2017 Trade Deadline Rumors/Speculation/Discussion

[andyb]

Why do you keep repeating this mantra that Hellickson had no value? We had a trade for him for a guy in the 150 range in prospect ranking. We don't know if there were other alternate deals out there? He clearly had value.

Then you go on a backwards logic comparison of saying that if people on this board don't think someone like Galvis is that good then the rest of baseball must agree (which is backwards of course since you love Galvis and post every time he does something good).

None of that is what I am prescribing. I don't want to make "bad trades". I do want more prospects however, even if they are second tier. Give me a $1 million international signing that is still in rookie league. Give me a young arm that throws in the mid-90s with command issues. Those guys might fail, but they might also become Seranthony Dominguez.

If a player does not look like they will be a starter in 2 or 3 years when hopefully the team will contend again why wouldn't we think of trading a player like Galvis or Rupp. And why wouldn't we think of trading a player where we have a potential minor league replacement (like Cesar Hernandez).

The only thing I can conclude from your logic is that you really don't care about actively improving the team and its future. You just want to sit and wait and trust our prospects. I am fine giving chances and waiting for prospects. I just want more of them and better ones. San Diego accumulated more talent in the last year than we have in the last 2-3 years. Why can't we do that?

[andyb]

But then you jump into a comparison of Galvis leading with average (and .250 is not that good) and HRs (where he is a little above average for a SS). Ignoring OBP which is more important. If Crawford hit .230 with 10 HRs in the majors he would be a better offensive player than a Galvis who hits .250 with 20 HRs. Simply because Crawford would probably have an OBP 50 points higher than Galvis.

Yes there are "ifs" with Crawford as with any prospect. But lots of the disappointment in Crawford is that he does not look like a superstar ranked in the top 10 prospects in baseball any more. He still projects to be better than Galvis offensively however. He is still the youngest guy on the AAA team. He is just working through some issues with his swing.

And on the "if" category, what if Galvis reverts back to his .283 OBP career average and the power slips a bit. One can pose "ifs" on any player and the certainty of Galvis being good offensively is not set in stone. Just as the certainty of Cameron Rupp being a 700+ OPS guy was not set in stone.

[Philsmania]

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.

Crawford at this point looks like a prototypical eight-hole shortstop who would be great on a team that is otherwise an offensive juggernaut.

[Philsmania]

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)

This ^^^^, though I still think Klentak should have traded Hellickson for more befitting value rather than having made his quixotic demand that he get comparative value for the possible first-round pick.

[bigegypt0417]

if he hits .240 or .250 he gets on base way more than galvis.

He's also younger and controllable.

Again...it's not like galvis has set a high bar.

[Austinfan]

When your talking about prospects in the #150 range, you're talking pretty low value, not worthless, but not a huge opportunity cost either.
That trade fell through, which suggests alternative offers weren't as good or they wouldn't have passed them over to try and make that trade work.
And if the alternative is a prospect in the #200-300 range, maybe another half year of Hellickson protecting young starters has more potential value (plus what you'll get in July had he pitched as well as last season).

The reality is that mediocre returns means low opportunity cost of preserving option value.
This is different than holding on to Cliff Lee for two more years when the team was no longer competitive and watching his value go to zero.
Rupp had more value to the Phillies (someone has to catch and Alfaor wasn't ready) than the meager returns he would have garnered, had he stepped forward instead of backward his value would be much higher with 2 ML seasons. But one reason his value was low was that teams were rightfully wary whether he was a proven commodity.
Hernandez has value if he can come back and show he's healthy because he's pretty much proven.
Galvis has value if he finishes the season strong, but as a July deal he doesn't, because how many teams will put a high value on just his fielding for a half season - his value is showing the hitting surge is real and can be a long-term answer.

So when you start from low value, the value to keeping the player to buy time, and to retain the option that they might improve, is often more valuable than the prospect you'll get in return, who'll have his own issues or he won't be available.

[andyb]

Doing nothing is a huge opportunity cost. Not using our financial resources is a huge opportunity cost.

For someone who advocates all the time that we need sign mid-level international prospects because they are more cost-effective, why wouldn't you want to acquire a few prospects that rank around 150th overall. That would be 8-12 in our system. That is higher than Pivetta was ranked. That is higher than your friend Galvis was ranked. That was higher than where Altherr was ranked.

Why wouldn't the Phillies make these trades, especially for veterans who won't be part of the next contending team. We could always get Mini Mart to play SS for a few months. Chase D'Arnaud is still lurking somewhere.

And why would Galvis only have value at the end of the season and not now? Talk about taking all your talking points about how great he is now and torpedoing them. Players have more value at the trade deadline because selected teams have short term needs.

[allentown]

The #150 prospect player in baseball is not low value. That's the #5 prospect on an average farm. Certainly a top 10 prospect on our team. It's worth more than a comp pick in the draft. You're the guy who says that once you get past the top 30 prospects in baseball, that the next couple hundred aren't greatly different in value. Certainly none is risk-free -- perhaps high risk/high ceiling or moderate risk/moderate ceiling. If I can trade some combination of Hellickson, Neshak, Rupp, Nava, Benoit, Galvis, Joseph for a half dozen of top 300 prospects in baseball -- preferably guys playing in A-ball or below, then I walk away with a smile on my face. I have no illusion of being able to acquire one of the top 50 prospects in this way, but adding a half dozen top 300 prospects improves the Phillies future.

[Austinfan]

You're assuming we can get that much, who exactly is going to garner that kind of return?
Kendrick, but only if he comes back and is healthy for a couple weeks, same with Hernandez, no one wants a mid-season acquisition who finishes the season on the IR.
Hellickson? Nope.
Keshak, probably not, he's a 7th inning RP, a good one, but still . . .
Galvis, how often due defensive SSs get traded in July, his value would be higher in December if he continues to hit, and by then we'll know if Crawford is ready for 2018.
Nava? Nope.
Joseph in July, doubtful, who gives up good value for a RH 1B who's got only a full year under his belt. Again more value in December if he has a strong finish.
Garcia? Not this July, maybe December if he has a strong two months to finish the season.

Problem is we've traded our best trade chips, what we have will garner some prospects, but in many cases we're better off holding on to guys like Galvis, Joseph and Garcia until the offseason.
I'm all for trading Keshak, Nava, and Kendrick in July if we can get anything for them.
The younger players don't have enough value to be worth trading in July, while some could increase their value with a strong second half. I'd rather gamble they show enough to garner a top 100 pick than settle for a 2nd tier guy.

[andyb]

You have failed to make anything close to a case that waiting till the offseason on guys like Galvis will increase their value. Joseph is perhaps the only one that really applies to and he is a special case because we probably get a little better with Hoskins than with Joseph.

Galvis is 27. In his prime. He is a 20 HR guy. He is as likely to increase in value as he is to decrease in value at age 27. And he only gets more expensive the longer you wait. There is just no credible case that he is likely to have more value at the end of the year.

[flyers19rw]

Doing nothing is a huge opportunity cost. Not using our financial resources is a huge opportunity cost.

At this time, this is probably the best path for improving the Phillies. Look for a team with a mid career player on a deal that the club can not afford and pick up the contract for moderate level prospects. The O's are in the mode of going cheap again. Probably Machado's days are numbered there. Will the Pirates, with their financial difficulties, keep McCutcheon? Going for players like this makes sense right now if they become available.

[andyb]

If we are thinking about Hellickson, look at the Padres trade of James Shields last year to the White Sox for Fernando Tatis and another player. Then Cashner for Naylor (who we could have had for Hellickson and who compares favorably to Cornelius Randolph as 1st round picks in the same year). We don't have a Pomeranz to deal, but Hellickson, Neshek, and maybe Neris should get us decent prospects back if we want to.

[Austinfan]

Although Shields was having an offseason with SD last year, his track record up to that point was far superior, so the White Sox bet on a bounceback (wrongly as it turned out).
His velocity had started falling off in 2015 and has continued that decline.

Cashner got a good haul, but he has a much better arm than Hellickson, though he seems to miss the friendly confines of SD's ballpark.

Hellickson last year had some value, Phillies were just the victim of bad luck:

Report: 'Tainted' Padres deal almost led Phillies to trade Jeremy Hellickson to...

Had someone made a good offer before then, I'm sure Klentak would have pulled the trigger.
The fact that no one expressed interest in signing Hellickson last winter showed his real value.
This year, he's fallen off considerably from last season, I don't see him traded until the end of July in the hope that 3-4 good starts could raise his value.

Neris is too inconsistent to have a lot of value, he's not good enough to be a closer, and questionable as a 8th inning pitcher, again, no point giving him away when he could bounce back the second half.
Garcia is probably our best RP, but he hasn't done it long enough to have a lot of trade value. Another who'd you'd be better off letting finish out the season to raise his value.
Benoit is meh.

I'll give away the one year players without hesitation, but the guys under team control shouldn't be sold low because they could always finish strong and raise their offseason value.

[David_Criss]

Honest to goodness, I am not to concerned about ranking of prospects the team receives in return. Heck Paplebon was a throwaway that netted an AA arm with ERA around 4 and today Nick Pivetta has started 11 games and is only 24 for the Phillies.

Hellickson and Neshek are not Hamels and Giles, but they absolutely have value to contenders. Kendrick, Nava, Neshek, Benoit, Hellickson while Rupp and Joseph and to don't appear to be in the long term plans, so I expect to see a number of lottery tickets, yes some with better odds than others, join the Phillies this month.

I'd also like to see Joseph be given a shot at 3B, but what do I know?

Contenders and needs that match up with the Phillies are numerous:
Boston - Kendrick and Franco
KC - Kendrick, Nava, Benoit, Hellickson
AZ - Kendrick, Neshek, Benoit, Hellickson
Yanks - Joseph, Neshek, Benoit
Twins - Rupp, Neshek, Benoit, Hellickson
Nats - Neshek, Benoit
Indians - Hellickson

Will all be traded? No. But with that group, I hope they take the best offer over nothing.

[allentown]

Hellickson, Galvis, Neris, Joseph will definitely get you that much.

[andyb]

I basically have come to the conclusion that the Phillies did not really try that hard to trade Hellickson last year. Yes there was a potential deal for Naylor, but it was only a backup for the Marlins if the whole Padres deal fell through. I don't buy for one second that there were no other similar offers for Hellickson. Klentak looks like he bet on the compensation draft pick scenario and lost.

Bottom line is we ended up with nothing for a decent pitcher in the middle of a pretty good season. Whatever Klentak tried to do it did not work and he really was pitching better than Shields at the time (with a track record when healthy). There is no way to spin what happened last year other than it was a failure by Klentak.

[Austinfan]

July trades are different from December trades.

In July, teams want veterans on short-term deals for the most part, who can help in a stretch run, which is why pitchers are so valued, if you have a solid team but a couple injuries to starting pitchers, a SP who can give you 12 average starts down the stretch might win you 2-3 more games than a below replacement pitcher you have to use (and the damage to your bullpen).
So Hellickson has value if he can string together 3-4 solid starts after the Allstar break and convince a team that they can get two good months out of him.
The RPs less so, none are legitimate closers or 8th inning guys, so they're depth at best, Neshek has the highest value, I doubt they'll get offered enough for Neris or Garcia to make it worth a move, I'd take anything for Benoit.

Players like Joseph and Galvis are valued more as potential long-term starters than as short-term fixes, so they'd have far more value if they finished strong and built up their resume and the perception they can play at a high level. If Joseph continues to post .850+ OPS after the break (matching what he's done since April), and Galvis continues to hit like he has since June, teams will see them as starters and value them as such. If they don't, they'll be valued as backups and garner similar prospects to what they'd obtain in July.

You don't trade to make a trade, you measure what you can get now v the option value of holding the player and seeing if their value increases.
The guys on one year deals have zero terminal values, so whatever you can get for Kendrick, Nava, Neshek, Hellickson and Benoit is positive value.
Guys under team control have option value, so you only trade them for an overpay.

[andyb]

July trades are different from December trades.

What does this have to do with anything the Phillies are offering? We should be willing to pick up salary in any deal. We have players like Joseph and Galvis that are theoretically starters close to their prime and not expensive. Why wait? Teams pay MORE to fill holes at the deadline than in the offseason where they are managing a budget.

Your logic seems to imply the team should do nothing at the deadline or why would you even post this?

[zambonir]

You have failed to make anything close to a case that waiting till the offseason on guys like Galvis will increase their value. Joseph is perhaps the only one that really applies to and he is a special case because we probably get a little better with Hoskins than with Joseph.

Galvis is 27. In his prime. He is a 20 HR guy. He is as likely to increase in value as he is to decrease in value at age 27. And he only gets more expensive the longer you wait. There is just no credible case that he is likely to have more value at the end of the year.

I'm not sure I agree with this. At the deadline you might have two or three teams looking for a shortstop as well as multiple sellers peddling free agents. Not all those teams necessarily even want someone who would be on the team next year, they might have an injury, or a prospect coming. But in the off-season there could be eight or 10 teams who need a shortstop and a limited trade supply (free agents, yes, but some teams would rather give up talent than money).

You both seem to have staked out extreme positions, that any trade for prospects is good vs. no trades at all. But the GM still has to like what's being offered. That didn't happen with Hellickson, and they didn't lose him for "nothing' because he's still here. Whether it might happen for Galvis, who knows, but I think this off-season the team is going to be geared up to acquire major leaguers or at least people who have to be on the 40, and that's not going to happen as easily at the deadline. Taking someone's bad contract in exchange for upgrades would be nice for sure but that could just as easily happen with Kendrick or Hellickson or Neshek.

I'm all for Mini-Mart at shortstop too. But to make a move like that and take away the Crawford insurance completely would take more than the Phillies got in any of its recent deadline deals. In theory Galvis should be worth more than Utley or Ruiz or Papelbon but I don't know that he actually is, teams are weird about star power and vets and playoff experience.

[Austinfan]

It has to do with how you value players you're trading.
One year deals have zero terminal value, so you take whatever you can get, the market determines value.
Players under team control with potential upside have option value, Rupp's value now v the chance he bounces back the second half and has more value in December. Yes, he could get worse but that wouldn't lower his trade value significantly, while if he had a hot streak in August he could raise his value.

Therefore, you set a reservation price on the players under team control, if a team doesn't meet that price, you hold on to the player.
On the other hand, you'd gladly take a bag of used baseballs for Benoit.