philliesphhan wrote:

Vote for Kalas wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:

Vote for Kalas wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:How do you know that VfK?

All the reports I have seen stated it was between the Phils and Padres...no one else was mentioned as having interest or making offers.

Of course, there might have been other teams no one found out about, but it certainly does not seem it rose to any serious level.

The option is irrelevant. If he sucks, he won't get the necessary plate appearances. If he doesn't suck, $7 million won't be much to pay in 2010 for a platoon OF. It's as much a positive for the Phillies as it is for Jenkins. So, in my mind, its 2 years in Philly vs. 1 year in the most pleasant city in America.

I believe it is 7.5M for the PA option. I do not know what it is for the mutual option.

How is an option irrelevant? Why offer it then? Why would he ask for it? Obviously, it has value to Jenkins since it locks in a 3rd year if he stays healthy and gets the PA or impresses the Phils enough they pick up the mutual option even if he falls short of the PA.

You think paying a platoon player 7.5M at age 35 is not much? Seems like a pretty nice chunk of change to me for a limited role.

As I said, a very easy decision for Jenkins even though I lived in SD for 8 years and it is na amazing place to live and Petco is beautiful.

According to what I have read, there is also a mutual option outside of the PA option for a 3rd year.

So even if Jenkins does NOT vest the PA option, the Phillies can still lock him in for the 3rd year if he wants to stay.

So, again, the options are hardly irrelevant in my eyes and obviously in Jenkins too. All he has to do is not suck enough for the Phillies GM Amaro to not give up on him even though he did not get the PA vested option. Something tells me that will not be too hard.

I don't think it could ever be a bad thing for the club to have options.

If you're going to say, well, Ruben is going to screw it up and exercise the wrong options, then all our discussions are moot anyway.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:I don't think it could ever be a bad thing for the club to have options.

If you're going to say, well, Ruben is going to screw it up and exercise the wrong options, then all our discussions are moot anyway.

Who said it was bad?

The contention was they are irrelevant. I disagree and showed why.

i thought there was supposed to be a press conference!

Vote for Kalas wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:

Vote for Kalas wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:

Vote for Kalas wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:How do you know that VfK?

All the reports I have seen stated it was between the Phils and Padres...no one else was mentioned as having interest or making offers.

Of course, there might have been other teams no one found out about, but it certainly does not seem it rose to any serious level.

The option is irrelevant. If he sucks, he won't get the necessary plate appearances. If he doesn't suck, $7 million won't be much to pay in 2010 for a platoon OF. It's as much a positive for the Phillies as it is for Jenkins. So, in my mind, its 2 years in Philly vs. 1 year in the most pleasant city in America.

I believe it is 7.5M for the PA option. I do not know what it is for the mutual option.

How is an option irrelevant? Why offer it then? Why would he ask for it? Obviously, it has value to Jenkins since it locks in a 3rd year if he stays healthy and gets the PA or impresses the Phils enough they pick up the mutual option even if he falls short of the PA.

You think paying a platoon player 7.5M at age 35 is not much? Seems like a pretty nice chunk of change to me for a limited role.

As I said, a very easy decision for Jenkins even though I lived in SD for 8 years and it is na amazing place to live and Petco is beautiful.

According to what I have read, there is also a mutual option outside of the PA option for a 3rd year.

So even if Jenkins does NOT vest the PA option, the Phillies can still lock him in for the 3rd year if he wants to stay.

So, again, the options are hardly irrelevant in my eyes and obviously in Jenkins too. All he has to do is not suck enough for the Phillies GM Amaro to not give up on him even though he did not get the PA vested option. Something tells me that will not be too hard.

It's irrelevant in the sense of making this a bad deal if it vests. What are the odds of him getting 975 PA if he's not good? It's certainly not zero, but I think its not more than 20%. If he plays 2 years, gets 1000 PA, and puts up an .825 OPS, the Phillies will want to pick up that option for 2010.

Jenkins was one of the better free agent values out there I think. The Phillies pretty much picked him up for two years if he isn't all that good and three if he is. That's not bad. The money isn't extravagent and teams are rolling in dough anyway.

Is Jenkins a lot worse than Rowand or Torii Hunter? Well, in the role he'll fill for the Phils, he might be better than either. Jenkins doesn't hit lefties so hot. How often and it what situations will he face lefties? In important situations, he will almost certainly not have to face them often at all. And who cares howe many outs he makes in situations when the Phils have a game in hand or are being blown out? It might hurt his overall numbers. But it won't hurt the team all that much.

Quite a few guys come to the Phils and really have nice seasons for our heroes. Criminy, Rod Barajas was a positive offensive player for the good guys last season. Jenkins might be this years' Dellucci or Werth or Dobbs -- Dellucci is the most comparable I guess. Time will tell regarding that.

It's also kinda cool to see that he signed for less than was reported to be his "demand." He was supposedly looking for 2 eights. That is a little different from what the Phils normally do it seems.

Were the Phils his only suitor? I doubt that. I've read here that the Phils were the only team interested in Eaton last season and I know for a fact that the Mariners were after him in a big way last off season. I'd guess a lot of teams were talking to him. He probably eliminated a bunch of them for one reason or another. I don't think the number of teams that are interested in a guy means much of anything anyway. Lots of teams were after Rowand and Hunter. That doesn't make them any better in my view. How many teams were interested in Dellucci and Werth and Dobbs and guys like that. It means nothing in my view.

So Jenkins gives the Phils four outfielders who are pretty much established good hitters. That's pretty cool. So now they have Snelling if he's healthy and he can almost certainly hit. And if he's not healthy they have some guys who can help you as a fifth OFer -- Jacobs (my favorite; Watson, Bohn and some folks I'm probably forgetting at this point. I don't think dobbs is really in the mix and I think Roberson is around 8th or 9th on the OF depth chart (or at least he should be).



So, despite losing Rowand and Bourne, the Phils look pretty decent in the outfield. I think that's well worth a 2 year 13 million simolean deal.

1 wrote:i thought there was supposed to be a press conference!

you must have blinked
it was rather quick

Trent Steele wrote:

Vote for Kalas wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:

Vote for Kalas wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:

Vote for Kalas wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:How do you know that VfK?

All the reports I have seen stated it was between the Phils and Padres...no one else was mentioned as having interest or making offers.

Of course, there might have been other teams no one found out about, but it certainly does not seem it rose to any serious level.

The option is irrelevant. If he sucks, he won't get the necessary plate appearances. If he doesn't suck, $7 million won't be much to pay in 2010 for a platoon OF. It's as much a positive for the Phillies as it is for Jenkins. So, in my mind, its 2 years in Philly vs. 1 year in the most pleasant city in America.

I believe it is 7.5M for the PA option. I do not know what it is for the mutual option.

How is an option irrelevant? Why offer it then? Why would he ask for it? Obviously, it has value to Jenkins since it locks in a 3rd year if he stays healthy and gets the PA or impresses the Phils enough they pick up the mutual option even if he falls short of the PA.

You think paying a platoon player 7.5M at age 35 is not much? Seems like a pretty nice chunk of change to me for a limited role.

As I said, a very easy decision for Jenkins even though I lived in SD for 8 years and it is na amazing place to live and Petco is beautiful.

According to what I have read, there is also a mutual option outside of the PA option for a 3rd year.

So even if Jenkins does NOT vest the PA option, the Phillies can still lock him in for the 3rd year if he wants to stay.

So, again, the options are hardly irrelevant in my eyes and obviously in Jenkins too. All he has to do is not suck enough for the Phillies GM Amaro to not give up on him even though he did not get the PA vested option. Something tells me that will not be too hard.

It's irrelevant in the sense of making this a bad deal if it vests. What are the odds of him getting 975 PA if he's not good? It's certainly not zero, but I think its not more than 20%. If he plays 2 years, gets 1000 PA, and puts up an .825 OPS, the Phillies will want to pick up that option for 2010.

I understand what you are saying, but what is defined as "not good" and whose defintion? Gillick? Amaro? Manuel? Monty?

We both know they have kept playing guys even when they are not performing well and, in some cases, keeping better options off the field due to contracts.

We both know they are not great at talent evaluation.

We both know Burrell is gone after this season and I think there is a fair chance Jenkins will start in LF in 2009.

We both know most likely the Phillies will not have anyone ready from the farm system or will sign any top level FA OF to challenge him for AB. If Jenkins stays healthy, he could get 525 AB even with subpar production.

I think it is likely Jenkins gets the majority of the RF starts this year and can pick up enough PH/LF AB to vest that option even with subpar production.

If Jenkins starts 100 games this season and gets 4 AB per, that is 400 AB and I think he could easily pick up another 65 AB in LF or PH.

If Werth gets injured again or struggles, it would be even easier unless the Phillies are going to start Snelling or Jacobs over Jenkins which I doubt outside of drastic circumstances.

I think paying a platoon OF 7.5M in 2010 at age 35 is not the best scenario...thus the options are not irrelevant in my eyes.

I find it weird that the option is based off of ABs and not PAs

MoBettle wrote:I find it weird that the option is based off of ABs and not PAs

My mistake...it is PA and not AB.

Vote for Kalas wrote:
We both know they have kept playing guys even when they are not performing well and, in some cases, keeping better options off the field due to contracts.

We both know they are not great at talent evaluation.

We both know Burrell is gone after this season and I think there is a fair chance Jenkins will start in LF in 2009.

We both know most likely the Phillies will not have anyone ready from the farm system or will sign any top level FA OF to challenge him for AB. If Jenkins stays healthy, he could get 525 AB even with subpar production.

.

Well, Barajas had a bigger contract than Ruiz and Ruiz played much more than he. Helms had a much bigger contract than Dobbs yet Dobbs played a lot of 3B. They traded Cormier and got rid of Franklin and used cheaper guys in their stead. Who are all these guys who played because they had big contracts? Bell? That was a while ago. Who else?

I don't think we all know much about who will be in the outfield in 2009. A lot depends on what happens in 2008.

This club sure scores a LOT of runs for guys who can't evaluate talent. They'd probably score 1200 if they knew anything about hitting.

Amaro actually said on DNL a few weeks ago that they're thinking of resigning Burrell. Not now, mind you.

It would probably cost half the price to sign him now.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:It would probably cost half the price to sign him now.

I would extend him right now to be honest. I don't see anything of interest on the FA market next season. Juan Rivera? Raul Ibanez? Abreu? I'd give him 3 years, 30 mil right now.

He's got to throw in his lady coming the other way. He can get more.

I'm kind of worried about Burrell over the next 3 seasons. He's already one of the worst defensive LF in baseball, and has been a negative value defender in 2 of the last 3 seasons. The question is, what will his bat do over those 3 seasons? Will his power stay level or drop off? His WARP the last 3 seasons; 5.0, 5.3, 4.1. Is he better than the options available? Probably most of them. But I don't know if he's a 10M+ a year player, largely because he's a defensive liability.

phuturephillies wrote:I'm kind of worried about Burrell over the next 3 seasons. He's already one of the worst defensive LF in baseball, and has been a negative value defender in 2 of the last 3 seasons. The question is, what will his bat do over those 3 seasons? Will his power stay level or drop off? His WARP the last 3 seasons; 5.0, 5.3, 4.1. Is he better than the options available? Probably most of them. But I don't know if he's a 10M+ a year player, largely because he's a defensive liability.

This is going to be a part of another entry on TGP, but defensive play means less in the CBP than in most stadiums. CBP can mask deficiencies because of the small outfield and prevelance to the homerun.

CFP wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:It would probably cost half the price to sign him now.

I would extend him right now to be honest. I don't see anything of interest on the FA market next season. Juan Rivera? Raul Ibanez? Abreu? I'd give him 3 years, 30 mil right now.

I've been thinking much the same thing. But, given that he's only going to get worse in the OF, I'd go shorter and more $$. I'd probably do 2/25, for example. Based on his production, he's worth it in this market. I don't think he'd take $10MM/yr. He'd be worth more than that as a DH for someone. But I could be wrong since he seems to like playing in Philly.

I'd try to get him to give us a discount. See if he really does just love it here.

Trent Steele wrote:I'm sure if you went back and looked at old Trent Steele postings, I affirmatively advocated the signing of Geoff Jenkins. I still do. I love this signing.

Over the next two years, the Phillies will pay somewhere less than $16-18 million total for very solid RF production and an improved bench. This is so much smarter than signing Rowand to a 4 year 50 million deal or signing Torii Hunter to some bananans deal.

I think Gillick has done a fine job this offseason. If he somehow pulls a decent starting pitcher out of his arse, it's an A+ to me.

That's pretty much my read. Dumpster dive for a bunch of #5 candidates, see who wins out, and wait in the grass for the right deal for a decent #3 that does not upset your basic roster chemistry that's been built.