Comments on: Phillies Opening Day Rosters: 2004-2009

By: John Russo

John Russo — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 19:01:52 +0000

Isn’t Park #5 and Happ in the pen?

By: bski

bski — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:25:59 +0000

I know Amaro "made the final call" on Ibanez, but he certainly didn't make it alone. I just get the feeling that, even though I know Gillick had a say, this was Looper's call. Would we have signed Ibanez if we had not just hired Looper? I suppose it's possible, but I don't know. I just think it is more than coincidental, especially after reading Burrell's comments about not really being contacted and such. A 3-year contract for a soon-to-be 37-year old doesn't happen without some major lobbying on his behalf, IMO, so Looper's neck is on the line with me for this one.

By: J Dubbz

J Dubbz — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:15:27 +0000

Pete… I gotta agree with you on this one. On paper Ibanez is an upgrade to Burrell and we are trying to win NOW so the draft pick thing is not valid in my opinion. Sure draft picks are great but they won’t help you win a championship in 2009.

By: Pete

Pete — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:10:07 +0000

keith law hates me…

Pete (Philly): I know you hated the Ibanez signing. But here’s the other side of the coin. Ibanez hit 100 points highers with RISP than Burrell in the last 3 years, puts more balls in play, strikes out less, plays horrendous (but still better) defense than Burrell, and has hit over .300 against the only lefty in the NL (Johan) worth mentioning. He’s older, sure, but has shown his work ethic will make that less of an issue. He’s not loads better than Burrell, but I don’t think it was quite as bad as you made it sound.

Keith Law: (1:55 PM ET ) That’s rationalization. BARISP is a skill? No, it’s not. Strikes out less and puts more balls in play – those are one point, and when you’re as slow as a sack of hair, striking out less isn’t necessarily a good thing. And I’m not so sure Ibanez is a better defender than Burrell. Finally, you omitted the entire draft pick problem – no arb to Burrell plus losing a pick for Ibanez = bad pick management.

By: J Dubbz

J Dubbz — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:42:59 +0000

bski…. Finally someone up in New York has come back to reality and recognized the Phils for what they are, A BETTER TEAM. He is correct in that your team on paper doesn’t mean much, its what you do on the field and winning games obviously that is gonna get you that ring. Respectful comment made by him and I appreciate that.

By: bski

bski — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 17:22:14 +0000

Well, well, well. Just when you think you know what to expect from the hated Mets. Check out what Omar Minaya had to say about the Phils in today's NY Daily News.

By: Pete

Pete — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:55:22 +0000

jjg-

saw that scouting report while fishing around. thought it was strange the guy called him a #4 but then said his upside is Freddy Garcia, who was a 1/2 at his best.

either way. i'm very curious to see what baseball prospectus says about him, and the rest of our guys. they should have their top 11 list out in a couple days and I will write a post up on it.

By: jjg

jjg — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 02:12:23 +0000

Pete He’s been hyped liked a #1B (which may be the fault of reaching writers more than Phils). I’ll be satisfied if he turns out to be a solid #3 based on what I’ve read and Phils’ history with their ballyhooed minor league pitchers. (Gavin Floyd, Adam Eaton, Carlton Loewer, Wayne Gomes, Tyler Green, Pat Combs, Brad Brink … all 1st rounders, all pretty much busts in our city.)

Fastball 88-94 but “lacks movement/relatively straight, not a swing-and-miss pitch.” Slider “inconsistent.” Change, “bread and butter.” Mechanics “can be problematic.” Again, it’s Kiley McDaniel’s (“Saberscouting”) observations and formed opinions. Another
evaluator, Alex Eisenberg of baseball-intellect.com, “wasn’t impressed by Carrasco during Futures,” liking 3 others over him while admitting Carlos has a lot to work with. Sounds like he’s still a work in progress.
I don’t get the sense that he’s gonna ever gonna be dominant.

Thanks for your reply. Enjoyed reading basis points.

By: Pete

Pete — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:56:23 +0000

jjg -

basing my assessment on a bunch of things. but I’ve read scouts saying everything from what you said, to a borderline #1. I’m not going to find/remember everything I’ve read of him, but here’s where I was coming from.

- he’s got better stuff than a #4 would have with a plus fastball (92-94) and plus changeup.

- MLB.com just ranked him as the 28th best prospect in all of baseball, calling him a “top-of-the-rotation right-hander, settling in behind Cole Hamels.”

- from baseball prospectus phillies top prospects article last year… “Opinions vary on Carrasco. Most believe he’ll at least be a good No. 3 starter, and some think he’ll be more than that.” Their 2009 list for the Phils should be out in the next couple days, so we will see if their opinoin has changed.

- from a Jayson Stark article around the trade deadline last year. A scout said this, not Stark…. “Why is this guy still in Double-A? He’s a big-time arm with quality stuff who could eventually be a top-of-the-rotation guy. I don’t see them trading him. I really don’t.”

- I remember reading one scout call him the best pitcher at the Futures Game in 2008.

obviously not all the positives I’ve read, but all I could find just now.

to be clear…..his CEILING is a solid #2 with the #’s I listed above. Right now, he’s not ready for the majors. But, the kid is only 21.

By: jjg

jjg — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:27:01 +0000

Pete Carrasco - a solid #2? The scout I quoted said “a #4 w/flashes of better” (one opinion, true). How did you reach your projection? Ever seen him? Hasn’t thrown a big league pitch yet. Could you be wearing a hopeful fan’s rose-colored glasses?