For Delusional 2016 Phillies Phans

[tom81]

I disagree, the team isn't going anywhere this year so why not keep him if they believe he has the potential to be a valuable player in a couple of years. It should not matter to the Phillies if they hurt his development because for him to play every day in the minors it will probably be with another team.

Maybe what he needs is an injury so he can be Dl'ed for a few weeks then allowed to rehap and play every day for a few weeks to get him timing back.

The crux of the matter is that I'm delusional enough to believe they have a chance to go somewhere this year. . I believe that Their margin is small and so they can't afford to carry dead weight. They need more productive players. Either bring up a real OF for the spot, a hitting 1B or even a catcher so you can pitch hit with Ruiz/Rupp.

[LoneStarPhan]

Goeddel is not even the least productive player on the bench.

[Lucky_Beagle]

I disagree, the team isn't going anywhere this year so why not keep him if they believe he has the potential to be a valuable player in a couple of years. It should not matter to the Phillies if they hurt his development because for him to play every day in the minors it will probably be with another team.

Maybe what he needs is an injury so he can be Dl'ed for a few weeks then allowed to rehap and play every day for a few weeks to get him timing back.

The crux of the matter is that I'm delusional enough to believe they have a chance to go somewhere this year. . I believe that Their margin is small and so they can't afford to carry dead weight. They need more productive players. Either bring up a real OF for the spot, a hitting 1B or even a catcher so you can pitch hit with Ruiz/Rupp.

Then find a way to replace Buriss, Ruf, and/or Howard. They all probably could go and stand to improve the team more than the player who could then slide into the 25th slot and see only occassional duty.

[zambonir]

One of the recent news stories quoted a Phillies executive (unnamed) as saying "I don't care about our record." Which is hardly a surprise. They are sensitive to the tanking talk, but they have a plan and they are not going to waver from it. I don't really see what Burris is adding in terms of utility or defense, he doesn't even get used enough in those specific roles (and Cody Asche certainly isn't coming to the rescue) but the development of Tyler Goedell, for instance, is more important to the front office than the wild card race.

[Philsmania]

One of the recent news stories quoted a Phillies executive (unnamed) as saying "I don't care about our record." Which is hardly a surprise. They are sensitive to the tanking talk, but they have a plan and they are not going to waver from it. I don't really see what Burris is adding in terms of utility or defense, he doesn't even get used enough in those specific roles (and Cody Asche certainly isn't coming to the rescue) but the development of Tyler Goeddel, for instance, is more important to the front office than the wild card race.

Darned Hinkie had to be so brazen about what he was doing and now it's hard for anyone else to do it, and not just in Philadelphia.

[EDmuch]

Why the dumping on Ryan Howard? Yes, his BA is deplorable. But he is hitting for power and I think he has 3-4 game winning hits. So he is ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTING to the team's success. Lay off of him. It is his farewell tour. I wish him well. He will be gone after this year.

[EDmuch]

Burris on the other hand ........

[Austinfan]

Meh, if they had options they'd employ those options.
But they're not promoting Perkins on the basis of 80 PA in AAA ball.
Let the kids learn down on the farm, when they're ready, we'll know.
I mean if Williams has a .900+ OPS at the end of June . . .

The FO is right, this start has been fun, but it's "fool's gold."
Keep panning the stream until you get the real thing.

[tom81]

Getting rid of Burris doesn't belong in the delusional thread, there isn't any good reason to have him on the team. Getting rid of Goeddel belongs in the delusional thread because the only reason to let him go is to be more competitive this year.

[zambonir]

I guess this is as good a place as any to ask: who would you trade for Mike Trout right now (or this off-season)?

fangraphs.com/blogs/the-garr ... -question/

[julio]

I guess this is as good a place as any to ask: who would you trade for Mike Trout right now (or this off-season)?

fangraphs.com/blogs/the-garr ... -question/

I'm not sure what's realistic - it would have to be a lot.

Right off, since Trout would be going into center field, Odubel Herrera's on the table. But Herrera's not enough; the Phils would have to sweeten the deal (a lot). Vince Velasquez? (He'd love it; he's a SoCal guy.) After that, only lesser pieces (e.g., not Crawford; not Franco; not Nola; etc.). Obviously, as much dross (Galvis, Hernandez, Ruf, Rupp, Asche, Bourjos, etc.) as LA wants; I'd happily trade 10 for 1, if only the top two were of real value. But additional real talent could be included; one of Knapp or Alfaro, for instance; a less-certain but high-ceiling pitching prospect (Kilome?).

[el-pietro]

There was a comment on that article, saying that a deal might be easier if the trading team were to take on Pujols contract. That might be an option. We could release him if needed.
Trout and Puhols (full contract) for Williams + Eickhoff + Appell + Kilome?

Its probably close to impossible to put together a trade that is paletable for both teams.

[Philsmania]

This is the Mike Trout scenario that I am envisioning/dreaming.

Trout is signed through 2020. At least by 2019, it's painfully obvious that the Angels have to do a rebuild. After 2019, Trout is a year from free agency. He lets it be known that he wants to move on from Anaheim and play for a winner. By then, the Phillies are a contender with a loaded farm system. He also lets it be known that if he's traded to Philadelphia--his hometown team--he'll forgo free agency and sign an extension with them and even give a slight discount. Otherwise, he will still likely pursue free agency even if he spends 2020 someplace else. A deal gets done and the Phillies don't have to pay a king's ransom since the Angels don't have too many other options. Phillies phans get an early Christmas present in December of 2019. "Phillies reel in the big fish!", the evening newscasters all say at the top of the broadcast. After taking Clearwater by storm, Trout makes his triumphant homecoming on Opening Day 2020!

Not pie in the sky. It's the same scenario we had with Halladay.

[tom81]

I guess this is as good a place as any to ask: who would you trade for Mike Trout right now (or this off-season)?

fangraphs.com/blogs/the-garr ... -question/

I'm not sure what's realistic - it would have to be a lot.

Right off, since Trout would be going into center field, Odubel Herrera's on the table. But Herrera's not enough; the Phils would have to sweeten the deal (a lot). Vince Velasquez? (He'd love it; he's a SoCal guy.) After that, only lesser pieces (e.g., not Crawford; not Franco; not Nola; etc.). Obviously, as much dross (Galvis, Hernandez, Ruf, Rupp, Asche, Bourjos, etc.) as LA wants; I'd happily trade 10 for 1, if only the top two were of real value. But additional real talent could be included; one of Knapp or Alfaro, for instance; a less-certain but high-ceiling pitching prospect (Kilome?).

There is no way you include both Herrera and Valasquez in a deal for Trout. They have combined to give you more WAR this year than Trout at a fraction of the cost. We need lots of productive players not just one superstar.

[zambonir]

If the article has the merit, the 2019 scenario will be too late (though of course he'd be approaching free agency with whatever team acquired him).

I agree with julio that it will take the likes of Herrera and Velasquez, what they have done in the last four weeks is irrelevant compared to what Trout has done (and Trout is scarcely younger than either of them).

But, if you were really going to make an aggressive early play for Mike Trout you can't go weakening the few strengths of the major league team. Rather than Herrera or Velasquez I'm assuming you start with Williams and Thompson. One of Quinn and Altherr too. If one of the catchers can replace one of those names, sure. And then 1-2 lower level guys.

And that's certainly not a lot considering what Giles and Hamels, a closer and a much older player, got.

[julio]

Rather than Herrera or Velasquez I'm assuming you start with Williams and Thompson. One of Quinn and Altherr too. If one of the catchers can replace one of those names, sure. And then 1-2 lower level guys.

Yeah, I would much prefer that. But who are you kidding. That would not get it done. None of your "big four" has reached the majors; if I'm the Angels, I look at Klentak and say, "What makes you think I would trade Mike Trout for four guys who might not have major-league careers?"

I was not suggesting that I wanted to trade Herrera and Velasquez (plus other significant pieces) for Trout - but that's what it would take. If you offer Williams and Thompson (and Quinn +), then the Angels likely just find another trading partner. It's not as if they have to deal with the Phillies.

[zambonir]

Rather than Herrera or Velasquez I'm assuming you start with Williams and Thompson. One of Quinn and Altherr too. If one of the catchers can replace one of those names, sure. And then 1-2 lower level guys.

Yeah, I would much prefer that. But who are you kidding. That would not get it done. None of your "big four" has reached the majors; if I'm the Angels, I look at Klentak and say, "What makes you think I would trade Mike Trout for four guys who might not have major-league careers?"

I was not suggesting that I wanted to trade Herrera and Velasquez (plus other significant pieces) for Trout - but that's what it would take. If you offer Williams and Thompson (and Quinn +), then the Angels likely just find another trading partner. It's not as if they have to deal with the Phillies.

Ok, maybe it takes six guys. But the premise of a Trout trade in 2016 is the Angels won't be good for 2-4 years, a la the Phillies in 2012 (had they realized it).

When you put it that way, if they need the veritable major-league ready talent and they need sure things, I don't think a Rule V surprise, delightful (and seemingly sustainable) as he may be, and a guy some scouts still see a reliever (albeit a closer) even gets the package started. Not sure Franco would either. But most of the big money, high-bidder teams pursuing him would be teams who don't want to delete two significant players from their immediate major league future either.

[Three_up_Three_down]

But who are you kidding. That would not get it done. None of your "big four" has reached the majors; if I'm the Angels, I look at Klentak and say, "What makes you think I would trade Mike Trout for four guys who might not have major-league careers?"

Phillies have done this their entire existence. I thought it was general practice around the league.

[tom81]

Wow, they were actually talking about the Phillies on the WIP morning show! Unbelievable

[Slinging_Southpaw]

This team(so far), is making the argument that I've been making for years. While so many will make the argument,
saying the team has to add so much "WAR" to win, thinking they have things all figured out and that the stats hold all
the answers, sometimes, it's just baseball.
This team could be 10 games under .500 just as easy as 4 games over. Baseball isn't a game where you can just add
up all the stats at the end of the season and determine a winner. Could it tell you who the more talented teams are?
Sure, but as tired and lame as "One game at a time" is, that's baseball.