RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Ask the Nats.

What does that mean? Did they give two starters or their "overpaid" closer away for nothing?

If you're talking about several years ago, that's apples and oranges. A mostly empty stadium and terrible fanbase vs. our situation a year out from a new TV deal

heyeaglefn wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:if it seriously was this tommy kahnle guy, then im glad we didnt trade. seems like he is pretty sucky.

For M Young plus giving back 5 million dollars? What the heck do you think Young is worth to the Phillies?

kahlne seems totally worthless. just trade him to trade him? im fine with amaro waiting and trying again through waivers.

that's basically a trade to do a team a favor. there's no point in it, and the salary doesn't mean anything this year

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Ask the Nats.

What does that mean? Did they give two starters or their "overpaid" closer away for nothing?

If you're talking about several years ago, that's apples and oranges. A mostly empty stadium and terrible fanbase vs. our situation a year out from a new TV deal

It was a glib statement to be sure, but there's little value in being mediocre in the current MLB environment. Sacrificing a handful of wins by moving players who aren't in your long-term plans might provide actual long-term benefits to the team in the form of protected draft picks and a larger signing pool.

It's not as if the fans are watching this crap team in record numbers anyway. So yeah, I disagree that it's not a realistic notion for a GM to consider.

heyeaglefn wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:if it seriously was this tommy kahnle guy, then im glad we didnt trade. seems like he is pretty sucky.

For M Young plus giving back 5 million dollars? What the heck do you think Young is worth to the Phillies?

Why in the hell do we care if the Phillies' ownership saves a portion of the $6M that they owe to Young for 2013?

maybe not trading them at the deadline is a good thing too. maybe some get through waivers or are claimed by a team who actually wants them, like ruiz or young. amaro can ask for a bit more bc he has shown he isnt afraid to just keep them until the season is over.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Ask the Nats.

What does that mean? Did they give two starters or their "overpaid" closer away for nothing?

If you're talking about several years ago, that's apples and oranges. A mostly empty stadium and terrible fanbase vs. our situation a year out from a new TV deal

It was a glib statement to be sure, but there's little value in being mediocre in the current MLB environment. Sacrificing a handful of wins by moving players who aren't in your long-term plans might provide actual long-term benefits to the team in the form of protected draft picks and a larger signing pool.

It's not as if the fans are watching this crap team in record numbers anyway. So yeah, I disagree that it's not a realistic notion for a GM to consider.

How far down that road do you want to go? Embellish the Brown and Lee injuries? Phantom hammy injury to Hamels? No beer sales after the 2nd inning?

Not going to get fired up about any of this until I see what happens when Brown comes back. If I start seeing lineups with Young and Young in it at the expense of Ruf and/or Asche, I'm going to be really pissed.

More than MY10, I have no idea why they keep paying/playing Delmon.

real important to get a top 10 pick imo. they're well on their way to that without any tanking anyway.

Trent Steele wrote:Not going to get fired up about any of this until I see what happens when Brown comes back. If I start seeing lineups with Young and Young in it at the expense of Ruf and/or Asche, I'm going to be really pissed.

More than MY10, I have no idea why they keep paying/playing Delmon.

I agree with this. The only thing I can think of with Delmon -- if that persists -- is a hope they can get something for him if he gets hot

CalvinBall wrote:maybe not trading them at the deadline is a good thing too. maybe some get through waivers or are claimed by a team who actually wants them, like ruiz or young. amaro can ask for a bit more bc he has shown he isnt afraid to just keep them until the season is over.

I don't disagree with that either. I just disagree with the idea that Rube should be worried about squeezing every win out of the roster at this point.

Rube did say something interesting yesterday, apparently at the counter at Mack's Pizza.

He said the waiver trades could yield better returns than could be had now, because by the mid/end of august there are fewer real contenders remaining and those who remain may be willing to pay more. (I'm paraphrasing of course; I couldn't transcribe and eat an extra cheese slice at the same time).

Discuss.

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Ask the Nats.

What does that mean? Did they give two starters or their "overpaid" closer away for nothing?

If you're talking about several years ago, that's apples and oranges. A mostly empty stadium and terrible fanbase vs. our situation a year out from a new TV deal

It was a glib statement to be sure, but there's little value in being mediocre in the current MLB environment. Sacrificing a handful of wins by moving players who aren't in your long-term plans might provide actual long-term benefits to the team in the form of protected draft picks and a larger signing pool.

It's not as if the fans are watching this crap team in record numbers anyway. So yeah, I disagree that it's not a realistic notion for a GM to consider.

How far down that road do you want to go? Embellish the Brown and Lee injuries? Phantom hammy injury to Hamels? No beer sales after the 2nd inning?

"Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats, living together! Mass hysteria!"

They don't need to tank - they're terrible.

Relative to runs scored and allowed, they've been the LUCKIEST team in the majors. They have 5 more wins than they "should". Only the Marlins project to fewer wins based on runs in the NL.

I hope we can work miracles in the offseason, because what I really can't handle is the thought of blowing the TV deal. And no one is going to watch this team if we play next season anything like this one.

i'll watch

Bucky wrote:Rube did say something interesting yesterday, apparently at the counter at Mack's Pizza.

He said the waiver trades could yield better returns than could be had now, because by the mid/end of august there are fewer real contenders remaining and those who remain may be willing to pay more. (I'm paraphrasing of course; I couldn't transcribe and eat an extra cheese slice at the same time).

Discuss.

Although I agree with the idea of not accepting a pile of shit simply because of the 7/31 deadline, Rube is actually saying that when you have:

--Fewer buyers
--More sellers
--Fewer games remaining
--No potential other buyers to drive up the price due to the waiver process

That you might get a better return? Stanford degrees just ain't worth what they used to be, I guess.

CalvinBall wrote:maybe not trading them at the deadline is a good thing too. maybe some get through waivers or are claimed by a team who actually wants them, like ruiz or young. amaro can ask for a bit more bc he has shown he isnt afraid to just keep them until the season is over.

Unless one of the ~25 teams claim Young that he won't waive his NTC clause for.

bleh wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:maybe not trading them at the deadline is a good thing too. maybe some get through waivers or are claimed by a team who actually wants them, like ruiz or young. amaro can ask for a bit more bc he has shown he isnt afraid to just keep them until the season is over.

Unless one of the ~25 teams claim Young that he won't waive his NTC clause for.

If he makes it past all the NL teams, the Yankees will probably claim him.

Shore wrote:They don't need to tank - they're terrible.

Relative to runs scored and allowed, they've been the LUCKIEST team in the majors. They have 5 more wins than they "should". Only the Marlins project to fewer wins based on runs in the NL.

I hope we can work miracles in the offseason, because what I really can't handle is the thought of blowing the TV deal. And no one is going to watch this team if we play next season anything like this one.

The downward progression, despite a high payroll, is clear to everyone. And Ruben certainly hitched his wagon to an aging core. He does and should look bad for that.

That said, was it realistic to expect to get next to nothing from Howard for two full seasons? Or worse than nothing from Roy Hallday for two full seasons? An extremely flukey/weird 2012 from Lee and 2013 from Hamels? Absolutely nothing positive from the bullpen (other than Papelbon) two consecutive years? Perhaps the dramatic dropoff from Ruiz this year should have been foreseen -- and I know you called for them to sell him off last year -- but I didn't see it as a slam dunk. I mean really, you could say that other than a month of red-hot Dom Brown and a surprisingly healthy and effective Utley this year, we've had a pretty incredible run of bad luck. Pettibone and Kendrick are nice stories, but you expect a few of those

I don't say that to excuse Amaro, at all. Just to say that 2014 and beyond may not be as bleak as many think. Especially with a couple good moves this offseason and one or two prospects stepping forward

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:if it seriously was this tommy kahnle guy, then im glad we didnt trade. seems like he is pretty sucky.

For M Young plus giving back 5 million dollars? What the heck do you think Young is worth to the Phillies?

Why in the hell do we care if the Phillies' ownership saves a portion of the $6M that they owe to Young for 2013?

Another calculation is the Phillies might save a few million in salary for the rest of the year, but maybe that causes more people not to buy tickets for the rest of this year and next year and also causes people who already bought tickets this year not to attend the games. If the average person spends $100 on tickets, parking and concessions per game, every 10K tickets not sold is $1 million. If the average person spends $50 a game on parking and concessions, every 2K in no-shows is 100K in revenue.

You save money on the salary, but you might lose it on the revenue side too.

Edit: The Phillies are paying MY10 5.5 million and the Phillies and Rangers are splitting the 1.2 million extra he got for being traded to make up for income tax differences.

So $6.2 million for the entire season, or $3.1 million for the rest of this season.

They could pretty easily have that savings wiped out with decreased fan interest.