there is an audio clip so you have to listen to it. not really any reading involved.

He's just pointing out two things from the Nola start that we covered in the GDT:

-- the 2-2 pitch in the 1st inning that should've been strike 3 but wasn't called. LA flipped his shit on Ted Barrett
-- Middleton sitting behind home plate in a peach shirt eating ice cream

So is this right?

Didn't deal Hamels at the 2014 deadline because we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.
Didn't deal Hamels after the 2014 season because we waited to see which teams would be frothing at the deadline.
About to not deal Hamels at the 2015 deadline because too many sellers and we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.

I'm fine with it

get top notch prospect(s) or hold onto him, the money supposedly isnt the issue so why be so impatient?

I don't understand anyone that is fine with it. The market wasn't overflowing with available pitchers until they waited until every team that might want to be a seller could wait it out. Incompetence. His value isn't going to increase. He is worth what the best they can get for him is. His value is more likely to decrease or cease altogether than it is to increase given how things are moving.

He is not valuable to a historically terrible team unless something useful is taken from him. I love him and wish he was a lifelong Phillie but things are being f'd up once again. I can't even believe that something of good value hasn't been offered for him. They overplayed this hand again it seems like.

so you'll take middling prospects for him just because that's all you can get? Fuck that. If a team wants one of the best pitchers in the league to help them win a flag then they should pay for it. If I was a Cubs or Dodgers fan I'd be happy giving up a top guy to get him and make a run at it. It's perfect timing for those clubs to make such a move.

his contract is reasonable and isn't hurting the team like Howard or Chooch. Hey, we may even have a turnaround by the time his contract is up. So, yeah, if they end up keeping him til the contract is up because they don't get good offers then yes, I am a ok with it.


(and yes injury is always a risk, it's even a risk with the prospects you get back)

WilliamC wrote:I don't understand anyone that is fine with it. The market wasn't overflowing with available pitchers until they waited until every team that might want to be a seller could wait it out. Incompetence. His value isn't going to increase. He is worth what the best they can get for him is. His value is more likely to decrease or cease altogether than it is to increase given how things are moving.

He is not valuable to a historically terrible team unless something useful is taken from him. I love him and wish he was a lifelong Phillie but things are being f'd up once again. I can't even believe that something of good value hasn't been offered for him. They overplayed this hand again it seems like.

Yes. This is classic "Well what do you want me to do about it?"

this team will have a lot of money to spend. unless they get what they want I'd keep him and spend their way back towards contention.

Watch the only deadline deal we make will be trading Utley.

ReadingPhilly wrote:this team will have a lot of money to spend. unless they get what they want I'd keep him and spend their way back towards contention.

Any examples of teams that have done this successfully? Gone from historically bad to buying their way to contention with little help from farm system?

lowcountry wrote:So is this right?

Didn't deal Hamels at the 2014 deadline because we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.
Didn't deal Hamels after the 2014 season because we waited to see which teams would be frothing at the deadline.
About to not deal Hamels at the 2015 deadline because too many sellers and we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.

* Sums up the RAJ world of awesomeness pretty well.

#TrustTheProcess

heyeaglefn wrote:

ReadingPhilly wrote:this team will have a lot of money to spend. unless they get what they want I'd keep him and spend their way back towards contention.

Any examples of teams that have done this successfully? Gone from historically bad to buying their way to contention with little help from farm system?

The Dodgers have added these guys recently just with cash:
Zack Greinke
Mike Bolsinger
Kenley Jansen
Alex Guerrero
Yasiel Puig
Justin Turner
Brandon Beachy
Brett Anderson
Brandon McCarthy
J.P. Howell
Hyun-jin Ryu

and got Adrian Gonzalez mostly for taking on salary.

edit: not that they should keep him. they need to trade him for anything they can get.

lowcountry wrote:So is this right?

Didn't deal Hamels at the 2014 deadline because we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.
Didn't deal Hamels after the 2014 season because we waited to see which teams would be frothing at the deadline.
About to not deal Hamels at the 2015 deadline because too many sellers and we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.

It goes even farther back than this. December 2013: https://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/ ... 6726941696

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:If a team wants one of the best pitchers in the league to help them win a flag then they should pay for it. If I was a Cubs or Dodgers fan I'd be happy giving up a top guy to get him and make a run at it. It's perfect timing for those clubs to make such a move.

I very much agree with this. Now it's entirely possible the reason he stays is either Amaro's price was stupidly high, or other teams lowballed because they don't respect Amaro. But if the only options are keeping Cole or accepting Asche/Morgan types to watch him win somewhere else, let's keep him.

And we should all know by now waiting for the deadline doesn't hurt at all, even if he gets lit up again. He's a known quantity and teams want him, make them pay up.

JFLNYC wrote:#TrustTheProcess

I trust in something and it's why I am getting the sick feeling. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't scare trade partners off with ridiculous proposals on a few guys that they thought would have maybe bought Ruben more time.

BIGPHILLY wrote:

lowcountry wrote:So is this right?

Didn't deal Hamels at the 2014 deadline because we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.
Didn't deal Hamels after the 2014 season because we waited to see which teams would be frothing at the deadline.
About to not deal Hamels at the 2015 deadline because too many sellers and we could get more in the offseason when more teams would be interested.

* Sums up the RAJ world of awesomeness pretty well.

It'll make quite the epitaph. Who am I kidding? He'll be GM forever.

So are we stuck with Ryan Howard forever?

The thing with Hamels is that other teams don't want to "save" Amaro's job (which they won't), but we also shouldn't burden the next GM with a subpar deal. I'm fine letting the next GM see what's available in December.

WIP weighs in on Cubs rumors:

Amaro Pursues Sole Heir