Why I Might Rather Trade for Cliff Lee
All winter, the focus on the Phillies has centered on Cole Hamels. He’s their best player, they’re an obvious seller, and the remainder of his contract is a bit of a discount relative to the current market price for frontline starting pitchers. Of course, those last two factors also mean that the Phillies asking price has been quite high, as they look for multiple young prospects in return, with the acquiring team also absorbing the entirety of the rest of his contract. For reasons that have been covered ad nauseum, no one has been willing to give up that kind of talent while also taking on $96 million in salary commitments, and so for now, Hamels remains in Philadelphia.
At some point sooner than later, now that spring training is beginning, pitchers are going to start getting hurt. Pitchers on contenders. Guys that win-now teams were counting on are going to report some stiffness in their elbow, and after a few days of assuming its just normal dead arm, they’ll be told they need Tommy John Surgery. And then the rumors will begin to kick up, and that team will get attached to Hamels as a potential suitor, and eventually, Hamels will have a new home. At least, as long as he isn’t one of the guys complaining about dead arm anyway.
From now through the trade deadline, the asking price for Hamels probably only goes up. The Phillies are already paying the cost in awkwardness of bringing him to spring training, so there’s no reason for them to give in and take a deal similar to what they’ve been offered at this point. Amaro is betting on injuries depleting the supply of arms on contending teams, pushing the demand for Hamels higher, allowing him to get the kind of return he’s been seeking all winter. As long as Hamels stays healthy, it will probably work.
But Cole Hamels isn’t the only interesting piece of trade-bait in Philadelphia. And in fact, if I was a team like the Red Sox or the Padres, I might actually target Cliff Lee instead.
Given his age and the fact that he’s coming off a season plagued by elbow problems, the Phillies simply aren’t in a position to make the kinds of demands for Lee that they are for Hamels. And while they’ve apparently been against paying down any of Hamels salary to obtain better talent in return, there’s basically no question that they’re going to have to send cash with Lee in any trade. Because of the remarkably high $12.5 million buyout on his 2016 option, Lee’s remaining contract can either be looked at as 1/$37.5M or 2/$52.5M; no one is going to take the rest of that deal without some financial relief.
With their financial resources and lack of talent, the Phillies should be in the market to use their payroll to buy younger players that they wouldn’t be able to sign through free agency. While they may have their reasons for not wanting to use Hamels in such a way, Lee is an obvious candidate for such a move, since the question isn’t whether the Phillies will include cash in a Lee trade; it’s how much they’ll include in order to maximize their return.
And this is where I think a deal for Cliff Lee could be perfect for a lot of teams, especially teams who might already be running up against their 2015 budgets. The Phillies have already budgeted for Lee’s salary this year, and unless they’re planning on becoming a late player in the market for Cuban defectees, there aren’t really ways to redeploy his salary to upgrade the roster in other ways. And most teams don’t treat their MLB payroll and international acquisition budgets as one pool, so even if they did save some money by trading either of their star pitchers, it’s not clear that money would be immediately available to bid up the Cubans anyway.
Meanwhile, the Red Sox payroll currently sits at about $180 million, so they’re bumping right up against the luxury tax threshold. The Padres are very likely out of money after signing James Shields, a move that was only made possible because the Dodgers are paying almost all of Matt Kemp’s salary in 2015. By keeping Lee’s 2015 salary on their own books, the Phillies could instantly turn him into a fascinating target for those contenders who have already spent their money elsewhere.
Let’s say the Phillies went along with this plan, and agreed that they would pay 100% of Lee’s 2015 salary, leaving the acquiring team only on the hook for either the $12.5 million buyout or the $27.5 million salary in 2016 if his option vests — which it does with 200 innings pitched this year, as long as he doesn’t end the season on the DL — or they picked it up as part of the trade. At that point, the risk to the acquiring team is quite low, as they will pay just the $12.5 million buyout if Lee doesn’t live up to expectations, and it would be applied to next year’s budget anyway.
And if Lee does pitch well, returning to prior ace-like form, the $15 million marginal cost difference to have him in 2016 might actually be something of a bargain anyway.
The lack of risk associated with short-term deals drives higher annual average values, so while Lee probably isn’t worth $28 million next year, it might actually be closer than we’d think. The average cost of a win on long-term deals was around $8 million this winter — we’ll get into that more next week — and it isn’t crazy to think that a healthy Cliff Lee could be a +3 WAR pitcher for each of the next two years. ZIPS projects him for +2.4 WAR in 140 innings this year, while Steamer is at +2.7 WAR in 170 innings, so both project him at over +3 WAR per 200 innings in 2015. You can’t count on getting 200 innings, of course, but prior to last season, he’d been a durable workhorse; we’re not talking about Francisco Liriano here.
And just being on the hook for either the buyout or the 2016 salary gives the acquiring team significant insurance against another injury. The $27.5 million salary only comes into play if Lee stays healthy and pitches well, in which case a team would be buying two years of quality performances for the same AAV that Ervin Santana signed this winter. And while Lee’s results weren’t that great last year, there are plenty of reasons to prefer him to Santana-type pitchers for the next couple of years.
Keep in mind, Lee’s struggles in 2014 were all BABIP-related. His 81 xFIP- ranked 15th in MLB among SPs with 80+ innings pitched, sandwiching him squarely between Madison Bumgarner and Jon Lester, and ahead of Max Scherzer, among others. And while it’s entirely reasonable to think that the elbow problems that led to diminished stuff also led to harder contact allowed, it’s still the least predictive result a pitcher can theoretically control. Betting on Lee isn’t betting on a broken down pitcher returning to prior greatness; it’s simply betting that he’ll be healthy enough to not allow a .358 BABIP again.
And if he’s not, well, then it costs you $12.5 million in next year’s payroll to make him go away. If he’s healthy enough to just get some BABIP regression and maintain most of his 2014 performances, he’s still likely a very good pitcher when he’s on the mound. And maybe not all that much worse than Hamels, at least in the short-term.
This is the kind of low-risk, high-reward, short-term acquisition that has the Red Sox written all over it, but it’s also a kind of a perfect play for a team like San Diego or St. Louis as well. With the 2015 salary off the table, it wouldn’t be difficult at all to see a real bidding war commence, and once Lee strings together a few good spring training outings where he’s flashing his pre-injury velocity, you could start asking for legitimate prospects.
No, you’re still not getting Mookie Betts or Blake Swihart, but basically every other name that has been bandied around for Hamels is probably not too far off a fair return for a subsidized Cliff Lee. You won’t get two of those guys for Lee, even paying down his salary, but $25 million buys you a pretty good prospect, and in the day and age where Brett Anderson gets $10 million in guaranteed money, asking teams to be on the hook for Lee’s $12.5 million buyout isn’t outrageous at all.
If I’m Boston, San Diego, or St. Louis, Lee is exactly the kind of upside play I’d be looking for. With Hamels, you not only absorb the cost in prospects surrendered, but you spend the next four years hoping that his elbow doesn’t blow out. Under this scenario, there’s almost no downside for the acquiring team. And that reduced risk is what drives prices up.
With Lee’s contract immovable without some financial considerations, the Phillies should just go whole-hog and keep his entire 2015 salary on their books. They’ll still get the flexibility of reinvesting the savings next year, and if they make him a free-for-2015 pitcher, they could land the kind of deal they’ve been looking for all winter.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
But then there is still the problem of Ruin Tomorrow Jr. being the Phillies GM. He is incapable of reason.
You haven’t been paying attention the last few years i guess.
Amaro is showing that he’s capable of reason in the last few years?
He clearly meant that he also ruins today along with tomorrow over the last few years.
Don’t forget yesterday.
Wags,
Amaro (as the proxy for the entire Phillies front office) was mostly terrible from the time that he took over following the 2008 championship until 2012. However, since then, he’s been much better and probably somewhere around mediocre while the team’s performance has suffered due to the sins of 2008 through 2012. Since last July, he’s developed a national reputation that he asks for too much in trades and can’t get the rebuild started. Despite this narrative, since August 1, 2014, he has:
1. Traded 2 months of Roberto Hernandez for one B- prospect and one C+ prospect.
2. Traded 1 year of Jimmy Rollins, who had a full no-trade clause and only would agree to be traded to one team, and $1M for one B/B- prospect and one B-/C+ prospect.
3. Traded 1 or 2 years of Marlon Byrd and $4M for one B prospect.
4. Traded others like John Mayberry, Jr. and Antonio Bastardo.
On 7/31/14, due to injury and/or poor contracts (100% Amaro’s fault) and/or 10-and-5 rights, there was no market for Cliff Lee, AJ Burnett, Ryan Howard, Jonathan Papelbon and Chase Utley. There was also little reason to sell any of the young and/or cheap and/or poor performing players like Giles, Diekman, Dom Brown, Asche, et al. That basically left maybe 6 or 7 players on the roster who could be dealt and who it made sense to deal if the return was sufficient. Of those, he dealt 5. How does that make him incapable of reason?
Yeah rumor is it that Amaro is looking for a package 3 big names, including Brien Taylor, Todd Van Poppel, and Drew Henson.
It’s not really clever, interesting, insightful or adding to the conversation in any way to post these one-liners about Amaro on every single Phillies post. It’s not worth the Internet space it’s printed on.
I think they were going for funny. Is is funny.
It was for the first 20 or so articles. Not really anymore.
Yes it is. It very much is.
Yes guys please try to meet Andrew’s reasonable standards for future comments thx for your cooperation
Yea, well, every message board has some douche looking down his nose on the articles he reads. It’s never really clever, interesting, insightful, or adding to the conversation in any way.
Given the back end of Danks/Noesi, what would it take from the White Sox to net Lee? Would Danish, Montas, or Adams be enough? Amaro would probably turn down a package of all three, but sooner or later he has to adjust his expectations…right?
With a rotation of Sale-Q-Lee-Shark-Rodon, it might not matter how the positional question marks like Avisail Garcia, Carlos Sanchez, and Conor Gillaspie perform.
I don’t think the White Sox would give Montas/Adams or Danish/Adams. Danish/Montas? Sure…. but you have to figure that Adams is worth an aging Cliff Lee at this point. While Adams grades out anywhere from 98-120 in prospect rankings, he only has a 1/2 season of MiLB under his belt, and most scouts feel he’s a top 25 caliber talent after seeing how well he adjusted to pro-ball last year. In Adams case, he just needs to show success for an entire season before being elevated into the top 25. I imagine the White Sox and Hahn view Adams as the top 25 guy – not the top 100 guy.
That said, I find it incredibly unlikely that the White Sox acquire Lee. Hahn has been pretty adamant this off-season about improving the MLB club without harming the talent he has started to develop/build in the minors. The starting rotation is a strength for the White Sox – while bolstering that would be fun, it’s not on the top of his list.
I actually think Noesi could be a nice #4 this year – his progress with Cooper last year was very noticeable as the year went on. Danks is probably a lost cause if his arm never comes all the way back. Terrible luck for the organization – he was locked in at a bargain price. He was a 5 WAR pitcher 3 years in a row before the injury. Hate to see careers ended by injuries.
“but sooner or later he has to adjust his expectations…right?”
NO.
The Phillies print money faster than the Philadelphia Mint.
The Phillies have already slashed over $43 million off this years payroll, more
than any other MLB team.
The Phillies need real talent. Their farm is full of the fake stuff. There’s no
use for anymore of that.
Sooner or later you and many others will have to figure this out.
You have to have asset to get talent an old injured pitcher on his last leg earning 35 mil an year is not an asset
I’d give your trolling a 40 present grade with maybe a 50 future grade. As a plus, you have misplaced antagonism toward the Phillies while ignoring all more criticism-worthy things. As a negative, everyone knows you’re a troll now so it’s harder to be effective. If you work on your trolling kid, you might just make the major leagues of trolling. Good luck!
He’s a true 20 talent troll. A generational non-talent.
he’s schizophrenic, not a troll
In addition to Betts and Swihart, I’d add Russell and Bryant to the names that I’d with hold from this offer. My gut tells me Lee is going to be reasonably close to his old self in 2015 and that your idea here Dave has a lot of merit…even if a team had to kick in say $2M of the 2015 salary–this could be a terrific manuever.
RAJr’s stock is so low right now it seems like he thinks he needs to pull off a stunt like Costner’s character in “Draft Day”
Stock according to whom? The fangraphs audience? He doesn’t really care what your stock of his performance is.
You can check around sites and blogs and easily find a world full of head scratchers and shakers on how bad the contracts are, the timing of moves, moves not made at all and comments/attitudes from the players that amply illustrate the plight of Mr. Amaro.
He may not have anything to lose by waiting as he has no takers for what he sells. This time of year injuries pop up all over and then perhaps he can drive a harder bargain for Hamels and Lee. I could have sworn he told Ryan Howard words to the effect that the Phillies were better off without him a while back and now they announce him as their starting 1B. This org is in deep, deep weeds.
If Amaro were responsible for the moves you and others blame him for
he would have been fired two or three years ago.
When are you going to figure that out?
Free, if Amaro isn’t the worst GM in baseball he’s a close second. You can make excuses for him – blame ownership, etc – but at the end of the day the lack of talent within the organization rests solely on his shoulders.
My bad–RA has no accountability for the current condition–it was George W Bush.
im surprised you didnt blame obama.
oh wait…
I blame Obama. And Ruin Tomorrow, Jr.
Our “stock of his performance”? lol
I believe the author was only referring to Red Sox prospects, not all prospects…however, in addition to Betts & Swihart, I would add Henry Owens.
Lee is probably the pitcher I most want the Pirates to pursue in a trade for both reasons of reduced cost (financial, certainly, and maybe also in prospects) and limited long-term risk/commitment.
I’m sure it won’t happen, but a robot can dream, can’t he?
Would it make sense for the Cubs to trade for Lee, “giving” up Edwin Jackson and giving up a good prospect?
For the Cubs, they are basically paying Lee 14.5 million this year (I’m assuming Jackson is worthless to the Cubs) and they get a free $15 million option on Lee next year.
For the Phillies, this would save a little face, and also would avoid the possibility of MLB nixing the trade (I honestly have no idea what the chances are that they would, but I know when a ton of money goes with a player, there is scrutiny). I also don’t buy that the Phillies wouldn’t want to save a little in 2015 salary.
Also, Jackson is only 32 this year, maybe he bounces back. At least you have a person to go out there and pitch every fifth day.
LOL why would anyone trade for Edwin Jackson?
While they’re at it, maybe they can take Josh Hamilton, John Danks and all of baseball’s horrible contracts with Edwin.
Ummm, because they save $11.5 million dollars and get a good prospect? Are you rational or retarded?
No one wants Edwin Jackson. He is not an asset. He has no value. They don’t “save” money by acquiring a shit contract just so they can also acquire a prospect. They are better off simply paying Lee’s salary, and acquiring a prospect. Jackson shouldn’t even be in the Majors at this point – he has a cumulative WAR of -3.6 over the past two seasons. He’s not good out of relief. He’s not good as a starter. He’s not even someone you can “throw out there every fifth day” because he’s horrible. Sorry.
Philly doesn’t want Edwin Jackson. It reduces the return Philly would get in moving Lee, while giving them a pitcher they don’t need.
As it says in the above article Philadelphia already has prepared themselves to spend the money for the upcoming year and could save 12.5MM even buying the full freight this year. Secondly, Jackson’s contract is spread over the next two years. Covering Lee this year would save them more money and clear the following year. Also a good prospect is going back to Philadelphia in either package, so why would Philadelphia complicate the trade by adding a bad asset? They already have bounce-back candidates such as Billingsley. The only way the trade makes any sense is if the Cubs are willing to pay a premium on the prospect going back to Philly above any other deal.
Your trade proposal was bad and there is no need to resort to name calling when someone points that out.
Even if my trade proposal was bad, you’re response was worse. Acting like I was suggesting that Edwin Jackson would be anything other than a salary dump, as TB points out (and as I do in suggesting he has no value to the Cubs).
Jackson was really bad last year, but before that he had five straight years of better than average FIP (generally barely). By fWAR, he’s been worth 2.4 WAR the last two years (I realize it is impossible to ignore the gaudy 2014 ERA). I’m guessing you were using bWAR. You are wrong that nobody want him. The Cubs want him, or they’d have DFA’d him. Fangraphs crowd actually said he was worth $10 million over the next two seasons in the bad contract crowd source. So again, you are wrong, or maybe you know more than the Fangraphs crowd and the Cubs front office?
Also, acquiring Jackson IS essentially paying Cliff Lee’s contract, at least a large portion of it, and in a way the MLB won’t scrutinize. Once again, don’t be retarded.
I don’t buy that Philly ownership is just desperate to pay as much money as possible.
I also don’t see why it really matters that much if the Philly’s pay 27.5 million this year or 13 million this year and 13 million next year, except that it is less money, and they avoid MLB scrutiny.
This isn’t the NBA, people aren’t dumping expiring contracts. No one wants to take on an asset with absolutely no value and a huge contract. No one. It was a poor proposal that made absolutely no sense, and all I did was simply call you on it. No need to get so angry buddy.
Edwin Jackson is probably, no exaggeration, the least valuable player in baseball. He provides a negative value by a good bit.
…. and yes, when assessing a players value in a year that happened, I always use bWAR – at that point, I don’t care what his peripherals say because the season is over. At this point in Jackson’s career, I think it’s fair to say he will not perform as well as his peripheral stats.
When projecting and forecasting what is most likely to happen going forward, I will use fWAR.
They’d trade for Edwin Jackson for the same reason the Dodgers traded for Carl Crawford.
Crawford has never had a negative WAR. Even at his worst he was better than replacement level. Crawford actually brings something to the table, however little you feel it is. He is not a player that should be out of baseball as Edwin is.
You’re still not understanding me. No one wants Crawford on his current contract. Taking his contract is a way that the Dodgers provided value to the Red Sox. If the Phillies take Jackson, it will be as a way to provide value to the Cubs, to improve their return. If there’s any time to have a lousy pitcher stuck on your roster, it’s in a rebuilding year.
There’s a difference in a still-performing player that is grossly overpaid and a player who hurts your team who is less grossly overpaid. Check out Jonah Keri’s worst contracts column on grantland to hear him break down how various executives felt about the difference:
http://grantland.com/features/worst-mlb-contracts-2015-alex-rodriguez-ryan-howard-prince-fielder/
If Jackson’s contract is seen as worse that Crawford’s because Jackson has been so bad, then that just means that the Phillies would be providing even more value to CHC by taking him off their hands, if that’s what they wanted to do.
Bip, this just doesn’t make sense in baseball. The Dodgers could afford to overpay an under-performing, but still positive, baseball player. In terms of Jackson, paying him at all is a problem so paying him that much is just insanity. You are downgrading the MLB roster by acquiring him, because he’s worse than a random replacement level player. No GM wants to make a trade in which the player they acquire actually makes the team worse… regardless of perceived “value” added to the trade for the other team. At least in my opinion.
I don’t think you know the Carl Crawford trade as well as you think.
Dodgers wanted to make a splash and wanted to bring homegrown hero Adrian Gonzalez home. The Red Sox weren’t trading AGon, unless they took CC.
So unless, Chicago is including Anthony Rizzo in the trade. Its is not similar at all.
It’s similar in that a team would take a player from another team not because the receiving team wants him, but because the other team doesn’t want him and is willing to give the acquiring team something they DO want in exchange for taking on that player
That’s all I’m saying. It’s not that complicated people. You can say it wouldn’t happen but it’s happened before.
If any team was in a position to take on an effectively worthless player, it would be a team that has no change of imminent contention.
Fair enough Bip – in regards Jackson, we simply agree to disagree.
I was merely stating that Crawford still had value – regardless of how little. Jackson has none, in my opinion. Must be 8 Cub fans down voting that Jackson has no value, or 8 Cardinals fans who feel he provides them with a ton of value every time he pitches for the Cubs.
Yeah but in Dave’s scenario the Phillies are picking up the whole $27.5M tab on Lee. In this scenario they aren’t picking up any of Lee’s money and are instead taking on Jackson’s albatross contract. Now I would say that that Dave’s scenario would be the smartest approach that gets them the biggest return, but TKDC’s idea seems pretty reasonable to me. Jackson being a dumpster fire is irrelevant. It’s dead money being used to offset Lee’s high salary.
“and giving up a good prospect?”
The Cubs have a lot of good prospects. You failed to name any of them. Until
you produce a name there is nothing to think about in regard to your proposal.
Oops, your hypothetical, fantasy trade that won’t happen in reality wasn’t specific enough for Free_AEC to consider it.
Armchair GMs take notice!
I would think it is more likely that the Cubs would include Travis Wood or Wellington Castillo in the deal. Both of those players still have some value and are taking up roster space on the Cubs who have no need for either.
there is a difference between “worthless” and negative value. Negatives hold value. Jackson is in this category. Philly trade for Edwin Jackson? This is not basketball with salary cap issues clouding values. Edwin Jackson?
E-jax has a tons of value for a team aiming for a good draft pick. He will go out every 5th day, give up a bunch of runs, leave early from the game and wear out the bullpen. It’s like giving your team a 30 loss head start to the #1 draft pick. This is a most-have for the Phillies.
Take a lesson from the Sixers (wow). 2015 is already going to be a fiery ruin for the Phils. The one thing you CAN do is spend money, but the catch is that no amount of spending will buy you wins today. So spend money today to buy wins tomorrow, and pay off the contracts of anyone currently on the roster in order to trade them for high-ceiling prospects.
The difference is at least the Sixers have a plan and a purpose. They were tired of being the mediocre, win approx. 40 games each year and maybe, just maybe, squeak into the playoffs type of team. The plan involves a lot (A LOT!) of losing in the short term, but I have faith it’ll pay off in the long term. The Phillies clearly did not have a long term plan in place. While they’ve finally acknowledged that they need to rebuild, it seems like it’s shocked and completely blindsided EVERYONE involved with the team, including players and executives, when those outside the team knew a rebuild was necessary at least 2 years ago.
An aside: I’m going to my first ever Sixers game tonight. So, yes, the Sixers’ plan gets my full endorsement.
The Sixers are trying to be the smartest guys in the room in a sport dominated by talent and athleticism. Basketball isn’t baseball… At the end of the day, talent perseveres in the NBA. There are 5 players on the court, and the impact that one player can have is so immense that you can try to implement all the metrics you want – you can find as many undervalued aspects possible, but at the end of the day, you either have THAT DUDE playing for you, or you don’t. Baseball, football and hockey have more variables than basketball.
The Rockets shoot no long 2’s – all their attempts are in the paint or from three, because metrically those are the most efficient shots in basketball and long 2’s are the least. The Rockets can do that all they want, but when the playoffs start if James Harden and Dwight Howard don’t play elite basketball they won’t win.
The Sixers are treating human beings like stocks, and at some point you need to understand that these are human beings and not just assets. No free agents are going to play for an organization that operates like the Sixers, and young players will be reluctant to sign on for the long term with them (for proof, look into the KJ MCDaniels trade and why it happened).
In summary:
-talent is important so don’t even bother with other stuff
-if your players play poorly you don’t win games
-players are very sensitive about what internal strategies their front office is using. converting them to win-value or monetary value is dehumanizing and makes them feel bad.
Hi, meet the sister franchise of the 76’ers. We basically operate the same.
Er, trying to get premium talent is exactly what the Sixers are trying to do. They keep trading for draft picks until they get “the guy.” That’s why they just traded MCW and their other young guys. They weren’t good enough to be pillars. So they grabbed more draft picks and will be giving it another shot.
How do/did they know MCW wasn’t good enough? He’s 21 years old.
Through 2 years in the league, at a younger age, his numbers are nearly identical to Jason Kidd – who oddly enough just acquired him.
They’re acquiring non-lottery picks. What good does that do? What percentage of non-lottery picks went on to be NBA Superstars? .1%?
The Sixers are trying to re-invent the wheel in the NBA. The Bulls have built their team while competing – lucked into Derrick Rose, but found some nice gems late in the draft that they developed over 3+ years. The options in the NBA aren’t winning a title or going for fewest victories – the Sixers have taken it to an extreme, and it will not be successful.
The Sixers traded MCW for the Lakers pick. Chances are that will be a lottery pick next year. The non-lottery 1st round pick they acquired was OKC’s, which they received because they added a player.
Many teams traded players at the NBA trade deadline. Are the Sixers the only one that treats their players like stocks?
By the way, MCW is 23, not 21.
“They’re acquiring non-lottery picks. What good does that do?”
“The Bulls have built their team while competing – lucked into Derrick Rose, but found some nice gems late in the draft that they developed over 3+ years.”
You answered your own question, I guess. I understand your broader point about the Sixers needlessly (in your mind) tanking, but you seem to be jumping through logical hoops to justify the point. The Sixers are trying to find stars with their own draft picks and the lottery ones they’re hoping to luck into and “nice gems late in the draft” with the lesser picks they’re getting. It might not work out, but they have a clear strategy that I would swear you support just by looking at how you think a good team is built.
MCW isn’t good enough because the guy flat out can’t shoot. Upper 30s from the field and 20s from beyond the arc. You can’t run a pace and space offense that way. His stats are inflated by being on one of the fastest paced teams in the league, one that uses a ton of possessions. The guy simply isn’t that great. Shooting was his knock in college, and it’s his knock in the pros.
Assuming that the financial part of the deal goes as Cameron describes above, what would be a realistic offer for Lee look like? I assume it will cost considerably more at the tread deadline if Lee performs well.
Would Austin Hedges for Lee be an overpay for SD? How about something like a package of Garin Cecchini and Bryce Brentz from BOS?
There is no chance of the Phillies paying big bucks for crap like that.
You can safely bet the lives and memory of everyone in your family tree on that.
I think the Phillies are using Visualization Meditation. They just have to Visualize that they have other teams’ top prospects, and then their desires will be actualized.
Probably best for them to pay big bucks for Lee to pitch for their crap 2015 team.
Or in the Free_AEC world, folks in Philly storm the Bastille and throw Middleton’s money around to overpay enough free agents for a 2015 World Championship. We’re all just too stupid to see that.
Cecchini and Brentz would be young cost controlled starters for the Phillies, why the heck would they do that???
Bring back Marlon Byrd next year on a 2 yr deal
Brentz is already 26, and Cecchini is an upside 3b… where the Phillies actually have some young players with promise (Asche, Franco). So I’m thinking thats not likely excite anyone in Philadelphia.
I’m no huge fan of Hedges, as its unsure he’ll ever hit. But at least the defense is plus, and I’d take a flier on Maybin as well… and maybe accepting his salary would reduce the money needed to ship Lee. Throw in some lower level prospect, and maybe you could construct some sort of deal with SD.
Why would the Phils be willing to take the financial hit in return for prospects when dealing with Lee after showing an unwillingness to do so w/r/t Hamels? It’s as good of a point with Lee as it is with Hamels, but I don’t appreciate a meaningful enough distinction between the two to appreciate why they’d embrace that with one and not the other.
I can see why they may not want to trade Hamels without a perfect deal, since he’s a lifelong Phillie and he technically could even be on the next decent Phillies team. Lee on the other hand doesn’t have the same sentimental value, and almost certainly will not contribute to their next contending team on his current contract.
The latest nonsense as an excuse for not signing Yoan Moncada is the
Phillies are going to sign a lot of players during next years July 2nd signing
period.
Those kids are all 16 and 17 years old. So if the Phillies score a real hit
you won’t see that player doing damage in a Phillies uniform for at least
six years.
Hamels will be 37 years old then and if still pitching on his next contract.
I’ve now seen enough comments by Free_AEC to downvote them automatically.
@Robot
I said the same thing a week or so earlier, and I’m always glad to see more people join in.
By all accounts they’re willing to do so for Hamels, but as an elite pitcher if they’re doing that they want an elite prospect – which teams don’t seem to be willing to do. With Lee’s questionable injury status they’re likely to take less heralded prospects to get some value for him.
Then the surplus value squad screams that Lee makes too much
money so the Phillies have to send an enormous sum of dollars
with Lee, but the prospect package is still complete crap.
Circular thinking.
The circle stops only when the Phillies get what they need.
Plus, Hamels is a tool. Remember when he hit Harper on purpose?
Yeah, I mean it’s amazing that anyone would do that to such a fine upstanding, respectful young man as Harper. What is this world coming too, when people try to knock down a modest, unassuming, non-douchbag like Harper?
I’ve met a lot of douchebags, and virtually none of them deserved having baseballs thrown at their head at 90 mph.
I forget that incident. Was the pitch near Harper’s head?
eh I don’t think so but the sentiment is the same to me. Just don’t think most people deserve 90 mph baseballs at any part of their body really.
That’s fair, but if every pitcher who ever threw a brush back pitch was a tool, then there are a lot of tools pitching in MLB. The point being that Hamels throwing at someone was not unique, him being stupid or honest enough to admit it was.
Yes, and it was awesome, both for hitting him and for Harper then stealing home on him
This has been happening on a lot of articles: the apostrophes are often facing the wrong way (i.e. they look like open-quote instead of close-quote)
If you really had to devote a post to apostrophes, couldn’t you have at least mentioned something significant like Frank Zappa’s album?
The Sox and Phillies should get something done. The Phillies have Hamels, Lee, and money. The Sox have too many outfielders and a good farm.
From a Lee perspective, I would actually want the Phillies to pay the 2016 cost of $12.5m. The Sox can go over the cap in 2015 and have a $15m good pitcher for 2016 or a free release from Lee while getting under the cap with all their expiring contracts. What Sox players would get this done? I’d say that Allen Craig, Sean Coyle, and 1 of JBJ/Nava would get it done. From the Sox perspective, they can overpay since all these people are blocked and the only potential loss is if Craig gets back to his former self. But they are also dropping his contract obligation transferring both the risk and the dollars. From the Phillies perspective, you have a 4-yr Craig who can take over for Howard, a 2B prospect who can make Utley trade-able when it’s time to move on, and a playable OF (JBJ still being a prospect while Nava is more of a known quantity).
Phillies get some good assets, while the Red Sox get 1 year of a potentially great player and they lose their backup 1B/OF, a blocked 2B prospect, and a little OF depth that they won’t miss.
Sox would be selling low on JBJ, not their style. Let him re-establish value at AAA this year.
Plenty of blocked prospects to send w/ Craig & Coyle to the Phillies (Brentz, Wright, Couch, Shaw).
Neither Hamels or Lee will ever pitch for the Red Sox.
I have never come in contact with a group of people even half as arrogant
as the Red Sox Nation.
So Free_AEC, what value do you suggest Red Sox Nation place on Cliff Lee?
A) Several decent parts who could do more for the Phillies future than 1 year of Lee
B) A couple of decent parts plus a package of blocked B-grade prospects
C) Betts, Swihart, Owens, Rodriguez, and Yoan Moncada with his contract fully paid for.
D) All of the above, plus Bogaerts, Porcello, and 3 death sentences for John Middleton.
Honestly, the tears of rage from Phillies fans who demand that the Sox include Betts, Swihart, and a gold-plated Roll Royce for the privilege of paying Cole Hamels a slight discount from the market rate are almost adding value to the Philadelphia side of trade…
“John Middleton’s Fangraphs Spy says:
February 21, 2015 at 11:29 am
So Free_AEC, what value do you suggest Red Sox Nation place on Cliff Lee?”
The answer from Boston is they’re willing to give the Phillies a bronze
plaque that says “SUCKS TO BE YOU”
Enjoy Johnny Cueto
Free AEC, the Red Sox have a lot of good prospects. You failed to name any of them. Until you produce a name there is nothing to think about in regard to your comment.
I know everyone and their cousin expects the Phils to be a dumpster fire for some time, but don’t they have to have at least one or two decent players on there somewhere?
If the Phils sell off Hamels or Lee there is less than zero reason to show up to the park, or tune in on TV, even once every 5 days.
Even a rebuild needs some sort of core to start from.
The last time the Phillies lost over a hundred games was 1961.
This group that owns the Phillies is strange this way. They’re OK going
áfter the free players in June and boycotting the free agent market, but
there is a limit to how much they are willing to stink up the game.
Free_AEC Wish we could say the same about the amount you’re willing to stink up this site.
you’ve never been through a rebuild, I take it.
I would like to see the Cubs go at Lee for those prices depending on how he looks in a few weeks. Wellington Castillo and what prospects get the job done? Can you throw in a Travis Wood or maybe even get Ben Revere in return as a pinch runner – 4th outfielder?
You still have not named a prospect.
That means the answer is NO, the Cubs can’t get the deal done.
Ben Revere? You want him, you got him.
Okay, would you like to see the Phillies do either of the following?:
1. Wellington Castillo, Albert Almora and Edwin Jackson for Cliff Lee with no money changing hands.
2. Wellington Castillo and Albert Almora for Cliff Lee with the Phillies paying $25M of Lee’s salary.
I left Johnny Ringo’s Travis Wood for Ben Revere suggestion out of the equation.
“1. Wellington Castillo, Albert Almora and Edwin Jackson for Cliff Lee with no money changing hands.”
I don’t see how Castillo has any value since he can’t hit and doesn’t look like he ever will. You can buy a catcher like that any winter you want for very little.
So the deal is completely Lee for Almora.
Almora has some glitter from last year’s prospect ranking, not unlike
Tommy Joseph who fronted the Hunter Pence debacle with the Giants.
Almora couldn’t hit last year. Until that changes, no he wouldn’t have any value to complete a trade. The Phillies have a physical monster
in Aaron Altherr who can play CF well, but does not appear to be able
to hit.
Why would the Phillies want another CF who can’t hit?
So Almora has a breakout this year and his star is on the rise in June.
Now you have a deal. Guess what? Now Almora is pulled off the table.
This is easy to figure out. The intransigence from the Phillies ends
when they actually get someone back that is a real piece, or in Hamels
case pieces.
Kill yourself already.
Did you ever read “Going Postal” by Mark Ames?
My favorite non-fiction book, and non-fiction makes up 99.9% of my
reading.
And about 0.1% of your writing.
Mr Amaro needs to get a serviceable starting pitcher in the package for Lee. Travis Wood had a bad year last year but was an allstar the year before. He’d be an upgrade
cost control wise and youth wise over Lee. Wellington Castillo almost reminds of a young Chooch Ruiz–he has an improving bat and also- cost control and youth.
And the clubs split Lee’s salary. None of this can transpire though until everyone sees how Lee looks–so i wouldn’t expect to see any moves for a couple weeks.
The Phillies don’t need pitchers. They can afford to sign Price and Zimmerman
next winter.
The Phillies need core position talent.
SEC–it has become apparent that along about the time it seems like you have good points to make–you begin to make no sense.
The Phils are trying to move Hamel and Lee. If they succeed, their #1 starter becomes Aaron Harang?! And you say the Phils need no pitching.
Then you say they need core position talent–I agree. It’s pretty obvious that’s true. But then you totally dis Revere who is only 27–hit about .300 three years straight and has averaged 35 steals during those same 3 years even though he played with screws in his ankle in 2014. He’s not Willie Mays–but he’s a MLB worthy leadoff man and you say “you want him? you can have him.” Brilliant. I’m out–good luck in your quest for a Phils rebuild.
My apologies-AEC, not SEC. One more thing on Revere..he’s a pretty close comp to Juan Pierre as far as a slap hitter with no power but with speed. The 2003 Marlins managed to win the WS with Pierre..so perhaps the Fightins’ are better off making personnel decisions without your input?
Apology accepted.
More from the Cameron Comedy Routine.
In the words of Cliff himself: “FAAART”
Ok, here’s a trade idea from Pittsburgh to Philly:
B- OF prospect Harold Ramirez, LHP Jeff Locke (guy with *some* success in the majors and some remaining control), Tony Sanchez (struggling former 1st round catching prospect who’s had some up & down seasons with the bat and defense) — those three with no money thrown in for Lee.
Swap Sanchez for Jacoby Jones (SS B-) and $10M salary if you prefer.
Er, rethinking this, Pittsburgh would want money no matter what and I’ll bet Philly would jump all over that first trade proposal with $0 coming back. Let’s move those number to $10M first scenario and $20M second.
That’s a pile of crap. Totally useless.
Austin Meadows or Josh Bell could do it. The Phillies would have to cover most of the money.
I thought Pittsburgh was the best bet to do something with Hamels since they
don’t want to pay a pitcher like him. The problem with Pittsburgh is they are
blocked by both Hamels and Lee.
Pittsburgh is not a glittery place to play. Probably better than Toronto at the moment, but not by much.
“That’s a pile of crap. Totally useless.”
I’m guessing you were looking in the mirror when you said this?
What if Free_AEC is Reuben Amaro in disguise?
He couldn’t be because even Amaro is unwilling to waste his time trolling a niche website with dozens of comments that have been outed as trolling so the desired effect of the trolling is not being achieved.
How about this.
Sign Moncada and then trade him for Cole Hamels. Since Moncadas value will be around 80 million (we think), the Phillies might have to throw in some cash for to cover some of Hamels salary, or another player/prospect, perhaps enlarging the deal to get another lesser prospect.
Win win for both teams. Phillies get a great prospect they cant afford, Red Sox get to keep theirs. Phillies get salary relief and Red Sox get their ace.
Its basically a cash deal for the Red Sox after converting cash into a tradeable chip
Why would any team spend $156 million ($90 mil for Hamels over 4 years and $60 on Moncada and $6 for buyout) for 4 years of Hamels? That makes zero sense.
Maybe if the Phillies ate Hamels’ entire contract and buyout, leaving the team acquiring Hamels with $60 mil for Hamels over 4 years in exchange for a 8-12 overall prospect in Moncada.