Cost Certainty: What Does It Mean?
So the Phils have unloaded a trio of three-year deals in the past few days on Joe Blanton, Shane Victorino and Carlos Ruiz. While the three players earned the money with their play in the last two years, and the front office has achieved cost certainty into 2011 and 2012, there's a good chance the team will look tremendously different when the three are heading into 2012, the final year of their contracts. Let's take a look, after the jump.
2011 commitments
Starters:
Roy Halladay - $20 million
Cole Hamels - 9.5
Blanton - 8.5
J.A. Happ - 1st arb/4
Kyle Kendrick - 1st arb/2.5
Relievers:
Brad Lidge - 12
Danys Baez - 2.75
Ryan Madson - 4.83
J.C. Romero - 4.5
RP - OPEN Scott Mathieson? - 1st arb/1.5
RP - OPEN Antonio Bastardo?
RP - OPEN
Regulars:
Jimmy Rollins - 8.5
Placido Polanco - 5.4
Victorino - 7.5
Chase Utley - 15.286
Ryan Howard - 20
Raul Ibanez - 12.1
Ruiz - 3 (avg)
RF - OPEN (Domonic Brown?/Ben Francisco)
Bench:
Ross Gload - 1.6
Francisco - 1st arb/2.5
Brian Schneider - 1.625
Juan Castro - .75
OPEN
Subtotals: 17 contracts ~ $137.8 million, 3 arbitration ~ $10.5 million
Total: 20 players controlled ~ $148.3 million, could go up to $149.8 with league-minimum contracts for Brown, Bastardo, Mathieson. Ruiz's deal is probably backloaded, meaning there might be about $500k of savings from this projection on the actual deal.
I see the Phillies pushing their payroll to $150 million or so for 2011. Jayson Werth is gone unless the team can move Ibanez or Lidge. $4.5 million for Romero hurts, too.
AND
2012 payroll
Starters:
Halladay - 20
Hamels - last arb/10
Blanton - 8.5
Happ - 2nd arb/6
Kendrick - 2nd arb/4 OR prospect (Phillippe Aumont/Vance Worley/J.C. Ramirez/Trevor May)
Relievers:
Lidge - 12.5/1.5 buyout
Bastardo - controlled
Mathieson - 2nd arb/2.5
OPEN - Aumont??
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
Regulars:
Utley - 15.286
Victorino - 9.5
Polanco - 6.4
Ruiz - 3
1B - OPEN, no one in minors who projects here
SS - open, likely Rollins @ 8 or so
LF - open, likely Francisco - 2nd arb/5
RF - open, likely Brown - controlled
Bench:
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
OPEN
Subtotals: 7 contracts ~ $75.17 million, 3 arbitration ~ $23.5 million, 3 controlled ~ $1.5 million,
Totals: 14 commitments ~ $100.19 million
Here is where some drastic changes are likely to occur. Continued good health and performance should allow the Phillies to remain very competitive through the 2011 season, but the bill from two years of dealing prospects away might need to be paid in 2012. It's possible the team could, with smart deals and cheap talent percolating up from the minors, continue to be outstanding, but 2012 and 2013 could also mean a big step back from a decade of winning.
A few guesses for 2012: Lidge will be bought out for 1.5 million (against a 12.5 million salary) and Rollins will come back for 8 million (34 y.o.), so that will drop the payroll to $97 million, with a Ryan Howard-sized black hole of production at first base. I'm also guessing that Francisco will be a full-time player in left, at least until Tyson Gillies or Anthony Gose is ready for the show. Domonic Brown should be entrenched in right field at this point as well. I think that the front office would non-tender Kendrick rather than pay him 4-5 million to be the fifth starter.
Also of note: there's definitely room in the payroll for Werth in 2012 if they can squeeze him into 2011 somehow, either by moving Lidge or Ibanez. It probably comes down to a decision between Werth and Howard, as both will command similar money. Both play premium offensive positions, and Werth especially provides great value in the field and on the basepaths.
However, the rub is that Werth is also more organizationally replaceable with the team's glut of OF talent in the minors. There are literally no corner infield prospects in the Phillies organization who can be projected as major-league players outside of 18-year old Jonathan Singleton, who's best case scenario is a 2013 arrival anyways. So I figure the Phillies try to get Howard signed for 2012-2014 at about $22 million per and have Howard hold down the spot until Singleton is ready.
Also key for the team is the internal development of various reliever types. Because so much money is tied up in so many places, the club can't afford to throw money at relievers for 2011 and 2012. The performance of Bastardo and Mathieson this year is key, because a solid 2010 from both of those guys means there's only one spot to fill in the pen for 2011.
B.J. Rosenberg and Michael Schwimer also figure in this discussion and could contribute in 2011 or certainly 2012.
The emergence of a dominant, young, cheap arm in the back of the pen could really free up space in 2011 payroll by providing an internal replacement for Lidge. If Lidge bounces back in 2010 and Mathieson (or Bastardo/Rosenberg/Schwimer/Aumont) shows he's ready to be a closer type, $11.5 of payroll space could be cleared by trading Lidge, which in turn can be thrown at either Howard or Werth.
Note: this is my best guess at what the salary situation could look like in a few years. I got the salary information from David Murphy's excellent High Cheese blog for the Daily News and by averaging the recent deals. Obviously, trades/injuries/surprise performers can and will impact what the team looks like in 2011 and 2012. This is just one bored man's guesses.
Edit: found some more contract info at Cot's Contracts and updated accordingly.
54 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If the Phillies really want Werth back, I don’t think Ibanez’ contract is a big problem. They can move Ibanez in 2011, pay Werth $7 million in 2011 with a backloaded contract, or pay big salaries to both Ibanez and Werth in 2011. At worst, it’s a one-year problem. With Brown replacing Ibanez in 2012, there will be a big drop in corner outfield salaries.
Rollins will be 33 for the entire 2012 season. I think he will get a nice bump in his next contract, but maybe not too many years.
Shedding Lidge’s contract in 2012 will free a chunk of change. We will be in good shape if we can fill the closer role from within the organization. Aumont may be the guy.
by Derekcarstairs on Jan 24, 2010 11:37 PM EST reply actions
i don’t think it’s going to be as easy moving Ibanez as everyone seems. he’s making a more than decent salary, and the phils have no reason to move him mid-season to a contender unless for some reason they fall out of the division race, which shouldnt really happen, and why would a team over pay for him in the off-season?
the reason Werth probably won’t be back is because of the fact that you can’t have an unlimited amount of $15M contracts, with howard, utley, halladay and Ibanez. he is going to demand alot, plus we are going to have big holes in 1B, 3B and one corner OF, plus an aging rollins with no viable replacements (except for Brown in the other corner OF spot.)
I would love to hear if Werth is open to the “home team discount”, but either way he’s going to command more per year than Ibanez, which could cripple the team with few controllable players on the horizon.
Chase Utley is so good that on one pitch he stole second, third and the shortstop's hat.
In a similar discussion elsewhere...
It was noted Ibanez has a limited no-trade clause – likely similar to Utley’s as he was given the right to upgrade his trade protection to equal that of any other contract signed while he is under contract. I don’t think it’d be impossible to trade Ibanez, but obviously harder with this cavet.
Either way, the possibility fo Werth in LF and Brown in RF in 2011 sounds great. I’d love to replace Ibanez with Werth.
moving high dollar contracts are not that easy
Unless the Phillies have a fire sale because they are falling out of contention, but even then baseball’s economics wouldn’t allow more than the top 4-5 paying teams to make that move. and Lidge’s and Ibanez’s contract will not just be moved at no cost to the phillies, as well as picking up prospects. (the phils will have to still pay some of their salary)
use the mets aquiring Sarge Jr. as an example…The Angels paid all but $2-3M of Matthews’ contract just to get rid of the big contract.
Let’s stop saying we can just move Ibanez or move Lidge or any other high dollar value contracts, just to shed team salary. It’s great in theory, but it makes no sense for the other teams involved.
Chase Utley is so good that on one pitch he stole second, third and the shortstop's hat.
I’ve seen the David Murphy blog write-up on future Phillies rosters based on contracts before, but there is a better (at least more consistent) site to view the payroll for every team.
by Phils 2036 World CH on Jan 25, 2010 9:28 AM EST reply actions
From what you wrote, it looks to me like we’re actually in pretty decent shape for 2012. It’s 2013 where things start to look iffy, but then, we have a lot of time to prepare for that. 2010 draftees could be making impacts by then.
Not so fast… 2012 doesn’t seem set in stone at all. Looks like only 6 players are under contract for 2012, the rest being arbitration eligible or FA’s.
Under Contract:
Pitchers -
Halladay
Blanton
Position-
Victorino
Utley
Ruiz
Polanco
Possible Free Agents after 2011:
Ibanez 12.167
Rollins 8.5
Howard 20
Hamels (4th year arb????) 9.5
Madson 4.833
Lidge 12
Between those 6 guys, it’s approx. 67 million off the books from the 2011 earnings. A couple of those guys are coming back. Rollins and Howard at this point are must-haves, but I’m solely basing that on who in the Phillies org or in FA’s would possibly replace either of those 2.
by Phils 2036 World CH on Jan 25, 2010 2:53 PM EST up reply actions
The goal isn’t necessarily to have as many good players under contract as possible. The goal is to be able to project as much sub-market talent as possible. Five of the six guys you mentioned are likely to be pretty decent bargains in 2012. So are the arb-eligible guys (who are as good as being under contract for these purposes), most notably Happ. So, obviously, are any players who will be produced by the farm system in the next three years, such as Domonic Brown. Even Cole Hamels will be a bit below market.
The three holes that may or may not be left (1B, one Corner OF, SS) are not insignificant, but because we’ll be sub-market at so many of our other positions, we should have enough money to come up with solutions that are at least adequate.
problem is
1B and corner OF both command premium dollars on the open market, and the phils are either going to have to pay the going rate for a top free agent, close to the going rate for their own guy (howard/werth), or pay less to someone on the market and receive considerably less production (if there are no good prospects ready to fill those holes)
Definitely hoping Hamels rebounds from 2009, but if he has back-to-back successful (Happ-like) seasons, he will be far from sub-market. And with that in mind we could be looking at throwing another wrench in payroll machine to go along with Howard.
by Phils 2036 World CH on Jan 25, 2010 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
I suppose he’ll be sub-market for an ace/2nd starter because of the arbitration, but you’re still talking about 13-16 million for that year which hardly seems like sub-market. 2012 is really an open
by Phils 2036 World CH on Jan 25, 2010 7:57 PM EST up reply actions
sub-market: below the market price
Regardless, I wasn’t clear on my point before. Sub-market is not relative to the Phillies payroll budget, but that of which other teams are willing to pay for Hamels. Although he may be sub-market based on the last year of arb, we can’t conclude that he’s easily affordable for the Phillies with other cogs of the wheel (like Howard in 2012) that need to be replaced (For Howard; quite possibly by a $25 million a year contract).
by Phils 2036 World CH on Jan 26, 2010 1:11 PM EST up reply actions
Hey, you know what would be great for the Phillies right about now? Inflation. Lots of it. Come on Bernanke, open the spigots.
What if someone has their contract in Euros, WHAT THEN?
"I remember being three and I wanted to be a baseball player, that's all I ever really wanted to be. That and Spider Man." -Raul Ibanez
by Jose and the Contrarians on Jan 25, 2010 10:48 PM EST up reply actions
Gotta love articles like this that really put moves in perspective. Nice work Gov. What I wonder is, what would this article have looked like in Jan 2006, looking ahead to 07/08? Certainly at the time the team was somewhat disappointing but did the contracts and players on the rise signify what was really coming? Point is, 2012 looks a little iff now but I’m sure 2008 did as of Jan. 2006 and look how that turned out…
by Sept.28.Oct.27.Dec.28.2008 on Jan 25, 2010 9:14 PM EST reply actions
Phillies in January 2006:
Howard, Utley, and Rollins looked like studs.
We had a stopgap 3B with no good prospects at the position.
Lieberthal was on his way out and we though Jason Jaramillo would be our catcher of the future, though we weren’t expecting too much from him at that point.
Burrell was coming off his best season since 2002. Abreu was entrenched in RF. We had just traded Thome for Rowand in CF.
Brett Myers was coming off of a very good season at age 24. Cole Hamels was creating a cult following in the minors was was expected to see the majors in 2006. Gavin Floyd was still young and had ace potential, though he struggled in his major league opportunities. Lieber, Padilla, and Wolf rounded out the rotation. The starting pitching situation looked great.
Billy Wagner was a free agent but we signed Tom Gordon, who was studly as a setup guy for Mo Rivera in New York. Aaron Fultz in 2005 looked like JC Romero of 2008. The rest of the bullpen was considered shaky at best.
The minor league system was thin, partially because we kept losing picks because of free agent compensation and we refused to sign players over slot for draft picks. Baseball America had our top 5 prospects as Hamels, Greg Golson, Bourn, Mathieson, and Welinson Baez.
As for where our current players were at the time, Victorino was raking in the minors and did well in 17 ABs in the majors, though he was seen as a 4th outfielder at best.
Ruiz hit fairly well in AAA but people didn’t think he’d be much of a major leaguer.
Werth had a major injury and didn’t play at all in 2006.
Polanco had been traded by the Phillies in the previous season.
Feliz played multiple positions for the Giants and was considered a disappointment.
Ibanez was in Seattle, of course, defying age already.
Blanton was coming off of his rookie year in Oakland.
Halladay was an ace on a team that nobody in America watched.
Happ was pitching well in Lakewood
Madson was a disappointment after he followed up a great rookie season with a bad sophomore season.
To sum it all up, the team looked like it had a bright future. The future of the rotation looked fantastic with a 1-2-3 of Myers/Floyd/Hamels and the only two holes in the lineup were at 3B and catcher. The only real problem was the bullpen. Then 2006 came and the Phillies disappointed. The rotation was awful outside of Myers and a little bit of Hamels. The bullpen was even worse than expected. Rowand busted his face on the wall and missed a bunch of time. The Phillies were out of the race and traded Abreu for practically nothing. Yet somehow the Phillies started winning after the trade deadline and gave fans a little bit of hope for the years to come.
In hindsight, it’s amazing how much we lucked out with Victorino and Werth. We’ve gotten huge production from those guys for practically zero cost. Without them, we probably have no postseason appearances right now, let alone championships. All our hopes would have died with the Abreu trade.
by taco pal on Jan 26, 2010 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
excellent point...
And rec’d. And Shane was an Ed Wade guy, right?
It’s actually pretty interesting how this team (particularly now, in 2010) so strongly bears the imprint of its last three GMs, and almost entirely in good ways (Wade’s reluctance to trade his top prospects, Gillick’s “dumpster diving” and finding gold, Amaro’s balls-out aggressiveness…).
http://www.thegoodphight.com
I think you could find guys like Victorino and Werth on every championship team who step up big time and incredibly outperform their salaries (Marlins being the extreme). The Yankees caught lightning in a bottle this year by all their high priced players ACTUALLY playing up to their salaries, which I think is quite rare. The problem is in baseball, year-to-year performances can be quite inconsistant, its just the nature of the game. You have to hope the big contracts don’t tremedously underperform (Adam Eaton) and your arbitration guys greatly outperform their puny contracts. My point is at some point (probably 2012) we are going to need a new Victorino and Werth to step up.
I don’t see a problem to penciling Happ in to be your fourth starter. We all know that regression is inevitable based on the peripherals, but even if we use xFIP, Happ (at 4.49 last year) was right in the neighborhood of guys like Jason Marquis, Mark Buehrle, John Danks, Jered Weaver, Mike Pelfrey, Jeff Niemann, Bronson Arroyo, and Jon Garland (all between 4.41 and 4.63). That seems like solid fourth starter material to me.
by PhillyFriar on Jan 27, 2010 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
back
Happ should be a very cheap 4th/5th starter for the next couple years. That’s a very valuable commodity.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Jan 27, 2010 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
Plus I think he can improve on that 4.49, considering he was only 26 and inexperienced last year. It’s certainly more likely than regression (from that baseline).
Agreed completely — I think that’s a point that’s getting overlooked. Of course Happ’s 2009 was a “raging fluke” (thanks, KLaw) when we look at peripherals, but with his minor league track record, I’d expect a slight bump in strikeout rate in Year 2.
by PhillyFriar on Jan 27, 2010 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
Right. As David Murphy noted in his recent blog post, none other than Bill James himself projected that Happ would post a 4.31 ERA in 188 IP. I don’t know what anyone else thinks, but that sounds great to me! Last year, it would have placed him 40th in the NL in ERA (100 IP min), which is solid.
Keith Law is just way too preoccupied with proving how much smarter he is than the unwashed masses. If your rhetoric as a commentator is driven by what other people think about the subject of your commentary instead of the subject of your commentary itself, well then you’re a bad commentator. Law’s a smart guy who knows a lot about the game, but that doesn’t make him a good writer.
by taco pal on Jan 27, 2010 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I actually like Law a lot, but I can see how the snarkiness bothers people. The real issue here (and Law’s not the only one guilty of this) is getting past the “Happ outperformed his peripherals to a fluky degree in 2009” trump card that gets held up to the uneducated fans — you and I and readers of this blog clearly understand that fact, but we want to carry the discussion a step further to ask, “Well, what can we expect of Happ this year?”
by PhillyFriar on Jan 27, 2010 11:49 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I may have been a tad harsh. But my problem with Law isn’t so much the snark as such. It’s that Law seems to slant his conclusions in service of that snark. It should be obvious to someone like Law that if a pitcher posts defense-independent stats in the 4.4 neighborhood as a rookie (albeit an older rookie) while actually underperforming some of the peripherals that could have projected from his minor league career, then the most reasonable prediction for him is as a middle-of-the-rotation starter. To the extent that there are uneducated fans saying that Happ will be an ace (and frankly, I haven’t seen all that many of these fans out there, not even on philly.com), it’s OK to use sarcasm to counter them by arguing that Happ is “only” a middle-of-the-rotation starter. It is not OK, however, to argue (with or without sarcasm) that Happ is “maybe a No. 4 … otherwise a very good No. 5.” When he says something like that, it shows that he’s letting his personal agenda get in the way of his judgment.
I’m late to the discussion here, but I think this really highlights that Amaro’s moves were fueled by the idea of locking in the current roster (almost in its entirety) for the next two years, then giving himself that 2011-12 offseason to judge how best to proceed going forward.
Nice work, Governator.
Looks like today is Cole Hamels day on philly.com.
Hamels, Andre Iguodala, and McNabb ought to form a support group. They have a lot in common.
They sure do. Completely unappreciated for what they can do and continually blamed for what they can’t do. All play at incredibly high levels under constant media pressure/focus. Some of them say some head scratching things to the media, but a lot of what they say gets overly scrutinized and taken out of context.
"Tortorella’s got it all wrong ... Gaborik shouldn’t be messing with our skilled player." -Peter Luuko
by doubleh on Jan 28, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
What is it about these three guys’ personalities that causes them to be treated so similarly? I think this is actually a very thought-provoking, and difficult, question.
I am not so naive as to think that race doesn’t matter at all, but given that Hamels is white, it obviously doesn’t explain everything.
It’s also obvious that it isn’t all about the presence or absence of rings. Hamels has a ring – in fact, he practically got us that championship singlehandedly. And other ultra-popular athletes like Brian Dawkins never got one.
Is it because they’re introverts? I don’t think so. McNabb and Hamels aren’t really all that introverted. And there are other introverts (Chase Utley, for one) who are popular.
Is it because they’re thoughtful and introspective? Again, I don’t think so. Julius Erving might have been the most thoughtful athlete we’ve ever had, and he was beloved.
Is it because they aren’t “blue collar” enough? That’s the most common explanation for this type of phenomenon in Philadelphia. But it’s not as if any of these guys come across as lace-curtain. (Well, maybe Hamels.) McNabb and Iguodala only fall somewhere in the middle of that spectrum. And again, Dr. J wasn’t blue-collar at all, but was still beloved.
Is it because they’re “soft”? But McNabb once played an entire game on a broken ankle and threw three touchdowns.
Is it because they’re “un-clutch”? But Hamels just two years ago had one of the clutchest performances in Philadelphia sports history. And Iguodala has never really even had the opportunity to prove whether or not he’s “clutch.”
So basically, I can’t figure out what the right explanation is. I feel like there’s one out there but I can’t articulate it.
Expectations? Overhype?
Igoudala reminds me some of Clarence Witherspoon, as Spoon was drafted and compared to Barkley and kind of touted by management as the heir apparent to Barkley. Through no fault of his own, the timing worked out that AI, kind of became touted as the replacement for AI.
McNabb was drafted #2 overall, and I think the prevailing “wisdom” is that if you get picked #2 overall as QB anything short of a Hall of Fame career and multiple Super Bowl rings deems you a failure.
Cole Hamels was heavily hyped, even by the national media in some cases, as the best young pitcher to build around in all of baseball. He tore through the minors and when he joined the big club, I think some expected him to immediately be Randy Johnson in his prime.
I don’t think the treatment has anything at all to do with the players. I think in the 90’s the same could have been said of Eric Lindross.
Or maybe Lindross, Hamels and Igoudala are all disliked because their names look like they’re misspelled no matter how I type them out.
Maybe. But I don’t think Spoon was ever really disliked. Also, while all these guys had high expectations, they’ve also kind of fulfilled them, haven’t they? That’s the whole reason why the mass distaste for them seems strange to begin with. And there are other guys who have come with high expectations (Dr. J, Jim Thome, Moses Malone) and have still been well-liked.
But one difference is that unlike Dr. J, Thome, and Moses, Hamels, McNabb, Iguodala, and Lindros all started their careers in Philadelphia. So did Mike Schmidt. Maybe it’s just impossible for any person to begin his career in Philadelphia with very high expectations and end up being appreciated. The only exception I can think of is Allen Iverson, and he’s only a semi-exception.
Perhaps AI was saved by the fact that Larry Brown is such a miserable, unlikeable prick. Also, AI may have been helped by the fact that he got the team to the finals and can be viewed as an overachiever given his size.
You may actually be on to something there, even with the AI caveat.
That’s true, He has to end up being better than Kyle Drabek, Michael Taylor, Travis D’Arnaud, Carlos Carrasco, Jason Knapp, Lou Marson and Jason Donald. He also will need to be a perennial all star and put up with haviong his name mis-spelled for the next 30 years. That kid’s screwed.
I don’t think most fans will remember any of those names in a year or two, so I don’t think Brown is going to be suffering from inflated expectations for that reason.
I disagree. Starting around early July last year, every Phillies fan became a self-appointed expert in the farm system. D’Arnaud and Knapp might slide off, but the rest of them will be remembered, especially Drabek and Taylor.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
Drabek I'll give you
Given his family connection.
Everybody becomes a self-appointed expert that time of year because prospect talk heats up on CSN and other outlets, but I still think that in general, just as their interest is transient, so is their memory.
Maybe. But as I think you were hinting at in your first comment, even if Brown’s expectations aren’t inflated because of Drabek and Taylor, they might still be inflated for other, more general reasons.
I also wouldn’t put it past our local fan base to get things mixed up in their heads as time passes, and to start believing that keeping Brown cost us Lee or some nonsense like that.
Taylor plays the same position. If he were to play the season with the A’s next year and wins Rookie of Year, or even prove to be a solid contributor and Brown turns into Glenn Wilson – a solid, but unspectacular player (aside from his awesome arm and mustache). People will remember that, and, in case anyone forgets, I’m sure announcers and writers will remind everyone of it often enough.
I actually think there’s less of a connection to Drabek, even in fans minds, because the deal was going to be Drabek and either Taylor or Brown.
Not just the mustache, mind you, but the bandolier full of baseballs.
The coulda/woulda/shoulda piece of this too will rear its ugly head, such as: Had Pope Owens not been desperate to move Larry Bowa and in love with Von Hayes, we would have had an infield of Schmidt/Julio Franco/Ryne Sandberg throughout the 1980s.
This combination is coming, we just haven’t seen it fully yet.
by Wet Luzinski on Jan 29, 2010 5:49 PM EST up reply actions

by 
































