Reds Looking to Slash Payroll
The linked post names Bronson Arroyo and Aaron Harang as the usual suspects, but also Brandon Phillips and even speculates that the club might be willing to trade Joey Votto if the acquiring team would also take on a big contract, as they have Yonder Alonso pushing the upper levels of their minor league system. Phillips is very interesting if the Mets are able to move Castillo, as he's essentially what Orlando Hudson was when he was actually good at defense, and with more raw power as well, though this is offset a bit by a lower walk rate. And obviously, Votto would be an excellent buy if that were at all possible. Maybe the Mets could work something out where they deal Murphy and a couple of the better prospects in the system for Votto and one of the pitchers, taking on the entire salary. Ike Davis would have to move to the outfield, but who cares at that point?
over 2 years ago
Mark Himmelstein
37 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I want Harang and Votto!
I wonder what they could be had for. if they really want to slash payroll, I’d be willing to take on any one of their contracts if it meant keeping some prospects. I’d be willing to trade a combo of Murphy, Nieuwenhuis, Holt, either Tejada or Havens and one of the pitchers from Savannah, preferably Carson or Beaulac and keep Familia and Allen. If they’re really looking to slash payroll and care more about getting rid of contracts as opposed to getting talent, I think that would be enough, though I was never good at guessing trades.
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
I think the problem with taking on those contracts
Is it makes adding a big offensive piece iffy. Can the Mets afford to add $30 mil in payroll? Cause that’s what adding Harang and Holliday would cost. I’m not saying they can’t, but I think that range is kind of that blurry area, where its unclear if the organization is just playing coy or they really don’t want to bump payroll by that much for two players. But if Castillo can be moved and Phillips had, that would be a nice upgrade there, and a more Mike Cameron-esque outfieder would be fine. And if Votto could be had, I think you have to be willing to give up a top prospect. Votto’s a stud.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 1:30 AM EST up reply actions
If you could get Phillips and Harang on the cheapish
I’d even think Milton Bradley should be a consideration, if the Cubs were willing to swap him for Castillo. Cammy’d be better, but unless someone can convince Beltran to move to a corner, its hard to imagine him coming back unless the Mets bowl him over in terms of dollars.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 1:52 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not a big Phillips fan
I’d much rather have Holliday and Castillo than Phillips and Cameron
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
That is, if Holliday + Castillo came with Havens/Tejada in a year or two.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
Why wouldn't it?
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
What if its Cameron + Phillips + an extra $6-8 mil in payroll room?
And that’s payroll room you have every season, not just this year, since we’re assuming a long-term contract for Holliday. I still think Cameron and Phillips is better, even if you have to give up one of those two. Even if you assume Havens is in the 25-50 Top hitting prospects, which he’s probably not, he’s worth about $23 mil. If he’s 51-75, he’s worth closer to $14 million. Having an extra $6 million bucks in each of Tejada/Havens six controllable seasons = $36 mil.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 2:09 AM EST up reply actions
Tenatively disagree
Maybe I’m taking my Castillo hate too far, but making the cheaper, long-term investment in the premium-position guy seems like a better long-term/short-term balance to me.
Imagine if we traded for Phillips, signed Molina, and signed Cameron, we’d win every game on the strength our defense, 0 walks, and 4 solo homers:
Reyes
Phillips
Wright
Beltran
Francoeur
Cameron
Murphy
Molina
Molina?
He’s not even a good fielder anymore, and we don’t need two guys unlikely to have an OBP over .300 (Francoeur and Molina) and two more unlikely to get over .330 (Phillips and Murphy). Look, if we’re getting rid of Castillo, (I’d still rather have him and Holliday over Cameron and Phillip, this is just for the argument) lets go after Polanco and Holliday. I see Holliday as a long term solution in left and Polanco is just as valuable as Phillips.
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
Just to clarify
I think Holliday & Polanco would probably be the best option of the three for 2010.
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
I'm not even sure I agree with that
Polanco is on the wrong side of 30, which makes his defensive prowess seem less sustainable in the short term than a guy like Phillips, he walks just as much little as Phillips, he has considerably less power. He has an outstanding contact rate, but Phillips isn’t a whiffer, 16.6% career K-rate, 12.8% in 2009. I’ll take the skills that make Phillips a 3-4 WAR player as more sustainable than Polanco’s. If Polanco was considerably cheaper, which I’m sure he would be, he’d be a better option, but in terms of talent, I think he’s at best equal to Phillips.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 3:07 AM EST up reply actions
Well
Phillips is gonna be paid $6.75 million next year and $11 million in 2011. Polanco made $4.6 million this year and I don’t see him getting a raise due to his down offensive year so his salary will be between $4-5 million in 2010. In terms of talent, I don’t think Phillips is a 4 WAR player, I think he’s a 3-3.5 WAR player. He had that one great year where he was worth just over 5, but the last two he’s been a 3 WAR player. Polanco is similar, 5 three years ago and 3.1 the last two. I think they shuld both be around 3 next year, but Phillips has more potential to do better.
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
Well if you run a 5-4-3 regression on his WARs
You get 3.52. I don’t think 4 WAR is all that much less likely than 3 WAR. But otherwise I agree, value-wise Planco may be the better buy, but I’d guess its pretty close, considering age and offensive upside both favor Phillips.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
I also like the fact we don't have to pay Polanco 11 million in 2011
so should Havens/Tejada be ready we could play them
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
I like Havens and Tejada
But expecting either one to be ready in 2011 is a bit of a longshot. I expect they’ll be, at best, about where Davis is now, guys who look like they might be able to contribute in 20011, but not necessarily guys who should be given the job in the offseason. I know Tejada will probably make it to Triple-A this year, but he’ll be just 20 and his upside isn’t anything crazy, he may top out as a bench player, and at best about average MI production if all breaks right, and a guy who would have considerably more value at SS since defense is such a big part of his game. I guess between the two its not impossible. Havens in particular might really perform well in Double-A and catch up with some of his fellow 2009 draft-classmen, but its hard to expect a guy who hasn’t even played in Double-A yet to be MLB ready in a year.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 10:55 PM EST up reply actions
True
but if we get Polanco on a two year deal for ~5 million a year, that’s still 6 million less than we’d pay Phillips in 2011. I will say I’m not as down on Phillips as I was when we first started this debate, but I still don’t see him as a high upside acquisition, and why pay 11 million when you could pay 5 for similar production?
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
I essentially agree
The extra $8 million you’d have to pay Phillips over the two years isn’t really worth his upside. I do think he has some though, and I wouldn’t be at all upset if he were acquired with someone like Harang. He’s going to be more valuable than his salary, and I am a bit worried Polanco is going to decline in a hurry. But if you assume that Polanco is going to be relatively consistent over the next couple years, he’s the better value buy.
Just one more little addition the argument: Phillips 7% BB-rate this year would be the second highest of Polanco’s career, (7.9% in 2003), and he hasn’t been over 6% since 2005. If you look at Polanco’s numbers since 2005 in fact, almost all his offensive value has been tied to his ability to make contact, and thus his BABIPs, since he has so little power and draws so few walks. Here are his BABIPs since 2005:
.307
.349
.321
.295
And his corresponding wOBAs:
.305
.371
.339
.321
Meanwhile, Phillips’ BABIP has been .281 and .288, lower than any of Polanco’s marks, in 2008 and 2009, and because of his power, his wOBAs have been .324 and .337, each higher than Polanco in two of his last four seasons. In 2007, when Phillips had a .354 wOBA, his BABIP was just .307, so if he can bring his career mark up to the nominal .300 range in the next few years, which isn’t all that crazy of an expectation, he could improve his offensive production but a pretty significant margin.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 12, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions
Well, if Phillips' career BABIP is .288
you have to consider that normal for him, not .307. I wouldn’t be disappointed if we got Phillips, but as I said before, I think we could get better value for the money, although probably not with Omar as GM.
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
I understand, but the early part of Phillips career is probably more weighted in his career average than it should be
If you’re trying to determine his current talent-level, since he clearly was not major league ready through his first ~500 PAs, which is still a large enough sampling of his career to effect the final product more than it probably should.
Just look at Polanco, you had very similar situation. His career BABIP through 2003 (about age 28, where Phillips is now) was .300 even. Now its .316. I was just saying that a jump from .288 to .300 in Phillips career mark over the next “X” number of seasons is perhaps even probable, since the sample representing his current talent level vs. the sample representing his talent level in his non-MLB ready seasons will be weighted more accordingly. Certainly an increase in his career BABIP over the next few years is much more likely than a drop in that number, not because of natural BABIP regression, but because his current career mark is a bit below his current natural talent level.
Even from this past season, using this (says its for pitchers, but should work for batters too) method for xBABIP, I get .298 or Phillips. And for 2008, the THT spreadsheet for their more detailed xBABIP model had Phillips at .295. And the previous two seasons, his actual BABIP was a tick above .300.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 12, 2009 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
I'd be happy if they're ready by 13962
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
Also
I just assumed Sam was joking about Molina.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 3:08 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, the "0 walks and 4 solo homers" was obviously a joke
Sarcasm detection fail.
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
I was just saying
there’s a scenario where we could have the most lopsided SLG:OBP lineup in history, not that I think it’s a good thing.
Most fans probably think that it would be a good thing
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
Really?
I disagree. Phillips and Cameron would cost about $17 mil and neither a long term commitment. Holliday alone will cost at least that much, and paired with Castillo, I don’t see the two as any more valuable than Phillips and Cameron. You’ll probably get something like 7 WAR out of either pair.
I understand why Phillips gets some flack from stat-peeps. .322 career wOBA. 5.8% career walk rate. But at the same time, 7.3 UZR/150, .170+ ISO, his BB% is trending in the right direction the last few years, and he’s only 28. He’s not the star non-stat-peeps make him out to be, but he’s a very solid 3-4 WAR type player with sustainable skills, namely power and defense.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Nov 11, 2009 2:05 AM EST up reply actions
Pretty sure you all know my stance on this at this point.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
this is what i meant
when i said i wouldn’t give up much for harang even though i wouldn’t mind picking him up. the guy is owed $12M+ next year and he’s coming off 2 straight sub-par years. w/ a team looking to cut costs who obviously won’t pick up any of that salary, i don’t give up any of my big name prospects.
by Rob Castellano on Nov 11, 2009 12:07 PM EST reply actions
fwiw
those subpar years include an injury plagued 2008 and a 2009 with a BABIP against of .331. And even in those years, he put up solid numbers for an average starting pitcher, including a 2.5 WAR. Considering the luck adjustment and the benefits of Citi Field, I see no reason why he shouldn’t be worth the contract.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
but he's always posted high BABIP's
in his 5.4 WAR 2006 he posted a BABIP of .325. his career mark is .316.
so the fact that he did again so this year really doesn’t mean much to me. now couple that w/ a declining BAA, K/9 and BB/9 as well as the fact that he’ll be 32 and in the last 2 seasons he’s missed more time than the previous 6 years combined and i don’t think he’s quite the slam dunk everyone seems to think he is.
like i said, i’d definitely be ok bringing him in but i just can’t justify giving up much for a player w/ that many risk factors making $12M+/yr
by Rob Castellano on Nov 11, 2009 6:54 PM EST up reply actions
Why the hell are the Reds looking to cut payroll?
I don’t think that Brandon Phillips is one of Omar’s “guys”, so the likelihood of that actually happening isn’t all that great, I don’t think.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Nov 11, 2009 3:01 PM EST reply actions
No, I bet Omar will overpay to get Phillips
Just to make up for that Bartolo Colon trade when he was in Canada.
by boom_roasted on Nov 12, 2009 11:24 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
