2017 Season Phillies Discussion (News/Notes, etc.), continued

EDmuch 2017-08-29 17:01:50 UTC #623

I really hope they do not go with the Buchholtz journeyman crap again next year. The young starters need some help carrying the load, not some guy who demonstrates what NOT to do when pitching.

nycphils 2017-08-29 17:02:45 UTC #624

Frontloading the deal is irrelevant- the luxury tax is based on AAV

allentown 2017-08-29 17:12:30 UTC #625

That's correct, which is why I've proposed to get around it with a 4-year deal, which has all the money gone at the earliest time we might need it. If we assume that years 5 and 6 of a six year deal are going to see bad performance or injury and we don't want to burden ourselves from lux tax standpoint in those years, and we are awash in money now and next 4 seasons, then just sign a 4 year deal and give Darvish the full 6-year contract value in 4 years. If you worry that he just might be very good in year 4 and you would want to be able to take a chance on him in year 5, then include a team option.

andyb 2017-08-29 17:13:08 UTC #626

I understand that. Frontloading the deal though might help their $100 million look better to the potential signee than someone else's $100 million.

The main point is that even with the worst deal imaginable they should not put themselves in danger of the luxury cap line even if the deal is for 6 or 7 years. Our danger absent adding 5 big contracts immediately is much more 8-10 years out when we could be paying our own young players big dollars.

Austinfan 2017-08-29 17:20:53 UTC #627

Well, if you just want to make sure the money gets burnt, they could sign random fans to contracts, that way it would be a way of rewarding loyal fans and using up salary cap money.

andyb 2017-08-29 17:23:31 UTC #628

Some of us want to find a way to use that money to make the team better. It is a mystery why you seem to not want that.

nycphils 2017-08-29 17:35:42 UTC #629

I'd like to use it that way as well, but just don't think Darvish is the right place. YMMV.

I'd rather target Gerritt Cole or Archer or Baumgartner etc and give up the prospects...I want the best team and sometimes you have to gamble. The only untouchables I'd have would be Sixto, Hoskins and Kingery. Again, YMMV - there's no right answer.

Makes me wonder what the Pirates would need to give up Cole, who is 2 yrs from FA. McCutcheon seems gone, they need OF production and SS upgrade and their prospects at those spots are ok not great.

David_Criss 2017-08-29 17:47:33 UTC #630

A couple rumors heard on a local sports radio show over the lunch hour is that the Royals are looking hard at Nava and Jed Lowry. They need something to wake up the offense and only have about 48-hours to determine if they are in the race or not. Just thought I'd let you know I heard Nava's name mentioned. Only a couple days left before the Aug. 31 trade deadline. Trading Nava would open a spot for Alvarez on the 40-man to start a couple games in September as an audition and to fill the Paul Abbott role.

andyb 2017-08-29 17:49:54 UTC #631

Well the Royals did trade for Nava last August when he was having an even worse season, so it is not that surprising. Not expecting much return and they may just let him go for nothing.

Austinfan 2017-08-29 17:59:37 UTC #632

I'd be happy with a PTBNL for Nava, something like the choice of 3 A ball players who don't need to be protected.

California_Dreamin 2017-08-29 18:07:17 UTC #633

Well, if Nava starts again tonight [he started last night], that might be an indication that some team is making sure he is healthy before trying to acquire him in the next few days.

I agree with AF, the Phils signed Nava in order to trade him for a minor leaguer and if he isn't moved he will merely take up space in September when the rosters are expanded and both Herrera and Altherr come back. Same with Kim, though I am sure no one is interested in him.

allentown 2017-08-29 18:07:37 UTC #634

My mileage does vary and I don't want to give up prospects, at least not our better prospects and my restricted list goes well beyond 3. We have $, so that it what I want to use to acquire talent. Trading prospects for established talent, if it is a fair trade, is the surrender of more future value than the amount of current value you are acquiring, doing a sort of net present value on WAR. Certainly you can use $ to acquire a bad contract without parting with your significant talents, but Bumgardner is not at bad contract. Since we are a team on the upswing, we should not be trading future value for present value, IMHO.

California_Dreamin 2017-08-29 18:12:42 UTC #635

By the way, one indication that there may be a market for Nava was an interesting comment by Peter Mac last night. He indicated that he would find out who Matt K wanted to play when planning his lineup going forward.

Remembering Mauch and Green [perhaps even Manuel], I found this comment interesting and telling and perhaps Nava is the main guy he was referring to. I also think he was talking about Crawford, who should be with the team this weekend.

andyb 2017-08-29 18:40:51 UTC #636

Archer and Baumgartner have under market contracts with team friendly option years. Archer is signed for 2/14 where the options could make it 4/34. That has huge value. Bumgarner only has 2 option years that make it 2/24 effectively. Again lots of value for a $30 million pitcher on the open market (which means the Giants would need at least $36 million in prospect value plus something to replace Bumgarner's on the field value to start the conversation.

Cole is just arbitration for 2 years. Figure $25 million year to year, maybe a little more. He has been less good than the other two the past couple of years so there may be more of a shot to get him but without McCutcheon they have plenty of payroll room to fit him in a $100 million payroll. Maybe they would ask for Altherr, Galvis, and a pitcher like Pivetta. Not sure I would pay that. I certainly would think about dangling Moniak or Haseley in a deal for a pitcher we could control for several years but the Pirates probably want someone closer to the majors.

Philsmania 2017-08-29 18:46:09 UTC #637

IIRC, Nava was a nonroster invitee who had to win a roster spot in Clearwater. When ST began, it appeared as though Coghlan had a leg up on him. But, in the end, Nava beat out Coghlan for a roster spot and then went on to have a good though somewhat injury-riddled season which made him something of a surprise trade chip.

California_Dreamin 2017-08-29 18:49:04 UTC #638

andyb...gosh I would really be loathe to move Altherr, I simply believe the guy is going to be a star. Remember when he was signed it was reported that this was a really raw toolsy guy who might become a very good player.

I believe we are seeing this and the fact that he came back from a serious wrist injury was impressive to me. I do not see him as injury prone, a hamstring injury tends to reoccur if a players comes back too soon, which I believe he did.

I like him an awful lot. I think the Phils have 5 potential "star" players...Hoskins, Herrera, Altherr, Crawford and Kingery. And I think they all become stars within 3 years, if not sooner.

andyb 2017-08-29 18:57:09 UTC #639

Me too. Just thinking that Pittsburgh is going to ask for a young major-league ready OF if they dealt Cole. And Altherr would be the young, controllable, inexpensive outfielder I would ask for first, maybe even before Herrera. As the Phillies GM I would certainly offer Williams instead. I just don't think Pittsburgh would want that.

allentown 2017-08-29 19:12:35 UTC #640

I'd be willing to trade Williams.

bkox 2017-08-29 19:25:04 UTC #641

AFL list seems unexciting this year

harrisburghusker 2017-08-29 19:27:11 UTC #642

I do have a major issue with DWAR, because it's heavily based on zone rating which is mostly subjective. The offensive numbers can't be faked, but defensive metrics have made Jason Heyward seem like the best RFer in the game and I don't think he is.

Conversely, Aaron Altherr has a negative DWAR, my eyes must be lying if that value were to be believed