In Baseball, Positions Matter, But Roles Don't
by taco pal on Dec 5, 2011 5:28 PM EST
Email
PrintI think one of the most common misconceptions about baseball that you see lingering out in casual fandom is the idea that baseball teams require "balance" -- or in other words, that you must not have too many of one type of player or too few of another type of player. Instead, you need a bunch of different guys who play a bunch of different roles, so that collectively, you have representatives of each of the different types of players that exist in MLB. For instance, if you have too many "leadoff hitters," then you need to discard one of them and replace him with a power hitter. If you have too many power hitters, then you need to replace one of them with someone who puts the ball in play. You get the idea -- the permutations are endless.
You can see an example of this in Marshall Harris' column on csnphilly.com today about the Jimmy Rollins-Aramis Ramirez situation. Harris writes:
If the Phillies can’t sign Rollins to a four-year deal (Not sure who would give him five), they could really use the burst of offense Ramirez would provide. Years ago, 26 homeruns from a third baseman was pretty standard. But Ramirez and his 26 bombs won the Silver Slugger award in 2011. That’s more home runs than the last three years combined from the Phils’ everyday third basemen (Placido Polanco and Pedro Feliz had 23).
Bottom line, if the Phils can’t sign Jimmy, they should go hard after Ramirez. He had a down 2010, but he’s probably the best offensive option at third in the N.L. after his bounce back .306 in 2011. An aging third baseman doesn’t bring the same issues on defense that a shortstop would. So paying more for Ramirez makes sense. I’m not worried about Polanco’s future. Ruben and the gang can figure that out later. Getting some offense on this club is the real issue.
Harris' logic goes like this: Jimmy Rollins is a good offensive shortstop. Freddy Galvis might be better on defense than Rollins is, but he's clearly worse on offense. So therefore, if the Phillies downgrade on offense at shortstop by replacing Rollins with Galvis, then they need an equal-and-opposite upgrade on offense at some other position, regardless of the impact that move would have on defense at the other position. QED.
The problem with Harris' logic is that generally speaking, this isn't how baseball works. What matters in baseball is how good your players are -- it doesn't matter how your players are good. The only differentiation you need is that your guys have to be able to cover all nine positions. Once you've got that covered, then it doesn't matter how many of your players are good at hitting homers, how many of them are fast, how many of them are good at defense, or what have you. As long as your players are good somehow, then it's perfectly fine if they're all good in the same way. This isn't basketball or football or The Fellowship of the Ring. Beyond positional considerations, in baseball, roles don't matter.
Harris is right in saying that if the Phillies replace Rollins with Galvis, this will almost certainly hurt their offense. But he's wrong in concluding that this means they'll "need more offense" somewhere else. Replacing Placido Polanco with a better hitter but worse fielder will do nothing for the team unless that replacement is better overall. And as a matter of fact, it's questionable at best whether Aramis Ramirez is any better of a player, overall, than Polanco is.
157 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There’s no way in hell Galvis is better than Rollins with the glove. Galvis has range yes, but his arm is just average.
Its all about the []_[]
#FirePaulHolmgren
And besides, defense aside, Rollins + Polly > Aram + Galvis. Galvis came a long way with the bat last year, but he still only OPS’d .727 in AA and .678 in 125 AAA PAs.
He’s not a good hitter by any means, he’s just not really really bad anymore.
Its all about the []_[]
#FirePaulHolmgren
by philiafan14364 on Dec 5, 2011 8:09 PM EST up reply actions
I’ll say one thing, I’m looking forward to Galvis’ game. He brings all the little things the Phils need more of. Has more of a small ball mentality and will bunt, take a walk and move a runner etc.
Emphasis added.
??? Even excepting Galvis’ inability to take a walk, is small ball even popularly conceived as a philosophy that encourages walks? I was under the impression that, given the ideological dominance of the hit and run, the bunt, etc, that contact was king. And king-god of small ball, D. Eckstein, sports a whopping 6.6 BB%. Am I missing something?
Oh no, I think I maybe accidentally killed a joke.
You’re missing the genius part of that quote in which he goes on to sayRamirez would be needed. In other words, we need to replace Rollins with someone who does what Polanco does, but is likely much worse at it. Then we’ll replace Polanco with a guy who might be, at best a very slight bit better at the same things Ofensively as Jimmy, but is much worse on Defense.
Well, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to say that Ramirez is solidly better than Rollins or Polanco with the bat. The problem comes from his lack of defense and the fact that we still need a shortstop.
Agreed, but the poster’s premise was that Galvis is a needed small ball player (same as Polly). Galvis would hit for, likely .070 fewer BA points. Then Rollins would be replaced by Aramis ho might hit for ~.020 more in BA than Jimmy and hit 10-12 more HRs. I just don’t think the swap of 2 for 2 is equal straight up.
To me that quote sums up the point TP is making to another level. IE good defensive players are contact hitters. Contact hitters strike out less and draw a walk. All power hitters are bad fielders and strike out too much.
JRoll pops up too much in the leadoff spot. The list goes on and on.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
Yeah he basically encapsulated the exact fallacy I was critiquing.
Now, of course, if Galvis is at SS, you BETTER have a guy like Ramirez to carry some of the offense over at 3B. It basically may come down to Rollins and Polly….or Aramis Ramirez and Freddie Galvis.
What the hell kind of logic is this? So because you’re losing runs scored with Galvis, you need to increase runs scored with Ramirez, regardless of whether you’re increasing runs allowed even more? How does this make any sense? How can anything be more important than net runs?
I disagree with the premise as well that an aging 3rd baseman doesn’t hurt as much as an aging shortstop. To the contrary, it’s worse. If Jimmy loses range or speed, he can move to third and likely be fine. If Aramis gets worse, maybe he can move to left or First, but the offensive bar rises for each of those positions, making him a potential downgrade. The offensive bar doesn’t rise nearly as high in the move from SS to 3rd.
This is totally OT, but have you guys seen this?
Four conferences, two with seven teams, two with eight.
Yep, talking about it over on BSH right now.
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
I don’t mind the realignment so much, but the rumored playoff format is not really to my liking. Supposedly, they are still tweaking that. I don’t anticipate Phx staying where they are for long, which is why there is some flexibility with the conferences.
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
You don’t anticipate Phoenix staying in the West or staying in Phoenix?
I’m not up on my NHL rumors.
Not staying in Phoenix. They filed for bankruptcy.
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
Huh. You mean hockey isn’t sustainable in Phoenix?
Where are they likely to go, I wonder. I’d love to see a team in Seattle…
The rumored cities to get teams have always been KC, Seattle and Quebec City. There have been rumors of expansion again, although I’m not high on that. They league needs to not own a team and handle all the ones going bankrupt (cough, Devils, cough) first before expanding.
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
KC and Seattle seem like bad choices to me. Neither of those cities is cold. They should move teams to Quebec and Hartford like back in the day.
Seattle is certainly colder than Nashville or Dallas or Carolina or Tampa. KC, maybe not, but I’ve thought Seattle deserves a NHL team for a long time.
Now the Nordiques and Whalers being reborn would be awesome, though.
Both cities would also need to build stadiums. Why not Portland, where there’s an NBA team with a stadium that can be converted for Hockey as needed?
KeyArena seats 11,000 for hockey. No current NHL arena seats less than 15,000.
Bob.
by The Dark on Dec 6, 2011 12:53 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
If memory serves, it’s a lot easier to convert a hockey stadium for basketball than the reverse, since hockey rinks are bigger than basketball courts. I think it was for this reason that the Coyotes had to build a separate arena from the Suns. The Suns’ arena was built first before the Coyotes got there, so it wasn’t adequate for hockey.
I refuse to believe Amaro used with the word patient.
It's in his wheelhouse!!
Carlos Ruiz, My Nickname is Chooch.
That would be wonderful, but how much is reality and how much is Ruben just saying what he needs to say.
Interesting RAJ Quote from that link. When asked about Phillies players accepting arbitration, he said:
I hope one does," he said. I hope two do….If I were a betting man I’d say none [will accept arbitration]
Yes, I am pretty sure he meant Madson and Rollins, but not Raul.
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 (e) Papelbon's bloat deal
Do metrics even show Rollins to be a good fielder anymore? I haven’t seen the metrics for this previous year (and I’m also going on the sabermetric system used by the game Baseball Mogul) but he hasn’t posted positive defensive runs/wins in awhile. In fact, the only years he did such were 2002, 2007 and 2008. In 2009 he was very bad (worse than Aramis by a lot in run prevention) and was not very good in an injury plagued 2010. Aramis is also a far better hitter (and I don’t think Polanco has much juice left in the tank). I think that at worse, a Ramirez/Galvis combo would be about the same overall as a Rollins/Polanco in overall net runs and could potentially be better. Ramirez isn’t a young guy anymore but neither is Rollins and he’s asking for less years. It may not be the best situation, but given the pieces available, it certainly could be worse.
rollins UZR/150 by year
2002: -2.0
2003: +7.2
2004: +7.3
2005: +0.5
2006: +4.9
2007: +2.4
2008: +15.2
2009: +5.0
2010: +12.3
2011: +3.1
rollins Rtot/yr by year
2001: -7
2002: +3
2003: +9
2004: +10
2005: +10
2006: +5
2007: +9
2008: +5
2009: -4
2010: +9
2011: +6
I have no idea what the f*ck Baseball Mogul is, but it sounds really stupid.
rollins Rdrs/yr by year
2003: +10
2004: +5
2005: +15
2006: +10
2007: +5
2008: +15
2009: -2
2010: +11
2011: -2
It’s a simple general manager simulation. It’s a pretty fun game if you enjoy baseball.
That being said, I’m glad to have you updated my (possibly) misinformed view on Rollins.
I still do not want the Phillies to give him a 5 year deal. He may be the “Derek Jeter” of the Phillies, but those kind of loyalty contracts really don’t help to win baseball games. I kind of wish the Phillies had signed Reyes, but his contract is going to be a huge gamble.
Oh no, if Rollins wants anything more than three years with an option for a fourth, I don’t want him on this team. Especially if we have that Howard deal to contend with.
It's in his wheelhouse!!
Carlos Ruiz, My Nickname is Chooch.
Jeter had 2.7 WAR and was 36 years old before he signed his contract. Rollins had 3.8 WAR last year and is 33 years old. Comparing Rollins to Jeter is absurd.
It wasn’t a direct comparison, it was more in reference to personality. Signing Rollins to a 5 year contract will be a mistake. Signing Ramirez to a 3 year contract may also be a mistake, but at least the team won’t have to deal with it so long. I seriously doubt in 4-5 years that Rollins will have anything significant to offer as a starting infielder. I really love the guy and I’d love to see him back, but 5 years is much too much.
Also in reference to the “roles” mentioned in the article…lol. I’m sure a team that lacked any fast guys or contact hitters or any other type but was stocked with power hitters who had a .400 OBP and a .600 SLG percentage would probably be the best team in baseball. The entire notion of different types of hitters is quite absurd. How well a person hits overall is the most important.
Polanco had 2.8 WAR in 3/4ths of a year last year. Your belief that he doesn’t have much juice in the tank is not supported by facts.
Given that your facts about Rollins and your facts about Polanco were false, I don’t see why we should any credence whatsoever to the analysis and conclusion that you based on those false facts.
How much of a season do you think he’ll end up playing next year? He’s a great defender, but his stats are only going to decline, and perhaps very harshly. I really don’t think that’s up for debate.
I was also using a different statistic than you for Rollins from a different method of metrics. I’ve been searching for a Phillies/baseball community like this one for awhile but I’m not so completely intertwined with advanced metrics yet. I’m not trying to throw a bunch of ESPN nonsense in here. I apologize if I offended you to such a capacity to get such a harsh response (I’m being a little sarcastic).
but his stats are only going to decline, and perhaps very harshly. I really don’t think that’s up for debate.
So he’s not going to get better, fine, but he’s definitely going to decline? Possibly, sure, but definitely? Next year? He might play a full season and post 4 WAR. He might be injured in April and post zero WAR. What’s likliest is that he’ll come close to 3-3.5 WAT again.
Welcome, Matt.
such a harsh response
Taco’s response to you was relatively mild, compared to how he typically responds to (as you put it) people throwing in ESPN nonsense. Think of it as a rite of passage. Or commenter-quality-control. Or, in many cases, an opportunity to learn.
At any rate, welcome.
I <3 our rookies.
by LeepinLizardz on Dec 6, 2011 8:44 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I remember I got ripped apart by WholeCamels on my first post…
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Dec 6, 2011 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
That’s probably because over time, you don’t sweat the minor idiotic posts anymore after dealing with some real nitwits. /Eskin’d
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
But you’ve taught me well.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Dec 6, 2011 1:12 PM EST up reply actions
Look, you made a declarative statement about Rollins’ fielding metrics while failing to cite either of the two most highly regarded metrics that exist today. That shows, at minimum, a failure to educate yourself before you formed your opinions. If you do that, somebody’s going to call you on that, and you have no right to complain about it. It isn’t personal, it’s just the way it is.
Love it
I call this phenomenon “So who bats fifth?” It’s the kind of question that gets asked when you lose a player. It could be a musing on the new lineup but it’s often actually that narrow a remark. There are so many games in baseball people get used to lineups looking the same and any disruption seems like you need to “fill the void.”
But per the rules someone has to bat fifth and it doesn’t matter who. It only matters that you score more than the other team.
A Picked Nit
While your central point that it doesn’t matter how you are good is mostly correct, I would argue that there is at least some diminished value from stacking things too much on the defensive end.
The most significant component of a player’s defensive value is his range. Therefore, an extremely rangy center fielder has increased value in an outfield where the left and right fielders have diminished range. Similarly, if you stack things too much on the defensive end, you lose some value due to overlapping ranges.
In player terms, Franklin Guetierrez would be a lot more valuable playing next to Ibanez than he would be playing next to another copy of himself.
I agree at one point the returns would become lower, as there are only so many fly balls to catch. However, it can’t hurt to enable your outfielders to play very far apart and more shallow.
by EJL on Dec 6, 2011 7:28 PM EST up reply actions
Nice article. I just heard a discussion about this topic this morning on the radio, and the hosts should read your post. It’s the show on sirius xm that has Rob Dibble and Jim Memolo during the season, but I’m not sure who the hosts were today.
Anyhow, they were arguing (actually agreeing) that the Marlins should not sign Pujols because they need starting pitching. One host asks rhetorically, “what are they going to do, slug their way to winning a bunch of games?” So I’m thinking, ‘hey that sounds like a pretty good strategy,’ but what do I know?
Sure there could be arguments for signing Wilson over Pujols, or signing neither, when you consider the contracts each might command. But that was not the argument being made. The argument being made was that a team should sign an inferior player because that player throws a ball, instead of a superior player because that player hits the ball with a bat.
SMDH, as the kids say.
I could see a logical argument that a Starting Pitcher may be a better allocation of their funds. Pujols will likely be, what, $25-30 mm/per season? If you instead allocated those funds to SP, then you can perhaps go into next season with CJ Wilson and Oswalt pitching behind Josh Johnson. And I don’t necessarily think they’d be idiots for doing that.
Are you saying that Howard being a slugger and getting RBI’s doesn’t matter? RBI’s win games. Running bases well, defense, getting on base do not with games without the RBIs. Don’t tell me about no slg% or OPS+ or any of that stat mumbogumbo. I only need his REAL power numbers—HRs and RBIs.
by Cole_Hamels_Can on Dec 6, 2011 11:13 AM EST reply actions
ruben himself spreading the fallacy
Amaro said for the umpteenth time this offseason that his priority is to re-sign Rollins, but he also admitted that if his veteran shortstop with the surest glove in the National League goes elsewhere, the Phillies need a Plan B.
“I think we’d probably have to consider improving our offense somewhere else,” the general manager said.
Link.
Brookover adds:
Fox Sports reported that the Phillies are trying to trade Polanco, but he has a $7.25 million price tag attached to his name and recently underwent surgery to repair a double sports hernia. Since he is coming off his least productive offensive season since he became an everyday player, Polanco is a tough sell unless the Phillies are willing to eat some of the contract.
BLARGH
So let’s sum things up.
Our third baseman gave us $12.8 million of value in 122 games last year, and is under contract for $6.25 million next year.
We are thinking about replacing him with a player who will give us comparable value, except that he will cost about double, and require a three-year commitment.
We will also eat part of our existing 3B’s $6.25 million salary, for the privilege of getting him and his on-field contributions off the roster.
The extra money that we spend on 3B will be offset by savings we will accrue by letting our 3.8-WAR shortstop walk, and replacing him with a kid whom John Sickels ranked as the 17th-best prospect in our organization.
I’m confused. What not too long ago struck me as a smart (if imperfect organization), now strikes me as. . . less smart.
Did the Phillies win 102 games last year, or was that in my imagination?
Their player development people still do good work. We just never get to see the fruits of it.
I think the problem is simply that Ruben has lost his damn mind. After the ‘08 title, with a big budget and a well-run farm system, all the organization needed to do to stay in contention for years to come was to run the team conservatively. I thought Ruben started out on generally the right path, but he’s regressing.
by taco pal on Dec 6, 2011 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It seems to me that the Dom Brown/Hunter Pence complex of actions is the turning point. Unless the organization truly has soured on Brown, it’s a mystery what they’re doing with him. Seems to be a lot of overreaction to some passing slumps on offense in each of the last two years.
I’d thought that, hey, it’s ok if the Phillies aren’t into advanced metrics, they still get the job done. But it occurs to me, looking back, that Amaro was simply lucky that Halladay and Lee actually are as good as their results/reputations. Perhaps I’m being uncharitable. But, though I was fairly ambivalent about the Pence deal at the time, nearly all of the moves this off-season have left me unimpressed, and cast that deal in a worse light.
Don't understand...
Why Phil’s would need to pick up any of Polanco’s salary from a saber metric WAR per $ standpoint. Polanco will actually be a good deal if he produces his typical 2ish WAR. That the Phil’s would have to pick up salary makes no sense if I take the current dollar per WAR calculations.
Agreed, but good luck selling that.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Dec 6, 2011 1:14 PM EST up reply actions
Then...
If the WAR per dollar calculations won’t work in the market…why accept them as more or less factual?
Are we saying that many orgs are dumb?
I’m only entertained if it blows up in their face. Is that wrong?
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
Don't see how the fish...
Can possibly sustain that payroll.
Young, cost-controlled players filling up many of the key roles. Frees them up to sign an FA or two, especially if they’re seriously hiking up the payroll.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Dec 6, 2011 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
There’ll be big trouble up the road for them though, because their player development pipeline has gone dry.
How do you figure? Are they sucking more money from player development to get Reyes, et. al?
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Dec 6, 2011 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
What do you mean by “pipeline” exactly? They have no prospects left?
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Dec 6, 2011 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
Virtually. They’re probably one of the 5 worst systems in baseball right now. If their strategy is going to be to break the bank for 4 guys and go cheap underpaid value elsewhere, they need 2 or 3 really, really good drafts starting with this past one for them to maintain that. Their system is bone dry above A+ and even there, it’s pretty slim.
Out of curiosity I looked at this
Starting 8:
C: 6.5m for Buck
1B: ??? (~$25m if Pujols, <$1m if not)
2B: $4m for Infante
3B: $15m for Hanley
SS: ~$18m for Reyes
RF: $416,000 for Stanton
CF: $490,000 for Coghlan
LF: $414,000 for LoMo
SP:
~$14m for Johnson
$9m for Nolasco
~$4m for Sanchez
$445,000 for Volstad
5th starter???
There weren’t as many cost controlled guys as I thought.
It’s going to be a fun season in the NL East, that’s for sure. I say bring it on.
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
by TheOrangeCone on Dec 6, 2011 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
I can see the Marlins being this years Red Sox, oodles of hitting talent with junk for pitching.
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.
-Oscar Wilde
No, their pitching is better than that. They were 7th in the NL in xFIP last year, and their main guys are all young and returning.
thanks for bursting my bubble.
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.
-Oscar Wilde
by VanceinmyPants on Dec 6, 2011 2:07 PM EST up reply actions
I suppose they would have a much more formidable staff with Josh Johnson healthy. But it seems like he has an annual season ending injury at some point every year.
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.
-Oscar Wilde
by VanceinmyPants on Dec 6, 2011 2:13 PM EST up reply actions
I like the way Taco Pal
highlights in bold print his most emphatic points. I guess it is for the benefit of us morons who would otherwise not understand the gist of his arguments without visual aids.
In any event, I think when the dust settles, you have to look at the team in its entirety. Assuming that no one can afford the best player at every position, there are tradeoffs to be made by any team. The goal is to field the team that gives you the best chance to win. The Phils have done a pretty good job with that over the last decade.
My biggest issue is what happens when the current group visibly starts to decline. What is left in the tank for the future.
"I have had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it." Groucho Marx
The Phils have done a pretty good job with that over the last decade.
Half decade, maybe. Which Phils team were you watching in 2001?
What?
Five years isn’t a decade? Who knew?
"I have had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it." Groucho Marx
Sources: Placido Polanco not on block – Jayson Stark
Despite the trade talk, the Phillies’ first preference is to keep their infield defense at a high level. And they have serious reservations about Ramirez’s glove at third base.
-------
Celebrating over 50 years of slightly more Phils wins than losses: 1961-2011
I also read they will only trade Polanco IF they re-sign Rollins. That’s a little more comforting than what everyone was thinking yesterday. A little.
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.
-Oscar Wilde
by VanceinmyPants on Dec 6, 2011 2:10 PM EST up reply actions
Interesting. Everything I’ve seen said the opposite – they would only trade Polanco if they don’t re-sign Rollins.
you be right, I misread.
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.
-Oscar Wilde
by VanceinmyPants on Dec 6, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure if I want this to happen or not...
There’s lots of buzz that Ryan Madson and Francisco Rodriguez could accept arbitration with the Phillies and Brewers, respectively, tweets ESPN’s Jayson Stark. I still think Scott Boras will advise both to decline tomorrow night.
On the one hand, having Madson setting up for Pap would be fantastic, on the other, the money he gets paid to be the set up guy will be pretty ridiculous and I would imagine that money would have to come out of money used somewhere else. Unless the Phillies just say the hell with it.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
IF he accepts arb, it would be a reasonable $ amount. That would make him a very valuable trade piece to a team like Toronto, who are looking for a Closer. That said, MAdson has nothing to gain by accepting Arb now.
What he could gain is a decent salary for this year and reenter the market next year when there aren’t as many closers available.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
Here’s what I don’t get. Yes, if he accepts arbitration, he can sign a one-year contract and reenter the market next year. But can’t he do the exact same thing if he declines arbitration? All he has to do is say “I’m only interested in signing a one-year contract” and make his $ demands reasonable. But this way he can negotiate with any of the 30 teams, instead of putting his contractual terms at the mercy of an arbitrator.
Which is why I would think Boras would instruct him to say no. Chances are he will get more on a one year deal when any team can go after him as opposed to whatever he gets in Arb. But the closers market has seemed to dry up rather fast. Especially now that Toronto is out of the mix and San Diego seems to be fine with going in house.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
Can you imagine if he ends up signing somewhere for something like 1 year/$8 million? I may need to stock up on blood pressure meds on the way home in case this happens.
If he signed that cheap with a team in a pitcher’s park like San Diego, Seattle or went to a potential high profile playoff contender in a good park like Cincy, LA, etc. He could make an absolute killing next year with 2 seasons as a closer under his belt, and fewer options available.
Anybody know what teams are still looking for closers? Toronto is off the board, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Boston stays in-house. Would San Diego do one year to get the draft picks next offseason? I can’t see them spending much money, though.
well, Zolecki listed LAA, BOS, CIN, NYM, and SDP.
Mets are obviously out and I can’t really see the Padres spending more than the $9M Madson could get in arb, even on a 1-year deal. would think that Red Sox are fine with Bard, but on a 1-year deal I’m sure they’d be interested in Madson. Angels—what’s wrong with Jordan Walden? the Reds would seem like a good fit, at least to me.
God, they can’t even SPELL Ramirez.
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
replace the BAT with rameriz(sp)
rollins… is bobby abru again but worse
Great. So….the Phillies take Rollins back, add no significant offense. How has this team improved?? Why will this postseason be any different than the last 2..maybe 3???
Ohh..and I love the twitter quote on this page for Murph’s account where Amaro says if they sign Rollins that this will be their last move for the offense. What?? Again, if the end result is that you haven’t changed one bit, how is keeping Rollins a move for the offense?
Well, there was that one guy… what was his name… Thomeiggintonix?
I should just stop here.
guarantee if rollins signs with us nothing will change. rollins will be telling charlie to put him in the leadoff spot and will tell charlie to give him the green light to swing at anything he wants. and then we will miss the playoffs for the first time since 2005.
This one's a gem.
need Aramis’s offense much more than Rollins defense
-or an expensive closer for that matter -Ruben remains clueless
I really hate still hearing Phillies fans down on players like Abreu or Burrell. If Gillick hadn’t shipped out Abreu in 2006, the Phillies may have made the playoffs. Also (though not in hindsight), signing Ibanez to a 3 year contract in 2009 was pretty absurd given the contract that Burrell accepted from the Rays (but we all saw how he tanked). I think Gillick’s time in Philadelphia was WAY overrated. At least when Amaro trades people, he brings in some decent players.
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
