FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Burrell is very streaky. Unless he does have a serious injury, he probably has a few hot streaks left in him. Even in his hideously bad 03 season, he had moments of brilliance (specifically every time Thome was intentionally walked; Burrell took it personally)

    I wouldn’t bet a dollar on him hitting more than 25 HR on the season, but he might have a month where he goes insane. The ZiPS projection looks about right.

    How many close calls has Burrell had this year? I haven’t seen him play.

    Comment by DavidCEisen — May 15, 2009 @ 7:13 am

  2. But the Phillies still signed the wrong guy…right?

    Comment by Chris R — May 15, 2009 @ 8:30 am

  3. Or maybe he just hit .215 after the All-Star break last year and is continuing that?

    Comment by Bill — May 15, 2009 @ 8:38 am

  4. I think, if anything, this shows that the Rays probably should have gone after Dunn instead of Burrell.

    Comment by Davidceisen — May 15, 2009 @ 9:16 am

  5. Donkey’s a lefty. Rays needed a righty power threat so Los is sandwiched by righties. If anyone they should have gone after Abreu and his crazy demands. Rays signed PtB before the market truly crashed, so though they got him at a discount, they probably could have saved even more if they had gotten him a couple of weeks later. It’s not like Abreu has torn up the league, either.

    Comment by Sandy Kazmir — May 15, 2009 @ 9:50 am

  6. If I recall, both Dunn and Ibanez were more than reluctant to DH. The Rays were looking at the same numbers as everyone else who thought it best to keep those guys (and Burrell) out of the field.

    Comment by Marlowe — May 15, 2009 @ 9:51 am

  7. Dunn wasn’t interested in becoming a DH.

    Comment by R.J. Anderson — May 15, 2009 @ 10:25 am

  8. Based on what we knew at the time? Absolutely.

    Comment by R.J. Anderson — May 15, 2009 @ 10:26 am

  9. Based on what we knew, but not necessarily what the Phillies knew.

    Comment by Davidceisen — May 15, 2009 @ 2:39 pm

  10. If that’s how you want to excuse incompetence, then go ahead. I’m not going to argue with you.

    Comment by R.J. Anderson — May 15, 2009 @ 2:47 pm

  11. If you want to believe that you knew more about a player on the Phillies roster than the Phillies front office knew, then go ahead. I’m certainly not going to argue with you.

    Comment by Davidceisen — May 15, 2009 @ 2:55 pm

  12. You can’t judge a 3-year deal, given to a 37-year-old player, in the first 2 months of that deal. I didn’t like the contract terms when they were announced, but I really like Ibanez as a player and he seems like a pretty cool guy, so I’m hoping he proves us all wrong by continuing to perform like this through 2011. A season in which he will turn 40.

    Comment by CH — May 15, 2009 @ 6:20 pm

  13. I’m pretty sure RJ does.

    Comment by Nick — May 16, 2009 @ 5:26 pm

  14. Of course not, but you can look at the the player gotten rid of (Burrell) and the player brought in (Ibanez) and compare the two. Its not immediately apparent that Ibanez is going to decline faster at 37 than Burrell will at 31. You can also look at how long the Phillies team has a likelihood of competing for a championship (2 to 3 years), and measure the deal that way.

    Also assuming that Ibanez starts to decline, his biggest decline is going to come in the field (where is UZR is higher than what is expected anyway). If in the third year of the contract Ibenez is good bat (wOBA~ 350) with a terrible glove, the Phils could trade him to an AL team looking for a DH.

    The Phils were obviously thinking short term with the Ibanez signing. They want to win again. Call it incompetence if you like, but they managed to sign the league leader in .ISO and wOBA so far.

    Comment by DavidCEisen — May 17, 2009 @ 9:45 am

  15. I don’t think you can trade his salary to a team looking for a DH. The teams with the money available to take on $11.5 a year tend to have plenty of candidates for the DH role. Or, if you can trade him, you have to eat at least half of his salary.

    Plus, I never called it “incompetence,” although some others might have. I just said I didn’t like the terms of the contract itself. It’s not that Raul Ibanez isn’t a good enough player to sign, it’s that they’re paying him too much and for 1 more year that I would have liked. If they gave him a 2 year deal for $8 mil per year, I would have loved the deal. That would be $16 mil guaranteed instead of $31.5 mil guaranteed. That’s a significant difference, and the $15.5 mil that they would have saved could be spent on upgrading a pitching staff that drops off precipitously after Hamels.

    So, again, let’s wait until 2011 to say it was a good move, or at least until September.

    Comment by CH — May 17, 2009 @ 11:12 am

  16. I should have added that the Phillies would have to eat some of the salary.

    Comment by DavidCEisen — May 17, 2009 @ 1:53 pm

  17. How much of what we “knew” accounted for league and park?

    Comment by Chip — May 17, 2009 @ 4:06 pm

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Current day month ye@r *

Close this window.

0.123 Powered by WordPress