.

Likely an easy question for those w/ good knowledge:

Would any of the speculated players (MYoung, Chooch, Joba) net any draft picks if made a QO but they sign somewhere else in the offseason? I'm guessing none would qualify as Type A FAs, but I'm not real familiar w/ those rules.

Chamberlain "could be" bad?

I'd imagine the odds of that are pretty high given his numbers the last couple years.

I love how beating on Michael Young is still en vogue, like it was after they acquired him and the same people were saying he'd be awful offensively.

I agree wholeheartedly that they should move him, but not because he'll suck in he second half. He was supposed to suck in the first half too, according to the same people that hated trading for him.

Corey - I misunderstood your post at 10:49. Yes, I completely agree that trading two starting position players for Joba is a terrible move. I thought you were saying that its a bad move to trade MYoung for Joba straight up, because the Phillies could theoretically get 2 future starting position players instead.

I wouldn't trade Chooch at all right now. The team needs him, especially the young relievers. MYoung I would trade for a reliable 8th inning arm. Not sure if Joba is that guy. He could benefit from the change of scenery and have a great second half, or he can totally flop out.

nokwurst, there are no more "Type A" free agents. Secondly you cannot make a qualifying offer to a player that has been traded after the start of the season. Finally Qualifying Offers are tendered only to free agents that bring in more than oh about 3 WAR in production that you wouldn't mind coming back on a 1 year $14 million dollar deal. Doesnt apply to any of these players here.

Iceman: I'll bet anything you like that Young has an OPS in the second half below his current .755. Deal?

Also, I fully admit he's been better offensively than I expected. He's also been as brutal defensively as expected. Which is why he's only been worth a whopping 0.2 WAR according to Fangraphs and a -0.4 WAR according to B-Ref.

Is it "beating" on him to point out that he's been replacement-level?

I could see considering a qualifying offer to Chooch, depending on how he plays in the 2nd half.

Obviously, you don't make a qualifying offer to Young or Joba.

Chooch would take that 14 million dollars in a hearbeat. I think there are better ways to spend that money. Use Kratz/Rupp and invest in someone else.

By the end of the week, they'll be 8 games out again & few on Beerleaguer will be talking about being buyers. - BAP
--
Yeah, that sounds about right. The Phillies will lose a mere half game and the schizophrenic Bloggers, Beerleaguers, and Journalists will demand a fire sale.

Jake is like an odd combination of Phlipper and TTI.

I shouldn't bite, but I will. He seems to think the Phillies should be buyers even if they're 7.5 games out of first place. I have but one question:

Seriously?

bittel: I agree that, if the Phillies were to sneak into legitimate buying territory, it would be an acceptable gamble to trade Young for a reliever, and then go with a Frandsen-Asche platoon (clearing space for Asche by dumping Laynce Nix). But the reliever would have to be someone with a better recent track record than Joba Chamberlain.

Of course, as lorecore pointed out, any team that needs Michael Young is not going to be trading away one of its experienced relievers. And any team which has experienced relievers to trade is not going to be interested in Michael Young. The way to get around that is to make a 3-way trade, in which the RedSox or Yankees get Young, a non-contending team gets a couple of the RedSox' or Yankees' middling prospects, and the Phillies get a semi-competent reliever from that non-contending team.

This is all contingent on the Phillies being buyers, of course, which I still regard as unlikely. But they've at least moved themselves onto the bubble.

All Your Crappy Middle Relievers Are Belong To Us!!!

Chamberlain "could be" bad?

I'd imagine the odds of that are pretty high given his numbers the last couple years.

Posted by: NEPP
*************
The point is to try to find a matching team for Young, who won't net you any prospect(s) worth a darn. Has to be a contender with a need he fills. The Red Sox are probably out, as they just lost Miller. What do you have in mind?

Losing Michael Young isn't going to hurt the Phillies. And yeah, he's been OK offensively despite his 30 GIDP pace.

Frankly I didn't realize Joba was still in the majors until his name started to be bandied about a few weeks age.

Thanks Nik, I figured it didn't apply here, but just wondered.

BAP: Why do you have to sell Michael Young and get a reliever back in the same transaction?

Why not just sell Michael Young for the best offer you can get for him, and then deal with trying to get a reliever from a separate transaction? Keeping the most options open for both deals is likely to net you the best outcome.

Both you and lorecore keep talking as though you have to make one deal involving Young and a reliever. I think this comes from a sense that you can only do one of "buy" or "sell." I'm advocating essentially doing both, and treating these transactions as completely unique.

And Jack has the brain power of the desk I'm sitting at

Oh we aren't just randomly insulting people?

"Yeah, that sounds about right. The Phillies will lose a mere half game and the schizophrenic Bloggers, Beerleaguers, and Journalists will demand a fire sale."

It's only "schizophrenic" if you start with the assumption that, at 7.5 games out, we're in buying territory. Most of us, however, are working on the assumption that 7.5 games out is selling territory.

Wow

I just took a look at Joba's 2006 Scouting reports. This guy is going to be awesome for us! He was BA's #3 prospect in 2008 just like Delmon was #3 in 2007, 2005, & 2004! Now if we could just find a way to get our hands on Brandon Wood (#3 in 2006)...

TTI: Why did you think that was an insult? This Jake character appears to share your relentless optimism about the Phillies. I would think you would see that as a compliment.

No way can you trade Ruiz doesnt make sense. Making a supposed playoff run with 2 AAAA catchers?

Cause you still have an issue with the idea that people can not like things the Phillies do but not feel the need to go completely into hyperbole mode about it like you, and so many other members of the Brainless Brigade on here.

I'm more positive than others on here but in many instances only because the negative nancies on here can be so over the top dopey at times.

The Phillies shouldn't be all-in buyers like they were in 2011, but they should be making low-risk moves to improve the 2013 team. 7.5 back with 70+ to play is not at all insurmountable for a team that is just now finding its stride.

Buyers or not flipping MYoung (in a 2 or 3 team deal) for a semi-competent reliever who will still be under contract for at least 2014 wouldn't be a terrible idea. It's not like you're going to get a Boegarts-Webster package for M. Young anyway. A middle reliever in 2014 probably has a lot more value to the club than does a C grade A-baller.

Comment by Pedro's Lucky Midget:

"No way can you trade Ruiz doesnt make sense. Making a supposed playoff run with 2 AAAA catchers?"

I agree. They only unload Ruiz if they they're throwing in the towel for 2013. Ruiz is the guy you want behind the dish in the playoffs.

No, NO, NOOOOO!

Joba Chamberlain is an overrated douchasaurus. If they bring him in it will only further my dislike of the r00b regime, who have already lost a great deal of my confidence with the signing of guys like -elm-n and Durbin.

I like Jake's enthusiasm and optimism. It provides a great balance on this site.

He is also fairly new so I would expect a slow descent towards the dark side over the rest of the course of the season.

Redburb - Haha, I sure hope you're wrong about my descent into darkness.

Jack: If MYoung gets dealt, I'll bet you that Kevin Frandsen's current OPS will decline more than MYoung's.

I wouldn't mind a M. Young for a reliever trade and it is the kind of move that Amaro should look to make if he doesn't really want to sell.

Chamberlain is just the wrong guy for multiple reasons not to mention that fact that he has been terrible since he came back at Memorial Day.

Jack,

You could do it that way too. But I certainly don't want to trade any of our half-way decent prospects. So now we're down to fringe prospects. I tend to think that Michael Young could get you a better caliber reliever than fringe prospects could get you. But it would have to be in a 3-way trade.

Maybe this already got posted and I missed it, but I thought it was funny:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/panicked-sabermetricians-forced-to-rethink-entire,33047/

Yeah. 7.5 games with 70 to go is no big deal.

I mean, the Phils current playoff odds are 7.1% according to ESPN. But by all means, we should definitely bet on that happening.

Jake, I hope you don't gamble much, for your sake.

Jack: "Both you and lorecore keep talking as though you have to make one deal involving Young and a reliever. I think this comes from a sense that you can only do one of "buy" or "sell."

Let me be clear, I am 100% "sell". Have been for well over month. I would rather trade Michael Young at the waiver wire deadline for nothing but money than a player not signed past this year.

Someone was joking about a "dumb thing ppl say" spreadsheet last thread. Whoever has it, please add all the people who want to trade for Joba Chamberlain so the Phillies can "contend".

Maybe Rube thinks Dubee could stretch him out so we can have an even weaker 5th starter.

"not insurmountable" = "no big deal" ?

Jack:

When you still have 13 games to play against the team that you are 7.5 games behind, you DO control you destiny a little...right?

As a long-time lurker and VERY occasional poster, I can understand what Redburb is saying about how optimistic posts/posters can get overrun by the doom-and-gloomers who can dominate the narrative around here. I think your last post to Jake was a classic example of how a glass-half-full poster can get a fistful of Beerleaguer snark. Since 2005, there have been a bunch of examples of teams who were facing as long (or longer odds) at this point of the season finding a way to turn things around and make noise in October.

Can the 2013 Phillies do that? I don't have a farking clue. And I probably wouldn't bet the house on it...but as a 40+ year Phillies FAN, that does not mean that I am not hoping that they find a way to get back into this thing.

There is PLENTY of time to be a seller. Why not give them 2-3 weeks to see if Hamels can get straightened out and the offense continues to improve. If they are 9-10 out by the last week in July, then - even as a Phillies optimist - I think that RAJ should sell EVERYTHING that isn't bolted down...but until then, I have no problem checking my bid to see a couple more down cards first.

As someone who thinks a lot like Jake, your response to him is a classic reason why I lurk more than I post.

"7.5 back with 70+ to play is not at all insurmountable for a team that is just now finding its stride."

How exactly do we distinguish a previously mediocre team that is "just finding its stride" from a mediocre team that is still mediocre but has just been playing well over a short stretch? Even the pathetic Marlins just went on a 10-3 stretch. Unfortunately, they've since lost 4 straight. That's what bad teams do.

7.5 games may not be "insurmountable," but 99 times out of 100, the team 7.5 games out does NOT come back to win the division. So until and unless that lead drops to about 5 games or less, I'm going to bet against the idea that a team which has been below .500 over its last 252 games has suddenly become good.

lorecore: I'm generally in "sell" mode as well.

But if the Phils are hanging around, my point is that you can trade a piece like Michael Young and still try and contend. I would absolutely sell Young if someone is offering anything of value for him, because I don't think you need him to contend. He's a replacement-level 3B. If someone values him higher than that, they should trade him.

However, I would also be willing, if in contention, to deal a longshot prospect for a middle reliever who may be better than what we currently have. The Nats traded someone named Ivan Pinyero for Scott Hairston (who I'm analogizing to a decent middle reliever). Pinyero failed to make Sickels list of the Top 22 prospects in the Nats organization. Does anyone really care about losing one player outside our top 20 prospects?

Whether that middling prospect is the same as you got back for Young (making it a 3-way trade like BAP proposes) is irrelevant to me. I fail to understand why you would limit your options by only considering 3-way deals, when you bring in a much broader possible set of moves to choose from if you look at it as two separate moves.

bebop: "There is PLENTY of time to be a seller. Why not give them 2-3 weeks to see if Hamels can get straightened out and the offense continues to improve. If they are 9-10 out by the last week in July, then - even as a Phillies optimist - I think that RAJ should sell EVERYTHING that isn't bolted down...but until then, I have no problem checking my bid to see a couple more down cards first."

I agree on waiting to sell, but I disagree with people who want to spend assets to improve the team during this waiting period instead of preserving/improving the future.

Call me up, bitches! I'm ready to play 3B with my versatility in the field and my switch hitting ability!

"There is PLENTY of time to be a seller. Why not give them 2-3 weeks to see if Hamels can get straightened out and the offense continues to improve. If they are 9-10 out by the last week in July, then - even as a Phillies optimist - I think that RAJ should sell EVERYTHING that isn't bolted down...but until then, I have no problem checking my bid to see a couple more down cards first."

Yeah, I don't disagree with any of this. I don't think anyone is arguing to sell *tomorrow*.

Jake's point seemed to be that in late July, if we're still 7.5 back, we should still be buyers because there's a "chance" we could make the comeback.

That would be a terrible decision for the GM to make, even if I completely understand hoping for a comeback from the fan's perspective. The GM is paid a lot of money to make rational decisions. A fan is inherently irrational.

I see the point from both sides but I think even by the trade deadline, there is a middle ground to get some value for players while also not putting out an AAA team.

Jack: Scott Hairston is 33, can't play D and has a 77 OPS+ and is owed another $3M. His WAR is lower than Delmon Young's.

That's what you get when you trade away long shot prospects, below replacement level players. They doesn't help the Phillies compete, so why bother?

Why would we even consider giving the Yankees 2 decent players (speaking offensively for MY & considering Chooch's value as a catcher) for 1 pitcher who is not even a marked improvement over what we already have in the 'pen?

Because Cashman leaked the "rumor" to show he wants M.Young & Chooch but won't buy much for them.

Its all BS/manuevering at this point.

ahem "pay", not "buy" in the above post.

I also reserve right to post the above stats about Hairston before he takes Hamels deep tonight.

Cardinals released Ty Wiggington. Quick, sign him Rube!

Cardinals release Ty Wigginton. Didn't realize you could do that half way through the season.

WOOHOO...versatile and affordable!!!


Step 1: Sign Wigginton
Step 2: Recall Mini Mart
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit!!!

I think Step 3 in that scenario, NEPP, would have to be bring back Baez or Romero or Durbin.

Jake: "The Phillies shouldn't be all-in buyers like they were in 2011,"

The shouldn't have been buyers in 2011 either.

Wigginton will make $2.5 million next year.

Awesome.

Wow. He had 63 PAs for the Cards and accumulated -0.8 bWAR.

Is there a worse All-Star selection than Ty Wigginton being the Orioles lone representative in 2010?

If you actually read the source article, it doesn't really say that the teams have discussed a Young-for-Chamberlain swap. All it says is that the Phillies asked about Chamberlain. The writer then goes on to say that "sources" have indicated the Phillies are willing to trade Chooch & Young. By putting these 2 facts together, he creates the idea that the teams have discussed an actual trade of Chamberlain for Young or Young/Ruiz. But it's really just the writer who's coming up with this idea.

Writers have deadlines, News at 11!

What is more believable:

"The Cardinals organization evaluated Wiggington's numbers and scouted his play, and then negotiated a fair 2yr/$5M deal for his services in 2013-14."

"Ty Wiggington created a mind control device in 2045, then later a time machine, and went back to 2013 to force the Cardinals into a $5M contract in effort to pay off his Martian bookie who he was in debt to"

Jack: Frandsen can't hit RHP, so he very much IS a downgrade from MYoung.

I think teams that are 7 back at midseason make the playoffs more than one time in a hundred. Maybe even more than 7 times in the hundred that the stats have us at now.

Joba Chamberlain has a far better chance of being a decent major leaguer than the prospects who'd be acquired for the guys NEPP and BAP want to trade.

Jack, if you want to have credibility as a blogger, I advise you not to base your opinions on absurd ESPN predictions.

Adderall-free, 34-year-old Carlos Ruiz has posted a .616 OPS in his first 122 plate appearances.

That's way too small a sample size to draw any conclusions, but it bears watching, especially the .294 SLG.

I'm surprised there was no comment on this last night: Why was Papelbon brought into a 7-3 game in the 9th on Sunday?

When I saw that I just assumed the Phils had an off day Monday. Otherwise, how does it make sense?

Joba Chamberlain has a far better chance of being a decent major leaguer than the prospects who'd be acquired for the guys NEPP and BAP want to trade.

Posted by: clout | Tuesday, July 09, 2013 at 01:30 PM

Is the Strawman industry doing well these days or are there a bunch of tax breaks that you get to take advantage of to get by?

***I'm surprised there was no comment on this last night: Why was Papelbon brought into a 7-3 game in the 9th on Sunday?***

Are you familiar with Pavlov's experiments when it comes to ringing bells and having dogs salivate? Imagine something similar but with negative reinforcement when it comes to using non-Papelbon relievers in anything resembling a close game for UC and it all makes sense.

Also, UC never manages for anything other than the game he's immediately in with no thought of the next day.

I could get behind trading for Joba if I was a Cardinals fan or something. I believe change of scenery is necessary at times, especially when it's leaving a team like the Yankees, but I have no faith in Dubee and co straightening him out.

I would take almost anybody at this point, I'd even consider someone named Chad. I saw Bonderman was DFAd and immediately pondered if he's a worthy reclamation project for a bullpen role before slapping myself back into reality.

And for the record, I'm in the middle too. I think they should sell anything that gets an above market return, but 2006s near miss after selling in July and buying in Aug, and 2007s 7 back with 17 have left me with almost eternal hope that a run can be made at anytime.

If you think the Phillies should be playing with the chance to come back from 7.5 games back right now, you sort of also have to think they should be playing to win every game they're immediately in with no thought of the next day.

I tend to think most relievers can hold a 4-run lead. But I also think most relievers can hold a 3-run lead, and yet no one here would question Papelbon for coming to a 7-4 game in the 9th inning, because that's a "save" situation. And if you're going to be ok with that, I don't see why you're not ok with Paps being used on Sunday.

They needed to win the game. They did.

For all the chatter here about teams being able to come back, there are a lot of short memories.

Where were the 2010 Phillies on July 21st?

I think i read like a dozen comments last night about Papelbon throwing a lot of pitches the previous game in a non save situation.

However, I'm not surprised clout would ignore what was actually said and just come up with his own statement about what was/wasn't posted.

Being 7.5 games back with a sub .500 record is different than being 7.5 games back with a record above .500.

Discuss....

Jack, I'm merely explaining UC's reasoning on using Papelbon, not defending it.

As to the Papelbon discussion, I'd like those who are positing that the reason he gave up two runs last night was because he was used in a non-save situation the day before to cite the empirical evidence that this is likely true.

awh - I remember the 7 game deficit quite clearly, and I remember all the radio personalities talking about giving up on 2010 to reload for 2011.

clout - The GM made it clear that this month is do-or-die for the team. That means every game is a must-win, and Charlie is managing accordingly.

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