Discussion

allentown 2017-07-13 17:47:11 UTC #181

After his successful AS appearance, I think Neshek is at peak. I'd like to see him traded before he throws another pitch for the Phillies. Why tempt fate?

Austinfan 2017-07-13 17:52:54 UTC #182

Takes two to tango.
If someone makes a mediocre offer, why not gamble you can get something better by waiting a week?
We're gonna lose mediocre prospects in the Rule 5 draft, why add another, especially if we have to protect him.

Problem is we don't know what people are offering, so we can't judge whether they should pull the trigger.
Just because one team got a good return for a certain player, doesn't mean those offers are available for another player.

andyb 2017-07-13 17:56:31 UTC #183

He is only a setup guy, but he could be the best right-handed setup guy on the market. Good guy in the clubhouse. Handles big innings pretty well (remember the WBC). Hoping for someone towards the back of the top 100. And yes we should trade him today if we can. Not sure waiting will do too much for his value since he is so unique. Waiting also might take some teams out of the market if they trade for other relievers while we wait for a higher bid (something I am pretty sure happened last year with Hellickson).

We should not let the perfect deal get in the way of the very good deal.

Austinfan 2017-07-13 17:58:08 UTC #184

But again you're assuming someone has offered a very good deal.
Often, the first deal is a lowball, to see if Klentak will panic.
And a week or two later, the same or another GM ups the ante.

allentown 2017-07-13 18:01:02 UTC #185

You don't know that the offer in hand is mediocre. We also don't need to take that offer. We can let it be known that we are accepting the best offer on the table by Saturday. There is absolutely no reason that we must trade for guys who need protection from the Rule 5. I'd rather take younger guys with more upside -- tools, with some record of performance. No need at all for a AA or up guy. I'm not filling an MLB hole for 2018.

andyb 2017-07-13 18:06:01 UTC #186

There are good deals out there. If a team wants Neshek a good GM will figure out the right deal with that team. All this game of chicken waiting is just not reality. The baseball trade market is much more fluid than you give it credit for. Deals are just as likely to get worse as we get closer to the deadline as they are to get better.

Klentak had his tentative rookie season last year. This year he needs to step up his game and improve the team.

Austinfan 2017-07-13 18:15:43 UTC #187

You miss the point.
No, we may not want certain players, or as much as other players, BUT IT'S A NEGOTIATION.

That is, we don't know what Klentak has been offered, and what he's willing to settle for.
It's worth gambling for a better offer if the initial offer(s) have limited value.
If all you've been offered is an "Andrew Pullin" or similar player in AA or AAA ball, you might be better off waiting, because your opportunity cost is low.
If he's been offered a top 100 pitcher in A ball, well, that's worth taking.
In between, well, it depends how in between.

Neshek is a chip, but he's not a blue chip, a 7th inning RP is not going to be as valuable as Papelbon, though the economics are better, the talent is worse.

Lawman 2017-07-13 18:16:54 UTC #188

This may kill any talk of Tommy Joseph to NYY:

bigegypt0417 2017-07-13 18:24:52 UTC #189

I don't understand why you always feel like you need to point out things everyone knows?

DO you think we're all under the impression you just go in and ask for who you want and a trade is done?

andyb 2017-07-13 18:25:41 UTC #190

You are kind of missing the point because you are stating the obvious. We have no clue what has been offered. Of course they are negotiating. There is just nothing that would suggest earlier deals are that much different than later deals. There might be more sellers in 2 weeks so it is not guaranteed that deals will get better.

And BTW you are dead wrong about Papelbon. First of all Neshek's performance has been better than Pap. 7th inning is less valuable then the 9th, but performance still matters. At the worst the performance is a wash. What you are totally forgetting yet again is the MONEY. The Phillies sent cash to cover the current season salary, but Papelbon had a $13 million option for the next year that was only negotiated down to $11 million. So the Nationals picked up $11 million dollars for 1 more season in that deal. Neshek can be traded with no financial considerations like that which means that he is probably a little more valuable than Papelbon was at the time.

Austinfan 2017-07-13 18:56:48 UTC #191

Cooper is more Brock Stassi than Hoskins.
age 24 at A+ ball, RC+ 142
age 25 at AA ball, RC+ 123
age 26 at AAA ball, RC+ 171
And he's a RH 1B

Austinfan 2017-07-13 19:03:23 UTC #192

Papelbon for one more season at $11M was not a burden, a slight overpay but only one year for a guy who was still a solid closer.
Pivetta was a 4th rd pick in 2013, 10th best Nat prospect in 2014, in AA ball when we traded for him.
So I doubt Neshek will land someone as good.

Papelbon had a 1.59 ERA in 37 appearances with 17 saves when we traded him.
He pitched decently for the Nats that year, fell off the next year, but that's the chance you take with aging RPs.

California_Dreamin 2017-07-13 19:08:17 UTC #193

I agree with allentown...Neshek should NEVER throw another pitch for the Philles, there is NOTHING he can do to enhance his value but several things to decrease his value. He could become ineffective, he could get hurt, or he could overstay his welcome so long that potential trade partners look elsewhere.

The trading barn has been opened, not surprisingly by Theo. Beane and Cashman will be next, and probably Dombrowski and Sabean. Klentak needs to act soon. Today or tomorrow would be nice.

And please no more "it takes two to tango" malarkey. We know there is a standing offer. Give teams a deadline of tomorrow to make their best offer and get on with it. There are other fish to fry [Joseph, Kendrick, Nava, Benoit, and maybe Galvis.]

andyb 2017-07-13 19:12:16 UTC #194

Papelbon would have been lucky to get $5 million as a free agent that year. Don't look just at the ERA and saves. We all knew the stuff was down and while he had solid command, there was also some luck and smoke and mirrors involved. That money was a huge barrier to his value. We would have gotten more for him than Pivetta without it.

julio 2017-07-13 19:28:15 UTC #195

Pardon? What does this mean? There's a publicly-known "standing offer" on the table for Pat Neshek? From what club? For what return?

zambonir 2017-07-13 19:31:24 UTC #196

It has been pretty widely reported for several weeks that they have a standing offer. Is that report from multiple named sources? No. And one assumes it is not the best offer they can get either. But I would agree this is one where they should be able to move fast. Invite a few teams to beat what's already on the table and if they don't want to then it's gut check time.

Of course if the "standing offer" was good, he'd already be traded. What you would have needed to make that deal two weeks ago is a pre-emptive offer.

julio 2017-07-13 19:37:52 UTC #197

More to the point - is it from more than one original source at all? Baseball sportswriters have a nasty habit of "reporting" things on the basis of what other baseball sportswriters have "reported" - without doing ANY verification or independent work. So one report (or rumor, or made-up fantasy) from one sportswriter gets repeated ad nauseum on the Internet, and after a while it's said to have been "widely reported," and treated as "certainly true" by fans who want to believe it, and who don't treat such things with any rational level of skepticism.

More than once, I've followed up on things that somebody here posted as "X, Y and Z all reported on this!", only to find that X speculated, and Y and Z wrote pieces that repeated the item, tagged "according to X."

Trust, but verify.

California_Dreamin 2017-07-13 19:39:52 UTC #198

Salisbury has mentioned it on several occasions, and I believe yesterday was the latest. Rosehthal and Cafardo have also mentioned it and I think Cafardo mentioned Red Sox and Nationals as interested. And as for "what return?", I find this argument so tiresome.

Klentak needs to determine if he can find a better offer than the "standing offer" and if not, make the deal. This simply cannot turn into another Hellickson situation, Neshek has even less long term value to the Phils than Hellickson did.

Milwaukee already started the "acquire a bullpen arm" dance today and I believe others will soon follow suit. The Phils do not want to play musical chairs again.

Again, I agree with allentown...Neshek should not throw one more pitch with the Phils.

julio 2017-07-13 19:56:09 UTC #199

You're going to make me do the scut work of actually digging out whatever's out there, aren't you?

When I report something I've seen in the media, I provide a link... as do most of our posters. It is, to me, just common courtesy to do so. Has anybody here provided a link to articles referencing a "standing offer" for Neshek? I certainly may have missed such a post, but I haven't seen one. Help me out here.

bigegypt0417 2017-07-13 20:17:43 UTC #200

There have been no names in any of the reports I see so it seems like all guesswork at this point.