What to do with Michael Taylor?

by phatj on Jul 25, 2009 10:46 PM EDT Comment 15 comments

Just so everyone understands, I'm making two few assumptions here. Feel free to quibble with these, but they're not really the point...

The Phillies will trade for Roy Halladay
Michael Taylor will NOT be involved in the Roy Halladay trade (the Jays have an OF logjam)
Dominic Brown WILL be in the trade for Halladay

The Phillies have an OF logjam of their own, with Ibanez, Victorino and Werth all being excellent contributors at their respective positions this season.

So, the Phillies have a few options, sometime before next season:

Trade Taylor for something other than Roy Halladay
Let Taylor season at AAA for another season, and bring him up to replace Werth in 2011
Trade one of the major-league OFs for help elsewhere (3B, C, or SP?) and to free up a spot for Taylor
Make a prospect-for-prospect trade of Taylor-plus for a Brown-level prospect.

I personally find the idea of trading Ibanez really attractive, as I don't think he's going to be able to repeat this season and the lineup could really use another power righty. But I suspect that other teams would be similarly leery of his prospects over the next couple of years, so I'm assuming that's not a real option.

I like trading Victorino. Trading Werth to free up a spot for Taylor doesn't really improve the offense, but Taylor has a good chance to be a better hitter in the near-term than is Victorino, and Werth is a actually a credible centerfielder.

However, if good value for Victorino isn't available, the idea of moving Taylor for a younger prospect is intriguing to me. Taylor is by pretty much anyone's measure an excellent prospect; maybe there's some team out there with a near-term need at OF but a budget crunch, who possesses a high-upside OF prospect who's a couple years away.

Thoughts?

0 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I like the idea of swapping him for a younger prospect (perhaps a corner infielder).

by FuquaManuel on Jul 26, 2009 12:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Trade

There is no doubt that the Phillies will become a more dominant team with Halladay in the rotation, and a possibility to repeat if our BP stays healthy come October. I dont know much about our prospects, but if the FO really wants to keep Drabek then keep him he may be a future ace, but since they are already interested in Happ and Brown, then keep that package and throw in a carrasco and a jason donald or lou marson so it would be 4 prospects to give up. In my mind that is a great deal on both sides. I mean it is most of our future, and how much time left does Halladay have anyway…. he is 32….

by MalibuLSV23 on Jul 26, 2009 2:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I am intrigued by your ideas, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

by phatj on Jul 26, 2009 7:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Werth

If he leaves, we should get comp picks right?

by philiafan14364 on Jul 26, 2009 9:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In theory

I would imagine Werth has played himself into “A” status, which would net two picks if we offered arb and he refused.

However, I’m a little leery about this assumption. Seems like given the economy, the free agent market is going to be depressed and teams will value their draft picks more highly.

by phatj on Jul 26, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ibanez

I don’t follow the logic on Ibanez. On one hand, yes we might get less in exchange for him in a trade than we might for Victorino or Werth. But if that’s the case, that’s because Ibanez is actually worth less than Victorino or Werth.

If a team has Player X (worth more) and Player Y (worth less), trading Player X instead of Player Y doesn’t necessarily benefit the team in any way. Yes, it would mean that we’ll get more back in the trade. But it will also mean that the guy we keep will be worth less than the guy we would have kept if we had made the other trade.

The relevant question isn’t which player has more trade value. The question is: which player’s trade value is higher in comparison with his actual projected worth to the team.

by taco pal on Jul 26, 2009 2:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In other words, yeah, other teams on the trade market will be aware that Ibanez is an older guy who may have had a career year. And they might offer us less for him on that basis. But if we don’t trade him, then we’ll be the ones left with the older guy who may have had a career year. There’s no net benefit for us by trading the guy with more trade value, or at least not necessarily.

by taco pal on Jul 26, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I was posting this late at night (for me) and I’m chronically lacking sleep, so possibly my point just doesn’t make any sense. But let me try to rephrase it.

My idea re: trading Ibanez is that the gap between his perceived value and actual value may be the highest of our OFs, due to his blazing hot season to date. And as we have Taylor looking like he’s ready to make the jump to the majors, this could be a good move all around if Ibanez can be traded for something in another area of need.

However, my suspicion is that other teams share my view that Ibanez is probably having a very late career year and won’t give up much for him, as he commands a substantial salary for the next two years.

Victorino is also a guy whose actual value may not match the perception.

by phatj on Jul 26, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, I understand that. My point is that it isn’t necessarily advantageous to hold onto him. If those other teams are right (and I suspect they are), then not trading him doesn’t just mean we’ll get less back in a trade. It also means we’ll have to keep the guy who’s on the decline.

Personally, my suspicion is that while Ibanez’s trade value may be substantially less than the trade value of, say, a typical 30-year-old LF coming off a 159 OPS+ season, it’s also substantially greater than the trade value of a typical 37-year-old LF with a career OPS+ of 116. So the margin between Ibanez’s perceived value and true value is still greater than the margin for Werth (and maybe Vic too).

by taco pal on Jul 26, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think that if we assume we trade for Halladay, then we also assume that next year we are going to want to have as good a shot at a World Series as possible (unless an extension is worked out or something). If we want to make a run next year, it would probably be prudent to trade Taylor and a few others for a bull pen guy. Eyre said he is going to retire, and we see this year what a long year can do to the guys in the bull pen, ie they are all going on the DL.

We may want to just try and pick somebody up through free agency though I guess.

A lot of this might depend on how Ibanez holds up next year. I think it would be best to keep Taylor unless something good comes up for next year in AAA. Then as the season progresses, the Phillies will have a better idea of what their needs are for a postseason run, and Taylor will probably be a big part of any trade they do. Worst case scenario, you let Taylor play in AAA all year long, hopefully develop and not get too frustrated, and then he can come in to play in 2011, or I guess be traded if things work out with Werth.

by Whack8888 on Jul 27, 2009 12:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Holy flying spaghetti monster

Trade Taylor AND A FEW OTHERS for a relief pitcher? That pitcher could be Mariano Freaking Rivera (ca. 2000) and I would still firebomb Citizens Bank Park if this happened.

by phatj on Jul 27, 2009 9:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs