Phillies sign reliever Shawn Camp

It'll be a minor-league deal with an invite to spring training for Shawn Camp, a soon-to-be 38-year-old journeyman reliever.

A day after signing Marlon Byrd, the Phillies added a potential arm to their bullpen in Camp, a source confirmed to CSNPhilly's Jim Salisbury.

Camp is just one year removed from a season in which he went 3-6 with a 3.59 ERA with the Cubs and led the league with 80 appearances. Last year, he struggled in just 26 games, posting a 7.04 ERA.

From 2009-12, Camp compiled a 15-18 record, six saves, a 3.56 ERA, 1.324 WHIP and 2.1 strikeouts-to-walks. He's also a double-play machine, generating twin killings once every 10.3 chances.

If anything, Camp provides depth to a team that clearly needs it. And if he can be an effective middle-relief man, that's a plus.

Camp has also pitched for the Blue Jays, Devil Rays and Royals.

Amaro banking on 'bang for the buck'
A day later, the dust has settled on the Marlon Byrd signing. Ruben Amaro has made it clear with his first move that the Phillies not looking to make the biggest splash like they used to. Rather, they're trying to spend smartly.

"We don't have unlimited dollar to spend," Amaro said. "So we have to make sure we get the best bang for the buck. Hopefully we did that with Marlon and the other players we're pursuing."

Amaro also revealed that the Phillies are somewhat protected if Byrd fails another PED test, as he did in 2012, Salisbury writes.

Comments

[Phillibuster]

jbird: My point is that it shouldn't matter what "most Americans" do or do not appreciate as far as you your own motivations on the subject go.

Unless you're intentionally engaging in groupthink, I guess, but that'd be... Sort of weird, since it's not like we're having popularity contests or elections here (and you don't get much sympathy for holding a view simply because "the general populace holds it").

Also, by defining "practical knowledge" as "useful knowledge," you've implied that all knowledge outside this range is useless. Given the context, that would seem to either mean that advanced education (outside of The School o' Hard Knocks, anyway) is useless, or that lots of the knowledge obtained in an ivy league school is "practical knowledge," in which case the argument that Stanford grads should be viewed as hoity-toity folks who didn't learn anything useful seems pretty spurious.

Especially in the "practical" fields like business, the sciences, communications, etc.

Speaking as an English/History (totally impractical) degree-holder, anyway.

[derekcarstairs]

I was just looking at one of Chase Utley's closest comparables, HOFer Joe Gordon, who played with the Yankees and Indians in the '30s and '40s.

Gordon played 11 years, including nine consecutive years as an All-Star. He had a lot of pop for a player of that period, particularly a second baseman. He had double-digit HRs every season and seven seasons with 20 or more HRs, including two seasons with 30 or more.

Gordon was also an excellent defensive second baseman. His career dWAR was 22.4 with seven seasons of 2.0 or better.

[Chris in VT]

NEPP - I have also bemoaned Arbuckle's departure, but an honest question for you...How has he performed running the drafts for KC since '09? Have they had a lot more success? I know that they have had a pretty stocked farm system over the years, but how many of those were drafted since Arbuckle arrived?

[NEPP]

A depressing corollary is that replacing Amaro will be unlikely to improve matters.

**************

Asst GM Ed Wade is ready and willing to step up the moment Rube is gone.

[jbird]

Philibuster: My undergrad is an English/History double major as well. Hence the extra degrees and student loans so that I could actually get a job. My wife's a Philosophy major. I think you are conflating groupthink or mob mentality with culture. Also, I thought I took pains to not paint all Stanford grads as under-qualified and over-credentialed but rather only a certain segment.

My personal motivation on the subject is sarcasm and poking fun at folks a little higher on the social ladder (and the bum who's ruining my favorite sports team). Another fine American tradition.

[awh™]

"He went out and 'got his man' by offering a contract well above what any other team was offering, according to Byrd himself."

Lore, while Byrd may not have had another offer in hand, there is no evidence that he would not have gotten similar offers had he waited out the market. None.

There is also no evidence that the Phillies could have signed him for less had they waited. AAMOF, had they waited, it's possible another team - with a better opportunity to contend next year - could have offered Byrd similar money, and the Phillies would have lost him.

Hypothetically, suppose Boston doesn't re-sign Ellsbury, and miss on Davis? Would not a short term - though not ideal - fix for them be signing Byrd and moving Vic to CF?

So, if you're Byrd, and you have a 1/16 on the table from the Phillies, and a 2/14 on the table from Boston, which offer do you take if you want to win?

Besides, not that it's Gospel, but MLBTR's projection was for Byrd to get 1/15, so if the Phillies "overpaid" (which as I point out above is merely questionable - not a fact), they didn't overpay by much.

[NEPP]

Honestly I have no idea how he's done in KC...we're getting to the point where his first couple drafts should be ready to judge.

[awh™]

Should say "2/16 from the Phillies".

[The Truth Injection]

Lorecore's position brings up what I was saying yesterday about nuance on here. He looks at this as an either/or type scenario as if Amaro was negotiating in a vacuum where no other teams were going to compete. That is patently ridiculous.

A way to criticize the deal is not to say "Well if only he had waited..." we have no idea what waiting would've done. Could've worked out, might not have. Had it not worked who knows what we are running out there in that spot.

And again- this is not the Papelbon deal where he jumped in first and blew away the market. He got by all accounts what seems like fair market value. Also, there was a clear line of demarcation in the free agent outfielders. The best of the group get qualifying offers. Byrd was probably the best, or second best, of the group that was not going to cost a QO. He wasn't going to sign for 2/12 before guys like Beltran, Cruz, and Ellsbury signed. But giving him his market value- yeah he'll sign for that.

[jbird]

Arbuckle would have led the 2009 draft for the Royals, yes?
Aaron Crow in the 1st round is an ok reliever. Not what you want, but 3 years so far in the bigs with a 3.19 era is better than most guys.

Wil Myers was the 3rd round pick and was briefly the top prospect in baseball broke into majors this year with an .832 ops.

Chris Dwyer in the 4th round pitched 3 scoreless innings in his cup o' coffee this year, so-so minor league record.

Harold Coleman in the 5th also broke into the majors this year. 30 innings with a sub-1 era.

Highlights of the 2009 Phillies draft are Dugan, Colvin, and Singleton. Nobody has made it yet, and the best of the bunch plays for Houston.

[jbird]

Speaking of Colvin: Anyone have a sense on whether he's a candidate for the failed starter to good reliever transition or is he just a wreck at this point?

[CLOUT]

I am still a gay Philadelphian.

[bay_area_phan]

"To be fair, it was a BS in Human Biology...hardly a skate through course load for your typical student athlete."

Had he not been drafted to play MLB, RAJ was planning on continuing his education. In fact, he had already begun work on his Masters Thesis: The Fallacy of Age-Related Athletic Decline.

[bay_area_phan]

"Anyone have a sense on whether he's a candidate for the failed starter to good reliever transition or is he just a wreck at this point?"

He has certainly aced the first part of that formula.

[jbird]

BAP: Now that right there, that's funny.

[awh™]

"It indicates that the American public is predisposed towards anti-intellectualism..."

'buster ,true, but that is because the American public sees how intellectuals view and treat them.

In short, it's a behavior that is learned from experience.

[The Truth Injection]

BAP: See I can be fair- the 11:44 made me laugh.

[Chris in VT]

Just a quick look at the Royals' top 20 prospects...They have a bunch of B/B+ prospects, the best of which seems to be Kyle Zimmer, who projects as a future #2...Not really any studs, but solid depth and players who looks like future contributors. Obviously they traded away several of their top guys recently, and a bunch graduated to the majors, so it looks like they've done pretty well.

In comparison, Biddle grades out slightly below Zimmer, and Franco is probably the best bat in either system at the moment, although MLB.com has Bubba Starling rated above him (not sure why, as Starling hasn't done much in the minors). Zimmer is the highest rated in either system.

The Phils have fewer solid (B- and above) prospects, less depth, and what looks like slightly less impact-potential prospects. So...overall, KC has definitely drafted better than the Phils since Arbuckle switched organizations.

[GTown_Dave]

I don't know how much or how little Arbuckle has influenced the situation, but the immediate future certainly appears brighter for Royals fans than for Phillies fans. Plus KC has a player whose nickname is "Country Breakfast". That alone is worth at least 0.8 WAR.

[jbird]

Gtown: I don't know, that Shields-Myers trade was pretty brutal. And Shields had a good year.

[GTown_Dave]

jbird: KC improved by 14 wins over the prior season despite that trade. Their overall plan might contain questionable aspects, but at least they seem to have a plan. I'm not sold on a 3rd consecutive season of "Ryan Howard needs to play better" as a substitute for intelligent organizational strategy.

[NEPP]

The Shields trade is what happens when you have a GM with his back against the wall fighting for his job. KC had to make an effort to win last year so he tried to go all in with pitching.

[Oz, the Great and Powerful]

Anybody can have a brain. That's a very mediocre commodity. Every pusillanimous creature that crawls on the Earth or slinks through slimy seas has a brain. Back where I come from, we have universities, seats of great learning, where men go to become great thinkers. And when they come out, they think deep thoughts and with no more brains than you have. But they have one thing you haven't got: a diploma.

[GBrettfan]

A few links from the beat writers, FYI.

Matt Gelb ‏@magelb 2h
How does a GM operate under tenuous job security? Amaro insists he can be trusted to balance future with now. http://bit.ly/1hIAjiJ

David Murphy ‏@ByDavidMurphy 43m
Want to know what's wrong with the Phillies? Eight words from their GM. My manifesto: http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/phillies/The-problem-with-the-Phillies-in-eight-of-their-GMs-words.html …

[GBrettfan]

I love the Wizard of Oz quote above.

[Phillibuster]

awh: I think you're stuck with a chicken/egg situation in that argument.

Anti-intellectualism - even in America - dates back to before America was a country. Aristocrats were the only ones who could be educated, and by virtue of the much-more-concrete social classes often viewed those who weren't as "beneath" them. Since the "underclasses" weren't sheep, they developed a healthy disregard for the aristocrats.

I don't think you can say that any intellectual snobbery displayed by today's "highly educated" individuals is the cause for mass anti-intellectual sentiment among the "not-highly educated" populate today. Nor do I think you can say any such snobbery is a result of the scorn and derision heaped upon them by those without tertiary degrees.

It was a behavior "learned from experience" hundreds of years ago, and passed down (proudly, in some cases) to descendants who really would otherwise have no reason to act such. Much like racism, religious intolerance, or any other exclusionary behavior.

I would bet you good money there are at least as many people who feel smug about not having college degrees as those who feel smug because they do.

[LorecorE]

TTI: "We have no idea what other teams were willing to offer- or had offered to Byrd- up to this point."

This was posted earlier in thread:

"David Murphy reports that Marlon Byrd said he was surprised the Phillies were so "aggressive": "There really wasn't a chance for other teams to get involved."

In my post I specifically said that according to Byrd, no other teams were involved at the time Ruben made his offer.

[GTown_Dave]

GBrettfan: Thanks for the links. Murphy often annoys me, but it's difficult to disagree w/ what he's saying here. The following in particular is an exceptional metaphor:

"The problem is that many of the decisions that end up getting made, and the public defenses of those decisions, suggest that there is little science behind them, that the governing strategy is to plant a tree for shade whenever the sun moves and then hope that the forest ends up looking alright."

[GBrettfan]

I liked that metaphor very much, too. One might add that when the forest doesn't look right, it's because the trees didn't perform as expected, but that we are confident that next summer, the trees will provide plenty of shade.

[norbertods]

GBrett: As long as the trees produce, right?

[MG]

Chris - Yup and why the future beyond this year looks fairly bleak. There isn't a lot of talent with high upside potential, a real lack of system-wide quality & depth of prospects, and a gap of MLB-ready talent.

[GTown_Dave]

GBrettfan: I can hear it now:

"That oak w/ the dead root system needs to grow better & he knows it. We need him to grow better for us to have more shade. He's healthier. I have faith he will come back & do the things he needs to do. Will he grow 50 ft.? I doubt it. Will he produce 100 acorns? I think he will, if he doesn't topple over."

[bay_area_phan]

Other than a few grammatical/typographical miscues which makes it hard to read at points, that's a great article. And it's funny that, from that extremely long article, GTown_Dave managed to pluck out the exact same quote that I was going to pluck out & post.

[Jack]

Yes, the Phillies certainly seem to fall into the trap of trying to fix the hole created by the last problem, rather than actually having a proactive plan.

Ryan Madson leaves as closer? Sign the best closer out there for the biggest money! Young relievers struggle? Sign Chad Durbin and Mike Adams! Outfield an issue? Sign Delmon Young! Delmon Young an issue? Sign Marlon Byrd!

There's a failure to understand holistically what is going on. They see holes at 3B, RP, and RF, and say we have to fill those holes no matter what. A smart front office looks at the entire organization and says how can we most efficiently build the best team, now and for the future. There's a big difference there.

[jbird]

Murphy column was pretty dang good.

[Chris in VT]

Chris - Yup and why the future beyond this year looks fairly bleak. There isn't a lot of talent with high upside potential, a real lack of system-wide quality & depth of prospects, and a gap of MLB-ready talent.

Posted by: MG | Thursday, November 14, 2013 at 01:02 PM

But other than all that, things are looking pretty, pretty great.

[MG]

Phils emphasizing scouting over analytics isn't necessarily a flawed approach either.

Everyone touts the Cards' power pitchers they have drafted & developed the past few years. Steve Keim was on the radio earlier this year during an interview and provided some great insights into why it had succeeded.

First, it started out identifying a need and making it an organizational priority.

Two, it was slightly modifying at what they look at in their amateur scouting and identifying pitchers with a certain body composition and delivery style. They also looked at injury history too.

Third, it was a systematic installation of a select development monitoring process and program they put into place that all pitching coaches & managers were required to follow & they monitored closely.

Now some of this was 'analytics' but a lot more of it had to with selecting an organizational strategy, analyzing biomechanics/looking at video (not necessarily an analytics function) to identify the right pitchers to draft, and most importantly implementing a systematic process that including a through process, monitoring, and feedback system.

Some of what they did was 'analytically-driven' but that was overshadowed by the larger strategy and operations they put into place that really have paid dividends.

Analytics isn't an end-all strategy to anything and for various reasons it is ignored/not utilized in an organization. 'Big Data' and analytics in general are the most overrated things in business and society today to me.

The true masters to me are the operations people who know what to look for and have enough content knowledge about what they are looking at, how to sell the strategy to key decision-makers and get initial and continued buy-in, and most importantly put a system in place that largely builds off existing people/infrastructure to make it work and be able to deliver quantifiable results.

[Jack]

I actually agree with MG. The idea of scouting vs. analytics is a canard that doesn't accurately reflect the depth of the issues at play here.

Murphy's column was good not because it argued that the Phillies relied on scouts instead of analytics. That dichotomy is false.

Murphy's column was good because it exposed that the Phillies have no plan at all for what they're doing. Whether you use scouts or stats as inputs isn't the question. Every team uses both. What matters is the system and people in place to use those inputs to make decisions. The Phillies are failing massively in that regard.

[GBrettfan]

That's interesting, MG. Thanks for sharing it.

I just hope the Phillies aren't too busy applying bandages to try and find a cure.

[bay_area_phan]

"Phils emphasizing scouting over analytics isn't necessarily a flawed approach either."

I don't think Murphy's point was that it's wrong to emphasize scouting over analytics. His point was that it's wrong to rely on scouting to the exclusion of all other analytical tools.

I mean, did RAJ really need a scouting report to assess the prospects of a guy with 4,813 major league PAs?

[Chris in VT]

MG - As so many here have stated, there's absolutely nothing wrong with relying on a scouting-heavy approach. It's the complete disdain for the advanced metrics and analytics movement that is so concerning. Relying on either one exclusively is a terrible idea, and there is absolutely no reason to smugly and condescendingly act like people using advanced metrics as part of the scouting process or nerds or stat-wonks who don't understand baseball. Especially when all the successful teams use them as part of their evaluation process.

[aksmith]

All the analytics in the world won't fix a minor league system with poor instruction. And that is certainly the case. Nobody in the minor leagues learns new pitches. There is no pitcher the Phillies have developed who learned a new pitch in the minors. Every one of them has learned any new pitches they've learned after getting to the majors.

Also, would anyone here be surprised to find out that Amaro tells time with a sundial?

[Chris in VT]

What I'd really love to know is if anyone in the Phils' FO looks at the potential signing of Byrd and brings up all the red flags in his peripheral stats that scream 2013 was a fluke and asks the tough questions about those things? And if there is, does anyone listen to him at all?

It feels like that type of voice is completely non-existent in this organization.

[The Truth Injection]

Relying on scouting isn't a problem by itself.

Relying on scouting and sucking at it is a major problem.

[Chris in VT]

Not sure if anyone saw this, but MLB has pulled its proposal for the revised posting system with Japanese baseball...If no agreement is reached, Japanese FAs (Like Tanaka) will be unable to sign with MLB until 9 years of service time has been accumulated.

[MG]

TTI - Agreed. That and injury prevention & dealing with injured players.

It has reached almost comical levels the past year or so on how the Phils ineptly handle injuries.

[bay_area_phan]

A meting in the Phillies' FO:

The cast:

RAJ -- the GM
Benny Looper, Scott Proefock -- his minions
Scott Freedman -- fancy new analytics guy

RAJ: So, I got the report from my scouts on Marlon Byrd. They tell me that he changed his swing path last year & that was why he had such a good season. Can anyone give me a good reason why we shouldn't sign him?

FO Guys: Silence.

RAJ: Benny, you look like you were about to say something.

Looper: Well, I hate to be a nay-sayer, but I don't really care about swing paths. I care about production.

RAJ: Benny, that is a fabulous point. I'm so glad you brought it up. What about that? Do either of you have any thoughts on Marlon Byrd's ability to produce?

Proefock: As it happens, I brought my entire 2013 Topps Baseball card set with me. Let me see . . . Butera, Butler, another Butler, ah, here we go, Marlon Byrd.

RAJ: So, what can you tell us about his production, Scott?

Proefock: (looking at back of card) Oh, I hate when they do this!

RAJ: What is it?

Proefock: Well, Byrd played for 2 teams last year. Instead of giving you his total stats, they give you his stats with each team. So, for instance, I have no way of knowing what his RBI total was for the full season.

RAJ: Oh, that is so annoying when they do that. It's stuff like that which led me to go out and hire our fancy new analystics guy. Let's get him in here & see if he can help. (picks up phone) Yes, Scott, could you come in here for a moment. We need you to analyze some data for us. It's very important.

Freedman (enters): Hi Mr. Amaro. I'm glad you called. I know you guys were looking at Marlon Byrd as an acquisition, and I just got done making this spread sheet with his batted ball data from the last 12 yea--

RAJ: Never mind all that. What we need you to do is look at Marlon Byrd's baseball card, which shows that he had 71 RBIs with the Mets and 17 RBIs with the Pirates. I want you to add those numbers together and tell us how many RBIs he had in all.

Freedman: Well, it's obviously 88, but --

RAJ: 88! Holy hell! Does anyone have anything negative to say about Marlon Byrd now? (Silence.) Alright, I think we've found our man.

[bay_area_phan]

I'm sort of in between cases right now -- in case you all couldn't figure that out.

[jbird]

BAP: Ha! You are bringing it today.

[jbird]

BAP: can you bill your hours to Kabletown?

[Chris in VT]

bap - The only part of that discussion I would dispute is the "fancy new analytics guy" title for Freedman...It should read

"Fancy New Analytics Extern The Commissioner's Office Demanded We Hire Temporarily To Try To Move Us Into The 21st Century"

[CLOUT]

I am still gay. Still love men.

[nokwurst]

BAP, that was awesome.
As if BL had its own version of SNL.

[The Truth Injection]

BAP's good comedy is followed up by a child we still thinks gay jokes are funny.

[Curt]

And the subsequent phone call:

Ruben: hi this is Ruben Amaro. What would it take to bring Marlon back to Philadelphia?

Agent: well, we really haven't given it much thought yet. However, I know of a website that suggests $15 million/2 years...

Rube: Well I'm not sure what spiders have to with this, but how about we say $16 million/2, plus an $8 million option. How does that sound?

Agent: Deal!

[The_GodfatherSJP]

Just read the Murphy article. It's outside the focus of his article a bit, but I think context for a lack of "analytics" matters. Gillick was/is infamous for his rejection of "Moneyball" and the analytical approach it proffers. He's presented as a "scouts first" GM and I've never seen or read anything to counter that perception. He's actually almost a villain and a poster boy for what's wrong with Baseball in the book, and his Seattle Mariners are held up as an example of what the "old-school" philosophy produced: the much more expensive team finished well behind the Athletics (nevermind that the team finished with 93 wins that year).

Amaro was Gillick's assistant GM. And Gillick is still an adviser to Amaro. So of course he's taking a lot of his cues and ideas from the guy who was GM in 2008. I actually don't think the organization would have fared much better had Gillick remained at the helm through this year.

[awh™]

"So...overall, KC has definitely drafted better than the Phils since Arbuckle switched organizations."

Surprise, surprise.

[Redburb]

Whoa whoa whoa. A criticism of Pat Gillick? I've done that before and gotten blasted on here. Better watch out Godfather.

[jbird]

Gillick is a hall of fame GM. Sure, you can say he's the George Costanza of GM's, always leave on a high note, but you can't argue with the results. It's like arguing a hitter with an abnormally high Babip or a pitcher with a low k/bb rate paired with a low era wasn't good. No, his results were good. Is he likely to keep being good given the same set of circumstances going forward? Maybe yes, but you can't progress from the mean forever. However, you can't argue with what's already taken place.

[Chris in VT]

Like TTI said, relying on scouting isn't the problem. Relying on scouting and sucking at it is.

[CN]

@973espn 1h
New #Phillies rumor to chew on: Ryan Howard in exchange for David Price reports WDAE in Tampa....thoughts?

Just in case you need a good laugh.

[awh™]

"Third, it was a systematic installation of a select development monitoring process and program they put into place that all pitching coaches & managers were required to follow & they monitored closely."

Isn't Phillipe Aumont's complaint that there is no organizational philosophy or process - that he was hearing different things at different levels of the org?

Hmmmm....

[Phillibuster]

Aumont's kind of lost any credibility, considering the things he's said.

[jbird]

"Ryan Howard in exchange for David Price"

Would the phillies be picking up the entire TB payroll in exchange? I'd still do it.

[Chris in VT]

"So...overall, KC has definitely drafted better than the Phils since Arbuckle switched organizations."

Surprise, surprise.

Posted by: awh™ | Thursday, November 14, 2013 at 03:16 PM

Yeah, definitely not surprised either...Just went back and looked at Phils' drafts from 2006-2008 (Arbuckle's last 3 in Philly) and I was shocked at how much better they are than the 2009-2012 results. I knew the drafting acumen dropped off after Arbuckle left, but it wasn't just the quality of players, it was also the quantity. 2008, for instance, is infamous for the Hewitt flop, and Collier was the 2nd rounder. The next 5 picks (in order) were Gose, Knapp, Worley Pettibone, May. The only one of those that didn't pan out was Knapp, and he was the "centerpiece" of the first Lee deal. That's pretty impressive. 2007 had Savery, d'Arnaud, and Taylor in the first 5 rounds. 2006 was Drabek, Cardenas, Donald, and Berry all in the first 5 rounds... None of those players have become stars yet, but hitting on that many MLB-caliber players in the first 5 rounds still seems really impressive.

[awh™]

"Murphy's column was good not because it argued that the Phillies relied on scouts instead of analytics."

Jack, I didn't get that at all. I took from it that it wasn't so much Murph was arguing "scouts INSTEAD of analytics", but rather that by dismissing analytics that the Phillies were relying on limited data - that is scouting - instead of relying on the wealth of data that is at their disposal to ASSIST in their decision making.

I thought the couple of paragraphs about how Byrd's FB/GB ratio (among other info)was readily available - at the click of a mouse - was the most interesting, in that it was descriptive of the information available that the Phillies wouldn't even have to PAY for, yet they weren't using it.

In other words, the Phillies are making command decisions based on LIMITED data.

That's like Obama ordering the bombing of Syria based on one news report, as opposed to getting all the intel data from his own people as well as allies.

[Chris in VT]

And I should mention 2006 also had Dom Brown in the 20th

[NEPP]

I'd imagine that Arbuckle took a good number of his scouts with him when he left...that tends to happen when there's that type of transition.

[clout]

Godfather: "I actually don't think the organization would have fared much better had Gillick remained at the helm through this year."

That is an astonishing act of apostasy on a web site where Gillick is revered as a god incapable of error.

[clout]

Chris: Trevor May panned out? Did I miss something?

[NEPP]

Well he hasn't not panned out yet at least...so there's still a chance on him.

[clout]

NEPP: By that definition there's still a chance for Anthony Hewitt and Moose Mattair.

[Chris in VT]

Chris: Trevor May panned out? Did I miss something?

Posted by: clout | Thursday, November 14, 2013 at 04:06 PM

Eh...Became one of the organization's top 5 prospects, used as key part of a fairly significant trade...Panned out sort of, I guess.

[awh™]

bap, you win the thread.

Your 2:03 post might be the funniest thing I've read here since I found the site in 2006.

[clout]

Whatever else you want to say about Aumont, there is no doubt he was badly mishandled by this organization starting with the lost year in which they tried to make him a starter despite the Mariners having already tried and failed at it.

[Chris in VT]

Leave him off the list, including him is definitely fudging things. Still a very impressive haul in 2008, as far as getting guys who actually made it to the show, and, at least temporarily, performed well.

[clout]

Chris: Panned out as a piece with value. Not panned out as an MLB player.

[NEPP]

***By that definition there's still a chance for Anthony Hewitt and Moose Mattair.***

This is true. Hewitt might be in AAA next year...how scary is that.

***Panned out as a piece with value.***

That's not a bad thing...considering. Knapp was a successful prospect too. Teams need good prospects so that they can both make trades and improve through their system.

[awh™]

"Chris: Panned out as a piece with value. Not panned out as an MLB player."

clout, yes, but panning out "as a piece with value" is important too, no?

[awh™]

clout, good point on Aumont.

And his complaints were basically that he was/is being mishandled.

[clout]

awh: Agreed. But I'd say 99% of folks would define "panned out" as actually making MLB.

[awh™]

Anyone hear the latest rumor?:

Howard for David Price.

No, I'm not making it up.

[Chris in VT]

Anyone hear the latest rumor?:

Howard for David Price.

No, I'm not making it up.

Posted by: awh™ | Thursday, November 14, 2013 at 04:37 PM

That's hilarious.

[Jack]

That doesn't even qualify as a real rumor.

[Juums]

What the rumor neglects to mention is that the Phils will also be eating 80% of Howard's salary and are throwing in Brown, Biddle, and a PTBNL. Just to make sure the Rays don't feel cheated.

(The PTBNL will be Franco, of course.)

[Phillibuster]

I would normally dismiss that completely out of hand... But the Rays really do need a 1B. It probably wouldn't hurt if he ended up DHing at times also.

That said, it would require significantly more being given up by the Phillies, and they'd probably have to pay out at least $20MM of his salary for his remaining years.

At that price, I really don't think it's a net positive, considering Price is likely to run over $15MM for arb alone.

[bay_area_phan]

If you actually listen to the Podcast (from a Tampa radio station), they say it would be Ryan Howard and some dudes, with the Phillies eating half of Howard's contract.

Their source for the deal is a "friend from Philly."

[Juums]

Phillibuster:
My first question, in all honesty, is if the Rays are talking to the Phils about a 1B/DH-type, why isn't there a rumor circulating about the rather more obvious trade candidate? As RAJ's apparently not high on Ruf and his salary seems to play more towards the strengths of the Rays. (As does his MiLB platoon split, if the Rays end up going the route the A's went last year.) He won't bring back a whole lot, but he'd bring back something more than organizational filler.

[Jack]

I would pay 90% of Howard's salary to get back even anything, let alone David Price (though I agree that I'm not sure what getting one year of David Price for $15 million before he hits free agency does for us).

At this point, Howard is a not far from a replacement-level player, and it's his playing time as much as his money that's the issue. He isn't helping the team win on the field. There's also the psychological issue of him being here--as long as he's here, the team looks at it like "we have to rely on Howard to win this year," which as everyone here recognizes as a joke. "Howard just has to be better" and all that, and then we're plugging him into the 4th spot in the lineup if he's even 75% healthy.

I honestly would trade him just to remove that burden of feeling like they have to put him out there and try and build a lineup around him. Sometimes you have to turn the page, even if it feels like you're getting rid of a guy who is still good. I don't normally buy into that stuff (and Clout will bring up the Abreu trade here, and I agree with him on it), but in this case I kind of do. As long as you keep trotting out the same old guys from 2008 and fooling yourself into thinking that's contending, you won't contend. I honestly think the team would be better just to cut ties and move on.

[bay_area_phan]

Jack: Price actually has 2 years left before he hits free agency.

[bay_area_phan]

Ok, everyone, I've got a hot scoop here straight from my source. And I'm not making this up; I really do have a source. I can't tell you who he/she is, though, because I don't want to get him/her fired.

Anyway, my source says this rumor is total BS. I understand that some of you won't believe me. That's fine. I'm just passing on what I know.

[Jack]

BAP: Ok, fine.

Either way, as we both recognize, this doesn't even pass the far-flung rumor smell test, let alone the real thing smell test.

If I heard a rumor that we were considering trading Ryan Howard for a relief pitcher while eating 80% of his salary, I would still think it implausible. Let's just be honest here--Howard is here until the end of the contract or we just DFA him and eat the whole salary. He's untradeable.

[Phillibuster]

Juums: If the Phillies ate a significant portion (say, at least $17.5MM) every year for the life of the contract, Howard is simply a more proven option than Ruf.

In 2013, in a roughly equivalent number of MLB PAs (318 for Howard, 293 for Ruf), an injured Ryan Howard posted a higher BA, a higher SLG, and an ISO .011 points lower, and a lower K rate. Health aside (which isn't to say that health should be ignored... That's why the Phillies would be eating a lot of money), Howard was the better hitter in 2013, and he has a significantly better track record in even the medium term.

Additionally, the TBRs are right-handed heavy, which is a potential problem when 70% of starters you face are right-handed.

Also, the Phillies desire Price. Howard is a big name, with a big history, and a big bat. If he doesn't come with the big price tag, he could certainly be a piece (the biggest-name one, if not necessarily the lynchpin) of a trade for Price.

[Juums]

Phillibuster:
The starting premise there, that the Phils are willing to eat an immense portion of Howard's salary, is the sticking point. I am very much with Jack on this point: Howard is here for the duration, because the Phils won't ever eat enough salary to make him tradeable. (Assuming that such is even possible.)

[MG]

Still argue Howard isn't a worthless asset and if you could DH him (defensively he has been horrendous the past 2 years) and have him at say $10-$12M/year he has some value if you consider 1 WAR on the FA market is likely to be $6-$6.5M this offseason.

Do I think Amaro could be a ~2 WAR hitter or maybe even a bit better (2.5) as a full-time DH next year? Yeah I do.

[MG]

er Howard.

[MG]

Strong argue against Howard's value though is what a guy like Hefner got last year from the Yanks (1 yr/$2M) and the relative lack of AL teams investing heavily in a DH-only player the last few years.

[NEPP]

You have to imagine that any deal involved the Phillies eating at least $15 million per year of Howard's remaining contract.

[MG]

Can't see any team biting on Howard though at this point given his injury track record the last 2 years/overall production coupled with the 3 yrs @ $25M.

If he rebounds this year offensively a bit and stays relatively healthy, maybe the Phils would find a buyer in the AL next year if they ate a meaningful part of his remaining 2 yr @ $50M and the $10M buyout option. Say $15M-$20M total.

[Phillibuster]

Juums: I agree, that's the a priori sticking point.

But if we're imagining a world in which a Howard-for-Price trade could happen, that's the only way it could and not also involve leprechauns.