Following Florida Sunshine's post... the point was to fill the major league roster with short-timers who would not block prospects, but who would fill the positions until the prospects are ready... and to do this without committing to long-term contracts. At the same time, they wanted guys like Kendrick, Nava and Saunders, instead of guys like Darin Ruf or Brock Stassi, because they believed/hoped that the Kendrick/Saunders/Nava approach would improve the 2017 on-field performance... and conceivably yield something back in a mid-season trade or two. It's not only to buy the prospect time; it's not only to be as competitive as possible in 2017 without taking on long-term commitment; it's not only
the possibility of a trading deadline flip; it's all of the above. You don't get that with AAAA-types; you don't get that if you just go with Darin Ruf, Brock Stassi and Cameron Perkins.
allentown objects to this approach, it seems, because this approach required the Phillies to spend considerably more money than just going with AAAA guys. It's certainly true that it did... but why do we care? allentown will argue that spending in this way is the reason the Phillies haven't spend more on international signings - this is why he raises the cost factor; it's not that he's opposed to the Phillies spending money.
However, I don't find his argument persuasive; it's not as if the Phillies' spending on short-term roster patches has tapped them out. It appears to me that the Phillies haven't pursued big bucks over-23 international signees for the same reason they didn't blow through the international caps in past years - they don't believe these are prudent expenditures. It's not that they won't spend or cannot spend; it's that they don't believe this is the place to spend. Now, we may disagree with them (!), but that seems pretty clearly to be where they are.
Notwithstanding the above, the club is in a position where they ought to be able to get some interesting return for Pat Neshek. Hellickson may also be moveable. Kendrick is less clear - he's old, he's been on the DL. Nava the same, particularly if his current hammie issue is anything but very minor. Other than that, we're not talking about filpping guys we signed this past winter, but about moving current starters who may be standing in the road of better, younger options. This group may be more effectively marketed in the off-season - they're mostly not going to be game-changers for a team acquiring them for a stretch run; the question really is just how much value they have in trade.