Where is this team headed based on 2016?

[zambonir]

With the new Comcast agreement, there is no doubt the team is pocketing money now and will pocket it by the bucketful next season, if they don't start spending rather big on FA, over-23 international guys, blowing out next summers budget on under-23 international guys, taking on an expensive contract from another team, or re-upping one of our guys early with a front-loaded contract to minimize the salary growth of the contract over time. The MLB salary commitments are extremely small for next season and the media revenue has increased tremendously, so huge amounts of money will be pocketed. IMHO, that is beyond debate and the only debate is whether there is a good enough baseball reason for the owners to pocket this windfall and for that to be a good thing for the team and its fans. But please, don't try to sell me the improbable non-fact that the team is not pocketing money.

I honestly don't know. Do you know enough about the team's revenue from ticket sales (and all accompanying revenue sources) to say the Comcast money significantly exceeds the lost profit from lowered attendance (and lowered ad rates, TV ratings, sponsor fees)? In that same article, MacPhail says they are going to hire more analytics people, internatonal scouts and player dev people.

I realize 10 of those people still doesn't equal one position player, but I'm just not cynical about this, I think they have a plan, I think some of the money being saved now will actually get spent in the future (remember, the 2018 and 2019 spending spree will still be way ahead of a return to 2009-level attendance) and I think they will spend on the other stuff when they want to. I also think if they didn't sign more international people this year it's because they couldn't get someone they wanted (or Klentak didn't trust the old regime scouting reports). And if the owners are actually pocketing something in the meantime, okay, they shouldn't go sign Jose Bautista just because. And I don't think a close look at Middleton's net worth and the lawsuit suggests that would ever cost him enough $ to where he'd be pinching pennies out of fear, if he's even afraid of losing.

[Austinfan]

I have trouble thinking they're worried about money, and Middleton, at least from all reports, is the kind of owner whose ego is tied to his team winning (i.e., he's more interested in the consumption value of ownership than the investment value).

I do think MacPhail and Klentak like having the financial resources to make decisions without considering money (up to salary cap issues, though I think they have no problem paying penalties if it doesn't constrain future decisionmaking). I don't think they've had their people in place long enough to feel comfortable rolling the dice quite yet. I also think they are all in on the rebuild, and simply don't want to block young players by putting themselves in a "Howard" situation again (it's not just the money, it's the unpleasantness when you bench a high priced veteran you just signed to play a rookie). MacPhail was pretty committed to the youth movement in Baltimore.

I don't see a lot of opportunities to blow the bank in LA this year, they weren't in a situation to pull a Padres, to do so you'd have to have the people in place and the groundwork done two years in advance. Other than blowing out their cap, there was little talent left and they got a good chunk of it.

Is there anyone in the 23+ international market that fits their needs - that's the litmus test, because that's the best value out there (compared to 30+ year old FAs on the market). Trading for contracts is possible, but something like Kemp was too long for what they wanted (3 more years?). I don't think they want an over 30 OF who has a contract past 2018. Boston got really lucky to find a taker for bad contracts, but you can't count on that going forward.

One problem is simply that there is going to be so much talent at Lehigh, half will flop, but which half? If these prospects were in Clearwater, spending money on FAs would be easier to justify, but right now it's really awkward. Which is why I think big moves will wait until next winter, when they have a much better idea of the future of the prospects in the system.

[julio]

The issue and question is not whether ownership is "pocketing" money, in the short term; the issue/question is whether "pocketing money" is the motivating factor behind the decisions they're making. Some of our posters seem to see not spending at prior-year levels as prima facie evidence of either bad management or malign intent; some of us see the current, lower spending levels as a result of a long-term development strategy that, in principle at least (pending competent execution) makes sense. For me, harping about the current spending level is just missing the point - it's not about how much money is spent; it's about what the long-term plan is, and how well that plan is executed.

[allentown]

The issue and question is not whether ownership is "pocketing" money, in the short term; the issue/question is whether "pocketing money" is the motivating factor behind the decisions they're making. Some of our posters seem to see not spending at prior-year levels as prima facie evidence of either bad management or malign intent; some of us see the current, lower spending levels as a result of a long-term development strategy that, in principle at least (pending competent execution) makes sense. For me, harping about the current spending level is just missing the point - it's not about how much money is spent; it's about what the long-term plan is, and how well that plan is executed.

I can buy a build-from-within approach, but don't see that as consistent with failing to spend 150% of our international allocation this year, or blowing out the international allocation next season (although they may well do that). It is also not consistent with not signing youngish over-23 international FA.

[Austinfan]

You're assuming they could trade for 50% without giving up a significant prospect, and that there were prospects they could buy with that 50% which would make such a trade worthwhile. As far as I know, there was only one allocation trade, and it seemed to be more of a throw-in of the deal rather than the reason for the trade.

[zambonir]

I think the lack of immediate interest in an over-23 FA is about two things, the fact that Klentak wanted a year without any major moves (again, in part because he could only rely on the scouting and analytics of the previous regime) and the fact that he really was following a Houston-like path (which should also be the case with a lot more hirings and firing in the next three months). They really did think they'd get a Top 3 or at least Top 5 pick this year (and the run differential says they should have) followed by one last time in the Top 10 next year. Adding a 2-3 WAR player wouldn't have helped with that. But I guess we shall see how all these things play out heading into March.

[allentown]

You're assuming they could trade for 50% without giving up a significant prospect, and that there were prospects they could buy with that 50% which would make such a trade worthwhile. As far as I know, there was only one allocation trade, and it seemed to be more of a throw-in of the deal rather than the reason for the trade.

Yes, and I think that is a valid assumption because: we did that last year, the slot we would buy is of no value apart from selling it to the past allocation breakers who aren't allowed to sign a major LA guy this year, when the calendar rolls around to July 1, 2017 any untraded allocations vanish, quite a few teams have allocation to trade, there aren't a ton of teams interested in pursuing that allocation.

[Austinfan]

Conversely, if teams feel those allocations have value in July, they'll hold out and see if they can obtain something of real value, since they can always trade those allocations for trash later. The fact that no one was interested in trading for allocations says either the price went up or there was no one worth buying out there.

Given the 1-2 year lead on lining up the top prospects, most of the players you'd want to sign are gone, so the only remaining prospects are those turning 16 after the big LA rush, and only if you have a deal lined up with one of them does it make sense to trade for allocations.

[andyb]

I think that the allocations have little or no value. There are more teams under penalty so there is a larger supply of allocations that can't be used. And then you have the factor of the multiple teams like San Diego exceeding the pool this year and locking up the players. There is just no demand for those allocations from teams that adhered to the cap because the best prospects are gone.

This is NOT an excuse for the Phillies though. They had ample opportunity to build relationships with these players and there were a dozen Cuban prospects that did not require 2 years of lead time to sign. Plus Sal has been there for a long time already. It is not as if he is new. The fact remains that it appears the Phillies did not do a good job of planning how to spend their allocation. I hope they still do so, but the later that happens the lower chance that they spend it on talent that is not over-priced. This is probably the first small failure for Klentak. It is not a huge failure because they did lock up a decent number of prospects. They could have signed at least one or two more top end talents though. That is a failure.

[schooldoc]

Widely reported that Mackanin will be lobbying the front office to add a hitter this offseason. Understandably so, given the Phils' offensive struggles and that in his role as manager, Mac is going to take a more short-term rather than long-term view.

Do you agree with Mac? I do, but I don't see the solution in this winter's free agent market. It's going to take some kind of trade. The trick will be finding the right veteran bat and the right mix of guys to deal for that veteran bat.

I don't know if it could be him, but I've mentioned Andrew McCutchen before as a guy I'd look into....assuming Anaheim hangs up on me when/if I call about Trout.

[donaldorc]

Answering the question on this thread directly, after the past several weeks, deeper and deeper into the tank.

[Austinfan]

If Pete wants a new job, publicly pressuring his new GM who's committed to a rebuild to add an expensive, aging veteran that will block the numerous prospects at Lehigh is probably not the best strategy. Klentak might go that route, but I doubt he appreciates being pressured to do so.

[David_Criss]

My question based on 2016 is who plays center field in Philadelphia next year? At different times, I have heard Quinn is the future and that Altherr is far and away the best center fielder, etc. Meanwhile, Herrera, who was playing 2B in double A two-years-ago remains in center and while isn't knocking on the door for a gold glove, hasn't been awful.

At age 22 Herrera played 2B for the Rangers High A and double A teams. He hit .315 with a .383 OBP, 21 SB, 19 doubles, 5 triples and just 2 homers
Altherr in 2015 at age 24 between AA and AAA hit .293 with a .367 OBP, 16 SB, 32 doubles, 5 triples, 14 homers
At age 23 Quinn at AA hit .287 with a .361 OBP, 31 SB, 14 doubles, 6 triples and 6 homers

Quinn hasn't played a full season in forever - perhaps better training at the Majors helps??????
Altherr is he over the wrist issue?

Do all three make up the outfield in 2017? Not much power and a lot of youth, but the team is rebuilding.

[kmc1019]

Despite some great success in the minors - primarily at AA and below, the major league club goes in to next year with a lot more questions and uncertainty than we would like.

If Williams, Crawford and Knapp had put up great years at Lehigh, this picture would look more optimistic. At best, optimism is delayed.

Altherr is a question mark as to whether he will ever hit enough to be a major league starter.

Quinn is a question mark as to whether he will ever be healthy long enough to be counted on.

Strong years by Alfaro, Cozens and Hoskins are reasons for hope, but they will all be AAA players next year.

Throw in the unexpected health issue and related uncertainty with Nola's elbow.

All in all, and barring any big and unlikely free agent signings for 1B and corner outfield, this team will start 2017 looking to be marginally better or worse than this year and with sustained success still a year or years away.

[Austinfan]

That's what I've been saying since April, 2017 is going to be a transition year where questions get answered.
Which is why I don't expect big moves from Klentak until after the 2017 season.
This winter will be about temporary patches while the kids develop (or don't develop) at Lehigh.

[allentown]

I think some of the setbacks {Knapp, Williams, Quinn, Appel, Pinto) in the upper minors this year will turn out to be simply off-years and the players will rebound next season. Unfortunately, we have enough warning signals to expect at least one or two true wash outs of prospects we have counted on. Other guys have stepped forward and that balances the off-years of the prior 5 guys, in my mind. The injuries to Eflin and Nola are worrying. I think Altherr had the talent to be a major league starter as did Quinn. With both the issue is recovery from injury and future health. That's four players with injury issues. They won't all come back to be what we hoped they would be.

I still thing this organization does not currently contain enough talent to be a solid playoff team several years from now. We are especially lacking in star players. I think there is a pressing need to add talent. That is why I don't agree that it is wise for Klentak to just take a whole year off for evaluation and not do the utmost to add talent. If somebody eventually becomes redundant as a result of adding talent, that can be addressed by trade. I think the Phillies need more of a sense of urgency. Slipping from the original turn-around schedule announced by Gillick is not a good thing and I won't pretend that it is. It is a mark of organizational indecisiveness, failure to commit sufficient $, and some questionable decisions.

[EDmuch]

I think the biggest issue with adding talent in this off-year is that there is not a lot of high quality UFA talent available, particularly when compared to what may be available on the UFA market the two following years.

[Austinfan]

You don't add over 30 players on inflated contracts to be core players for a contender.
You add one on the margin to provide a boost to an already good team.
Which is why the international market is the only viable source (of under 30) talent this offseason.

[bigegypt0417]

I think the biggest issue with adding talent in this off-year is that there is not a lot of high quality UFA talent available, particularly when compared to what may be available on the UFA market the two following years.

There are other ways to add young talent and the Phillies now have the depth to do that. They also may have some players who will not be part of the core of this team that can bring back some assets...

[Austinfan]

Problem is right now they don't know which players will or won't be part of the core.
You don't want to trade young players too early (before you have a good assessment on their probably upside) or older players too late (when their value starts to plumment).