Phillies Focus on Polanco, Talks Serious

Quote from Todd Zolecki's twitter:
"Talks are serious as the Phillies have narrowed their focus to Placido Polanco at third base."

about 2 years ago Mitchell Green 15 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I’ve said before that I don’t think Polanco is the worst option, but I didn’t figure he’d be the top target. On one hand, I like that Ruben is going after his guy aggressively… but on the other, I wonder if (like the Ibanez situation) a better bargain might present itself if the Phils just waited this out.

I’ll just wait to see what the money looks like, and then compare it to what the other guys (Beltre, Figgins) make on the open market.

by PhillyFriar on Dec 2, 2009 9:02 PM EST reply actions

I’ve been hoping for Polanco for over a month, and posting about it. I like the option. The problem with waiting is, if the market suddenly takes off you go from getting a bargain to get stuck with Wes Helms part II, when the dust settles.If you think Polanco’s your guy, go get him.

by Cormican on Dec 2, 2009 9:20 PM EST reply actions

I do not understand this move, yea his Offense is superior to Feliz, which is great, and gives us another look as far as lineup goes, but….. He isnt a third base player, can he really play there? will his better average make up for what he lacks on defense? His defense could let in more runs than he actually produces. I just dont understand why you dont wait it out for beltre. Although Cormican has a good point

by MalibuLSV23 on Dec 2, 2009 9:52 PM EST reply actions

Stark: "discussing a three-year deal"

Couldn’t it be two with an option? Three seems like a lot for a 34-year old who doesn’t exactly possess “old player skills.”

Or, to put it this way: it’s from before last year, but Polanco’s PECOTA card projections for 2012 aren’t particularly encouraging.

by PhillyFriar on Dec 2, 2009 10:18 PM EST reply actions

For what it's worth

Fox Sports is reporting 2 years @ 5-6 per. I’d have to imagine Stark has better Phillies sources, but if there’s a discrepancy it leaves the door open for 2 with an option.

Link

by Aphilfan on Dec 2, 2009 11:05 PM EST up reply actions

Feliz in 2012

Maybe when Polanco suffers in 2012, we can get Feliz back, as his PECOTA card has an odd mini-bounceback in 2012. Go figure.

by David S. Cohen on Dec 2, 2009 11:26 PM EST up reply actions

Jon Heyman says: 3 years, $18 million

Link.

I’m sure that constantly handing out 3-year deals to guys in their mid-30s will never backfire…

by PhillyFriar on Dec 3, 2009 10:16 AM EST up reply actions

If Polanco can get 3/$18

I don’t want to think about the contracts Beltre and Figgins will want/get. Granted, there’s some chicken/egg involved here, but with the available options at 3B you’d think it’d be a buyer’s market. Guess that goes out the window.

I’ll try to be optimistic – if the contract is frontloaded, you can always use Polanco as a bench guy if he declines too much and still be able to afford another 3B. A 37 year old Polanco is still likely more valuable than Juan Castro or Beardo.

by Aphilfan on Dec 3, 2009 10:23 AM EST up reply actions

And now Zolecki’s saying 3/$18 with a mutual option for 2013?

The good news is that, barring a miracle, there’s no way the option gets used.

Having said that…this looks worse than the Ibanez deal at first blush. For the second year in a row, Reuben would have greatly benefitted from a little patience. Being aggressive is one thing, but…geez.

link

by Aphilfan on Dec 3, 2009 10:47 AM EST up reply actions

Malibu, he did play a decent amount of 3rd earlier in his career. He hasn’t played since the phillies wasted a terrible trade on him.

3 year deal is bothersome, but if the third year is for less money I would love him as a supersub off the bench.

by Cormican on Dec 2, 2009 10:39 PM EST reply actions

At least Detroit didn’t offer him arbitration so he won’t cost us any picks. That being said, I’d rather have Beltre. If we do get Placido, I’d love to trade for Brandon Wood to back him up then take the job in a year with regular at-bats and move Placido to utility guy.

by Michael Levin on Dec 2, 2009 11:10 PM EST reply actions

To me, this is one of two ways this move makes sense (the other being that they’re planning on splurging on a bullpen arm). Signing a Polanco for two years isn’t doing much more than kicking the can down the road, since I can’t imagine they’d sign him again after that to start at third. It’s the type of move you make if someone’s in AA. There isn’t reason to believe that such a player exists in the system at the moment.

Trading for a younger guy who needs a little more seasoning would be a good follow up move in this case. I just don’t see it actually happening.

by Aphilfan on Dec 2, 2009 11:21 PM EST up reply actions

I’m still bitter over trading him for nothing in the first place. He should have been our 3rd baseman all these years…

by doubleh on Dec 3, 2009 12:44 AM EST reply actions

For what the market is this year and looking at the fact we need a contact hitter over a power hitter I’m all good with this. If he hits .290 or higher and plays well defensively for 2 YEARS (no more) then its a great bargin deal. Sounds more like they want to lock up Lee. Also Polanco is a righty which is greatly needed as well.

Next year free agent class is going to be a tough one for Ruben. I would actually consider locking up Werth now as well.

by Ant on Dec 3, 2009 9:14 AM EST reply actions