Phillies, Ryan Madson Reportedly Getting Close on New Deal?
by WholeCamels on Nov 8, 2011 1:33 PM EST
Email
Print
Ryan Madson is arguably the most accomplished relief pitcher in Phillies history. In a few years, it should be beyond any argument.
Jon Heyman from SI.com, hot on the heels of news from Jayson Stark and Ken Rosenthal, reports that the Phillies and free agent relief pitcher Ryan Madson are getting close on a new contract that would presumably keep Madson in red pinstripes for at least a few more years. (h/t NBC Philadelphia)
Nothing is finalized, and we've all seen "close" deals fall apart before, but it's looking more and more like Mad Dog will be closing out his peak seasons as a member of the Philadelphia Phillies.
As always, the devil is in the details on whether it's a good deal or not. I'm optimistic that something will get done for three years at around $10 million AAV, and even if that's an overpay, it's nice to have some certainty. Phillies General Manager Ruben Amaro Jr. has made it clear from the beginning that he wants a veteran closer. He's never had to sign or trade for a closer before -- Brad Lidge's contract that expired at the end of 2011 is a remnant of the Pat Gillick regime -- but it's very clear that Amaro isn't afraid to spend money, sometimes more than necessary. Of all the most likely alternatives, this feels like the least offensive one.
That, and it'd make it so I don't have to root for Jonathan Papelbon.
261 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Peripherals are definitely Papelbon’s side.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:04 PM EST up reply actions
I like the fact that this money is going to Madson and not Cuddyer.
I don’t like the fact that this money is going to Madson and not Rollins.
I’m sure there will be enough $$$ left to sign Rollins or Cuddyer as the starting SS for next year.
(don’t kill me)
So your saying payroll can’t go up this year?
Where have I heard that before…
by philiafan14364 on Nov 8, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe, but I think a better question is should the payroll go up? Obviously it depends on the player, but generally speaking I would say no. Any money that’s available to add to the payroll should instead be added to player development. That would be a more efficient allocation of resources given this team’s present circumstances.
Payroll will have to go up, I don’t see anyway around that. It should, however, go up as minimally as practical.
I’m with TP on this (as I’m guessing most of TGP is).
What’s weird to me is why on a team that is based on starting pitching you would want to mess around with defense up the middle. Which is why I suspect (much to my chagrin) that if J-roll departs, choice one will be to give Galvis the “starting shortstop until proven otherwise” position in ST. That would be fraught with peril, a la the early Brown call-up
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
Potentially true dat.
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
It’s pretty aggravating that some of the same people calling for Rollins to be dumped in favor of Galvis are the same people calling for the Phils to give up on Brown because he’s unfixable. They just assume the best-case scenario will come to pass when it’s convenient for them, and that the worst-case scenario will come to pass when that’s convenient for them.
I think for some, if you are a top prospect and aren’t playing like a 27 year old Ken Griffey Jr. from the second you step on the field, you’re a bust and will never be worth anything. Worse, you’re wasting talent, that they would certainly put down their PBR, rise from their Barco and waddle down to CBP to claim your place if they had it.
You know, maybe these people are in jobs that don’t require the accumulation of knowledge and experience to excel in the workplace (these jobs are getting rarer and don’t pay well).
I was on probation in my second semester of teaching. Yes, read that as “nearly fired for ignorance and incompetence.” Since then I’ve won two teacher of the year awards. Just sayin’.
/empathizes greatly with Dom
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
I think midway through 2014 is a reasonable expectation for Galvis to break into the bigs and have the opportunity to stick. That said, we may already have a shortstop locked up for a few years by then, so his future is still a question mark to me.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
I think there’s at least a 50% chance that Galvis never turns into a starting SS at all. Obviously I hope he does, but he isn’t a blue-chip prospect.
Honestly, I think that might be a little generous. But more numbers at Triple-A like this year, those chances improve considerably.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:29 PM EST up reply actions
No doubt. I don’t want the Phils to give up on him or pigeonhole him, by any means. Just that they can’t count on him (for now).
I actually think it’s 70% that his ceiling is probably Utility guy. If he reverts next year at the plate, then he needs to start getting work at 3rd and 2nd, since that will become his path to the show.
I misread that as a 70% chance his ceiling is Utley. I almost shit my pants.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:35 PM EST up reply actions
how's this?
1% major league star
20% good major leaguer
45% non-good major leaguer
34% doesn’t make it
Budget
Payroll Ceiling before luxury tax will probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of $180mm
Currently $114,153,000 allocated
Hamels Arb (or contract): ~$12,000,000
Pence Arb (or contract): ~$11,000,000
Bastardo, Mayberry, Worley, Stutes, Herndon and one or two of: Savery, DeFratus, Schwimer or Aumont, will all get ~league minimum for a total of somewhere around $3,500,000
Assuming $10,000,000 for Madson that puts payroll at $150,000,000 (roughly)
That leaves ~$30,000,000 before luxury tax, they’ll likely put $5,000,000 aside for in season moves. So, $25,000,000 left. If Jimmy wants 15 and Cuddyer wants 12, you’re now damned close to luxury tax and we haven’t even talked utility infielder, backup catcher, 6th starter or 4th/5th Outfielders.
I’m not convinced the Phillies really care too much about the luxury tax at this point, especially if they’re only over by 4 or 5 million.
by philiafan14364 on Nov 8, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
This is probably the only reason I would consider giving Hunter Pence a contract with some length to it. He’s got 2 years of arbitration left, and if he plays 2012 like 2011, we could easily end up paying well over $20 million for his services before he reaches free agency. I wouldn’t mind terribly if we bought out his arbitration years plus a year of free agency for around, say, $28 million. I think he’s got the skill set to maintain success at least for that long.
Also, when considering the back-up catcher and 6th starter, do we resort to the minors to fill these holes? Kratz and/or Gosewich seem like capable backstops (with Gosewich’s game-calling receiving the praise of Halladay). As for the 6th starter, I’d like to see Kendrick fill that hole, but he’s due for a pay raise after putting up some solid numbers this season. I’ve heard about $5 million is a reasonable estimate for him. If that’s too much, maybe try out one of the Triple-A farmhands and see how they hold up.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
I’d get behind that. The way he handled the rookie was impressive, and he can call a good game. He’s also not nearly as incapable with the bat as his season numbers indicate.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
Free Tuffy!!! Occupy Home Plate!
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
by Bud in TN on Nov 8, 2011 6:12 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Sure, but it reduces the budget and therefore the likelihood. I think Rollins should have gotten the first contract because he has the most value and fills the greatest need. Maybe that was impossible because of Jimmy’s negotiating position, but we don’t know that one way or the other.
Very true, we don’t know, and it’s entirely possible that Rollins is taking a hard-line, no-negotiate position, and Amaro doesn’t want to be left “closer-less” by waiting out Rollins.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
Yeah, that’s possible, so it would be premature to excoriate Amaro over it. But I think it’s appropriate to say that it’s a bad fact, while reserving the possibility that it could be outweighed by other facts later.
Right, I’m pretty sure that Rollins is holding firm at the five year demand right now, and frankly, he should, particularly if he’s not getting good offers from anywhere. Why would he bid against himself this early?
Madson wants to stay and sees a situation where the teams in need may include Boston and Philadelphia, but not many other contenders.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
Maybe. I guess I don’t see their situations as being all that different – Rollins has a limited market for his services too. I don’t doubt that Rollins is holding the line right now, but for now I don’t think we can assume that the money and years needed to sign Madson now would be any less of an overpayment than signing Rollins to 5 would be. In which case, I’d rather have Rollins and get stuck with no closer than have Madson and get stuck with no shortstop.
But maybe Madson’s contract will be relatively small. In that case, I’ll be fine with it, but for now, I have some trepidation.
I’m assuming that Jimmy is waiting on Reyes to sign somewhere to show his true cards, as likely half the teams who would bid for him now, won’t until then.
I also think that signing a closwer and the Cuddyer talk is as much Ruben sending a message to jimmy that he’s willing to move on if he has to, but he’d be happy to sign him now at his terms.
they’re playing chicken.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
But Cuddyer can’t play short anymore (if he ever could), so I doubt that’s what this is about.
I wonder if Ruben would consider pitting Rollins’s and Reyes’s agents against each other, have the two of them fight it out over who gets the contract from the Phillies. Of course, this is completely ignoring every other team in the market for a shortstop, but that’s really limited to SF, STL, ATL and NYM.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 3:23 PM EST up reply actions
The message isn’;t that he’s signing Cuddyer to play SS, but that he’s gonna take Jimmy’s money, give it to Cuddyer, and go with Galvis.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
So Rollins takes someone else’s money and plays for them. If what Jimmy said is to be trusted, it doesn’t matter who gives him the money, as long as they give him close to what we wants.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 3:43 PM EST up reply actions
Look, Ruben wants a closer, and he wants that closer to be Papelbon or Madson.
I’m pretty sure he knows EXACTLY what it will take to get Papelbon, and would prefer to have Madson for less. But at some point, be it years or dollars, he’ll say goodbye to Madson and hello to Papelbon.
And everything else will be dictated from there.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
Both Papelbon and Madson will be 31 going into next season, so both are going to be looking for at least 3-4 years of job security. Papelbon’s been closing regularly longer than Ryan Madson, and he’s been very effective for those years, so he’s going to command more than Madson, in years or dollars. Madson’s still going to get a sizable contract, but not as big as Papelbon’s.
I fail to see any way that Ruben can justify signing Papelbon over Madson.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 3:14 PM EST up reply actions
Madson’s still going to get a sizable contract, but not as big as Papelbon’s.
I fail to see any way that Ruben can justify signing Papelbon over Madson.
These sentences are internally inconsistent.
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
NO I can't read NVM
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
I still haven’t resigned myself to the idea that we may have acrappyscrappy ShortStop next year.
FTFY…I think?
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:23 PM EST up reply actions
The two tools you never hear about.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:33 PM EST up reply actions
I don't disagree with your first sentence necessarily
but I’m curious as to how you define most accomplished and why you think Madson fits that definition. I haven’t really taken a close enough look at Phillies relievers (historically) so I’m interested to see.
He’s not the “best” reliever to play for the Phillies — that was probably Billy Wagner, but he was only here for two seasons.
It’s a sliding scale based primarily on performance and service time with the team. Right now the only real competition is Tug McGraw, and I think Madson has passed him now.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
I guess it’s kind of lazy for me to refer to players from this current era as “the best _ in Phillies history” because with the exception of Mike Schmidt and Steve Carlton (and Richie Ashburn), most of these guys are the best.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
easy ones: 2B Utley, SS Rollins, 3B Schmidt, RF Abreu
LF Luzinski, I guess?
Catcher is a tough one. Seminick, Boone, Lieberthal, Ruiz.
No love for Dutch?
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:30 PM EST up reply actions
1B Howard, pretty confident in that one.
My LF is Ed Delahanty. Chuck Klein probably edges out Abreu in RF.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
Delahanty LF
Vic/Maddox CF
Kein RF
3b Schmidt
SS Rollinns
1B Howard
2B Utley
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
Holy Christ. Was Dykstra’s 1990 season really that incredible?
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 3:52 PM EST up reply actions
Offensively it wasn’t as good as his 1993, but the current defensive stats loved his 1990. Both FG (Total Zone) and whatever BB-Ref uses. BB-Ref has him 2nd in the NL in Defensive WAR, behind only Barry Bonds.
-------
Celebrating over 50 years of slightly more Phils wins than losses: 1961-2011
I admit that, as much as I’m not sure about current-day defensive metrics, I really don’t understand how they figure defense runs saved for the past
It looks like both FG and BR use Total Zone for the years before UZR is available. In any case, here is how they make the sausage: Total Zone
-------
Celebrating over 50 years of slightly more Phils wins than losses: 1961-2011
maybe, though it’s not clear where and when steroids came into play
his offense that season is not out of line with his career up to that point… I mean, it was a career best, for sure, but it’s not insane; it’s very similar to 1986, with somewhat higher walk rate and BABIP.
The big difference in 1990 is his defense.
1993 MVP voting, for giggles:
1. Bonds 372 (24 1st place)
2. Dykstra 267 (4 1st place)
3. Justice 183
4. McGriff 177
5. Gant 176
6. Matt Williams 103
7. Daulton 79
…
16. Kruk 9
Kruk got finished 17th, 14th, and 16th in 1991-93
-------
Celebrating over 50 years of slightly more Phils wins than losses: 1961-2011
4. was actually anthropomorphic spokesdog for National Crime Prevention Council, not baseball player
by perfectdepth on Nov 9, 2011 10:56 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah I suspect that he started using in 1990. He struggled a lot in the half-year after he was traded for Samuel – people initially thought McDowell was the jewel of that trade, and Dykstra was expected to battle it out with Sil Campusano for the CF job in ST 1990. Then he showed up in 1990 WAY bigger than he’d ever been before. I vaguely remember Bill Lyon reporting that he told the press it was all because of “those special vitamins” or words to that effect. So yeah, 1993 wasn’t out of nowhere, but his suspected steroid use wasn’t out of nowhere either. It all matches up pretty neatly. It just wasn’t noticed as much before 1993 because he kept getting hurt.
You might have something with 1990, but then again, I’m thinking he may have been trying out things when he first came up with the Mets, which also happened to be at the time of the equally-curious career peaks of Dwight Gooden and Darryl Strawberry. He had good years in ’86 and ’87 before falling off in ’88 and ’89.
Obviously things really took off when he ballooned in ‘90, and there had to be a change in approach there. But I’m thinking the timeline is more complicated than “he started steroids in the ’90 offseason.” A possibility that comes to mind is that he used amphetamines (for example) in ’86 or even earlier, and by ’88 his body was building up a resistance to the stuff. After a poor showing in ’90, he decides to work steroids into the mix, or a different dose/mix than what he was using before, and puts himself on a freakish workout schedule to add all that muscle mass.
That’s somewhat of a wild guess, and maybe I’m going against Occam’s Razor there, but I just have a hard time believing that Dykstra didn’t pick up any habits coming up around the same time as Strawberry.
Offensively: Lieberthal
Defensively: Boone
Of the two, I’d probably choose Lieberthal.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 3:20 PM EST up reply actions
I agree — they had similar career WAR, but Daulton had the better peak.
WAR with the Phillies (BB-ref):
Daulton 21.9
Lieberthal 15.8
Seminick 15.7
Boone13.4
Just noticed Lieberthal is about 16 months younger than Jim Thome.
-------
Celebrating over 50 years of slightly more Phils wins than losses: 1961-2011
True, but Daulton took a little bit longer to build it up than Lieberthal, and he fell a good bit farther after his peak. But during that four year period, he’s off the charts.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
Going to have to explain this one
This is solely stat-based, centered on OPS+, ignoring era (so deadballers abound), and limited to players who played at least 200 games with the Phillies.
Outfield: Elmer Flick, Lefty O’Doul, Billy Hamilton
3B Dick Allen
SS Sherry Magee
2B Nap Lajoie
1B Ed Delahanty
C Smoky Burgess
Bob.
Sherry Magee is one of my personal favorites among underrated players of the deadball era, but it’s probably unfair to list him as a shortstop when he played a grand total of 39 games there in only 1 of his 11 years with the Phillies.
Lefty O’Doul is the answer to a good trivia question, as he’s got the highest batting average of any eligible position player not in the Hall of Fame (.349). (do have to specify eligible, as Shoeless Joe edges him out otherwise.) if he’d been playing in the majors instead of the PCL from 1924 to 1927, he might be in the Hall; he hit .369 and slugged .553 with 166 doubles and 88 HR in about 700 games on the west coast.
Cool information, thanks.
I’m really fascinated by the unaffiliated minor league / major league stuff from early in the 20th century, and how it affected guys like Lefties O’Doul and Grove.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
likewise. O’Doul’s a pretty fascinating story, since he was sort of the poor man’s Babe Ruth: the Yankees and the Red Sox both tried to use him as a pitcher, and he was apparently a pretty good one in the PCL, going 25-9 with a 2.39 ERA when he was 24. he also managed in the PCL forever with a pretty good reputation. helped along a young Joe Dimaggio, too.
one thing I love about those old PCL seasons is that their seasons were ridiculously long. so in 1950 O’Doul’s SF Seals won 100 games—but lost 100 too. or in 1925, O’Doul recorded 300 hits for the Seals, but he had 198 games and 825 at-bats to do it.
by perfectdepth on Nov 9, 2011 11:04 AM EST up reply actions
O’Doul’s name often gets mentioned in various Phillies-related contexts, and I always just kind of vaguely assumed he was a really old-timey baseball player without ever looking up his stats – but no, that’s not really true, huh? I had no idea he played with Chuck Klein, that’s squarely in the modern era.
hard to believe he only played in Philly for two seasons, with as often as he gets brought up.
I’m guessing he was probably a better hitter than Klein, or at least not as much a Baker Bowl creation. he hit extremely well in Ebbets Field with the Dodgers too, and I think that had a reputation as a bit of a pitchers’ park in those days, actually.
by perfectdepth on Nov 9, 2011 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
I’d forgotten about Klein, but he was kind of a creation of Baker Bowl. His home/road splits were massive. If Abreu had lived in the 1930s he would have dominated too. Of course, he also wouldn’t have been allowed to play.
Klein WAR (prime years)
1929 6.1, 1930 7.3, 1931 5.1, 1932 7.3, 1933 7.8
Abreu WAR (prime years)
1998 6.8, 1999 6.7, 2000 7.2, 2001 5.8, 2002 5.6, 2003 5.8, 2004 5.7, 2005 4.2
WAR graph – Corner outfielders
-------
Celebrating over 50 years of slightly more Phils wins than losses: 1961-2011
Masterful
"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 Nov 8, 2011 6:42 PM EST up reply actions
Al Holland was the Rolaids Relief Man of the Year!
by Wet Luzinski on Nov 9, 2011 10:12 PM EST up reply actions
I’d love to have Madson back, but multi-year closer contracts for big money don’t seem to pan out unless your name is Mariano Rivera. Off the top of my head, Lidge, Nathan, K-Rod, Gagne, Wagner, BJ Ryan, Fuentes, Cordero, Wood. What is that saying again about history repeating itself?…offer arbitration, collect the draft pick, and sign someone like Nathan or Broxton or Aardsma or even Lidge to a 1 year deal.
In all fairness, were K-Rod not a sociopath, he’s a pretty reliable pitcher. Mad Dog has going for him a pretty long track record as a reliable reliever.
Same with Wagner. If he weren’t such a rat-bastard, he’d be one of my favorite relief pitchers ever.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:41 PM EST up reply actions
I guess we know who wears the glove in that family.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This is making me kind of uneasy
Amaro doesn’t always have the greatest track record when fixating on one guy. Someone have any reassurance….?
And this is supposed to help how?
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 4:44 PM EST up reply actions
One time he was fixated on Halladay, but he got Lee instead, but later he got Halladay too. Madson now, Papelbon at the trade deadline?
Madson, Papelbon, Bell, and… Contreras. Dream team bullpen to match our dream team rotation!
We can throw all the youngsters into the trade for David Wright.
Word is the potential deal will be 4 years, with about $11 million average and a vesting 5th year option.
deep breaths
The number of years is a bit alarming, but outside of this, the Phillies bullpen for the next several years will be young and cheap, notably cheap. I do not like the number of years and what it signifies from a thought on standpoint on Amaro’s behalf, but I’d rather this than Papelbon or Bell on similar contracts. I can live with this. And this is coming from someone who has Amaro on a very short leash.
Editor at SB Nation's Philadelphia Union blog, The Brotherly Game. Follow me on Twitter.
Look at the commitments in 2015, realizing that your “cheap guys” hit arbitration and rethink that.
It’s not the AAV. It the 4th year and the option if it’s true that’s baffling. Just stupidly baffling.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
I was hoping for no more than 3 years, but since he’s been our guy for a while, a fourth year is not too disconcerting. The AAV is high; I’d prefer it in the $8-10 million range. I think Justin F. makes a good point about the state of the bullpen. Beyond Madson and Contreras, everyone in the bullpen next year will be under 26 and no more than 1 year removed from having pitched in the minors (unless Kendrick goes to arbitration).
If I were to grade this particular deal, I’d give at B-/C+. It’s not bad, could have worked out better, but it’s not going to destroy the team.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 6:49 PM EST up reply actions
You guys are all assuming 4/44 also means 11 per. It’s probably 8, 10, 12, 14, which makes the length even worse.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
Because Rube is a back loading machine. It was a little sarcastic, too..
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
Am I the only one that thinks that in addition to working on signing Cuddyer, the Phillies should be looking at what the Braves want in return for Martin Parado? I mean, I’m really not sure what the market for him would be, if Atlanta wants talent already in the show or prospects, and what kind of prospects, but I think exploring the idea at least is worthwhile. Defensively, he’s just as versatile as Cuddyer, but probably more of a plus infielder, he’s just as good a contact hitter and OBP guy (if not better…though he lacks Cuddyer’s pop, so what), and more importantly he’s younger. If we don’t resign Rollins, trading for Prado makes all the more sense as well.
Who was it that tweeted something similar about Prado? Was that Olney? Or an imaginary figure of my dreams?
Editor at SB Nation's Philadelphia Union blog, The Brotherly Game. Follow me on Twitter.
Trollney
“An AL official on Martin Prado, who has been made available by ATL: “He’s like a younger Michael Cuddyer — and might be a better hitter.”
by philsandthrills on Nov 8, 2011 6:32 PM EST up reply actions
So the AL is trying to get Ruben to fuck us over. Super.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 6:42 PM EST up reply actions
The idea of overpaying for a closer is still stupid. This is better than the Lidge deal most likely, but most things are.
"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 Nov 8, 2011 7:28 PM EST up reply actions
And how’d that deal work out for us? Name a reliever not named Rivera on three year deal ever north of 10mm per that worked out.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
I didn’t realize I was stating a fact. It is my opinion that it is a bad idea to give 10+ million for 3+ years to a closer as those deals generally don’t pan out. I’d prefer to groom young pitchers to fill that role supplemented by veterans on 1 year deals…just my preference.
That’s small market mentality in my opinion. A quality closer at market rates is a good allocation of resources IMO for a team with a budget like ours.
You’d sign guys to 44 million dollar deals to not give up 3 runs in an inning?
That just isn’t a good idea. I’d say you could make an argument for it if you were going to use Madson any time there was a high leverage inning, or had him face the 3-4-5 hitters in the 8th and let somebody else pitch the 9th against the bottom of an order. But the fact of the matter is you’re paying a guy a ton of money to have a real meaningful impact in MAYBE a dozen games.
Formerly... "You don't have to be sweet, to be good"
Hey, if there’s anything we learned from the NLDS, it’s that the bottom of the lineup is not totally useless.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 9:13 PM EST up reply actions
In an unexpected insight from Mitch Williams the other day he noted that pitching the 8th inning is much harder than being a closer, since the 8th inning usually faces the heart of the order. I was not expecting that.
the 8th inning usually faces the heart of the order
I wonder if there is any truth to that.
/guessing no, but who knows
-------
Celebrating over 50 years of slightly more Phils wins than losses: 1961-2011
If that were the case, the pitcher would have to be throwing a no hitter going into the eighth, or the opposing team would have had 8-9 hits by the eighth. Both of those are less likely than, say, a team having 5-6 hits going into the ninth, which would put the heart of the order at the plate during the ninth.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 9, 2011 12:18 PM EST up reply actions
Meaning, even a good WHIP is 1+. so eight or nine baserunners by the 8th inning sounds fairly reasonable.
Oh yeah, valid point. I didn’t consider that.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 9, 2011 12:21 PM EST up reply actions
No, because that wouldn’t be sensible either. I’d look at where the team is weak and can be improved cheaply. Thome is a signing I can get behind – cheap deal, and even if he’s a bench bat, he’s a massive upgrade over the current bench. A couple (better) utility guys and bench bats will have a greater effect on the Phillies next year than having Madson close instead of Random Pitcher X. That’s what I mean by marginal return.
Bob.
by The Dark on Nov 9, 2011 12:33 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
This also has a 4th year,
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
by doubleh on Nov 8, 2011 7:30 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
RAJ's style
Almost every major contract RAJ has made has had one too many years: Ibanez, Polanco, and I’d even argue Lee. The one exception might be Halladay. Of course, the other way, with about 3 or 4 too many years, would be Howard. This is a function of RAJ’s desire to get things done immediately, strike quickly. Great in getting Lee to sign, terrible in many other contexts (I’m guessing RAJ advised Homer in the Bryz signing. :-((
I simply cannot see any reliever being worth that $$ for 4 straight years. Maybe 4 years in his career. The only modern exception is Rivera. Even the old guys like Gossage and Sutter had off years.
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
I immediately thought of Bryzgalov as well. I’d imagine the idea of having a “Proven Closer” is as overblown as the idea of having a “Proven Goalie.” Sad that both teams also have other cheap, young, good options as well.
Whatever. I can’t change it, so might as well be ambivalent about it.
I will always over-value prospects and over-hype rookies. I can't help it.
"Follow me, as I ogle at some gigglesome prospect statistics." -bobbykelly, Silver Seven SB Nation Senators blog
by LeepinLizardz on Nov 8, 2011 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
To be fair, though, the “proven closer” is in play for maybe 5% of a team’s season, while the “proven goalie” is usually out there for 90% or more.
The Proven goalie is much, much more reliant on the teams defense than the Closer. Not to mention the market for goalies is shit, and Holmgren still paid out the ass for one.
Formerly... "You don't have to be sweet, to be good"
by Ed Van Chimp on Nov 8, 2011 11:55 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, sure. I don’t disagree that overpaying for a “proven [anything]” is a bad move, just that the goalie is maybe a bad example.
A “proven cornerback” might have been a better example.
Yeah, the “Overpaying for a ‘Proven [Anything]’” was the point I was trying to make. Sorry for the otherwise flimsy analogy.
I will always over-value prospects and over-hype rookies. I can't help it.
"Follow me, as I ogle at some gigglesome prospect statistics." -bobbykelly, Silver Seven SB Nation Senators blog
by LeepinLizardz on Nov 9, 2011 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
On the flipside if he was being an elite setup man where most if not all of his innings are a bulk of the highest leverage it might make more sense, strangely enough.
"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 Nov 8, 2011 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
I would really love for Madson/Bastardo whomever to be used in the highest leverage situations regardless of the inning; it would actually make them more valuable and thus closer to being worth these kinds of deals. That’s too much to ask, I suppose. Maybe in another 5-10 years.
Apparently it is. If we paid Madson $11 a year to be the guy used in the most key time, I’d be fine, but he’ll be pigeonholed as a closer because all the sudden, ONLY HE HAS THE CLOSER MENTALITY.
I swear, a world turned upside down from 2 years ago.
"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 Nov 8, 2011 7:41 PM EST up reply actions
See my post above about high leverage innings making these things more acceptable.
Madson won’t see many outside of the 9th, yet will pitch in plenty of 3 run games. Sense, it makes little.
I think it would be a sensible compromise to eliminate the “three-run” part of the save rule. Just define a save as coming into a game with the tying or winning run on base, at bat, or on deck. Which would basically cut it from three runs to two if you come in with the bases empty. That would improve the save stat immensely.
just read zolecki on FB
Says Cuddyer is in town. Great.
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
by doubleh on Nov 8, 2011 7:52 PM EST via iPhone app reply actions
Ruining my evening. :-((
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009
Just putting pressure on Jimmy? (she asked, hopefully)
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
by doubleh on Nov 8, 2011 7:56 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
RAJ is just morally opposed to letting a market set itself.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
The Phils are in need of depth at first base and in leftfield. First baseman Ryan Howard, recovering from a torn Achilles tendon, is expected to open the season on the disabled list. It’s possible the Phils could use leftfielder John Mayberry Jr. at first while Howard mends. If that happens, Cuddyer would be valuable in left field — if the Phils can sign him.
This is all well and good for the month or two when Howard is hurt, but it isn’t going to be a two-month contract, Salisbury. If we’re going to have to pay him an eight-figure salary for the next 3.5 years to fill a redundant position, that’s a cost you should probably consider.
Doesn’t anybody in the fan base or media understand the concept of planning for the future? It’s like every single one of them are college freshmen on their first-ever credit card.
Doesn’t anybody in the fan base or media understand the concept of planning for the future?
I mean, have you NOT learned this years ago. the answer, sir, is no.
by JpH89 on Nov 8, 2011 8:38 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Doesn’t anybody in the fan base or media understand the concept of planning for the future?
No, because it’s not their money. They don’t care. The fans, and the media have gotten so spoiled that they figure in 2-3 years whatever problems exist will be fixed by another short sighted signing.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
While I agree with all of the above, there’s a fundamental problem that runs deeper than the more advanced projections three years out. It’s this: I keep hearing LF LF LF LF LF as a place where Cuddyer will fit in nicely after Howard returns (Ignoring, for a moment, that the Phils are really not in need of a LF). No no, a thousand (and one) times no.
Michael Cuddyer’s career in the field:
11 Seasons. 9,267.2 innings played in the field.
38 total innings in left. 38 INNINGS. He’s not a goddamn left fielder, he can’t hear out of his left ear, and I’d appreciate if the beatwriter for the Phils had the first clue before writing a story as if he’s playing MLB The Show and moving guys into positions they can’t play.
Reply fail.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 8:11 PM EST up reply actions
…Trading the prospects.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 8:40 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
The Mayberries taste like Mayberries
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Nov 9, 2011 7:28 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
As long as they don’t have the drugged-out taste of Strawberries, I’m good.
Bob.
by The Dark on Nov 9, 2011 12:35 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I like how people are saying Cuddyer will be a defensive boost. i mean, compared to Raul he would be, but he’s still not a solid fielder.
When you hit bottom, the only place to go is up.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
This is totally off-the-wall here, but anyone else wondering if Ruben might already be looking to deal Pence? Slotting Cuddyer in right for a couple of years will certainly be cheaper, and if I’ve learned anything from talking with TGP, it’s that Hunter Pence is (probably) not that good at baseball. Additionally, and this is even less likely, he’ll give Dom his old position back in a platoon and have Mayberry in left for most of the year.
Alternatively, I could be a moron.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
If Ruben does that
I’ll strangle him, resuscitate him, show him pictures of Singleton, Cosart and Santana, then beat him unconscious, then resuscitate him again, then give him the finger, then beat him with a Steinbrenner.
by Cormican on Nov 9, 2011 11:22 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
it’s that Hunter Pence is (probably) not that good at baseball.
Its not that Pence is bad per say, its just that what we gave up and what he will make is not what he’s worth. Pence, in all fairness, is pretty good at baseball, but he can be replaced. Though, Cuddyer will makes close enough to the same as Pence($12 mill), and is not nearly as good all around.
I guess I was just fooling myself into thinking that maybe…just maybe, Amaro had realized what a mistake he’d made with the trade and was going to at least try and replenish the farm system some.
A man can dream, can’t he?
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 9:17 PM EST up reply actions
There’s thinking outside the box, and there’s wondering where the hell the box went.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Nov 8, 2011 9:36 PM EST up reply actions
What I hate right now is that the madson deal, the possibly cuddyer deal, and the lack of ready talent in he farm system is actually creating this "window"’that everyone thinks is already there. It isn’t. But damn were building it fast.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
I prefer a fireman’s pole, but that’s just my opinion.
#SWAGGG
by secondroundpick on Nov 8, 2011 9:53 PM EST up reply actions
“window”
But without a window to win there is no winning at all you see. Sometimes you just don’t get it Joe.
Huh? Sustained winning that controls major league costs which allows you to invest in player development which becomes a self sufficient consistent business model and also makes you a competitor? Nah, let’s get older.
Formerly... "You don't have to be sweet, to be good"
In some people’s minds, “sustained winning” = “an excuse to be cheap”.
Also, it’s the same mentality that says a player must run every single ground ball out as hard as he can no matter what. Giving maximum effort is more honorable than maximizing overall productivity. If you have assets spread out over a long period of time, your moral obligation is to cash them all in right now to take the absolute best shot at the opportunity that’s currently right in front of you. Whether you’ll be screwed in the future doesn’t matter. You must give maximum effort now, and give maximum effort in the future, but leaving a reserve in the tank to be used in the future is not giving maximum effort at every single point in time and is therefore wrong.
To be fair, and this is the case at most large institutions, in Ruben’s mind his main goal isn’t to be competitive in 2014 or 2015. He needs to produce winners now, because he’s in a position where if he doesn’t he might not be around in 2014 or beyond. It’s an incentive problem. [Although, knowing this nepotistic ownership clan, I’m pretty sure he’s got a fairly long leash]
Of course, a really savvy guy would realize that sustained success with the occasional run at the championship by getting lucky in the playoffs is the best way to sustain your goals long-term (Epstein, for example, follows such a strategy), but it’s well documented that humans are terrible at passing up instantaneous gratification for long term rewards. To paraphrase the title of that one website, “WeAreNotSoSmart”
by 88Lindros88 on Nov 8, 2011 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I’d actually be very interested in seeing the number of hamstring/calf/whatever injuries from running out routine ground balls vs. the benefit of actually running them out. I’d bet the difference is negligible at best over the long haul
Formerly... "You don't have to be sweet, to be good"
by Ed Van Chimp on Nov 8, 2011 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
Also TP, I am going to assume most people here don’t watch NASCAR it is kind of niche sport and Philly definitely isn’t the heartland for it. But the maximum effort thing is pretty funny, because it is one of the few sports where guys are actually praised for being patient and saving their car/tires/gas etc. for the finish rather than going sideways through turns all day and bouncing off the walls on the 3rd lap of a 400 lap race.
I think it is relevant in most sports, but because of the physical nature of the big 4 as opposed to driving a car people feel like you should be exhausted at every moment rather than strategically using your energy. Everyone praised Pronger and Timonen for palying 30 mins a game in the 2010 run. They should have been asking what in the hell they were doing playing those guys 30 mins a game. In fairness the answer there was Ryan Parent.
In baseball I look at Ken Griffey and Chase Utley as perfect examples. We all love Chase for busting his ass, but his overall value would be better if he had played smarter not harder and saved his body a bit. Griffey did the same crap running face first into walls for Fly balls and it killed his career.
Formerly... "You don't have to be sweet, to be good"
by Ed Van Chimp on Nov 8, 2011 10:45 PM EST up reply actions
While I don’t necessarily disagree with your premise, the Utley and Griffey examples are based on a premise that can’t be proved.
by FanSince1993 on Nov 9, 2011 12:52 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yup, plenty of guys who half ass it get hurt a lot too. I do suspect that Utley’s playing style and outright refusal to take a day off for anything less than an acute case of death is one of the reasons he’s so banged up. Can’t prove it? Nah.
Formerly... "You don't have to be sweet, to be good"
by Ed Van Chimp on Nov 9, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t think we’re really disagreeing here, but just to make sure this particular horse is dead I’ll say that injuries are unpredictable and often unexplainable but people love to form narratives anyway.
Rollins’ early injuries were oft said to be due to lack of preparation or poor stretching habits but now he’s labeled as injury prone. Griffey crashes into a wall early in his career and it’s a freak play but the injuries continue and he’s labeled (not necessarily wrongly) as frail. Utley suffers two time-consuming injuries from sliding into second and being hit by a pitch followed by a knee condition that a weekend jogger (blogger?) could suffer from and he’s being labeled as playing too hard.
Players across all sports could surely benefit from more time off and individual players would probably be wise to do a quick cost/benefit analysis before crashing into a wall or awkwardly thrusting their leg in front of home plate when their weight is clearly not properly shifted to take the impact of a charging player. But injuries will still happen, often just because.
by FanSince1993 on Nov 9, 2011 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think of people who claim we’re like the Yankees now and can just buy parts. Even the Yankees are stocked with homegrown talent they brought up through the system (Nova, Hughes, Cano, Joba, Gardner not to mention the old timers like Rivera, Jeter, Posada) There is not a single team anywhere in Pro sports built entirely by trades and Free Agent signings.
This is one of the best posts I’ve seen here.
It's in his wheelhouse!!
Carlos Ruiz, My Nickname is Chooch.
Hymen:
madson, phillies gm have agreed on $44-mil, 4-yr deal. but deal has been awaiting philly ceo montgomery’s OK for over a day
I don’t have a problem overpaying Madson in terms of a $11M per year contract (better than overpaying Papelbon or Bell) but the more I think about it, that 4th year is going to be one year too many, isn’t it? Ugh.
Editor at SB Nation's Philadelphia Union blog, The Brotherly Game. Follow me on Twitter.
Son: but Dad!
Dad: Take it back to the store!
Son: but it was only…
Dad: I said no.
Son: But
Dad: No buts.
Son: I told..
Dad: and I TOLD YOU how much. It’s not my problem you can’t listen.
Son: Please?
Dad: no. You’ll thank when your older
Son: I HATE YOU
Dad: I’ll get over it.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
by Joecatz on Nov 9, 2011 5:32 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on The Good Phight
Related FanShots on The Good Phight
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
Philadelphia Phillies
@
St. Louis Cardinals
Friday, May 25, 2012, 8:15 PM EDT
Busch Stadium
Clear. Winds blowing from right to left field at 5-15 m.p.h. Game time temperature around 90.
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
- The Juice: Mesoraco’s grand slam helps Reds complete four-game sweep of Braves
- Please hold: Indians’ Joe Smith jumps the gun on relief appearance
- Local radio host honors Cubs’ Tony Campana with parody song
- Roy Halladay bobblehead with glove on wrong hand selling on MLB.com
