Same as it Ever Was?
The Phillies completed the unofficial first half of the season Sunday afternoon with an 8-4 win over Colorado. In addition to staving off the Big Round Number for a few more days at least, the victory squared the team's record at 44-44 going into the break, and regained the game on the Mets lost Saturday when New York won at Houston in 17 innings. The Phillies hit their four-day idle stretch trailing the Mets by 4.5 games, and the Braves by 2.5.
Have we been here before? You tell me:
2006: 40-47, 2nd place, 12 GB
2005: 45-44, 4th place, 7.5 GB
2004: 46-41, 1st place, 1 game lead
2003: 52-40, 2nd place, 8.5 GB
2002: 39-47, 5th place, 16 GB
Of course, we know that the last two Phillies teams dramatically improved after the break; the 2006 Phillies went 45-30, and the 2005 club 43-30. This year's model has a little more hitting--they've scored 36 more runs than last year's team at the break after playing one more game, and there's no longer any clear position or lineup spot that offers a consistently easy out for opponents--and a little less pitching. Through 87 games, the 2006 Phillies had allowed 456 runs; the current staff has surrendered 463, and it's not at all clear that they'll be getting the second-half mound reinforcements so key to last season's strong finish.
The bottom line is that this probably feels more similar to past years than it really is. The Phillies are still a frustrating blend of strengths and weaknesses, stars and scrubs. But with the exception of 2004, when they actually led the NL East before Larry Bowa completely lost his team, they're closer than they've been at the break in any of the last five years. I still don't think they merit a "future-is-now" strategy--unless Brett Myers and Tom Gordon both come back strong, and they add one or two pitchers from the outside, the staff isn't good enough. But the race is so close, and the weaknesses of the Mets and Braves so apparent, that the temptation will be tough to resist.
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
That said, can we PLEASE trade Bourn for pitching now??
by das411 on Jul 8, 2007 11:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
No. Rowand is leaving at the end of the year. Burrell is a huge question mark even if he is showing signs of life. I'm not keen on entering next year with Victorino, Burrell, and someone else. I'd much rather have Victorino, Bourn, Burrell, and someone else (Dobbs/Werth, whatever).
I don't think that this team makes the playoffs this year. Even if they do, I don't see them doing much there, even considering the Cardinals last year. Don't cough up Bourn for a rent-a-player for this year.
The pitching hole is just too deep and wide to fill with whatever Bourn would bring. Let's face it...essentially, it's Hamels and Moyer and pray for rain. And Moyer is older than Methuselah.
by RememberthePhitans on Jul 9, 2007 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
by taco pal on Jul 9, 2007 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
That said, for the right guy I'd be okay with moving Bourn, or Victorino.
by dajafi on Jul 9, 2007 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
by ziola1039 on Jul 9, 2007 11:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
by Homer on Jul 9, 2007 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
by David S. Cohen on Jul 9, 2007 3:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
Reminds me of a nerdy joke: there are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don't.
by phatj on Jul 10, 2007 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
also nunez is from here on out known as "sandbag!"
by erf on Jul 9, 2007 4:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
by dajafi on Jul 9, 2007 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Same as it Ever Was?
by RememberthePhitans on Jul 9, 2007 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 
















