Time for Amaro to go?
After failing for years to fix an offense that has under performed in the postseason and has done nothing but decline. And every oppurtunity he had to help this offense he has passed by to overpay for pitching. All of you Kool aid drinking fans will disagree. But there is no reason this club with a 175 mil payroll shound not have more then 1 legit power hitter and should never be forced to start 3 inexperienced guys at one time in the same outfield. Rip me all you want but deep down you know he has not given the offense the same type of attention he has the pitching.
Problem is this roster doesn't have any low priced contributing talent.
For example, they had to spend 6 million on Adams because their younger bullpen arms failed.
Have an outfield problem because Brown failed.
No roster can have 10-15 million dollar players at every position. Have to have some low priced talent.
We are now going to have to hope Ruf and Brown contribute enough early for us to be in a position to make a trade later in season
Amaro has to take heat for this imbalances roster.
So I have no intention of ripping you for your point. Just want to point out the reference of Drinking the Kool Aid had its beginning in the mass murder and suicide of children at the Jim Jones Cult in 1970's so not sure that's a line you
really want to use in something as ultimately meaningless as baseball and this comes from a 40 yr phillies fan.
Ruben certainly has to take heat for the issues with this roster. However, it's hard to blame him for what appears to have been a very intentional path that the organization pursued.
I think if you look back, a lot of us were keen to retool following the 2009 season. That would have put the 2010 and 2011 playoff runs in jeopardy, but the organization would look much healthier today. The Phillies instead went the direction of loading up for 2010/11 which is why we are where we are. However, Ruben did not make that decision on his own, ownership was certainly involved and possibly even drove that process.
Additionally, Ruben was fairly green when he took over as GM. His handling of this offseason thus far has strengthened my confidence in him (which is to say, I'm quite uneasy about him rather than extremely so). It's good to see that he can handle multiple approaches to roster construction. He does appear to be learning from his mistakes, which is heartening.
ATeam. I respect you a ton and think you have a great knowledge of the sport. But even you know that a double platoon with inexperienced guys is destine to fail. A straight platoon in left with Ruf and Brown with an everyday rightfielder is the best approach for this team. But for some reason amaro is ok spending on pitching but not offense. on top of that people say let brown get a chance then amaro signs adams which stops aumont from getting a chance its a great move.
Such a double standard
Have I said anything overly positive about the Adams signing? I still have Aumont/Bastardo as the 8th inning guys until Adams proves he's recovered from surgery. I think it was a terribly risky signing and a poor use of resources. I've said all along that our internal bullpen options are sufficient and that they should be focused on starting pitching.
Ateam. I agree with you. But can you please explain to me why this Front office refuses to spend money on offense?
Also, how many platoons did the '93 Phillies have? A double platoon is not destined to fail. It's certainly not Plan A. Or B or C. But it could still work.
More importantly, we have to compare it to what is available. Did you want to pay Cody Ross - who by the way is another platoon OFer?
Perhaps you would have preferred to sign Swisher. Given the payroll, that could have worked pre-Adams, and it might even have helped the club enough to make a difference.
Dont forget the 93 platoons were with experienced players and not with young players. Swisher would have def helped this club. And dont be surprised to see ross hit 30hrs for arizona as a starter this year
It's simple really, they can't afford to pay $25 mil/season for a guy like Hamilton, and the other options out there are modest upgrades on hefty paychecks.
Originally Posted by Philsforever
For example, let's say the Phillies are willing to pay $5 million for each win. And let's say Nick Swisher is 2 wins better than a Brown/Mayberry platoon. Let's also pretend Swisher's deal is a 1-year/$13 contract just to keep the math simple.
Basically, Swisher costs $6.5 million per win. The Phillies cut off is $5 million. So they aren't interested in Swisher. Rinse and repeat for the other available options.
In reality, they might be willing to overpay their value of a win if it was on a 1 year contract. But since Swisher got a 4-5 year contract, opportunity costs come into play. It's more like paying $9 million per win if they signed Swisher. So even if he was 3 wins better than the platoon, the math still doesn't work.
But its ok to spend 20mil on halladay and 25mil on lee and 20 mil on hamels and 14mil on paps.
Double standard. Accourding to amaro its ok to spend 20mil a year on a guy who plays once every 5 days but not on a guy that plays every day and effects the outcome of 150games as opposed to 30
I will be surprised to see that. Very surprised. I have him projected for a .250/.310/.400 line with 20 HR if he gets to 600 PA. 30 HR isn't a huge outlier, but I really doubt he can reach 600 PA. 500 might be hard. And if I'm right about that, then 30 HR is out of the question.
Originally Posted by Philsforever
That's already over and done with though. You have to consider each move individually as well.
Originally Posted by Philsforever
The Halladay contract was extremely team friendly. There's no way they could not sign him at that rate and length.
Hamels' contract is more or less reasonable given his age and value to the franchise.
Lee's more on the borderline since he was older when he signed the deal. The length is the problem with that deal more than the amount.
In each of those three cases, those players represented the most cost effective use of resources at that particular time.
Obviously, nobody on here likes the Papelbon contract.
Keep in mind, when they extended Hamels, they were basically saying "In 2013-18 I prefer Hamels to unknown prospects of unknowable value by $144 million." If Hamels is 5 wins better than the typical "unknown prospect of unknowable value" (and he is) then that's a good value proposition.
Could a Jesse Biddle come along and make the Phillies wish they just let Hamels walk? Sure. But you have to place very strong emphasis on that "could."
excellent points. but that being said who is to say Hamilton wouldnt be 5 wins over brown and make same as Hamels?
I don't think you're grasping the money aspect of this. Amaro had a budget. The pitching options signed had more upside to make this team better given the budget. It's not that he won't spend on offense. There are just no affordable options that are an upgrade to this team.
I think your opinion is incredibly short sighted.
Btw, did this really need it's own thread?