Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Grotewold wrote:Just so we're clear, are the people bitching about this saying there was a decent deal to be had and Amaro said no just to pay Young $2M and see more from him the rest of the year?

I don't think anyone can either bitch about the non-action or defend the non-action on that point. We just don't know, outside of that one questionable Yankees rumor.

Right ... but what's the more reasonable assumption? That there wasn't a deal to be made, or that there was but Amaro herp derped it, trolled us, etc

JFLNYC wrote:Btw, trading minor leaguers for major leaguers is logically always going to end up bent a short-term "win." But the trades can't be fully evaluated until the careers of the players involves have ended.

smitty wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:

smitty wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:

dajafi wrote:

smitty wrote:Just read BP article by a guy from around here. He's some kind of smart guy. Anyway, he did this study using all sorts of terms and regression analysis chats and stuff I don't understand.

The study looked at GMs and their trading record. Amaro wasn't the greatest. He was second behind Dombrowski.

Basically, the Phillies got tons of WAR from Halladay, Oswalt and Pence and the guys we gave up for him haven't done much (yet, in several cases).

The bottom line is Amaro got a lot of value from guys he traded for and the guys he traded have yet to accumulate much in the way of value.

This doesn't surprise me. Generally, when you get the best player in the deal, you win the deal. Lee #1 and Doc were clear wins, even if D'Arnaud works out. Oswalt, we'll see, though even if Gose and Villar turn out to solid guys, I can't hate the deal because Oswalt was unhittable down the stretch that year. Even the Pence trade was defensible--though it was pretty clearly an overpay even at the time. Short of the unbelievable haul the Braves sent for Tex in 2007, I can't think of many quality plus quantity packages that compare. And he was a much better player than Pence.

The case against Amaro has almost nothing to do with trades. It's resource allocation, contracts, and general approach. That he's obnoxious adds some flavor to the disdain, admittedly, and that they claim to be a scouting organization yet have had so many high profile evaluation failures suggests he's simply full of shit.

Trying to figure out how we won all these trades, added a bazillion dollars in payroll, and dropped like 30 games in standings in last two years.

A team led by Carlos Carrasco, Louie Marson, Jason Donald, Travis D'Arnaud, Anthony Gose et al instead of Halladay, Lee, Oswalt, Pence et al wins 70 games a year.

So you're right. They wouldn't have dropped 30 games in the standings. They just would have sucked. Nice low payroll though.

This article was strictly about trades. The Phillies have won these trades in a huge way. The article had lots of economist type language and charts and graphs and stuff because the author is a bioeconomist, whatever that is, among other things.

But even someone as dumb as me can understand the value to this point that the Phillies received from Amaro trades has far, far exceeded the value given up.

Of course, some of the guys he traded should eventually pay off. Carlos Carrasco may win a Cy Young and Anthony Gose may be a hall of famer.

But you sure as shooting weren't winning division titles and pennants and stuff with those guys.

I will also report on the next article that rates GMs about contracts, resource allocation, general approach and smugness. What I won't do is criticize everything about him just because I don't like him. I don't care a whit about him one way or another. I just care about what he does and doesn't do.

The whole premise is strange to me. I have no idea how you can judge whether he has "won" the Oswalt and Pence trades now. Anything can happen but I feel it's more likely than not that Villar, Cosart, Singleton, Gose, etc. will exceed the 8ish WAR put up by Pence/OSwalt, but I didnt RTFA, so who knows.

I don't think I wrote he won trades anywhere. What I wrote was the guys he traded for provided a ton of value SO FAR and the guys he traded away have not. That is the way the author did the study. Amaro got great immediate results from his trades resulting in many wins and flags and sell outs and dippin dots sales.

As far as I can tell he added up the WAR SO FAR and derived some computer number. Do that and only Dombrowski scores higher.

Like I said. Five years from now, after Carrasco wins a Cy Young and Cosart, Singleton and Villar are the new Carlton, Luzinski and Schmidt, this changes dramatically.

That is my understanding of it anyways.

Grotewold wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Grotewold wrote:Just so we're clear, are the people bitching about this saying there was a decent deal to be had and Amaro said no just to pay Young $2M and see more from him the rest of the year?

I don't think anyone can either bitch about the non-action or defend the non-action on that point. We just don't know, outside of that one questionable Yankees rumor.

Right ... but what's the more reasonable assumption? That there wasn't a deal to be made, or that there was but Amaro herp derped it, trolled us, etc

Considering Rube thinks fewer buyers makes for a better market for sellers, I'd say the answer to that question is unclear.

Are you basing that off of Bucky's paraphrasing, which prominently included the word "could"?

Trent Steele wrote:The whole premise is strange to me. I have no idea how you can judge whether he has "won" the Oswalt and Pence trades now. Anything can happen but I feel it's more likely than not that Villar, Cosart, Singleton, Gose, etc. will exceed the 8ish WAR put up by Pence/OSwalt, but I didnt RTFA, so who knows.

Trent Steele wrote:

smitty wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:

smitty wrote:

Trent Steele wrote:

dajafi wrote:

smitty wrote:Just read BP article by a guy from around here. He's some kind of smart guy. Anyway, he did this study using all sorts of terms and regression analysis chats and stuff I don't understand.

The study looked at GMs and their trading record. Amaro wasn't the greatest. He was second behind Dombrowski.

Basically, the Phillies got tons of WAR from Halladay, Oswalt and Pence and the guys we gave up for him haven't done much (yet, in several cases).

The bottom line is Amaro got a lot of value from guys he traded for and the guys he traded have yet to accumulate much in the way of value.

This doesn't surprise me. Generally, when you get the best player in the deal, you win the deal. Lee #1 and Doc were clear wins, even if D'Arnaud works out. Oswalt, we'll see, though even if Gose and Villar turn out to solid guys, I can't hate the deal because Oswalt was unhittable down the stretch that year. Even the Pence trade was defensible--though it was pretty clearly an overpay even at the time. Short of the unbelievable haul the Braves sent for Tex in 2007, I can't think of many quality plus quantity packages that compare. And he was a much better player than Pence.

The case against Amaro has almost nothing to do with trades. It's resource allocation, contracts, and general approach. That he's obnoxious adds some flavor to the disdain, admittedly, and that they claim to be a scouting organization yet have had so many high profile evaluation failures suggests he's simply full of shit.

Trying to figure out how we won all these trades, added a bazillion dollars in payroll, and dropped like 30 games in standings in last two years.

A team led by Carlos Carrasco, Louie Marson, Jason Donald, Travis D'Arnaud, Anthony Gose et al instead of Halladay, Lee, Oswalt, Pence et al wins 70 games a year.

So you're right. They wouldn't have dropped 30 games in the standings. They just would have sucked. Nice low payroll though.

This article was strictly about trades. The Phillies have won these trades in a huge way. The article had lots of economist type language and charts and graphs and stuff because the author is a bioeconomist, whatever that is, among other things.

But even someone as dumb as me can understand the value to this point that the Phillies received from Amaro trades has far, far exceeded the value given up.

Of course, some of the guys he traded should eventually pay off. Carlos Carrasco may win a Cy Young and Anthony Gose may be a hall of famer.

But you sure as shooting weren't winning division titles and pennants and stuff with those guys.

I will also report on the next article that rates GMs about contracts, resource allocation, general approach and smugness. What I won't do is criticize everything about him just because I don't like him. I don't care a whit about him one way or another. I just care about what he does and doesn't do.

The whole premise is strange to me. I have no idea how you can judge whether he has "won" the Oswalt and Pence trades now. Anything can happen but I feel it's more likely than not that Villar, Cosart, Singleton, Gose, etc. will exceed the 8ish WAR put up by Pence/OSwalt, but I didnt RTFA, so who knows.

I don't think I wrote he won trades anywhere. What I wrote was the guys he traded for provided a ton of value SO FAR and the guys he traded away have not. That is the way the author did the study. Amaro got great immediate results from his trades resulting in many wins and flags and sell outs and dippin dots sales.

As far as I can tell he added up the WAR SO FAR and derived some computer number. Do that and only Dombrowski scores higher.

Like I said. Five years from now, after Carrasco wins a Cy Young and Cosart, Singleton and Villar are the new Carlton, Luzinski and Schmidt, this changes dramatically.

That is my understanding of it anyways.

OK. I guess I don't understand the point of the exercise then. Not sure I need a regression analysis to know that trading alot of propsects for elite players means you will accumulate way more short-term WAR than you give up. Probably could have relabeled the article "GMs Who Buy The Most Stuff." As if June 1st, Dayton Moore would have extracted lots of value out of James Shields.

I'm not really arguing Amaro's trade record just the article premise.

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Grotewold wrote:Just so we're clear, are the people bitching about this saying there was a decent deal to be had and Amaro said no just to pay Young $2M and see more from him the rest of the year?

I don't think anyone can either bitch about the non-action or defend the non-action on that point. We just don't know, outside of that one questionable Yankees rumor.

Right ... but what's the more reasonable assumption? That there wasn't a deal to be made, or that there was but Amaro herp derped it, trolled us, etc

Grotewold wrote:I don't believe that report, which Amaro denied. If you believe and want to cite gross incompetence and assume he won't be dealt and that it's gonna cost Asche or Ruf time, knock yourselves out

choco wrote:

Grotewold wrote:I don't believe that report, which Amaro denied. If you believe and want to cite gross incompetence and assume he won't be dealt and that it's gonna cost Asche or Ruf time, knock yourselves out

Even if all you got back was the corpse of Brien Taylor's shoulder and 2 million in salary relief, what are you really losing?

smitty wrote:

choco wrote:

Grotewold wrote:I don't believe that report, which Amaro denied. If you believe and want to cite gross incompetence and assume he won't be dealt and that it's gonna cost Asche or Ruf time, knock yourselves out

Even if all you got back was the corpse of Brien Taylor's shoulder and 2 million in salary relief, what are you really losing?

Your mortal soul dammit.

Polar Bear Phan wrote:A team's 15-25-ish prospect (particularly a reliever in the upper minors, or a bat in the low minors) is probably about what we should've expected to receive assuming the other team picked up the remaining salary. If that deal was offered, Ruben should've taken it.

Bucky wrote:

smitty wrote:

choco wrote:

Grotewold wrote:I don't believe that report, which Amaro denied. If you believe and want to cite gross incompetence and assume he won't be dealt and that it's gonna cost Asche or Ruf time, knock yourselves out

Even if all you got back was the corpse of Brien Taylor's shoulder and 2 million in salary relief, what are you really losing?

Your mortal soul dammit.

don't worry, music CAN save it

Houshphandzadeh wrote:GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PHILLIES!!!!!!!!!!!