2017 Trade Deadline Rumors/Speculation/Discussion

[David_Criss]

I'd bet Mateo would cost you more than a Neshek. Now if the Phillies and Yankees line up with Hellickson and/or Joseph, too then you can start asking about Mateo, Andujar, Adams or Clarkin, which would be my targets if looking at the Yankees to add to the Phillies rebuild depth and needs.

John Morosi now reporting the Yankees and A's are nearing a deal for Alanso, so I don't see the Yankees being to excited for Joseph.

[andyb]

Remember the Yankees signed 9 of the top 30 international prospects a couple of years ago. This is part of the reason they have 2 GCL teams. I would take a couple of those prospects who may not be that well known but have some tools and projection.

[Austinfan]

People assume it's about Klentak pulling the trigger, but probably every team he talks two is working on 2-3 similar deals, and face it, while Neshek is having a nice season, he's not a premier RP, he's a 7 inning guy who can't be overworked.
So I'd suspect that teams see Neshek as a second or third option, and won't increase offers until the first option is off the table.
This is why trades cascade, as the first guys get snatched, the second tier guys suddenly come into play.

[allentown]

Yes, that would be the ideal trade for us -- high upside gambles on guys who were very highly rated and also young enough that they are years away from needing Rule protection.

[David_Criss]

Just about every contending team would like to add Neshek to their pen, especially the Twins, Yankees, Rays and Brewers. I am fearful that once again the Phillies value Hellickson a lot more than other teams do since he doesn't seem to be linked to one public or "insider" rumor. I think we will see Joseph traded to the Indians or Twins and Hellickson could go to either of those two teams in a package deal, but I don't see either paying top dollar. And is Kendrick ever coming back to showcase again?

[Austinfan]

But do they want Neshek as their first choice?
Problem is teams trading only have so many assets to trade, and they are not going to use their better chips until the more attractive options are off the table.
We see this every year, a few minor deals, then the major deals, followed by a flurry of activity as teams that missed out quickly pursue their second and third choices.

As far as "overvaluing" Hellickson, peope weren't knocking down the doors last July, no one made him a FA offer, and he's pitched pretty badly since a hot April.
If he threw in July like he did in April, Klentak's phone would be "ringing off the hook" (for you younger people, landlines used to hang on a cradle).
That's why that HR in his last start pissed me off, a few good starts and he might garner a decent prospect, but get lit up like a Pinata and forget it.

[mdougherty12]

Hellickson has terrible peripherals in 2017. His K rate isn't quite as bad as it was in April/May, but he's still dead last in MLB in K% among ERA title qualifiers. Hellickson is near the bottom of the league in HR rate, too. Good control and good luck with BABIP are keeping him from being a complete disaster, but he's a mediocre innings eater at best.

[allentown]

Hellickson has terrible peripherals in 2017

Yes, since April, he has been not nearly as good a pitcher as he was last season. K-rate down, HR- and BB-rates up, ERA up. WHIP up. A mistake not to trade him last season.

[mdougherty12]

Even in April, Hellickson was more lucky than good.

[BostonRoss]

"Mistake" assumes we could have gotten something worthwhile in return. It still amazes me how people simply assume that a bad outcome means that an opposite action would have meant a good outcome.

[Austinfan]

We would have gotten more last year for Hellickson, but not that much more, basically for 1/2 a season of a #4 pitcher instead of 1/2 season of a #5 pitcher.
And he has eaten innings this year, which has real value, we've had to rush some pitchers who'd have been better off with a full season in AAA ball.

[bigegypt0417]

The Phillies bet on the fact Hellickson wouldn't accept a QO and they ended up being wrong. So last year they were looking for a return above the comp pick...

[Austinfan]

I'm not sure they were looking ABOVE the comp pick, rather, given the comp pick AND the value of keeping him for a year (since they had no income constraints), they weren't accepting any offers well below that value.
There was no guarantee that anyone would sign him, or that if they kept him he'd have the same value this July (plus the value of having him for half a season).
But there was enough value there that they weren't going to sell low.

[bigegypt0417]

I'm not sure they were looking ABOVE the comp pick, rather, given the comp pick AND the value of keeping him for a year (since they had no income constraints), they weren't accepting any offers well below that value.
There was no guarantee that anyone would sign him, or that if they kept him he'd have the same value this July (plus the value of having him for half a season).
But there was enough value there that they weren't going to sell low.

They bet on the fact he wouldn't accept a QO. They wouldn't take anything in return that would have less value than that. They could have signed him back after the season with no penalty.

[Austinfan]

When you make a "bet," you discount for the possiblity that you lose that bet.
They weren't 100% sure he wouldn't sign, so they would have discounted the value of the comp pick.
But they would have put some value on keeping him as well.
Given the options, Klentak probably had some minimum value he placed on Hellickson before he'd trade him, but less than the value of the comp pick.
So if you assume the comp pick would have landed you maybe a top 10 prospect (in their system), then at minimum he wouldn't trade for anything less than a player who'd be at least top 20 or so in the Phillies system.

[bigegypt0417]

When you make a "bet," you discount for the possiblity that you lose that bet.
They weren't 100% sure he wouldn't sign, so they would have discounted the value of the comp pick.
But they would have put some value on keeping him as well.
Given the options, Klentak probably had some minimum value he placed on Hellickson before he'd trade him, but less than the value of the comp pick.
So if you assume the comp pick would have landed you maybe a top 10 prospect (in their system), then at minimum he wouldn't trade for anything less than a player who'd be at least top 20 or so in the Phillies system.

if your scenario is correct then I'm on the wrong side of the "klentak was bad" at the trade deadline. Your scenario would be a fairly bad plan. You're betting a on top 40ish pick and willing to take a 5th or 6th round talent.

That's not a bet...that's a poor hedge.

[allentown]

You're betting a on top 40ish pick and willing to take a 5th or 6th round talent.

That's not a bet...that's a poor hedge.

Top 20 in the Phillies system was better than a 5th or 6th rounder. Although we've had some great 5th rounders, from Howard to Hoskins, the value of an extra 5th or 6th round pick you are allowed to take is a lot less than top 20 in Phillies system. I read what AF wrote twice and couldn't say for sure if he was talking about guys who miss the top 10 but hit the top 20 (11 - 20) or guys around prospect #20, so I looked up our pre-season prospect # 11-25. I used the summary table in Phillies Minor THoughts, which averages a number of sources. Here are those 15 guys:

Kingery, Gowdy, Medina, Randolph, Elniery Garcia, Jesen Therrien, Jason Knapp, Brito, Pivetta, Appel, Falter, Seranthony Dominguez, Stobbe, Lively.

Appel has bombed out, Knapp, Pivetta, and Lively have played in Philly. Some of others are well thought of prospects, although Dominguez recovering from injury and Gowdy yet to pitch this season. I think all are better than what one thinks of as a 5th or 6th rounder.

Guys who fit into the bottom of our top 20 have significant prospect value, as Stobbe and Lively at #24/25 show.

[bigegypt0417]

I guess my idea would be we'd be hedging vs. the 35th pick in the draft?

I mean in last years draft it would have been a top 35 pick so if that's the value what would have been enough to hedge and trade? I don't think I was the only one that thought the way Hellickson was pitching at the time he'd get a multi year offer...

[Austinfan]

We don't have enough information to know what they were looking for, but I don't think they assumed they'd get the comp pick, rather, they weren't going to give up that possibility without getting a solid prospect.
They knew he could accept the QO, and even if he rejected it, teams might not have been willing to sacrifice the draft pick to sign him.
So I doubt they assumed the comp pick was guaranteed, rather, it was the ceiling on Hellickson's value, the floor was no deal, pay the QO and have him for a half season and trade him.
Plus if they didn't expect him to have a similar season this year, they couldn't expect anyone to sign him to a multi-year deal, so they figured odds were his trade value this July wouldn't be much less than last year.

[allentown]

I think he could have had a multi-year offer. He couldn't have had a multi-year offer at $17+ mill a season and the other team gives up a draft pick. He bet on his ability to have an equally good year in 2017, hedged by the $17 million in pocket, and go out on the market this winter as a FA without a draft pick penalty attached to him. Just as Klentak lost his bet, Hellickson and his agent lost their bet -- at least he's got the $17 mill.