2017 Trade Deadline Rumors/Speculation/Discussion

[allentown]

The Phillies are losing because of a profound lack of talent at the MLB player. I don't think the manager is helping the situation, but the field management and the players have been put in a terrible position. Galvis could be the best player-leader in the history of MLB and this team would still stink. No near-star-level position player, most positions below league average, no #1 or #2 starter, a shaky pen -- not a recipe for success. There is no rush to trade Galvis, but I wouldn't turn down a good deal -- that is if a contender needing a SS NOW! gives a trade return better than what we are likely to get in the off-season. I don't see Crawford as being quite ready today, but think he is likely ready well before next year's trade deadline.

This team is bad enough offensively that Galvis or Crawford hardly matters.

[zambonir]

I think the off-season will probably be more fruitful, but they won't wait until next deadline. An off-season trade potentially changes the kind of player the Phillies might get in return (i.e. a major leaguer).

It's possible they could find a Velasquez or Domonic Brown (circa 2011) type player this deadline - someone a playoff team doesn't quite yet trust for this year's stretch run, where they are trying to upgrade (even if that upgrade is not directly from the Phillies).

btw, if Galvis was one year younger (service time-wise) I think this debate would be different.

[bkox]

My last thoughts are this.

Galvis is at 1.3 WAR according to fangraphs for 2017. Giancarlo Stanton, who many would like us to empty the bank/pharm for is at 1.8. Galvis has more value then phans give him credit for.

And with a young pitching staff.. IM sure they (and I) would feel much more comfy with Galvis glove behind them, especially if, as you say, Crawford and Galvis hitting is nearly equal

[allentown]

Crawford also has a good glove. I do not advocate emptying the farm for Stanton. This team plus Stanton is still not a good team and an emptied farm delays meaningful help. What this team needs is an influx of talent, not swapping talent for other talent. That means additions through FA, where it is just money. I'm happy to give $$$$ for Stanton and mid-level prospects. Too many posters say we need to include top prospects X and Y in a deal. A teams top 1 or 2 are often not included in even blockbuster trades. We held back our top prospect in the Lee deal and the Pence deal. We did not get the top 1 or 2 prospects from Texas in the Hamels deal. We didn't get Seattle's top prospects for Lee or SF's top prospects for Pence. We have a ton of mid-range prospects, no problem dealing them or youngish major leaguers like Joseph and Rupp, but we should not trade our top prospects. That is not the way to hasten a rebuild. It also kills us financially down the road to pay some new acquisition top $$, while also trading guys who will be cheap for 6 seasons for the right to pay the new guy top $$.

[zambonir]

Galvis is at 1.3 WAR according to fangraphs for 2017. Giancarlo Stanton, who many would like us to empty the bank/pharm for is at 1.8. Galvis has more value then phans give him credit for.

And with a young pitching staff.. IM sure they (and I) would feel much more comfy with Galvis glove behind them, especially if, as you say, Crawford and Galvis hitting is nearly equal

I think that is more an indictment of Stanton's defense. You want that kind of bat, you're willing to sacrifice the glove.

As Atown said, Crawford plays good defense. His lack of experience may mean he's not as good as Galvis right away but he'll be more than adequate, and playing in the major leagues will make him better in that department. To me, the young pitchers and the next 2B (i.e. Kingery) need to play with the SS they'll be teamed with over the next five years, not the guy who's leaving in one season. I just don't think the Phillies need to squander their first double-digit AAV contract on Freddy.

It is a near certainty that Crawford won't provide as much WAR as Galvis in 2018. It just doesn't matter that much.

[andyb]

It is a near certainty that Crawford won't provide as much WAR as Galvis in 2018. It just doesn't matter that much.

I am not sure about that. Galvis looks like a 2 WAR SS this year. At age 27 he is as likely to decline as he is to get better. Crawford is young and liable to improve. Not guaranteed of course, but Crawford still projects as a guy who could put up 4 WAR seasons in the future. Maybe it is not the 5-6 WAR seasons we were hoping for 18 months ago, but he can still be very good. And young SS often put up some of their better WAR seasons early in their career because they have so much defensive value when their range is at their highest (think Andrelton Simmons and his first couple of years).

I would say there is a roughly 30% chance Crawford is better next year. It is more likely that Galvis is better, but by no means a near certainty. As long as Galvis can't put up an OBP over .300 he just is not that good and is not going to put up a huge WAR number in any season.

BTW, zero interest in a Stanton. If we are going to owe $300 million let's do it in the free agent market and not give up prospects. I'd probably add a top starter first anyway and see how our AAA offensive players project in the next year. Crawford, Hoskins, Kingery, Williams, Cozens, and Alfaro will all get a shot. Maybe even Quinn and that all could rearrange where we need offense. We also have a bunch of #3-#5 starters. A legit #1 or #2 might be worth paying for if the right fit emerged.

[Austinfan]

Let's just see how the season plays out for a lot of guys.
There is no reason to trade a young player at the trade deadline, teams are looking for temporary help, not young players they have to develop for a stretch run.
After the season, when there's a full year to use in evaluations, and players can be ranked for 40 man roster purposes, Klentak should think about trades that could realign talent (maybe some A ball players that don't have to be protected for a year or two, maybe a young 3B as insurance in AA ball).

Joseph is the most obvious candidate, but if he puts up a post-Allstar break OPS > .850, maybe Hoskins ends up on the trading block.
Hernandez is a candidate, but you want to get him back healthy to showcase him, otherwise next July might be better value.
If they move Kendrick and Nava, Williams may finish the year in LF.
Not sure the catcher of the future is on the roster, Alfaro certainly has been a disappointment, but again, he is working at becoming more selective, maybe the light goes on and he starts pounding strikes and laying off balls.

Klentak doesn't have to panic and make moves just to shuffle the pieces, even if they lose one or two players to Rule 5, it'll be someone with 2 or 3 guys ahead of him who are close to the same age. So it won't be the end of the world.

[allentown]

I'd still trade Joseph. My fear is that he is just one mild blow to the head away from likely career over. Of course my fear is also one reason his trade value won't be high.

[phillychuck]

Walks are primarily determined by the hitter, not the pitcher. Crawford has drawn lots of walks since he was in rookie ball, every level. It's because he doesn't chase out of the zone, and its pretty good at spoiling pitchers' pitches in the zone. I've seen him play live at least 20 times, and his strike zone judgment is a plus-plus tool. Major league pitchers aren't magical strike throwing machines compared to AAA pitchers. His walk rate will probably go down (since everything does when you're promoted a level) but it won't crater. And he's 22 and Galvis is 27. That's 5 years for him to improve.

The sensible move for the Phils is to trade the player who is less controllable and will soon be very expensive for value. At some point you have to trust your scouts and development people.

[zambonir]

I am not sure about that. Galvis looks like a 2 WAR SS this year. At age 27 he is as likely to decline as he is to get better

He might hit 2.5, especially if he can hit, but sure.

At some point you have to trust your scouts and development people.

Well, we're not here to trust them, we're here to second-guess!

But yeah. It is very unlikely that the assistant GMs and Joe Jordan sat in that meeting last week and told Klentak, "we'd better start working on a multi-year offer to Freddy, the kid's not gonna cut it."

[andyb]

Klentak doesn't have to panic and make moves just to shuffle the pieces, even if they lose one or two players to Rule 5, it'll be someone with 2 or 3 guys ahead of him who are close to the same age. So it won't be the end of the world.

Klentak DOES need to make moves. In the last 12 months he has failed to move older players to get prospects. He has also only partially used the team's financial resources to acquire prospects.

What you don't get is that the Phillies have options beyond waiting for prospects to develop. They can do that and use their resources to acquire more prospects. You need to think 3-dimension-ally about how to improve the club. A good GM can be creative with the resources they have.

[BtownFan]

BTW, zero interest in a Stanton. If we are going to owe $300 million let's do it in the free agent market and not give up prospects

Looks like any Stanton trade is a pipedream.
MLB trade rumors: Marlins president says club will not deal stars
|https://www.mlbdailydish.com/2017/7/10/15949752/mlb-trade-rumors-marlins-stars

[allentown]

Exactly. What is the sense in losing our mid-level prospects for nothing, because we can't protect them? Or losing our one-year vets for nothing, when their contracts expire. You have to get what you can for wasting assets. How much you can get is a measure of a GM. Getting zip, because you hang onto a wasting asset is a failure.

[andyb]

Exactly. What is the sense in losing our mid-level prospects for nothing, because we can't protect them? Or losing our one-year vets for nothing, when their contracts expire. You have to get what you can for wasting assets. How much you can get is a measure of a GM. Getting zip, because you hang onto a wasting asset is a failure.

It is just hard to look at the deadline last year as anything but a missed opportunity. Yes there were backup plans for Hellickson. But bottom line is that they did not get a deal done. They also did not trade someone like Neris or Rupp at the top of their value. Again there were reasons to not do any individual deal, but they did not do any deal. A deal where we picked up a top prospect while also picking up somebody's $50 million contract was also not done. That would have been a good way to use our financial resources. We will be hard-pressed to have a $100 million payroll the next couple of years. Time to take a bad contract to get a prospect even if we waive the bad contract like with Harrison.

[EDmuch]

My last comment on Crawford and then I am willing to wait the rest of the year to see what he does. I feel rather let down that we used a first round pick to acquire a guy whose primary offensive skill is walking...... And he is not even a good base stealer. When we first drafted him I had visions of a Lindor/Correa type player. Now it appears the best we are hoping for is a guy who can hit .240 with little power but draw a decent amount of walks. His offensive ceiling, even according to his supporters, is incredibly low. Me? I would package him as a part of a some deal, give Freddy a 3 year deal and wait for Canelo, et al. to develop. I mean, I find it hard to get excited about the reincarnation of Bobby Wine.

[bigegypt0417]

My last comment on Crawford and then I am willing to wait the rest of the year to see what he does. I feel rather let down that we used a first round pick to acquire a guy whose primary offensive skill is walking...... And he is not even a good base stealer. When we first drafted him I had visions of a Lindor/Correa type player. Now it appears the best we are hoping for is a guy who can hit .240 with little power but draw a decent amount of walks. His offensive ceiling, even according to his supporters, is incredibly low. Me? I would package him as a part of a some deal, give Freddy a 3 year deal and wait for Canelo, et al. to develop. I mean, I find it hard to get excited about the reincarnation of Bobby Wine.

if you have a SS who can hit .240-250 and has an OBP around .350 then you have a SS better than the one you have currently. If Crawford can hit 15 or so HR's then you have a much better SS than the one you want to give 3 years to for a lot of money.

[Austinfan]

Some of you play too much video game GM.

When all you have to trade are marginal 40 man roster players, you're not getting much back for them.
Hellickson wasn't a hot item last year, and he's got limited value this year.
Rupp was an unproven catcher last year, what were you going to get for him? And Alfaro has shown he's not ready this year.
Neshak is a 7th inning RP, you think you're getting a blue chip prospect in return?
There's some luck involved as well - Morton started well, then collapsed, Kendrick was strokin', then the hammie goes.

If Klentak wants to make a big trade, all he has to do is offer Nola.
But if no one here thinks Galvis is more than a marginal starting SS, what do you think you'll get in return?
And if you trade him, and Crawford implodes, what do you do next?
Hernandez would be nice trade bait except he's injured. And Kingery probably needs a few months in AAA ball.

There's simply no reason to force bad trades that hurt the team now while adding mediocre prospects to a system loaded with second tier prospects.
Sometimes you just have to wait until someone offers something useful (like an A ball arm with upside you don't have to protect)

[phillychuck]

Crawford has two excellent offensive skills--he has great strike-zone judgment, and he is good getting his bat on the ball (his contact percentage on swings is high). He had these skills and has shown them since he was drafted. Even in this off year he has a 15% walk rate and only a 17% K-rate. Last year, for the first time in his minor league career, his LD% was above league average, although it's down a little bit this season.

His Achilles heel is infield fly balls (pop ups). I assume the Phils know this and have been working to reduce this tendency. He could be an 800 ops hitter if he controls the IF fly balls, just reducing them to league average.

[EDmuch]

BE the key to your post is the word "if". "If" Crawford can hit 2.40-.250. "If" he can hit 15 home runs. Galvis is currently doing both of those, hitting .250 with 15-20 home run potential. Now, if you can get a shortstop who can hit .250 and also hit 15 home runs and can also walk a significant amount of time, then he is obviously better than the guy who does not draw walks. The issue is "if" Crawford can do those two other things. And the answer to that will be played out over the rest of the season.

[EDmuch]

PC, "if" Crawford can cut down on pop ups, I agree that improves his value. "If".