Comments on: Phillies Ramblings

By: bski

bski — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:52:41 +0000

RARO: I couldn’t agree more. I realize it’s easy for us because we don’t have to make the tough decisions. I also understand that by committing a lot of money to certain players, Rowand in this case, it leaves less money for other needs. That being said, I still don’t see any way around the fact that teams must spend the money to have a shot. Like you said, “If Rowand is the difference between 80-something win territory and world series territory, then Rowand is priceless.”

You know, Zack(sixerzguy) and I have had a continuing discussion about this. Zack is a big Billy Beane/Moneyball fan. I always say that Moneyball is fine as far as it goes, but what have the A’s won? How they draft and develop is great, but it’s only half of what is needed to win a title. Then Zack brought up the Red Sox and how they have won since they’ve adopted the Moneyball approach(by hiring Bill James and such). I say that the Red Sox are exactly the point, and you nailed it as well. The Red Sox win because they COMBINE the Moneyball approach of drafting and developing players ALONG WITH spending the money necessary to keep the good players they have and add others through free agency. Only by using both avenues will a team have any chance at accumulating enough talent at one time to make a run.

By: raro

raro — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 02:23:45 +0000

Hey bski, great minds think alike! Or something…

But this is tough. Part of me agrees with Kevin that Rowand is not worth the 5 years that SF committed to him. Rowand was getting up there in age and 2006 was kind of an fluke. He was known as a great defensive CF with modest power. Who knew whether or not he could replicate 2007′s numbers? But if you’re talking about being a serious contender, then cost and worth take on different meanings. If Rowand is the difference between 80-something win territory and world series territory… then Rowand is priceless. Philadelphia is not a small market team and should not approach player retention as such. I think Boston is the model you want to follow here bski. Boston would have kept Rowand but would also have players like Pedroia and Ellsbury waiting in the wings. Problem with Philly is, we have no Rowand now and no Ellsbury. Problems about in the city of brotherly love.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:24:32 +0000

Yeah we definetly are missing Rowand’s production but I really don’t blame them for getting in a bidding war for him. He’s just not worth was SF paid him.

By: bski

bski — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:09:09 +0000

ZACK: We don’t need a Jamie Moyer for the lineup. We need Aaron Rowand! Raro hit it on the nose. I have no idea why I didn’t think about this when we were talking yesterday. Duh! It’s his production we are missing. Jenkins and Werth are not making up for his absence.

By: bski

bski — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:51:21 +0000

RARO: We were both typing the same thing at the same time. I laughed when I saw we both used the same reasoning(benching Rollins) to justify moving Howard down in the order.

Yes, you are absolutely correct that we did have that player last year. He is exactly what we need now. I’m not the one who didn’t re-sign him.

You know, that is exactly my point about building a winner. In order to make a run at a championship, you need to accumulate a bunch of good players. That means you need to keep the good players you have(or sign good free agent players) IN ADDITION to bringing up a steady stream of good young players. If you let your good players go or don’t spend the money on good free agents, then the good young players you bring up only REPLACE what you are losing. In order to accumulate enough good players at one time, you need to add both together. Otherwise you just end up treading water. You may be able to field a good team but, chances are, you’ll never truly be capable of winning it all.

That is what is so frustrating about the Phils right now. We are not that far away. I’d say we’re about 80% of the way there. The problem is that our window is small, probably only a few years. If they don’t act soon to try and get us over the hump, we will be stuck treading water in the good but not great, 80-something win territory.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:41:54 +0000

Hey I am all for it, if we can find another big bat that is not a liability defensively, then let’s do it. But lets face it, we get any production out of the 3-4-5 spot the last two weeks the we wouldn’t have lost the last 3 series. We may be able to upgrade in RF, but Feliz and Ruiz are here through the year.
Next year’s catcher spot should be Lou Marson, with Ruiz or Coste backing him up. I have a good feeling bout that.

By: bski

bski — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:28:00 +0000

KEVIN: I realize what I’m saying is closer to pie-in-the- sky than an actual possibility but if we can include Jenkins in the deal(or trade Werth or Dobbs and move Jenkins to the bench), that opens up the outfield spot. We can bat the new outfielder 6th, if he’s not suited for the cleanup spot, and move Burrell up to 4th. That would work for me as well because we would still move our less productive hitters further down in the order. Another bonus if we can add a solid, everyday outfielder now is that he will be on the roster for next year, which would really help if we don’t re-sign Burrell.

As far as Howard being happy, that’s his problem. I would like to see him take the mature, winning-is-the-most-important-thing, anything-for-the-team attitude that Burrell has. Besides, I’m only suggesting we move him down one spot in the order. I’m not hitting him 7th or 8th or sitting him down(which really might not be that bad of an idea against lefties right now). Howard needs to understand that it’s about the decline in his production. Manuel has said many times that he’s all about winning and the only way you get in the lineup is by producing. Look, if Charlie can send a message to Rollins by benching him for a lack of hustle, there is absolutely no reason why he can’t send a message to Howard about his slipping productivity by dropping him a spot or two in the order. He can hit his way back to 4th.

By: raro

raro — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:02:11 +0000

I think moving Ryan down one spot would be terrific provided we get the right player. Regarding Ryan’s happiness, if Manuel can bench Rollins for not hustling, I’m sure he can move Ryan down a spot.

“Now we’re down to the nitty gritty. I would like to see the Phils add a really solid, productive, right hand hitter(or switch hitter), every day, difference making outfielder(centerfielder or rightfielder—Victorino can play the other spot).”

@bski Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t we have that player last year? The player who is hitting .305 for the Giants this season? Granted, his on base % isn’t that great, but Rowand was that difference maker last year. I understand why we didn’t sign him long term, but…

Remember all those years when Manny Ramirez was made available by the Red Sox? He would be perfect.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:33:48 +0000

Ok wasn’t thinking about Jenkins. Sure I’ll take an upgrade at that spot. Don’t know who that would be, especially a guy that you have projected to bat cleanup. And I am sure Ryan would not be happy about being bumped down. Carlos sure is killing us with all the DP that he hits into, and the Sox were sure running on him this past series.

By: bski

bski — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:28:13 +0000

ZACK: Thanks. I have not had time to read either the Inquirer or the Daily News today, so I have no idea who wrote what about whom. Everything I posted just came out of what has been rumbling around inside my head. These are just my own insights, whatever they are worth.