Phils Sign P Adam Eaton; Dellucci to Cleveland

by dajafi on Nov 27, 2006 4:54 PM EST in News

[editor's note, by dajafi] I added the second half of this piece after hearing the Dellucci news; apologies to anyone confused or freaked out.

As the Phils say goodbye to one starting pitcher they drafted in the mid-'90s, they're bringing another one back: the team and right-hander Adam Eaton evidently have agreed on a three-year deal worth around $24 million.

A first-round pick of the Phils in 1996, Eaton left the organization in late 1999 as part of a trade package to bring back another drafted Phillie: Andy Ashby. (Hopefully this acquisition will work out better than that one did.) Like Randy Wolf, whom he'll replace in the rotation, Eaton is coming off an injury-marred 2006 season. He went 7-4 with a 5.12 ERA last year in just 13 starts.

For his career, Eaton is 54-45 with a 4.40 ERA. He's never won more than 11 games, thrown 200 innings, or posted an ERA below 4 in any season, but if he's healthy--his 2006 injury was to a tendon in his hand, which presumably won't recur--he's probably one of the better bets on this year's free agent market. That this says more about the market than the pitcher is, I guess, beside the point.

In other news, the Phils now officially need a new right fielder, as lefty hitter-for-hire David Dellucci has agreed to a three-year, $11.5 million deal with the Cleveland Indians.

I'm a big fan of Tribe GM Mark Shapiro, and I think he's made a nice addition with DD--on a reasonable contract to boot. If the Phils had re-upped Dellucci for the same deal, I'd be fine with that; I'm also fine with their turning him into two draft picks (Cleveland's second-rounder, as the Tribe finished in the bottom half of the standings, plus a sandwich pick) and going after someone else... provided, of course, that said someone else brings more to the table than Rowand/Conine-type intangibles. Trot Nixon is one rumored replacement; if Boston signs J.D. Drew, as expected, the Phils could go after him to basically fill Dellucci's role as lefty platooner who draws walks. Nixon's splits show a hitter who basically kicked ass until he got hurt around mid-season, then stunk out the joint after coming back. At age 33 and with an extensive injury history, he'd have to be handled with care, but he'd contribute.

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I thought

Gillick's whole philosophy was that hitters were a more proven commodity on the free agent market and that pitchers were notoriously bad buys? It was his feeling that pitching should be addressed through trades and the farm system?

That said. I have no problem with this signing. They needed another starter, they got one.

Bleeding Green Nation Philadelphia Eagles Blog

by JasonB on Nov 27, 2006 5:00 PM EST reply actions

Meh...

8 million for a crapshoot who could just hopefully be our #4 or #5? I don't mind risks, but this seems like a weak attempt to show people that they are trying to spend the money they saved on that bum Abreu.

by jonk on Nov 27, 2006 5:22 PM EST reply actions

in part, probably

But I'd rather pay for Eaton's upside than, say, Jeff Suppan's fluky October badassery. And I'm more confident that Eaton will perform at least at his past 2003-2005 level than I'd be that the light will go on for Gavin Floyd.

Ideally, this is the last free-agent starting pitcher the Phils sign for awhile: the #1 and #2 are very young, and there are a lot of arms on the way who, if they stay healthy, should pitch in the bigs. As a band-aid or bridge to the Gio/Carrasco class, Eaton's fine.

by dajafi on Nov 27, 2006 5:50 PM EST up reply actions

i'm okay with this

It's not a spectacular signing, but I think it's a solid one where, in this market, the number of years and dollars spent seem about as favorable as could realistically be had.

Now onto the bullpen...

by fuzzycopper on Nov 27, 2006 6:27 PM EST up reply actions

Eh

This is an easy one to reply "who then"? It's impossible to speculate about trades, so all we're left with is analyzing who is available (or would have been) via the free agent market.

Arguably, the Phillies had three options once Wolf decided to go west: Eaton, Meche, and Batista. I think Meche might be the better option if you were looking to fill a hole for much longer (a need we don't have), otherwise - is there enough difference between the three to care? Or is this just "Phillies don't make good decisions so I'm going to automatically assume this was a bad one."?

I remember a lot of folks suggesting we just get Lidle back this off season - we effectively did... a serviceable #4/#5 that should win more games than he loses. That's about all I expected.

Lord knows he's no Franklin.

by VoxOrion on Nov 27, 2006 9:55 PM EST up reply actions

that is a whole lotta money

and that's all i have to say about that

by taco pal on Nov 27, 2006 6:14 PM EST reply actions

i take that back

So this isn't a terrible move. It's way too much money, but at least you're getting a serviceable player. Eaton isn't a bad pitcher. He's also a Type C free agent. (So, unfortunately, was Randy Wolf.)

But now, we really need to scramble to get a rightfielder. We simply cannot go into the season with both Victorino and Rowand in the everyday starting lineup. That is not acceptable. Unless there's a better option, we need to re-sign Dellucci at the very least. We also need bullpen help.

Speaking generally, fifth starters tend to be highly overrated in importance. They often get skipped during the regular season; they never pitch at all in the playoffs. The value-added from filling any other hole on your team is usually greater than the value-added from filling the fifth starter position.

In this case, I'm OK with acquiring Eaton because he could very well end up being more than a fifth starter given the uncertainties surrounding Lieber, Moyer, and Hamels. But even so, even before this signing, RF and the bullpen should have been higher priorities. That might seem counterintuitive since the rotation was the team's most glaring weakness last year. But the rotation was trending in a somewhat positive direction as the season progressed, while in contrast we lost one (and now maybe two) right fielders and the bullpen was carried by a 38-year-old on his way downhill.

by taco pal on Nov 27, 2006 6:38 PM EST up reply actions

but...

and I know I keep writing this, the problem with paying for relief is that you don't know what you're going to get from one year to the next. Take these two possible 2007 Phillies bullpens:

#1: Gordon/Geary/Madson/Smith/Condrey/Castro/Segovia

#2: Gordon/Weathers/Dotel/Villone/Geary/Smith/Kolb

I know #2 would cost at least twice as much as #1; do you really think it would be twice as good? It might not even be equal, given how relievers vary from one year to the next; Chad Bradford and Joe Borowski, both of whom will cash in over the next couple weeks, were both non-tendered a year ago.

This isn't to say that the team should go with the totally in-house bullpen I posit in #1... but for heaven's sake, at least buy low. I'd take a flyer on someone like Dotel or Scott Williamson, hard throwers coming off injuries who can still strike guys out; otherwise, let the kids and the fringe guys battle it out in Florida.

by dajafi on Nov 27, 2006 6:59 PM EST up reply actions

i don't disagree, in principle

And I haven't even looked at available relievers on the FA market. But while I understand that relievers are unpredictable year-to-year and that FA signings are therefore usually overpaid and don't guarantee success, there are nevertheless some bullpens that do guarantee failure. I don't know if the Phils' current alignment falls to that level, but if not it's too close for comfort.

by taco pal on Nov 28, 2006 1:59 PM EST up reply actions

2007 JUST WENT DOWN LIKE THE TITANIC IN PHILLY

This is HORRIBLE! Losing Wolf is part of the cost of KEEPING Moyer and Lieber. Maybe now some people will see the awfully expensive, on-field cost of tying up payroll with a couple of fossilized outhouse crappers in the starting rotation. Delucci, too, could have been retained, with clearer and more intelligent priorities. 2007? Forget it - Gillick is Ed Wade in a Holloween mask. LOSING season coming up!

by robbybonfire on Nov 27, 2006 10:37 PM EST reply actions

Not really

The team has more than enough money to retain Wolf and/or Dellucci if they wanted to. Leiber's contract isn't preventing them from doing anything.

Bleeding Green Nation Philadelphia Eagles Blog

by JasonB on Nov 28, 2006 1:35 PM EST up reply actions

Good move!

It seems more than clear that the Wolfman wanted out of Phila, and I for one really can't blame him. This is his first chance at free agency, he has no real way of knowing how many more innings are left in his arm, why not take a lesser deal to pitch at home?

Gillick made the smart move here in locking up Eaton with a very reasonable deal. Sure, $24/3 is more than Lieber's original contract, but with the market inflation this year (Vicente really wants $40/4???) this is clearly one of the better buys out there. Better to gamble on a younger arm with upside than to invest heavily in a Schmidt who is just as likely to break down or a Zito who does not know the league.

After '07 Lieber walks and Eaton takes his spot in the rotation behind Myers and Hamels, Moyer does his thing and at least one of the kids will ideally be ready. If Gillick gives a contract of about this same size to Batista, and picks up a decent Ledee-esque platoon RFer (don't underestimate the offense we add upgrading at 3B), this looks to be a very successful offseason.

by das411 on Nov 28, 2006 1:03 AM EST reply actions

i agree, good move

Eaton definitely had one of the highest upsides of the pitchers in this barren market, and if Vicente Padilla is truly going to cost around $10 mil a year to sign, we should be happy that we made the first strike with Eaton for $2 mil fewer. If he falters with injuries, we have temporary stopgaps to put in his place, but if he stays healthy, he is what many teams hope Wolf will be next year. He's the AL's Wolf, and with the market the way it is, I don't see how anyone can call this a specifically bad deal.

www.kingmyno.com The best in Philadelphia sports-talk

by king myno on Nov 28, 2006 1:22 AM EST reply actions

I don't get it

Why pay this guy $8 a year to be the backend starter, especially when he's unlikely to stay healthy all year? 8 is alot of money, they paid Lieber and Lidle less just a couple years ago.

I don't get what's to like about Eaton. He has a mediocre ERA. He's not particularly suited to the park: he had about a 1:1 groundball to flyball ratio. He has a history of injuries. I don't see where he has upside: he's 29, he is what he is at this point.

What about this guy says 8 a year for three years?

by Behan @ The Good Phight on Nov 28, 2006 11:01 AM EST reply actions

new world

Salaries are up across the board this offseason, so your money buys you less in terms of talent and reliability. You can't really compare a contract signed two years ago to one signed this week. When Juan F. Pierre nets close to $9MM per, you know things are shifting in the pricey direction.

I agree that they probably overpaid at least a little bit, but there aren't a lot of options out there right now, and if/when Zito and Schmidt get their presumably huge contracts, 3/$24MM for Eaton may come out looking like a good buy.

by WholeCamels on Nov 28, 2006 11:25 AM EST up reply actions

Maybe this stat has something to do with it:

(can't quite get the numbers to line up neatly but oh well)

Games started, 2006 Phillies -

Myers 31
Lieber 27
Hamels 23
Lidle 21
Madson 17
Wolf 12
Floyd 11
Mathieson 8
Moyer 8
Brito 2
Bernero 1
Fultz 1

If all Eaton does is put up the exact same numbers as last year, which seems the least we can expect from him assuming he is healthy enough to pass his physical, then we can put 13 starts, a 7-4 record with an ERA around 5 up on the board. That replaces some combination of:

Wolf + (Fultz or Bernero, both were awful starts iirc)
Floyd + (Brito or Bernero + Fultz)
Mathieson + Brito + Bernero + Fultz

Or if they get a couple more starts out of Eaton in 07 he could easily replace all that time spent realizing Ryan Madson is not a starting pitcher.

Or with a full season of Moyer in the rotation also the two of them make up the 50 or so starts we lose from Wolf, Lidle, and Madson.

Don't think of this as $8/yr for a #5 starter, think of it as $5-6m for those extra 3-4 wins out of the rotation that Floyd and Mathieson and Mad Dog and Brito and Bernero could not give us. Therefore, in my book this counts as a very good move.

by das411 on Nov 28, 2006 11:34 AM EST reply actions

good analysis

It doesn't strike me as unduly optimistic to figure on slight improvement over their total 2006 work for Myers, Hamels, Lieber and Eaton, with about the same for Moyer. With our offense, the five guys should combine for around 65 wins, which should put us on pace for around 90 overall. If Myers breaks out or Hamels looks more like second-half Hamels, and everyone else stays healthy, 65 could be low.

But they're going to need depth, as every one of the starters aside from Myers has health or age questions. So there's some chance of disaster. I do like the odds that our AAA staff (possibly including Germano, Happ, Segovia, Gonzalez, Floyd if he isn't traded) can fill whatever gaps appear with at least decent performance.

by dajafi on Nov 28, 2006 12:04 PM EST up reply actions

Staff Win Projection A Bit High

FLASH: Moyer and Lieber are good for a combined 15-18 wins at the most, in 2007. They should both be OUT OF BASEBALL!

by robbybonfire on Dec 3, 2006 10:24 AM EST up reply actions

based on what?

That Moyer's old? That Lieber's fat?

From August on, they were both average to above-average starters. They're a far cry from Johan Santana and Roy Halladay, and both certainly could prove not to be worth their contracts. But to claim that they should be OUT OF BASEBALL coming off decent performance is, at the least, hyperbolic. Some explanation for this?

by dajafi on Dec 3, 2006 11:43 AM EST up reply actions

I hadn't though of it that way

For about two years, they haven't had a chance to win every fifth day. Eaton gives them that.

I guess for me, this is residual disappointment over the Abreu deal. When they give away such a quality player, and all they do with that money is shore up the backend (which really, that problem is a result of poor scouting and drafting), the only thing I can feel is disappointment.

by Behan @ The Good Phight on Nov 28, 2006 12:07 PM EST up reply actions

i could live with nixon

There's also Shannon Stewart, who used to be a pretty good player. He's been bad for a couple of years now, but he isn't all that old, and might be able to bounce back. If he could be signed for cheap, it might be worth the risk.

by taco pal on Nov 28, 2006 2:03 PM EST reply actions

Good move

A slight gamble, but if it comes off then he could be the #4 guy on this staff, giving us a ridiculously deep rotation with Moyer at #5. Yes they do need to give the 'pen a facelift and sign a new RF, but it's still November for christ sake, calm down all those guys out there saying this is a sucky move, cos its not, we needed a #5 guy and this automatically makes us better than last year.

by fredex1 on Nov 28, 2006 2:39 PM EST reply actions

well

i wouldn't say "ridiculously deep". more like "definitely possibly solid". unfortunately, this talk is eerily reminicent of the 04 season when millwood, padilla, wolf, milton, & myers were supposed to be the class of the NL East.

one of the best possible benefits of 5 entrenched starters next year, however, would be innings -- the minimization of cholly's half-assed undermanagement of the bullpen (followed in the late summer months by his half-assed overmanagement). give the guy a staff who presents him with less choices.

on the bright side, we now have 3 out of 5 starters who can sort of bunt.

by gr on Nov 28, 2006 4:26 PM EST reply actions

re: bunting

and steal bases!

by perfectdepth on Nov 28, 2006 5:07 PM EST up reply actions

Five Entrenched What?

Five entrenched starters? You mean THREE entrenched starters, plus Jon Lieber and Jamie Moyer for a few innings of solid six-run ERA, .300 BA against "pitching," until they break down, And they will have to break down to be jettisoned, because the Phillies, as we know, prefer to keep under-performing players who are under contract.

No way the Phillies win more than 40% of the combined starts by these two dinosaurs, next season. With Gordon's accelerated rate of decline, this is going to be some emotionally-draining season, coming up.

by robbybonfire on Dec 3, 2006 10:22 AM EST up reply actions

switch to decaf, please

They won 45% of Lieber's starts last year. They won 75% of Moyer's starts. Phillies and Mariners combined won 48% of Moyer's starts. Both pitchers improved as the season went on.

by taco pal on Dec 3, 2006 8:18 PM EST up reply actions

Glad to know I'm not the only one...

...Who thought it was a solid signing. Most of what I have read is not impressed with it. gr hit the nail on the head. It's innings, and hopefully Eaton can stay off the DL.

Balls, Sticks, & Stuff - http://www.ballssticksstuff.com

by TomG on Nov 28, 2006 5:55 PM EST reply actions

I gotta say

3 years of Eaton for less than it costs to talk to Kei Igawa is a bargain. Considering that Eaton may very well be the flat out better pitcher, the deal is going to look pretty good.

Bleeding Green Nation Philadelphia Eagles Blog

by JasonB on Nov 29, 2006 1:18 PM EST reply actions