Phillies Breakfast Links, November 5, 2009: Too Depressed to Eat Breakfast, Ma Edition
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 8:04 AM EST
178 comments
My last few playoff fill-ins on Breakfast Links were wonderful opportunities, for which I remain grateful. This morning, however, I have been passed a bitter cup: Skipper has tapped me to take one for the team on the morning after losing the World Series. Per Skip: Post some links and get out of there. Get on with the offseason while the Blog Lords get a head start cleaning out their lockers. But it breaks my heart. Just hard to watch. Just, just...Hurt.
So I tried to give the Yankees props. I'll even cop to the notion that they were the better team, and think that Matsui being the first Japanese player to win Series MVP is a great story, way better than this one, even though it came at the expense of Chase Utley. And if you thought last night sucked for you, imagine if you were this guy. Even, to a lesser degree, this guy.
But then I took a look at this:
Ghosts of '57 Game 7 remain just that
I swear this was one of the first postgame links out there last night. But for crissakes, the lede that you take is that it's a damn shame there's no game 7 in Yankees Stadium, and this continues a 52-year drought of game 7s? Right there-RIGHT THERE-I tapped into the vein of deep Yankee Loathing from which I will never return. It just seems like this is what America would be like if the Nazis had won. Don't believe me? Then try this.
So even though I feel like one of those guys in the late afternoon at the Aqueduct, stooped over below the day's post-racing cigarette haze picking through discarded betting slips looking for a winner, there really is reason for optimism as a Phillies fan, say, compared to the last team that managed to beat the Yankees in the World Series. Still hurts though, even though this '09 team didn't quit. Even though Manuel has plenty of room to be second-guessed.
Transit union chief says he's "most hated" man in Philadelphia. Joe Buck and Tim McCarver breathe easier. Everyone else has to walk or ride their bike to work. Meanwhile, in New York, well, you know.
Ogasawara busts out but keeps poker face.Game 3 of the Japan Series. Maybe somewhere over in Japan there's a slugging third baseman. And now it's official: the Japan Series is the baseball equivalent of Branson, MO. Go Ham Fighters!
That's all I have stomach and time for this morning. Feel free to add your links in the comments. Thanks again to all for a fun season. Until right now. Wait 'til next year.
0 recs |
178 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
The article from the NY Post which states the Yankees are in their “rightful place” and ends by taunting Red Sox fans for not having 27 rings. THAT is what makes the Yankees and their fans so easy to hate. You won, congrats, now try to have some class about it.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 10:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Again, I’ll say it: I think it is dishonest to count among their 27 rings any championship that was won before the game had been integrated.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It means none of the ones before the game was fully integrated count to him…it’s an easy principle to understand, the BEST players were not playing in the game because most of the best were excluded.
For instance, the best home run hitter of all time probably never played a MLB game.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ah, I think I get you now.
You mean racially integrated, right? Sorry long night last night.
by Togaman7 on Nov 5, 2009 12:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Its interesting. Jackie Robinson joined in 1947, but it’s really not fair to claim the game was integrated at that time. I just read that the last team who “integrated” was Boston in 1959, more than 12 years later. And surely the game was not truly integrated until well after that. The Yankess won 17 championships before 1959. And they won again in 1961 and 1962. The playing field was even before integration— so to speak— but it does seem completely wrong to tout that those teams were the best of the best before that time. But no one ever seems to talk about it.
by Boundforbeach on Nov 5, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The playing field was even, if you were white. The Yankees had a a great collection of white talent. And as great as he was, Jackie Robinson wasn’t even considered the best of the black players. He just was the best combination of talent, background, and personality to be the first to integrate.
And to be fair, the Phillies were a notoriously racist outfit that fought integration tooth and nail.
by The R on Nov 5, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, that’s absolutely right, but Phillies fans aren’t the ones bragging about 27 championships, many of which came before blacks were allowed to play…many of whom would have been as good as or better than the white players in the game.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you that everything from before the sixties should be looked at as a different time and we’re obviously not comparing apples to apples, but I’m not sure its the yankees’ fault for bragging about their championships. every team “brags” about their total number of championships (as well as all of the individual records that came against not-the-best-talent). I don’t think it’s a case of the yankees being especially insensitive or anything
by char6587 on Nov 5, 2009 11:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s not really the fans, it’s the NY Post – and when did anyone accuse the NY Post (or any murdoch owned property) of class?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yes yes yes
please do not quote anything the NY Post has to say and relate to any sane human being anywhere in the world.
Seriously though great series. In a perfect world this should have gone to the 7th game, 9th inning (Yankees winning of course lol). That is how close I think these two teams are.
Hopefully we can mark the Yankees-Phillies rivalry over the next few years on how many of the next handful of world series each ins against each other.
by Togaman7 on Nov 5, 2009 12:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One of my friends posted on Facebook how the Yankees were in their rightful place and Phillies fans should be used to it, given our history of losing 10,000 games. uggghh.
Togaman7 – I agree completely. I’d love to do this again next October and even things up.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dear Phillies Players.
I’m sorry I turned the game off after Jeters lead off hit when you were down 4-1, but I still want to thank you for 2 great seasons. Here’s hoping you do it again next year.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 10:45 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
i wonder how quickly johnny damon will grow his hair and beard back now that he won’t be playing for Big Stein and Co.
by sixrfan on Nov 5, 2009 11:18 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
What are the chances the Yankees make it back to the WFS next year?
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 11:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I don’t see why they wouldn’t be a favorite, they has the most money, expect Halladay to possibly move in the off season and an interesting thing to keep an eye on is King Felix – if the mariners decide in 2 years they can’t afford him they trade him now to maximize his value – red sox have the better prospects but the yankees would find a way to possibly over pay to get him, some how.
I see no reason to believe the yankees won’t again spend to get what they perceive as the best free agents to fill their holes…
Guess it depends on how healthy their pitchers stay?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not so sure about that...
I don’t really follow the Yankees, but I see a lot of aging, irreplaceable players. The real Yankees core, Jeter, Posada, Rivera, Pettitte, are all on the wrong side of 35. Jeter will probably be fine. Rivera is a freak, but age has to start affecting him at some point. Posada is clearly fading, and I don’t see Pettitte maintaining, unless of course they hit the PED sauce.
I don’t see them resigning Matsui or Damon, except maybe to short term contracts. Even if they do, both those guys are fading fast (despite what they did in the WS). Swisher is a question mark. As is Jabba and the bullpen. They have no 4th starter (and if they lose Pettitte, no 3rd starter). Melky and Cano are decent players, but no way are superstars in the making.
So it looks like they have question marks at LF, RF, C, DH, and any pitcher that doesn’t have a two letter name. I don’t really know what will be available in free agency, but that’s a lot of holes to fill with free agency. And from what I know, it’ll have to be free agency, since the Yanks farm system is pretty bare.
by The R on Nov 5, 2009 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If Kennedy, Hughes and Joba ever develop like expected, no worries with rotation. Closer could be a big problem, but I think Joba will end up there at some point (though Mo is impossible to replace). DH is likely an easy fix, you can always grab up a Jim Thome or similar hitter in the twilight of their career to DH for a year. LF and RF are bigger concerns.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Joba as a starter is very unlikely at this point, their best hope to salvage the mess they created with that tub of goo is hope he can replaced Rivera as the ‘uber closer’
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. Mo can’t pitch forever (even though it appears he can)
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup
But face it, nobody can really replace Mo Rivera. It’s like when we lost Griffey—sure, we ended up getting a far better than expected fill-in with Mike Cameron and some other random talent…but there was nobody like the guy leaving.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No – like i said – best case scenario to slavage the hype that was joba….
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Yankees screwed up Joba horribly this year, no doubt about it. But he’s still just 24 years old and has shown an ability to be a very successful major league starter (12 starts in 2008: 65.1 IP, 60 H, 25 BB, 74 K, 2.76 ERA, 1.30 WHIP). I think it’s premature to give up on him in that capacity yet, and to be honest, I’m expecting a pretty big bounceback year for him in 2010.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn’t he have ‘second time through the rotation’ problems though?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Most guys in their first
full year starting have problems getting through a lineup 2 and 3 times. Especially a 24 year old.
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Nov 5, 2009 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He probably did this year, but I’m honestly willing to give him a pass for the way he was handled. “The Joba Rules” is a dirty phrase in the Bronx at this point, because the organization filled his head with all these ideas that he shouldn’t throw too hard, he should pace himself, he should be cautious while they limited his innings, etc. It’s one thing to stretch a guy’s arm out, but it’s another to screw him up mentally while you’re doing it.
Despite all that, I think he’ll wind up being fine in the end. Ken Funck on BP has done some work lately that shows that every pitcher struggles to some degree getting through a lineup multiple times. I don’t expect Joba’s problems doing so will be worse than anyone else’s when all’s said and done.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well see – that’s why I think the yankees broke him – do we see any indication that they are going to discard those idiotic rules they had for Joba? If they still have all these restrictions versus letting the guy ‘just pitch’ I see no reason to believe his problems will be solved in New York.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Forgot about Kennedy. But isn’t he a soft tossing control guy?
I don’t see Joba as a starter at all. And I think Hughes ends up in the bullpen. I think both of them should have been in the minors for most of 2009.
by The R on Nov 5, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Kennedy is, but I’m only talking about a 4th or 5th starter role for him. I still think Hughes can start.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 2:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is that the Yankees will sign Lackey.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 12:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Or get hernandez if the mariners start forward thinking…
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think the Yankees have the prospects to swing that trade.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well – if Hernandez doesn’t agree to an extension than the deal probably doesn’t happen with anyone, and to stop the red sox from getting him (hs money and prospects) they might offer a boat load of money and their 3 best prospects and maybe take a crappy contract (do they have any) from the mariners.
I don’t know the mariners farm system well – but don’t the mariners need a catcher ready to play and isn’t the yankees best prospect one of those?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We don't really have a big enough need for a catcher to make that a priority, IMO--
Our current “catcher” is awful, but we’ve got Adam Moore coming up (probably) this year, and he projects to be decent. And yes, we do have one super-crappy contract—his name is Carlos Silva. He gets 2 more years at roughly 12M/year to be worthless. Frankly, I’d rather we keep Silva and get a boatload of talent if Felix must go than just offload him…but I don’t think ANYBODY in Seattle wants to see Felix in pinstripes, ever. And if he starts wearing a Red Sox hat…ugh.
Realistically, I hate to say it, but trading Felix this offseason might make sense, though—his stock will never be higher than it is now as a 23-year-old Cy Young contender. I wince when saying it, but I could see him going to a bigger-market team. On the flipside, it would probably burn up a LOT of the goodwill the Mariners regained with fans over the past season.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I realize that no one wants to see their ‘best talent’ end up on the yankees or red sox – but realistically – for the money he’ll be receiving in his extension – there are few other options willing to pony up the money (Pohald has the money but won’t) or that the mariners would trade him to (the angels would have to vastly over pay to trade him in division)
If Felix is on the market – the only realistic destinations are the AL New York team and the red sox – the mets might not have the money to spend anymore thanks to madoff and definitely don’t have the prospects.
Who owns the Mariners right now? I thought it was like Nintendo money owning this team?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nintendo of America owns the team, for all intents/purposes
Technically the leadership is required by the MLB to be American, so the real figurehead is Howard Lincoln, an exec from Nintendo of America. Hiroshi Yamauchi is the man with the money behind the scenes.
Frankly, the Mariners CAN afford to pay for Felix, but only with some careful planning or a payroll boost. If they start spending over 100M/year again (contracted back to the 90s in the past year), then it’s not a big deal, just restricts buying up big free agents to some degree. They have a ton of payroll coming off the books this year, which would make this winter a very convenient time for a contract extension.
No way in hell Felix goes to the Angels. Frankly, if he gets traded, it’s almost certainly to NYY or Boston.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me tell you that ownership that is answerable to stockholders is always more worried about the bottom line P/L than winning…Nintendo has gobs of money – they could afford to keep anyone they wanted on the Mariners if committed to winning…the difference isn’t available money compared to the red sox / yankees in my opinion but willingness to spend it – just like Pholad in Minnesota – has the money but won’t spend it.
No way in hell Felix goes to the Angels. Frankly, if he gets traded, it’s almost certainly to NYY or Boston.
I personally find that a silly principle but teams stick to it – if the angels make the best offer – take it – at most you face Felix 5 times a year in the regular season
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Trust me, I know.
The discussion about Nintendo being more interested in making money than having a winning team only comes up about 20 times a season up in Seattle.
The point is that I’m trying to stay realistic about what they will spend. They got burned hugely by trusting Bavasi to buy free agent talent ~2004/2005. I personally think that Zduriencik will get a few bucks this winter to play with on top of last year’s payroll, but ultimately, we have to assume that the basic plan of the Mariners being a 90-100M/year team will continue for the forseeable future. Ultimately, compared to the 90s with the previous ownership, we’re doing great.
As for not sending Felix to California—you’re not all wrong, but I’ll buy an A-Rod Yankees jersey the day that Seattle sends Felix to LAA.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh i understand it from the fan point of view – just never understood it from a front office point of view – make the best deal should be the front offices view – the better the deal the less it hurts.
The ‘corporate ownership’ issue is something that comes up for me being a fan of the sixers, I don’t like corporate ownership in professional sports in general…it’s not how i see professional sports ownership
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who stipulates Felix stays in the AL? What about the Dodgers or the Cubs (if their ownership situation ever gets cleared up)? The Mets system is a little weak on top shelf prospects, so not likely there.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Mets also have money issues because of the Madoff thing.
The Dodgers are going to have money issues soon as ownership goes through a contentuous divorce that Frank McCord probably aggravated by firing his wife.
Do the cubs HAVE any prospects worth coveting?
It’s a combination of having quality prospects AND the budget to sign the 100 million deal it will take to extend hernandez….the dodgers can’t do it and neither can the mets…the cubs i have no idea
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s a combination of having quality prospects AND the budget to sign the 100 million deal it will take to extend hernandez
Which is why the Yankees and Red Sox are 1A and 1B in terms of getting these deals done year in and year out.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There are other teams that could always be in that list if their owners were willing…but Idon’t think the cubs/dodgers/mets meet that criteria any more. I think the twins do
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dodgers
In addition to the divorce, they have plenty of other money issues. They are stuck with Manny and his salary for another year. They already have a 100mil+ payroll. And they need to figure out what to do with Kemp, as in try to lock him up with a contract. Same for Ethier, though I’m pretty sure he has an extension already.
Add to that that they have holes at 2b, 3b, and C(Martin has fallen off the map… PED user anyone?).
I don’t really see the Dodgers making any big frontline pitching moves. I see them sticking with Kershaw and Billingsley and hoping that one of them becomes an ace. Garland, Kuroda, and maybe Wolf fills out the rotation.
by The R on Nov 5, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Montero, Jackson, Hughes, and a Kennedy could get the job done
and would also completely wipeout the Yanks farm system
by ScottAZ on Nov 5, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I never underestimate the motivation to prevent the red sox from getting someone excellent…i think the yanks would over pay in both prospects and salary to prevent the red sox to get him even if they really don’t want to get him (i expect they would like him and would have the prospects but i don’t think they’d give him the deal he’ll want – jim callis expected that if Hernandez hits the open market he could get one of the biggest FA pitching contracts ever)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I just salivated at the prospect of that for Mariners fans. It would suck to lose Felix, but that would be an impressive jump-start to their (already in progress) rebuilding.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 12:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is true
Zduriencik has done an amazing job picking up the pieces left by Bavasi…but the pickup from a Felix trade would make the team look downright decent VERY quickly. We only mildly overperformed to get 85 wins this year…then again, Felix, was responsible for 19 of them.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok – so in the realms of what if – let’s say the phils are willing to pony up for an extension to cliff lee AND Felix Hernandez this off season.
How much of their prospects would it take and would it be worth it (no offense to drabek, but i prefer hernandez)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lots.
I don’t know your farm system at all, but the rumor at the trade deadline this year (and frankly, his stock has probably only gone up since…he had a monster 2nd half), Boston was willing to give us our top 5 prospects of choice. Other rumblings suggested Bucholtz in the mix.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just found the Boston Globe article I was thinking of:
According to the report, the Red Sox gave the Mariners a list of eight prospects from which they could choose five players. The list contained pitchers Clay Buchholz, Daniel Bard, Justin Masterson, Nick Hagadone, Michael Bowden, and Felix Doubront, outfielder Josh Reddick, and shortstop Yamaico Navarro.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously it’s a hypothetical, but the Phils would have to put everything on the table to get a deal done: Drabek, Brown, Taylor, d’Arnaud, and a choice of a bullpen arm (Bastardo, Mathieson) or a lower level prospect (May, Cosart, Santana). It could get done, but the system would look really, really ugly after that.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But would it be WORTH it? We can keep victorino and ibanez and they’ll be fine, assuming werths knees behave that’s good too – and they really have no SS prospect for the coming decline of Jimmy Rollins
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Would it look worth it for the next two years? Sure.
Would it wind up being worth it in the end? Absolutely not.
The ability to succeed in baseball if you’re not the Yankees, Mets, or Red Sox is irrevocably linked to your ability to produce cost-controlled talent. A trade like that would help put a juggernaut on the field for the next two years, but when the contracts of Hamels, Howard, Rollins et al. ended, it would cost over $200 million in payroll to keep that core together, and there would be no alternatives coming up through the system. It would basically be a two-year kamikaze run, followed by at least five years of miserable teams.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 1:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Again, I don’t think jimmy rollins is any longer part of the core…he’s enough years older that by the end of his contract I don’t think the phillies or fans will WANT him around and the phils need to get someone in the system now ready to replace him.
I also think at the end of his contract howard might not be worth it at all
And it’s possible that Hamels coffin is already nailed shut.
I see where you’re coming from – but 2 years of lee/hernandez/hamels while this core (sans rollins) is still tied up to reasonable contracts AND near the peak of their games doesn’t sound that bad to me…at some point you have to take some risk…
And you can restock your system pretty well if you tell bud to shove his slotting system and expand into latin america (the phils are still behind on that curve aren’t they?)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Even the teams that break from slotting don’t do so in a “F*** you, Bud!” sort of way. They either do what the Pirates did this year (pay some college guys underslot bonuses and use the “savings” to ink other talents), or what the Red Sox usually do (hand out 4 or 5 above slot deals to some key guys).
And the Latin American thing is all screwed up. I don’t actually mind the way the Phils do things at this point — signing a couple of guys each year to mid-level bonuses, and operating the DSL and VSL teams to unearth hidden gems — because the spending spree with regard to some of these guys has gotten out of control.
But in theory, you’re right — if the organization were to commit $20 million per year toward the draft and int’l free agents, and gave a large middle finger to Selig over the slotting system, then the farm would be in great shape again 2-3 years down the line. There’s just no way that actually happens.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So, speaking as a Mariners fan who doesn't know the Phillies farm at all...
Would be the sort of trade that could be reconciled on your end, or would it be like when we way overtraded for Bedard a couple years ago?
(Obviously, Felix is in a different class than Bedard ever was)
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It would be like the Bedard trade.
I’m not even sure if the M’s would bite on such a package — it’s outfielder heavy, and I think Jack Z is smart enough to build his team up the middle — but it contains enough talent that it’d be a fair swap.
But it would decimate the entire future of our franchise.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting.
I kind of figured that it would wipe out anybody’s farm system.
Given that your team’s package would be outfielder-heavy, I think you can write off your chances.
Jack Z won’t go for that when we used our #2 draft pick on Ackley last year, have Gutierrez playing absurdly good CF now, and still have Ichiro in RF, locked up for several more years, and showing basically no signs of slowing down.
We need infielders, period.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Any team that trades for Felix is going to wipe out their farm system, for all intents and purposes. I counter balance that with having a 23 year old ace to pair with Hamels long term. The danger is what Friar says, we’d need to get real lucky with some prospects over-performing and maybe trading or getting some over-performing free agents for it not to look pretty ugly in a few years.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Or just ignoring slot ‘recommendations’ and drafting those players people are scared of for signability issues and commit to rebuilding the system – in two years with smart drafting and scouting of latin america they could do it – you know – the reason the red sox can continue to trade away quality prospects and still have a quality farm system – a committment to developing your farm system on your own terms – not bud seligs.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, I was thinking about this as I was trying to go to sleep last night:
Where do we rank the Phillies among the best teams of the decade? In my opinion it has to be either 2nd or 3rd. The Yankees are clearly ahead of them. But I am not sure if the Red Sox are.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 12:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’d call them the NL team of the decade…probably 3rd behind the redsox – just looking at overall record, playoff appearances, and world series wins I’d put the red sox ahead of the phillies.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why are the yankees clearly ahead of the red sox?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
2 WS wins, 4 appearances, 8 division championships.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 12:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think we should do this scientifically – number of wins may be nice but how about taking into account payroll factors – a win with a 40 million dollar payroll should be worth 5 times a win with a 200 million dollar payroll?
And besides, THE CURSE, the red sox broke the curse, AND did something no other team had done in the history of baseball (3-0) against the yankees, I think the yankees should lose credits for that.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And yes – most of that was joking
But answer this question
Top to bottom ownership to minor league scouts – players in all levels – which franchise would you rather have as ‘yours’ right now – yankees or red sox?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Uh, that’s easy, none of the above…I’d take the Phillies.
But seriously, you make some good points. But I think if we are talking about the best teams of the decade based on results, then you have to take the Yankees.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry – i asked my question wrong.
If you were going to take one francise top to bottom as explained above and SWAP them – so that they were phillies and the entire phillies organization became the AL team you swapped with, which combination of roster, front office, minor leagues would you rather have as ‘the phillies’ right now – yankees or red sox?
. But I think if we are talking about the best teams of the decade based on results, then you have to take the Yankees.
But why not adjust for ‘salary spent’ as a yankees win costs more than a win by any other team?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s actually an interesting idea…I like it. Takes a bit more calculation.
And to the first question, I think I would take the Red Sox given the superiority of their farm system and scouts.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And so would I – i think you have to factor in ‘positioned for the future’ in terms of team of the decade as well…overall winning percentage (per dollar spent is better in my opinion) and playoff success is good too but how about factoring in managerial blunders (grady little) that helped one tema succeed over the other or are they going to balance out.
I think the reason the phillies are ‘ahead’ of the cardinals is partly because I htink they are better positioned going forward.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Red Sox, unless I have to factor into the calculation the warehouse of currency/open checkbook that I’d get if I were the Yankees. Then Yankees.
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the red sox have a pretty big wallet as well, I don’t they spend more judiciously and don’t have a ‘get the guy at all costs’ mentality that the yankees have. I think they set a number and aren’t willing to go above it…they could have paid jonny damon for instance, but they determined that the length of deal wasn’t worth it.
I believe that when the red sox target a guy – they also target an acceptable salary (and contract length) and won’t allow themselves to be buillied by an agent unless he’s TRULY a difference maker (Felix Hernandez for instance) – i think they have better prospects that they don’t have to over pay (in years) for a CC or a Tex – but they definitely need some catching help.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree. I was being pithy there, I realize the Sox have lots of money too, and in general can get who they want. Overall I think the Sox exercise more scruples and have a better plan on how to deploy the resources they have, so intellectually I can appreciate what they do more often than the Yankees. But there’s no denying they’re both pretty sharp clubs.
I do like the position the Phillies have in relationship to this dynamic, and think especially while the country remains in recession that they have opportunities to raid mid-market AL clubs who can neither afford their talent nor afford competitively to watch them go to NY or Boston.
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Red Sox are the best run organization in baseball. Not that the Yankees or Phillies or Twins or whoever aren’t well-run also, but the Red Sox do the best job overall.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that the twins are well run but they don’t have the ‘overall’ support of ownership that they could have. Pohlad has A LOT of money – and a city that WANTS to support the twins, if he would sign the guys they should sign – i’d be more admiring of them because they have that ‘final piece’ that makes the excellent scouting worthwhile cause you keep the guys as long as you want – but Pohlad is more Sterling than Steinbrenner in this realm.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Steinbrenner spends more money because he has more revenue. What you are asking Pohlad to do is spend from his personal non-baseball assets. That’s not an illogical position, but it’s not asking him just to do the same thing Steinbrenner does, it’s asking him to do more. Steinbrenner’s outlays come from his revenues, not out of his pocket.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But in the case of the twins, I believe that the more money pholad would spend out of his own pocket to keep guys long term that the fans want them to keep would increase his baseball revenue as well…the twins fans WANT to support them – they’re willing to pay to show up – they support this team when they’re good – and with the new stadium opening i think it’s also a chance for pohlad to show some good will and committment to the city – i mean i’m just guessing but i bet the state paid for a lot of that stadium?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The state paid for two thirds of the ballpark, the Twins the other third.
Basically, it’s a matter of diminishing returns. You can always increase revenue by fielding a better team, but at some point your revenues begin to increase by a slower rate than your costs do. It’s mainly a function of fan naivete and wishful thinking that people think there’s no tradeoff between spending and profit – it allows them to believe that owners have no real financial basis for not spending more and that they hold back purely out of malice. People say that because it’s what they want to believe – sort of like how in the 1980s, people believed it when the President told them that cutting taxes would increase revenues and reduce the deficit. The truth is a lot more mundane. Most (not all) owners are willing to invest if it will result in a positive financial return. That’s how they got to be rich in the first place. But what fans typically want them to do is not to invest but rather to donate their assets to the community. And maybe they should, but we should be honest with ourselves about what we’re really asking for.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 2:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well here’s the thing – my theory of sports ownership is that they are just ‘really shiny toys’ for really rich people – and everyone wants the shiniest bestest toy to show up all the other rich people – the bigger boat, the bigger car, the newest cool house, sports franchises – even if they are a ‘public type entity’ are just that on a HUGE scale
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 2:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps. I’m just saying that except for maybe Mark Cuban, nobody in sports does that. Steinbrenner isn’t Mark Cuban – he spends what his actual and potential revenues allow, not more than that, just like everyone else. (And even Mark Cuban isn’t really Mark Cuban – he has a salary cap.)
Obviously part of the reason why Steinbrenner makes a lot of money is that he spends money and fields a good team. But most of it has to do with the built-in advantages that he gets from his team’s market, history, and name recognition – factors that are outside of his control and can’t be replicated.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jerry Jones
Daniel Snider
In the NBA the lakers do spend an ungodly amount of money – they’re one of the few franchises that doesn’t care about the luxury tax but I think they also have the revenue because their damn ticket prices can be so high and still sell.
Cablevision seems to have an unlimited amount of money to spend on the knicks – even if spent badly…and people haven’t been showing up there for a while now.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 2:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The stadium will provide a nice boost
But the real issue is local market TV revenue. That’s where the Yankees run away from everyone else in revenue.
by The R on Nov 5, 2009 2:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i'd call them co-NL team of the decade
along with the Cardinals
by alcatraz0109 on Nov 5, 2009 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No – i’d rate them ahead of the cardinals
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 12:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well, I'm looking at "decade"
earlier this decade, the cards had perennial playoff teams, won 1 WS, appeared in another, while the phillies were only average or slightly above average.
That said, I think the phillies had a better second half to the decade and will def be better the next decade.
by alcatraz0109 on Nov 5, 2009 12:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just looking at the cumulative box score for this series. It appears as if the series was really lost in the 5th inning. The Phillies managed 0 runs in the 5th in this series while allowing 9. The run differential for the series was only +5 in the Yankees favor.
I didn’t realize how bad we were in the 5th in this series, it’s kinda shocking.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 12:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Surprising that we gave up 9 runs in the fifth inning, but not shocking when you think about it. The starting pitching starts to tire, and somone posted stats about a week ago about how good the Yankees stats were (at least in the regular season) the second and third time through the batting order in a game.
by Boundforbeach on Nov 5, 2009 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You guys put up a pretty decent fight...
And this Seattle fan was surprised how fun the Series was to watch.
That said, it’s damn hard to compete with any team that can afford to make massive mistakes/ignore injuries like the Yanks can. The shear fact that they bought up one of the best 1-2 starter combos in baseball in the same offseason is disgusting.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I mean, Burnett really isn’t THAT good. They clearly paid way too much for him.
I don’t think the money argument is really fair.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure it is.
How many other teams could have just shrugged off losing Wang?
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Besides, the point is that they simply were able to buy a solid 1-2 punch, period.
Granted, Sabathia was the bigger (figuratively and literally) piece of the puzzle, but still…Nobody can buy with impunity like the Yankees.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Except the red sox they’re just more selective
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Much as I hate Red Sox fans...
I do give SOME credit to the Sox for having a good farm system. They don’t have the same reliance on buying free agents as the Yanks.
by Rachmaninoff on Nov 5, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just like to point out
All three of the Yankees farm teams (A, AA, & AAA) at least made their respective title games. There is talent in that farm system. Also, the Yanks had more home grown players on their roster than any other team in either LCS.
by GMan83201 on Nov 5, 2009 3:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A. I’m not sure that making the title game means that you have major league calibre talent
B. MUCH of the home grown talent on the Yankees roster is nearing the end of their careers.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No argument on either front
I just want to point out that there is obviously skill in the Yankees farm system doesn’t suck and they don’t buy all their talent. In fact, some of their highest paid free agent talent was flat in the WS (Tex was abysmal at the plate, CC didn’t get a win, AJ had one good and one terrible outing).
Admittedly free agents such as Matsui and Damon had big series, but so did home-grown guys like Jeter, Posada (lost on defense though), Pettitte, and of course Mo.
by GMan83201 on Nov 5, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Counting Pettitte as home grown is sketchy, since he left for years and was signed as an FA. He’s kind of his own category.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 3:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but I htink you can count him since the yankees did develop him through the minors and get most of his ‘prime’ years too did they not?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No CC didn’t get a win – but he pitched pretty darn well….I’m not sure not getting a win is an indicator of quality performance of a picture.
See – those ‘home grown’ names you mentioned are much closer to the end of their careers than the beginning – so it’s really not a comment on their current system.
Guys like Cabrera, Huges, and Joba I think are the ‘newer’ home grown guys (I don’t know if garderner is or not)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s true that the Yankees don’t get credit for the guys they develop. Hughes and Joba are immensely talented, and even guys like Melky and Robertson are valuable pieces to a championship puzzle.
But it’s also true that the fiscal advantage allows the Yankees to keep their homegrown players for as long as they want to. Jeter could have come up in any system, but I can count on one hand the number of teams that could have afforded to keep him with a $189 million deal. Ditto Posada. Not that it takes away the fact that they were farm system products, but it does mitigate the simple numerical advantage of homegrown players on the roster compared to other teams.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Technically 1-2-3. The Yankees starters combined 2009 salary was almost $40 million. Phillies’ 4 starters were under $20 Million. Not to cry over salary, but when you can throw that kind of money at a problem, you can eventually fix it.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 1:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cole Hamels salary is lower compared to his value due to his relatoin to the arbitration years…that’s more of a comment on the yankees inability to develop pitching than anything else
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but when you can blow $40M to spackle your holes it gives you a distinct advantage.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The lack of any pinch hits whatsoever really bothers me. The Phillies really missed the boat in not calling up their high minor talent on September 1. Similarly, even small postseason roster moves like Bruntlett for Cairo, all on the margins, all seem profoundly pointless. The non- or under-utilized no talents we’ll discard (I hope) this off-season walk away with postseason experience that would have been better spent on youngsters, some of whom might have actually surprised us by contributing. Mayberry for one had a good series in NY in June.
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 1:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The bench is an area that needs to be targeted for improvement in the offseason. Francisco is a fine fourth outfielder, and I think that a healthy Dobbs will contribute sufficiently next year. But Matt Stairs may be at the end of his rope, and Bruntlett belongs nowhere near a major league team at this point.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 1:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And can a better back up catcher than paul bako be found?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Someone tell me again why he was a better option than Paulino? I know it’s small but come on
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m guessing, but considering how fast he was dumped, you have to think that there was some issue with Paulino in the clubhouse.
by The R on Nov 5, 2009 2:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I realize Mayberry isn’t the second coming of Hank Aaron, but he’s, presumably a long term 4th outfielder for the team. I would rather have had his bat on the bench than Bruntlett or Dobbs. Plus that experience would be more valuable to him at this point than a few swings in Mexico would.
Taylor and Brown, I think, are better off in Arizona and Mexico this year, as opposed to sitting on a bench and getting maybe 10 at bats all post-season.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 2:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing that complicates matters with Mayberry is that Francisco, who’s locked in as the 4th outfielder, is also a RHB. Ideally, you’d like a LHB to add some balance there.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 2:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True, but I would prefer Mayberry as the Game 2 DH over Stairs. I may also prefer him as the RF during the games Ibanez DH’d.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well what does mayberry’s bat do that franciscos doesn’t? Wouldn’t Ben have been the better option?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 2:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably, but Mayberry has better power.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well what does mayberry’s bat do that franciscos doesn’t?
Hit the ball every once in a while?
by Screen Name 20 on Nov 5, 2009 3:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=460055
http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?roster_year=2009&player_id=450204&c_id=phi
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no way to tell for sure – and after last nights performance i’m sure there are some who probably think mayberry would have been a better option :)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Mayberry couldn’t have been any worse at the plate.
by Screen Name 20 on Nov 5, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True – but Charlie made the right decision in that regard, I was shocked he didn’t go with stairs, but not only using francisco but moving Ibanez to DH.
Manuel made MANY ‘second guessable’ decisions in the series – i don’t second guess francisco – it was the right call
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mayberry is actually a pretty good fielder, he can run for his size. Anyone remember that top 10 play he got?
by Ant on Nov 5, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure that’s a qualification
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 5:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
PF, are either Taylor or Brown righties? In all the excitement of the postseason I’ve completely lost track of the details of our high minor prospects (an idea for a refresher hot stove post, btw)! If so, I’d platoon them with Ibanez in 2010. If it’s one of each, carry 5 outfielders and give the regulars way more time off…maybe more the case with Taylor than Brown, who could use another season at AAA.
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Taylor’s a righty.
Seems to me like a waste of resources though. Taylor playing fulltime can probably be roughly as good as the platoon. Might as well trade Ibanez in that case and get something useful at another position.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Taco pal’s right: Taylor’s a righty, and Brown’s a lefty.
And I’ll definitely be firing up some minor league posts in the next couple of weeks. I’m leaning towards an organizational depth chart format, but I’m certainly open to suggestions.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 2:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh. Just saw that the banner picture at the top of the homepage got switched back to the old one.
Can we at least get the blue “2009” banner up there?
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I noticed that, I don’t care what they put up there as long as it isn’t rocky – i freaking HATE the rocky thing
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s supposed to be Rocky? I thought maybe it was a dancing Angelo Cataldi shadow or something.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Any time i see a boxer associated with philadlephia i assume rocky – that and the poorly made bell
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m going to assume it’s Joe Frazier.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A poorly made bell and a fictional fighter.
I love that these are the things that people like to associate most with philadelphia sports :)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not just sports, but the entire city, as if there’s nothing else to the city but those things and cheesesteaks.
by doubleh on Nov 5, 2009 3:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey – as far as I know all Villanova university has going for it is 1985
:D
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just saying – what the hell are they doing in the big 5?:)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 4:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
if you’re a true Villanovan, you wonder what the big 5 is doing with them.
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 8:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m waiting until I can get a good picture of the 2009 pennant flag. Keeping the 2008 flag up seemed kind of, sad…
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 5, 2009 3:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good good. WL idea of getting a photo of both banners is kinda cool also.
by FuquaManuel on Nov 5, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ll play around with something when I get a good photo, but due to the smallish size of the banner/logo you want to preserve legibility and clarity.
Trust me I’ll do good.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 5, 2009 3:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
just please get rid of rocky?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve got Drago on the case
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 5, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Is there some sort of copyright law that prevents you from just putting the phillies ‘P’ in the phillies font up there?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yes
it’s known as “copyright law.”
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 5, 2009 4:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well see – I don’t know the ins and outs and I didn’t know if just putting up that P without any sort of money transactions being associated would matter….and nows i do
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 4:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
just breakin' balls
MLBAM are pretty vicious w/r/t their intellectual property.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 5, 2009 4:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not surprising, fan friendly and MLB don’t really go together on the silly things like this…
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s pie-in-the sky, but I’d love a solid utility IF who could seriously spell the middle infielders. The Phils have never adequately replaced a guy like Tad Iguchi.
For the organizational roster, we need someone at the high minor level we can start to consider replacing Rollins with.
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 2:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I started pulling together a list of candidates to fill our various roster holes — what, you expected me to go to bed right away last night with losing the World Series on my mind? — and there are a couple of names that jump out at me right away for the utility infielder role: Craig Counsell and Jerry Hairston, Jr.
by PhillyFriar on Nov 5, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh, Craig Counsell. I’d pay him money not to sign just because of his butt-ugly batting stance.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 2:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Adrian Beltre at third, maybe?
Juan Uribe is also available as a utility guy.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Beltre’s been mentioned a variety of places – but probably out of the phils price range
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
After Feliz, I’d pay anything to avoid that again.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Feliz
What to do with him??
Feliz is superb with the glove. But his hitting is a major liability.
He was the giant out over and over again last night. What a rally killer. Seriously, all I could think the entire time is why wasn’t Ruiz hitting behind Ibanez? Or at least in between Feliz and Francisco?
by The R on Nov 5, 2009 2:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Try and get Figgins
The Angels will most likely re-sign him, but there’s still hope. He would fill two needs (lead-off and 3B).
As for the batting order, I’m not sure. I’ve been wondering that ever since the Rockies series.
by Screen Name 20 on Nov 5, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why – cause figgins can steal at a 71% success rate?
Yeah – that’s awesome
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I'm more excited about the much better OBP
by Screen Name 20 on Nov 5, 2009 3:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He can steal
Put Davey Lopez knowledge behind him and that goes up. It’s the fact he can and has speed thats the plus, if I remember right hes stolen over 60 in a season before
by Ant on Nov 5, 2009 5:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Figgins is clearly a good player. I think he’ll probably be overpriced though.
by taco pal on Nov 5, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not the gross steals – it’s his poor steal percentage that concerns me – 71.1% success rate is unacceptable on the phillies and a guy whose stealing instincts need imrpoving and he’s already 32.
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 5:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Figgins would be be an interesting test case to see if Lopes really is just as awesome as we suspect, or if the Phillies base stealers (Rollins, Utley, Victorino, Werth) are just that effing good on their own.
But a very expensive test case, soooo… meh.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 5, 2009 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Victorino had already shown improvement from ‘raw speed’ to technique as well – hell the fact that ryan howard has stolen bases well has got to be credit enough to lopes even if it is only a few :)
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 5, 2009 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Feliz was the huge out all but 2 times the entire playoffs. I was sitting there last night wondering if Werth could learn 3rd base. Then bring up Taylor and replace Ibanez with Brown in 2011. That would be nice.
by Cormican on Nov 5, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
theory
Why not try Utley at least he is an infielder. Do the Phillies have any prospects for second on the farm level.
I would like to see more focus on pitching, get the rotation more solid. Starting with maybe Lackey and extending Lee. My random thoughts i could be wrong.
We don't play stats, we play baseball.
by W.P.M on Nov 5, 2009 8:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah...
1. They tried Utley at third in 2002 at Triple-A, and it was a miserable failure.
2. He’s the best second baseman in baseball, and it’s not even close. And he’s arguably the best defensive second baseman as well. Why diminish that advantage?
3. It’s a lot easier to find a decent third baseman than a second baseman.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 5, 2009 9:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Utleys fielding of late hasn’t been arguably best. I realize that’s small sample size, but I hope he loses the yips next year.
by Bilzo on Nov 5, 2009 11:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rollins
Just an outline of all the potential hot stove topics:
1- Do we ever move him down in the lineup?
2- What can we expect in 2010? Bounce back or continued slide?
3- Is now the time to deal him or make him Captain?
4- If you deal him, does it rip the heart out of this team?
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 5, 2009 8:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
If you ditch deal him, you have to replace him with something comparable, otherwise you do rip the heart out of the team. It’s quite possible that teammates have tired of Rollins’ poor plate discipline and penchant for popping up, ESPECIALLY if he goes ME before TEAM and refuses to move down in the lineup.
Seriously…in church league softball, I hope to bat as far up the lineup as possible, so I’ll get more ABs. I’m big and slow, but I can hit, and I like to hit, so I always want to bat at the top of the lineup. I know it’s probably not in the best interest of the team, because there are faster guys who can hit as well as I can, so it doesn’t make me mad.
by Bilzo on Nov 5, 2009 8:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Can’t deal him yet unless you have a replacement – like i said in other places, gotta find a prospect who is 2-3 years away…i think ‘good will’ has bought jimmy another year or so (his babip was ridiculously low this year – isn’t it bound to rebound?) but he’ll continue to be in the lead off spot cause Charlie thinks he’s the lead off hitter, even though he never has been.
I don’t think he’s any longer a member of the ‘core’ of this team, I personally think the downslide/side of his career started this year
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Nov 6, 2009 9:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
