Staff Blog
Where's the best sledding hill in Philly? (1 Answer)
The Phillies Missed the Time for Sentimental Decisions
UPDATE: This was originally posted a little after midnight last night, I bumped it up here so it wouldn’t get buried. If you’ve caught it already ignore, and if you it’s new to you: enjoy.
|
|
12:01 this morning was the deadline for the Phillies to offer arbitration to their available free agents: Jamie Moyer, Pat Burrell, Rudy Seanez, and Tom Gordon. Going into the night no one expected the Phils to offer arb to Rudy or Flash, there were experts on both sides of the fence when it came to Burrell and virtually everyone expected the Phils to use arb to bring back Moyer.
Well, when it came to Moyer, virtually everyone was wrong. The Phillies did not offer arbitration to any of the four.
National League sources confirmed to the Daily News that the midnight deadline to offer arbitration passed with the Phillies passing on all four of their players eligible for free agency: Moyer, leftfielder Pat Burrell and righthanders Tom Gordon and Rudy Seanez.
[snip]
The Phillies have made no secret of their desire to keep the 46-year-old Moyer, who was a bargain at a base salary of $5.5 million this year while going 16-7 with a 3.71 earned run average. And he has been open about wanting to come back.
So it was surprising that the Phils didn’t offer arbitration. The reason they didn’t appears simple enough: They didn’t want the amount of money they pay him to be decided by a panel or arbitrators.
That’s reasonable enough. Of course, if they can’t come to terms with Moyer the next step – finding a suitable replacement for the rotation – could end up costing even more.
My first reaction to this is the same as everybody’s: wow. Jamie Moyer was a relative bargin last year at $5.5 million, was constantly cited as a true team leader and as someone who wanted to stay, and was someone who the Phils would presumably want to lock up for only one year.
I also saw offering Burrell arb as win-win: if he accepted the Phillies kept a team leader and productive righthanded bat in the lineup; if he didn’t? Well, when the Phillies signed Tom Gordon away from the Yankees, they used the comp picks to select Joba Chamberlin and Ian Kennedy, two guys who the Phils wouldn’t mind having now.
So why would the Phillies not offer their two stars arb? ATJ Beerleaguer reads the tea leaves and we give our thoughts:
Yesterday, readers strongly criticized Todd Zolecki’s Sunday article in the Inquirer,
which opened the door to the possibility that the Phils may forgo draft
pick compensation and decline arbitration for Burrell. While keeping it
close to the vest, today on WIP, Amaro supported Zolecki’s notion by
emphasizing that by offering arbitration to Burrell, they may not have
the financial flexibility to address other areas of the roster down the
road. Burrell earned $14 million last season, and by offering
arbitration, the Phils would be bound to a one-year contract to be
determined by an arbiter, a figure likely to exceed $14 million.
Budgeting for that amount, in case Burrell does not find a suitable
offer and elects to return, would limit what they could do to address
other areas of the roster, Amaro said.[snip]
By the time WIP posts audio of the interview, the Phils will have
made their decision. I’ll do my best to relay what I heard. Reading
between the lines with Amaro, this Burrell decision is no small matter,
and I was struck by his comment about how this is not the time to make
“sentimental” choices.
I strongly disagree with that logic. This cast of characters just brought a championship to Philadelphia. Isn’t this exactly the time for sentimental decisions?
I suppose we should wait and see how this ends up before laying final judgment – the Phillies’ coffers are full of the fans’ money which should give them an edge in this in a hurting economy, perhaps they’ll end up bringing both back for lower salaries than they received last year – but I don’t think it’s unfair to be worried about Ruben Amaro’s apparent excitement over putting his stamp on a team that just won the WFC.
Worth Noting: I know we’ve gone over this before, but any player offered
arbitration has until next Sunday to accept or decline arbitration. If
they accept they become, for all intents and purposes, signed. If they
decline the team who offered arbitration receives compensatory draft
picks. Because both Moyer and Burrell were Type A free agents, the team would have recieved two high picks if they had signed with another team.
Ruben, Jr. said last night that he wanted more athleticism – so it sounds like that covers Pat. If they offered him arbitration, the real picture is he’s back, right? Do you think anyone else would step up to and over that level of salary for Pat?
In the end, I find I’ll really miss Pat – and I never thought I’d say that. But over the last 2 years, my take, he first grew into a man, and then the man. Fun image to see him as riding out of town behind the Clydesdales – and wherever he goes, I wish him well. (even if it the Mets? I need to think on that one)
So here is the wish list in Pat’s wake: right handed bat, enough pop to protect the guy in front of him, FEWER strikeouts, and (let’s make Ruben happy here) an athlete.
Jamie is a different story. Does he ask for 3 demand 2? Could he have done that in arbitration? Is there something Ruben Jr. knows that we don’t? I have a hard time making sense of this one. Just pay him – keep it under 3 years – and take the picks if he gets away.
Here is what I fear. Remember when the Phils let Jim Eisenreich go after ‘93? And got Danny freakin’ Tartabul instead?
Eisenreich was the ultimate quality guy. A tip of the hat to him still
I think that a lot of guys in that clubhouse took heart from both Pat and Jamie – being around them, seeing them fight through, talking to them, just seeing their approach to the game – and life.
I’m still holding out hope that Jamie comes back. But if not, this better work out – or it’s gonna be a heart ache.
Danny Tartabul? Great reference.
I had to call the walkin’ encyclopedia to retrieve the name – but I did not and will not forget the pain
I’m actually with Ruben Jr here, and not just cuz we share a name. James, you are correct that “this cast of characters” just brought us a chip, but was not Burrell hitless until his last AB of the World Series? He’s a fan favorite, loves the city, and certainly helped us win this championship, but what you have to realize is that this is the best time to part ways with him. Amaro’s right that the Phillies need to get more athletic at that position — this team really does not need 30 taters from Burrell’s spot, and Werth will easily make those up anyway. The word “sentimental” was not a good choice, but if you wanna make a broad change like this (exchanging power for speed), the best time to do it is after winning a World Series, when there’s a little less pressure. My money says if we had lost to Tampa, then Ruben Jr would have offered Burrell arbitration.
To me, this represents our GM having a firm view of what direction he wants us to go in, and acting decisively to point us in that direction. It reminds me of the NY Giants, who won the Super Bowl last year completely on their defense’s back, yet let 3 defensive starters walk in free agency (not including losing Strahan and Osi) and spent their first 2 draft picks on defensive players. And look where they are now. Saying “well we won the chip with these guys, so lets bring everyone back” is NOT the best way to try to repeat. Even teams that win the chip aren’t perfect, and I think it’s become obvious to Amaro (and me) over the last few years that the Phils need to get a fast guy/contact hitter in left field, even if it means giving up some homers.
Of course you would say that, Ru. You hate tradition.
ha. well, players win championships, not tradition. i mean, if someone wants to make the argument that the best 25-man roster we can field includes Burrell, then i’ll respect that (even if i don’t agree with it). But to bring him back only because we just won the World Series, and he was our starting LF, just seems asinine to me.
My take, we’re sidetracked here with the word “tradition” and with the focus on Pat.
Sure, players win championships – but there are players and there are players. Remember when there was “something about those Yankees?” – and then they started to shift to new building block guys like Bobby Abreu?
Can I call it heart? Whatever we call it I think terrific teams need a strong dose of it. And you are at your peril to let too much of it walk.
So Pat is gone, and his replacement will be fleet of foot and hard to strike out. I’m down
Open question, is there room on next year’s team for Jamie? and can we forge a deal that does not still have us groaning in 2014?
If three is and we can – I say get it done.
First of all, I don’t exactly see a market flooded with better-than-Burrell options, especially considering that the Phils aren’t exactly trying to spend Manny-money but fine, let’s play it on your terms.
I think that loyalty to Burrell has a tangible value. When Salisbury wrote his “whose the leader” column everyone – to a man – named Bat. In a clubhouse that thrives on consistency rather than emotion it seems important to, you know, stay consistent. Offering Pat arb doesn’t hurt the team, and if it turns out that second half was the true Pat he’s only locked in for one year. Besides that, it’s only today that Philly suddenly starts to assume that he would accept – you’re discounting the possibility of adding two free draft picks.
Fair points. I still think the bigger picture is missing though. If the team wants to go in another direction — and who said anything about “market”? What about making Werth an everyday player in the 5-hole and platooning other guys in left, then spending our money on more arms or extensions for our current guys? — now is the time to do it. Let’s say we’d offered Pat arb, he most likely accepts it (you’re right it’s not a foregone conclusion he would, but NOBODY else seems to want him), he puts up his standard .250, 30, 85, while struggling mightily against any above-awful pitcher, and we lose in the playoffs or don’t make it. Now the pressure is back on them to win, and any move that resembles rebuilding would be ripped, and thus somewhat unlikely. It seems like if they want to go in another direction, which they clearly have for a while with Pat, now is the time to do it. Why simply put it off for another year?
of course, i’m the guy who wants us to trade for Willy Taveras and roll with a Taveras-Rollins-Utley-Howard-Werth-Victorino-Marson-Feliz lineup. So my opinion needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt.
I guess my basic argument is – why would they want to go in another direction? I hear everyone knocking ‘treading water’ but aren’t the Phillies exactly where they want to be?
You seem be discounting another season of .250, 30, and 85 as worthless. I mean … it worked this year.
Yes, it did. But how about the last 8 years before this one? It seems your tenet is that teams that wins championships should make no changes. So the Giants should have kept Gibril Wilson and Kawika Mitchell? Heck, they probably should have franchised Shockey while they were at it. Much like the Phils, they were half-decent for most of the season, got hot late, won it all, then realized they could still be better. Frankly, I’m glad to see that Amaro is taking a hard look at our team and its weaknesses instead of taking the easy way out.
The NFL has a hard cap, the MLB doesn’t, so there is the first big difference. Your Shockey argument has to be a set-up for a straw man, so I’ll ignore that completely, and no, the Giants shouldn’t have kept Mitchell and Wilson because they were demanding far more than they were worth.
I’d argue that whatever Burrell would get in arb isn’t an excessive amount to pay him (if he even took it), especially considering that the deal wouldn’t have any long term ramifications or buy-out clauses. If he could get more than that, fine, let him walk and collect the two draft picks.
I definitely see your logic, and I imagine most fans would take your side. I guess it comes down to: 1) You either think Burrell is valuable enough that it’s worth the shot at getting the picks to go with him for 1 more year, or 2)You think he’s un-valuable enough that you’re willing to forego the chance at getting 2 picks in order to move on to someone else in LF and avoid having him for 1 more year. I’m for the latter, you’re for the former. There are good arguments to be made for both, but ultimately it boils down to subjective opinion.