I get it Joe, but kind of a bummer that A) He's the backup and not Revere and B) Ruf doesn't have a spot on the team.

It also gets back to the old "none of these are bad in isolation besides Howard..." it's just that we brought the whole band back.

Why can't Ruf make the team now? Mayberry-Ruf-Frandsen-Galvis-Kratz or Rupp can be the bench. Galvis' versatility at all the skill IF spots lets them carry Ruf IMO

Also Revere's health is still somewhat up in the air, so needed a backup CF on roster in case he starts on shelf. If JMJ sucks and say, Cesar Hernandez rakes in AAA and plays a good CF, don't think they're gonna be wedded to Mayberry

I guess he could, the implication Murphstud had was that they're going to sign a lefty to fulfill the Ruf role.

td11 wrote:

CFP wrote:

“Didn’t think about it all,” the Phillies' GM said when asked if he considered non-tendering Mayberry. “He was not a non-tender candidate for us. Any player who can hit 14 home runs in this day and age off the bench in limited at-bats and have the versatility he does … there was no thought to non-tendering him.”

Didn’t think about it all: The 2012-2017 Video Yearbooks

link? because i'm pretty sure that's from last offseason. mayberry hit 11 HRs this year so god help ruben if the quote is from this offseason

Salisbury/CSNPhilly

http://www.csnphilly.com/baseball-phila ... ole-player

I guess Rube thought he hit 14 HRs this year.

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:But there's no reason he can't say "John's coming off of a tough year and our roster is getting filled up, so yeah we had to at least consider it, but we thought that he brings enough power and versatility to the table that it was worth tendering him."

Is that different than what he actually said in any meaningful way? By the same token, did you appreciate the more expansive, if not quite SABR parroting, explanation on Frandsen?

I totally understand the big-picture criticism of Amaro, but the #$!&@ on -- and misrepresenting in many cases -- every single statement and move is getting really tiresome. [Certainly not singling you out there, RPF]

Grote, I get it. You're the ultimate optimist. You read my post and you see two statements saying positive things and leading to the same conclusion (tender), so you don't see the difference in those two statements. You don't see the difference in how Rube comes off by saying one versus the other. You don't see how the statement that he chose to make reinforces (some of) the EXACT concerns we have about Rube.

Now, maybe he's trolling us. But is that really a good idea either? I WANT to support him... he just won't give me a reason to do so other than blind homerism... and I'm just not willing to go there at this point.

joe table wrote:I think you guys are bordering upon absurd with the Mayberry complaining. He costs less than 2mm, is the only other OF who can play CF and hits lefties well, even in his #$!&@ year last year

Then Rubes should just say that.* Which is precisely my point earlier.



* Except for that part about hitting lefties well last year. That's not true at all. He had a .756 OPS for crying out loud. That means he does not "hit lefties well even in his shit year last year"--he hit mediocre at best against lefties last year. Yes, that's a positive platoon split, but that's an indictment of: (1) how bad JMJ fares against righties and (2) how bad the rest of the roster fares against lefties.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Grote, I get it. You're the ultimate optimist. You read my post and you see two statements saying positive things and leading to the same conclusion (tender), so you don't see the difference in those two statements. You don't see the difference in how Rube comes off by saying one versus the other. You don't see how the statement that he chose to make reinforces the EXACT concerns we have about Rube.

Now, maybe he's trolling us. But is that really a good idea either? I WANT to support him... he just won't give me a reason to do so other than blind homerism... and I'm just not willing to go there at this point.

There's no need for the ad hominen or talk of blind optimism.

If you seriously think he "didn't think about [nontendering JMJ] at all," which is the only way that snippet has any meaning whatsoever, then we disagree. But the rest of the quote about JMJ and the one on Frandsen -- even if you find fault with them -- don't support that.

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Grote, I get it. You're the ultimate optimist. You read my post and you see two statements saying positive things and leading to the same conclusion (tender), so you don't see the difference in those two statements. You don't see the difference in how Rube comes off by saying one versus the other. You don't see how the statement that he chose to make reinforces the EXACT concerns we have about Rube.

Now, maybe he's trolling us. But is that really a good idea either? I WANT to support him... he just won't give me a reason to do so other than blind homerism... and I'm just not willing to go there at this point.

There's no need for the ad hominen or talk of blind optimism.

If you seriously think he "didn't think about [nontendering JMJ] at all," which is the only way that snippet has any meaning whatsoever, then we disagree. But the rest of the quote about JMJ and the one on Frandsen -- even if you find fault with them -- don't support that.

How was any of that an ad hominem? You're the board optimist.

As for whether he didn't think about nontendering JMJ, please show me a quote that supports your belief that he actually considered nontendering (despite his very clear statement to the contrary).

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:How was any of that an ad hominem? You're the board optimist.

Because I wasn't being optimistic.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:As for whether he didn't think about nontendering JMJ, please show me a quote that supports your belief that he actually considered nontendering (despite his very clear statement to the contrary).

I took the reasonable description of JMJ's ability as evidence that he weighed the pros and cons. Or that he saw mostly pros and didn't like the market 4th outfielders. Whatever. And I saw that as not much of a Mayberry fan.

To me it was just a throwaway comment, brazen at worst. (The kind we all loved from 2008-2011.) Would I stop him from doing that publicly, if I could? I guess so? But to be honest, it must be annoying to have the entire Phillies nation and now reporters coming at everything from the "CUT THEM ALL CUT THEM ALL" angle. Hinkie answered a question about cutting Kwame Brown a couple weeks ago way "worse" -- called it the most offensive question he's ever heard.

But maybe Rubes is right about the price for 4th OFs going up. The Rangers just netted two of the A's top 10 prospects for their 4th OF and Josh freaking Lindblom.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:But maybe Rubes is right about the price for 4th OFs going up. The Rangers just netted two of the A's top 10 prospects for their 4th OF and Josh freaking Lindblom.

The other consideration is trade(s). We still have the Cesar Hernandez extra option year thing, possibly questions on Revere's health, and a need for a LH bench hitter. We'll see.

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:As for whether he didn't think about nontendering JMJ, please show me a quote that supports your belief that he actually considered nontendering (despite his very clear statement to the contrary).

I took the reasonable description of JMJ's ability as evidence that he weighed the pros and cons. Or that he saw mostly pros and didn't like the market 4th outfielders. Whatever. And I saw that as not much of a Mayberry fan.

To me it was just a throwaway comment, brazen at worst. (The kind we all loved from 2008-2011.) Would I stop him from doing that publicly, if I could? I guess so? But to be honest, it must be annoying to have the entire Phillies nation and now reporters coming at everything from the "CUT THEM ALL CUT THEM ALL" angle. Hinkie answered a question about cutting Kwame Brown a couple weeks ago way "worse" -- called it the most offensive question he's ever heard.

And I'd be fine with that quote if it was about Frandsen. He has actual value. JMJ does not.

There was no reasonable discussion of his cons--he just said he wasn't an everyday player.

Look, I guess you can boil it down to this: swagger is fine when you're fielding a championship roster. Swagger is not fine when you're coming off two shit seasons and you're putting nearly the same exact team out there one more time. At least give us the impression that you're taking a hard look at your roster and trying to figure out where you're going to get those extra wins.

Rube has created this frenzy. I'm not going to cut him slack just because he's getting fed up with the fans and reporters (which, BTW, I don't think has anything to do with that response).

man, we are kinda the same exact team minus Roy Halladay plus Marlon Byrd

that is a rough pill

Houshphandzadeh wrote:man, we are kinda the same exact team minus Roy Halladay plus Marlon Byrd

that is a rough pill

Embrace it Housh

Houshphandzadeh wrote:man, we are kinda the same exact team minus Roy Halladay plus Marlon Byrd

that is a rough pill

Well Halladay and his replacements and our RF mish mash were abysmal, and we have Gonzalez in the rotation

Asche and/or Franco will play a lot more. And even though they're injury risks, Ruiz and Revere and Brown and Howard should end up playing more. Perhaps a lot more. Who knows with the bullpen year to year, but they're pretty young there after Papelbon

All that said, I'd be surprised about and criticize there being no more big moves

I think at this point the only "big moves" I could see Rube doing I'd be against. I mean I could easily see him trading Brown for Ethier or something like that

There weren't moves that were gonna make us 15 games better on paper so I guess I'm less frustrated than many. I didn't want McCann/Choo/Ellsbury at 5+ years. Just keep picks and Asche/Franco. Hopefully ride plausible pen/3B/RF/SS/C improvements and BABIP and strand rate our way to a competitive first half, then re-evaluate from there

Big probably wasn't the right word -- I'd settle for a reliable 4/5 starter and a RP and a 2006 Dellucci type bench bat. No reason not to spend that money if it doesn't cost picks

it'd be refreshing to see them become sellers at the winter meetings and abort whatever they had planned. they can't compete with this roster, plain and simple. there's no point in keeping an aging, expensive, but still elite cliff lee on this mediocre team. see what is out there and get moving on remaking this team. if any of the front office had half a brain it's possible to expedite the turnover, but they're beyond hope.

pretty sure rube DID consider non-tendering JMJ

but since he decided the opposite, there's no reason for him not to talk nicely about his player

The move I'd get behind most right now is Brett Anderson. Not sure how we match up with A's though