mozartpc27 wrote:

pacino wrote:Alex Cabrera has 356 homers in Japan, while playing only 31 games in one season in the MLB

Huh. You'd think somebody like that would get another shot at some point. There's no way, you'd think, he wouldn't be at least a useful role player in MLB.

It could very well be he was happier being a star in Japan. Maybe made more dough too. The Pacific Coast League was pretty independent for a long time. A lot of guys preferred playing in the PCL rather than the Eastern teams in the big leagues. The PCL was kinda big league itself.

Actually, back in the olden days the minor leagues were independent. There were guys who spent their whole careers in the "minor" leagues and were happy to do so.

BigEd76 wrote:July 29 6-8 @ KoP Mall, Lidge and Chooch dual signing appearance. WFC

How much are they paying us to come

FTN wrote:

choco wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:It probably doesn't happen, but the Phillies should make it happen if there is a team that was willing to do it. Does it matter how much you have to eat on Papelbon if you can get Castellanos or whoever? Same with Lee if he could get you a Will Myers. I'm not suggesting you can actually do those deals, but theoretically, I agree with the idea.

I'm as unconcerned about our payroll as anyone here, and of course would be open to eating money for great prospects. Just saying the notion of eating upwards of $40M for Papelbon is absurd. I can't imagine not being able to achieve similar results at much less cost

Is any single prospect even worth $40 million dollars on top of what you pay them in salary?

ask dodgers fans how they feel about puig

I'm fine with giving a guy like Puig a 7 year 42 million dollar deal. You're basically buying out his entire pre-FA years.

Now if you're eating 40 million in salary and then you have to pay the guy for 7 years, sure the first 3-4 years are cheap, but he could be making 10+ mil a year in years 5-7.

Personally, I wouldn't pay more than 10-15 million (exclusive of salaries) for any single prospect unless you're getting a guaranteed star.

Rube should've gotten Craig Gentry instead of Ben Revere. Rangers org probably knew Worley and May would suck though.

It's funny how Revere looked good from a stathead perspective but from watching the games you see how bad he is. That should've been in Rube's wheelhouse.

joe table wrote:re: riverdouche, What are some precedent deals for non injured, non shitty players where the trading team ate half or more of the deal, over multi years? we just throw that around like its a legit option but I honestly can't recall many or any such deals off top of my head.

even the money that jays and stros sent over in respective Roy deals wasn't all that significant

That's how you exploit a market inefficiency. MLB has shifted to a market where teams are signing their young talented players to deals buying out a few arb years and a few FA years making it unlikely that a player is going to reach FA in his prime. So being a max payroll team loses some of its advantage that it had in the past. Trading high earning, elite/very good players in their prime years and paying large parts of the salary in return for elite prospects is a way to exploit the advantage that exists by being a max payroll team. IMO, it makes a ton of sense, but it would take some balls to be the first gm to roll the dice on it, if it works out, it's a no brainer. I mean if you trade papelbon + $13 mil and half of his 2016 vesting option if it vests. If you get a ml ready guy who can play now, you are gonna get a starting position player for 7.5mil plus rookie contract salary for 2 or 3 years then you get him at his arb number and the other team gets 2 or 3 years of an elite closer for 7.5 mil per. Seems like a win win to me.

Bill McNeal wrote:

joe table wrote:re: riverdouche, What are some precedent deals for non injured, non shitty players where the trading team ate half or more of the deal, over multi years? we just throw that around like its a legit option but I honestly can't recall many or any such deals off top of my head.

even the money that jays and stros sent over in respective Roy deals wasn't all that significant

That's how you exploit a market inefficiency. MLB has shifted to a market where teams are signing their young talented players to deals buying out a few arb years and a few FA years making it unlikely that a player is going to reach FA in his prime. So being a max payroll team loses some of its advantage that it had in the past. Trading high earning, elite/very good players in their prime years and paying large parts of the salary in return for elite prospects is a way to exploit the advantage that exists by being a max payroll team. IMO, it makes a ton of sense, but it would take some balls to be the first gm to roll the dice on it, if it works out, it's a no brainer. I mean if you trade papelbon + $13 mil and half of his 2016 vesting option if it vests. If you get a ml ready guy who can play now, you are gonna get a starting position player for 7.5mil plus rookie contract salary for 2 or 3 years then you get him at his arb number and the other team gets 2 or 3 years of an elite closer for 7.5 mil per. Seems like a win win to me.

Very good point. But you could still end up with a Jesus Montero or Justin Smoak. Lots of prospects end up being busts, even the ML ready ones.

But hitting the right guy does indeed give you the win-win.

BigEd76 wrote:6-8 weeks for Kratz

But they can still make playoffs we just have to believe

BigEd76 wrote:6-8 weeks for Kratz

Worst news ever.

smitty wrote:

Bill McNeal wrote:

joe table wrote:re: riverdouche, What are some precedent deals for non injured, non shitty players where the trading team ate half or more of the deal, over multi years? we just throw that around like its a legit option but I honestly can't recall many or any such deals off top of my head.

even the money that jays and stros sent over in respective Roy deals wasn't all that significant

That's how you exploit a market inefficiency. MLB has shifted to a market where teams are signing their young talented players to deals buying out a few arb years and a few FA years making it unlikely that a player is going to reach FA in his prime. So being a max payroll team loses some of its advantage that it had in the past. Trading high earning, elite/very good players in their prime years and paying large parts of the salary in return for elite prospects is a way to exploit the advantage that exists by being a max payroll team. IMO, it makes a ton of sense, but it would take some balls to be the first gm to roll the dice on it, if it works out, it's a no brainer. I mean if you trade papelbon + $13 mil and half of his 2016 vesting option if it vests. If you get a ml ready guy who can play now, you are gonna get a starting position player for 7.5mil plus rookie contract salary for 2 or 3 years then you get him at his arb number and the other team gets 2 or 3 years of an elite closer for 7.5 mil per. Seems like a win win to me.

Very good point. But you could still end up with a Jesus Montero or Justin Smoak. Lots of prospects end up being busts, even the ML ready ones.

But hitting the right guy does indeed give you the win-win.

Smoak and Montero would've been fine if they didn't end up with the mariners.

Mini Mart named phillies minor leaguer of the week. For real.

Squire wrote:Mini Mart named phillies minor leaguer of the week. For real.

get the fuck out of here. what does this say about the rest of our minor leaguers

Nick Leyva wrote:

BigEd76 wrote:6-8 weeks for Kratz

But they can still make playoffs we just have to believe

if we're gonna be banging this drum all year can we save it for players who are good

Napalm wrote:

Squire wrote:Mini Mart named phillies minor leaguer of the week. For real.

get the fuck out of here. what does this say about the rest of our minor leaguers

They took one on the chin from a champion

Barry Jive wrote:

Nick Leyva wrote:

BigEd76 wrote:6-8 weeks for Kratz

But they can still make playoffs we just have to believe

if we're gonna be banging this drum all year can we save it for players who are good

Kratz is a pretty good player.

he's a good backup catcher

Choch should begin a rehab assignment this weekend then catch each inning through a late September Jessie Spano spinout

It's symbolic of the year they're having, one of the few players who's outperformed expectations gets felled by injury

Is a Castellanos deal feasible, and can he play RF? (Not that it's necessary, but it'd be nice to leave Dom alone.)

Anything else of ours they might need?

ReadingPhilly wrote:

smitty wrote:

Bill McNeal wrote:

joe table wrote:re: riverdouche, What are some precedent deals for non injured, non shitty players where the trading team ate half or more of the deal, over multi years? we just throw that around like its a legit option but I honestly can't recall many or any such deals off top of my head.

even the money that jays and stros sent over in respective Roy deals wasn't all that significant

That's how you exploit a market inefficiency. MLB has shifted to a market where teams are signing their young talented players to deals buying out a few arb years and a few FA years making it unlikely that a player is going to reach FA in his prime. So being a max payroll team loses some of its advantage that it had in the past. Trading high earning, elite/very good players in their prime years and paying large parts of the salary in return for elite prospects is a way to exploit the advantage that exists by being a max payroll team. IMO, it makes a ton of sense, but it would take some balls to be the first gm to roll the dice on it, if it works out, it's a no brainer. I mean if you trade papelbon + $13 mil and half of his 2016 vesting option if it vests. If you get a ml ready guy who can play now, you are gonna get a starting position player for 7.5mil plus rookie contract salary for 2 or 3 years then you get him at his arb number and the other team gets 2 or 3 years of an elite closer for 7.5 mil per. Seems like a win win to me.

Very good point. But you could still end up with a Jesus Montero or Justin Smoak. Lots of prospects end up being busts, even the ML ready ones.

But hitting the right guy does indeed give you the win-win.

Smoak and Montero would've been fine if they didn't end up with the mariners.

I disagree but regardless. There are tons of Brett Wallaces and Matt LaPortas and Delmon Youngs and Mark Teahans around if you don't like the Mariner examples.