you keep saying the same thing. span is 29 in a couple months and cost a top prospect. And you're also ignoring this stupid end of the world post

Shore wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:If they get Michael Young......

Stop being so negative. If we get him he'll be only the first of several great moves to come. We already signed Hamels. The Braves lol are paying Upton a lot of money. At least we don't have that coke fiend Hamilton. Maybe we can get Swisher too. Blah blah blah.

You're whining that the phils might get pagan at a price less than span, and pagan has been better. Pretty much everbody wants Hamilton, don't understand the Swisher comment, and you're all over the place.

JFLNYC wrote:I don't like Swisher's contract demands either. And he's probably going to get ~6/$100MM. Under other circumstances, I wouldn't bother with him or any of the other FA's in this year's highly-overvalued crop.

With those demands, Swisher may be the one holding an empty bag when the music stops. Could be the el cheapo worth waiting for. Of course, he doesn't take care of CF...

The Dude wrote:you keep saying the same thing. span is 29 in a couple months and cost a top prospect. And you're also ignoring this stupid end of the world post

Shore wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:If they get Michael Young......

Stop being so negative. If we get him he'll be only the first of several great moves to come. We already signed Hamels. The Braves lol are paying Upton a lot of money. At least we don't have that coke fiend Hamilton. Maybe we can get Swisher too. Blah blah blah.

You're whining that the phils might get pagan at a price less than span, and pagan has been better. Pretty much everbody wants Hamilton, don't understand the Swisher comment, and you're all over the place.

No, I'm whining that the Phils might get Pagan at a price, and 4-year-commitment, that HE doesn't merit. And I don't think the Nationals paid more for Span - they turned a prospect they developed but didn't really have room for into a piece that they didn't have. The commitment is short term, and the dollars are small. Again, though, I don't think that Span is great. I just don't want Pagan for 4 years and ~$50M.

Ok, but what if money doesn't matter? what if pagan is the only realistic chance they have at upgrading right now, so they just do that and know the it won't matter in 2014 or beyond if he sucks? They may sign a guy that has been above average, and there's never been an indication a guy has a safe job b/c he signed a contract. You get mad at people for being negative in a game thread where it looks dire. it's really not dire yet and you're whining

In other words, are you more mad that it doesn't matter that you may be smarter than amaro? that this move may help next year and not be a disaster later?

The Dude wrote:Ok, but what if money doesn't matter? what if pagan is the only realistic chance they have at upgrading right now, so they just do that and know the it won't matter in 2014 or beyond if he sucks? They may sign a guy that has been above average, and there's never been an indication a guy has a safe job b/c he signed a contract. You get mad at people for being negative in a game thread where it looks dire. it's really not dire yet and you're whining

In other words, are you more mad that it doesn't matter that you may be smarter than amaro? that this move may help next year and not be a disaster later?

If I were guaranteed that money doesn't matter, and that if Pagan were here on a 4/48 deal but we had a better option next year that we'd bench the remaining 3/36, fine. But that's not realistic.

And Amaro graduated from Stanford - I failed out of Carnegie Mellon. He wins.

fine, if you won't believe that a failing player won't lose his role, if you think a guy who isn't mediocre IS mediocre, fine. but that would upgrade CF this year and next most likely. and they're going to make other moves, even better.

Saw this thread jumped a few pages overnight and hoped something worthwhile happened. Damn

if the phillies turn out to have good reason to worry that upton would not be worth the salary he got, and that turns out to be the case, a case can be made that pagan is the next best option. younger and less overpriced than bourn, more reliable offense (when not injured) than span or fowler. younger and better than crisp in 2013.

however, i have to say that it looks most likely to me that the dumb move of the offseason is going to turn out to be not at least matching the braves offer for upton. he's going to be a 4+ win value for a 3 win salary for the next 3 or 4 years. in that case, failing to get him will move past the lousy lee trade into (distant) 2nd place in my list of amaro's bad moves. (i found the extra years for polanco, ibanez, papelbon, nix, contreras etc. suboptimal, but not very significant, even cumulatively, and the acquisitions themselves to be good ones).
this move may well result both in not having enough offense to capitalize on (maybe) the last season of halladay/utley, and yet another big sunk cost in 2015.

Shore wrote:If I were guaranteed that money doesn't matter, and that if Pagan were here on a 4/48 deal but we had a better option next year

Who might that be? I think that considering Gillies or Collier anything more than lottery tickets at this point would be foolish. Ditto expecting Pagan to just fall off the cliff

sorry, another random thought just hit.
mlbtr has olney saying that justin upton might still be on the market.
can the phillies possibly send enough to the dbacks to get him? galvis, ruf/brown and lots of pitching?
would that be more than we can afford? would even that be enough?

I think both Uptons will be in Atlanta.

Stripes wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:I don't like Swisher's contract demands either. And he's probably going to get ~6/$100MM. Under other circumstances, I wouldn't bother with him or any of the other FA's in this year's highly-overvalued crop.

With those demands, Swisher may be the one holding an empty bag when the music stops. Could be the el cheapo worth waiting for. Of course, he doesn't take care of CF...

I thought I read that Bowden predicted 3/33, and that Fangraphs writers/commenters predicted 4/56. It sounds like there's a good amount of interest, though, and he seems like more of an AL guy to me (except for maybe going to the Dodgers)

phorever wrote: galvis, ruf/brown and lots of pitching?
would that be more than we can afford? would even that be enough?

WHY ISN'T KENDRICK NAMED EXPLICITLY HERE cmon man you're slipping

Maybe Rube can shit inside a lunchbox and send it to the Angels for Trout or SHEP

ek wrote:they still want a SS

galvis still doesn't count? and with enough pitching they may be able to trade with another team for a ss.

both upton's in atlanta with pagan being the phillies big acquisition after a lousy season approximates closely my worst baseball nightmare. hamilton or bourn might be even worse.

Grotewold wrote:

Shore wrote:If I were guaranteed that money doesn't matter, and that if Pagan were here on a 4/48 deal but we had a better option next year

Who might that be? I think that considering Gillies or Collier anything more than lottery tickets at this point would be foolish. Ditto expecting Pagan to just fall off the cliff

Pagan was 37th out of 57th qualifying OF in wOBA last year. Locking yourself up for 4 years with someone like that deprives you of the ability to make other moves. He's a good player, but he's not worth losing that financial flexibility (and positional flexibility because once you sign him, you're unable to take advantage of CF opportunities that may arise). Hamilton is worth it. Overpay for him. Go get David DeJesus or Michael Brantley to play CF. They will not cost much.

Overpaying for a modest upgrade is the worst possible thing you can do but I imagine that is where this will go if they can't get Hamilton.

Does Rollins count?

Trent Steele wrote:Pagan was 37th out of 57th qualifying OF in wOBA last year. Locking yourself up for 4 years with someone like that deprives you of the ability to make other moves. He's a good player, but he's not worth losing that financial flexibility (and positional flexibility because once you sign him, you're unable to take advantage of CF opportunities that may arise).

Why not factor defense in as well?

I get the positional flexibility thing, but by that argument, no one should ever sign a non-elite player. Which in reality would translate to a lot of GMs not doing enough to improve their teams. Especially GMs of aging, max-payroll teams.

ek wrote:galvis counts but he's not good enough. they want simmons from atlanta. that is the bar

yeah, all of this is predicated on atlanta refusing to give up simmons, or not being able to afford upton.
if, on top of that, the rangers lose out on grienke (wouldn't that be a lovely surprise for amaro to spring?), maybe they change plans and try to sign hamilton and then trade andrus to the dbacks for pitching (supplied by us).

darn it... i forgot to take my medication today, didn't i?

Grotewold wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:Pagan was 37th out of 57th qualifying OF in wOBA last year. Locking yourself up for 4 years with someone like that deprives you of the ability to make other moves. He's a good player, but he's not worth losing that financial flexibility (and positional flexibility because once you sign him, you're unable to take advantage of CF opportunities that may arise).

Why not factor defense in as well?

I get the positional flexibility thing, but by that argument, no one should ever sign a non-elite player. Which in reality would translate to a lot of GMs not doing enough to improve their teams. Especially GMs of aging, max-payroll teams.

Because defensive valuations contain so much noise that I don't trust them all (Per FG, Pagans' defensive numbers last three years are +15, -14, 0 - lolwut). And because there are diminishing returns in defensive value for a team that is already very good at run prevention but not at all good at run creation.

I agree that teams shouldn't overpay for non-elite players. I'd rather have them overpay for elite players.