Philadelphia Phillies In Love With Idea of Juan Pierre, Not Real Juan Pierre

You ever watch Role Models? You know, that halfway-decent Paul Rudd flick (that’s constantly mistaken for a Judd Apatow joint, when it is pointedly not Judd Apatow joint material) with the Stifler guy? About the two screw ups whose punishment for trashing a statue outside a school calls for the mentorship of a couple of troubled boys from hell?

Remember what Augie (dorky kid in glasses, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, who played McLovin in Superbad) says to Danny (played by Rudd) in the restaurant when asked what he wants to drink?

“I like the idea of Coke much better than I actually like Coke.”

(Thank you, commenter Michael.)

Simple humor. Easy laugh.

Except for, he’s totally right. In fact, there’s a lot in life that makes us confuse the idea of something and that something in actuality. People do it all the time with relationships. Scared, stubborn or comfortable, they ride out bad things far longer than they should, chasing the ghost of what their “thing” used to be, and clearly isn’t anymore.

That’s kind of what the Phillies did with Juan Pierre, signed to a minor league deal earlier today.

Believe me, I LOVE Juan Pierre, the Idea. He seems the ideal upgrade from Wilson Valdez, dealt to the Reds yesterday straight-up for Jeremy Horst. He seems the perfect addition of speed. He, a near-lifetime NL guy—he played with the White Sox in 2010 and 2011, his only AL stop in 12 years, seems to get the mutant brand of baseball the Phillies (like all NL teams) play. And given how he enjoyed a renaissance during the Dodgers—his .757 OPS in 2009 was the second best of his career—50 games without Manny Ramirez, you figure he’s a pretty good “team” guy that the Phillies, frankly, could use right about now.

You figure, lop together career averages of a .296 BA, .707 OPS and, more than EVERY other selling point, 50 stolen bases, and you’re set. Right?

Then you realize. You’re talking about the Idea, and not Juan Pierre.

For one, he’s not the utility infielder Valdez was. Checked his Baseball-Reference.com page up and down, and I’m pretty sure Roy Oswalt has spent more time in left field than Pierre has in the dirt.

Which reminds me:

Pierre’s speed doesn’t exactly come as advertised. His stolen base count peaked in 2007, when he slid into 64 freebies. But he’s taken fewer bases every (40 in 2008) year (30 in 2009) since (27 in 2011). And for those of you stoked about the 68 he grabbed in 2010, instead consider that last parenthetical note evidence of his coming down to earth.

If that doesn’t do it enough for you, you can peep his FanGraphs speed rating, which has aligned pretty closely with what you’d expect of aging, 32-year-old legs. A career-high 7.9 in 2009, followed by 6.9 and 5.2 thereafter.

And if not for quicks, why make the move?

And if not for that impending move, why deal Valdez?

That’s the assumption, right? That Pierre’s every-so-often speed in the lineup would more than compensate for the sprinkled-in at-bats you’d inevitably give Valdez. So why not make unmistakably interconnected deals one and two?

Why not? Because your infield is in shambles. Ryan Howard won’t start the season, and who knows what he’ll be able to contribute and when? Jim Thome was signed, you figured, to tap in. Except for now the organization thinks the better idea is a better-suited-for-third-base Ty Wigginton, who, you figured, would make the perfect contingency plan for Placido Polanco. (At least much better than the slower-than-cement Michael Martinez.)

And in case Jimmy Rolllins’ hamstring explodes, a pretty foreseeable scenario on recently made content 33-year-old legs.

That’s why not.

But now? I don’t know.

The team is already stacked at outfield, with promising players, but ones who need repetition. Or, in the case of Raul Ibanez, playing time to justify their ludicrous contracts. Or, in the case of Hunter Pence, proven players who you can’t succeed without. (Also in the case of Pence, justification for clearing out the last crumbs of talent from your farm system, Jarred Cosart and Jonathan Singleton.) Or, in the case of John Mayberry Jr. and Domonic Brown, finality on whether or not they’ll realize their potential.

In a non-salary cap sport, you take waivers. It’s smart business.

But bringing in a guy like Juan Pierre feels like the organization is saying something. What?

And it feels like they’re clinging to the Juan Pierre, the Idea, instead of Juan Pierre, the Player.

Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com

Philadelphia Phillies: Is GM Ruben Amaro’s Spending Becoming a Problem?

Maybe Ruben Amaro isn’t the wunderkind we thought he was.

Maybe he’s flawed. Shortsighted. Impulsive. 

Maybe he’s susceptible to the same spending mistakes as the rest of the sport.

Look at what he’s done to the roster. The team is stuck with three $20 million contracts in Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee and Ryan Howard, only one of whom pays it back in reliability.

They’ve acquired players at will, via trade (in order: Lee, Halladay, Oswalt, Hunter Pence) and free agency (Lee 2.0, Jonathan Papelbon) emptying out the cupboard (most notably and recently stud prospect pitchers Jarred Cosart and Jonathan Singleton) and piling it on in payroll. 

All that, without regard for unintended consequences. 

Moves like those create a culture without accountability. Like they’re saying: Lose the World Series in 2009? Reel Halladay and Oswalt to compensate. Fall to the Giants in the 2010 NLCS? Bring back Lee and bring on Pence. Stumble in the first round in 2011? Dial up the priciest closer that money can buy.

That’s the solution. That’s the message. 

“There was a hole. We’ll spackle it.”  

It’s not that the slack should’ve been picked up from within. That Howard should’ve tinkered with his swing. That Charlie Manuel should’ve challenged the lineup, benching and shuffling and coaching up the order when it wasn’t producing. That the lineup should’ve learned to stand on its own two feet, instead of leaning on the staff. 

No, no. 

They say that the problem could be cured from the outside, mitigated away by padding the payroll. 

It’s enabling the Phillies’ track record of denial.

That’s why Howard hasn’t caught heat for five 170-plus-strikeout seasons in his last six. Why Manuel wasn’t roasted for letting the lineup stumble to averages like Carlos Ruiz (.059), Howard and Placido Polanco (.105), Raul Ibanez (.200) and Pence (.211) in the NLDS without batting an eye. Why there was no reprimand for a lineup that let Halladay, Lee and Hamels fry for a combined 33 starts with two runs of support or fewer for a combined 8-20 record (of 96 starts total, or 34 percent).

Now, I’m not sure what’s worse: That the team can’t re-sign Hamels, or that we feel it has to find a way to.

That’s how crazy this thing has gotten. Rather than team-building like champions—through the player draft and farm system—the Phillies cop out like spoiled children, shopping and buying and whining at the first sign of a problem.

There was hope that Amaro would stop himself. With the Jim Thome signing came not only an answer to first base while Howard nurses his ruptured Achilles, but also the first glimmer of pragmatism. They addressed a problem with a practical solution. 

Then came Jimmy Rollins, for three years and $33 million, and Jonathan Papelbon, for five years and $50 million, and there that momentum went. The Phillies needed a shortstop and could’ve used a closer—who knew whether Ryan Madson would re-sign or replicate his 32-for-34 season from a year ago?—but both were like treating a headache with a lobotomy. 

#Overkill.

What’s worse is that that money could’ve been chalked up as savings. In declining options for Oswalt and Brad Lidge, the Phillies could’ve applied that $28.5 million toward top-priority stuff. Say, locking up Cole Hamels beyond a one-year, $15 million patch. 

Now? Hamels, inarguably the toast of the upcoming 2013 free-agent crop, might not fit the budget. 

“This is certainly going to test the limits of how much growth is within this organization,” Tom Verducci of SI told Mike Gill of 97.3 ESPN Radio South Jersey Tuesday. “It’s going to be a squeeze, no doubt.”

“When (Hamels) gets to free agency, he’s going to be looking for $20 million a year, and I think he should get it,” said ESPN’s Keith Law Tuesday. “I don’t know that the Phillies are going to be able to do that with the other commitments they’ve made.”

Then what?

Unless losing Hamels is addition by subtraction, and the team can and will elevate its game on command to compensate for losing the best up-and-coming left-hander in the game, that’s a problem. 

And it started with Amaro. 

“This all comes back to the mistakes that Amaro has made,” said Law. “These kinds of financial moves are hamstringing the franchise.”

It’s the same spending that torpedoed the Red Sox. Instead of milking mild victories in signing Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez away from the Evil Empire for the better half of a decade (and distancing itself from similar losses in C.C. Sabathia and Mark Teixeira in 2008), the organization found itself saddled.

In the wake of the “Fried Chicken And Beer In The Clubhouse” fiasco and with the front office up to its ears in sunken costs, Theo Epstein bailed. He knew he couldn’t repair a broken franchise with broken talent of its broken players. So did Terry Francona, a guy way too talented for so unceremonious an exit. 

This is where the Phillies are headed. This is where Amaro’s whims are taking them. 

It sounds sacrilege. Why? Because of the Phillies’ charm, how they’re the consummate underdog team of blue-collar players without the burdens and egos of front-runners. 

Or at least they were. 

That’s not them anymore, not any more than it is the Red Sox, who once tap danced on the improbable all throughout those magical Four Nights In October 2004, now better known for slugging OPB and wolfing KFC. 

Losing Hamels might be the first piece to fall. 

But this thing started crumbling a long, long time ago.

Matt Hammond is a producer for 97.3 ESPN Radio South Jersey, and writes for 973ESPN.com. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattHammond973. 

Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com

Philadelphia Phillies: Why Does Roy Oswalt All of a Sudden Seem an Afterthought?

He’s not even the white elephant.

Not only isn’t anybody talking Roy Oswalt, nobody’s thinking him either.

Ask yourself: When you mull over the Phillies‘ future, what first comes to mind?

Is it the guy who schlepped through a so-so 2011? Or the one you hope will round out your rotation for the rest of your buoyant future (Cole Hamels)? Is it the one with a creaky back who’s only going to get worse? Or the one brought in to fortify the core of your lineup for the foreseeable future (Hunter Pence)?

This is all you need to know: Nobody—NOBODY!—has offered Oswalt anything.

“No one has yet (that we know of) offered Roy Oswalt a contract,” wrote Craig Calcaterra yesterday.

That’s what Oswalt’s been reduced to. In December, Oswalt reportedly fished the waters for a three-year deal. Not even a nibble. That’s now changed, with his asking price coming down considerably to earth: a one-year deal and the neighborhood of $8-9 million.

The market isn’t doing Oswalt any favors. With Hiroki Kuroda’s one-year deal with the Yankees, worth $10 million, Oswalt’s value is deflated by one desperate-for-pitching team.

But you’d have to think Oswalt would factor into the Phillies’ plans.

Right?

“Having Oswalt and being able to back a couple of guys up one spot so you have a legitimate sixth starter would make a lot of sense,” scouting guru Keith Law of ESPN told Mike Gill of 97.3 ESPN Radio South Jersey yesterday.

 

Especially since the cupboard’s all but cleaned-out. The Phillies flipped Baby Aces Jonathan Singleton and Jarred Cosart to Houston in the Pence deal. They bumped Vance Worley, 11-3 and stunning as a starter, to the bullpen for the postseason.

And don’t hold your breath on farm-system reinforcements.

“They have very little depth at the upper levels,” said Law. “They have a lot of good pitching prospects; they’re all in A ball. They don’t have a guy who’s going to be able to step in and be more than just a fringy replacement if they were to lose a starter to injury.”

Trevor May (No. 87 overall, according to ScoutingBook.com, for his time in Single-A Clearwater), Jonathan Pettibone (No. 152, Single-A Clearwater), Phillippe Aumont (No. 180, Triple-A Lehigh Valley)? Not bailing anybody out any time soon.

So why haven’t the Phillies sunk a prayer (and $8 million) into Oswalt?

Why didn’t the Cubs, who dumped $4.5 million into Paul Mahlom (6-14 with a 3.66 ERA for Pittsburgh in 2011) over that and the marginal $3.5 million to meet Oswalt’s ask?

Why hasn’t anybody?

Remember: With the soon-to-be stretched-out playoff bracket, more teams have more opportunities than ever before. That includes fringe teams like Toronto, long buried beneath the big dogs of the AL East.

“I think it brings a lot of other teams into play,” Tom Verducci of SI told Gill yesterday. “Especially if we’re going to expand the postseason this year and have that second wild card in each league, that begins to bring some other teams into the mix who otherwise might not be in it.”

What gives?

“On the face of it, it seems absurd that he should still be out there and willing to do one year and $8 million. A healthy Roy Oswalt? Yeah, I’ll do that twice over.”

How we should read into the (in)activity: “I have a feeling that we have the market telling us, ‘we don’t like what we see’ in terms of Oswalt’s back.”

Oswalt missed 16 games in 2011 from lower-back pain, aggravated from the time he spent tending to his home after last April’s tornadoes hit Mississippi. He went 9-10 with a 3.69 ERA in 2011, finishing on an uptick with humble-but-reputable monthly performances for August (2-2 with a 3.71 ERA) and September (3-2 with a 3.51 ERA), after sputtering badly in June (1-4 with a 5.81 ERA).

Speculation has the Phillies opting elsewhere.

“I think that train has left,” Jim Sailsbury of CSN Philadelphia told Gill yesterday.

A thought we shouldn’t have had to ask for.

Matt Hammond is a producer for 97.3 ESPN Radio Atlantic City, and writes for 973ESPN.com. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattHammond973.

Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com

MLB Free Agency 2012: Cole Hamels Philadelphia Phillies’ Future Still Uncertain

This Cole Hamels thing just got complicated.

It shouldn’t be. Not yet.

With word that Hamels and the Phillies avoided arbitration with a one-year, $15 million tide-you-over-type deal should come relief.

Relief of no hurt feelings; how would you feel if your boss scrounged up reasons to diminish your value, common during often-heated arbitration banter?

Relief of a problem postponed; chalk up some $50,000 and countless hours in savings, from the prepping costs of a hearing that won’t happen, and talks that have turned completely on the long-term. 

Relief.

This? Anything but.

It’s questions. Uncertainty. Anxiety.

How much is Hamels worth?

Can the Phillies afford it?

Does Hamels even want to stay?

Might the Phillies feel forced to ship him out?

Peeling back the layers won’t find you any comfort either. With production and accomplishments like Hamels—a career 3.39 ERA and four-of-six years of sub-3.5 ERA stuff, and that 2008 World Series MVP—he’s likely to clean up on the open market. Maybe not the stuff of record books. But he’ll bust the bank, no doubt.

 

“As a free agent, you’re starting to talk about (C.C.) Sabathia money: seven years, $161 million,” Tom Verducci of SI told Mike Gill of 97.3 ESPN Radio South Jersey yesterday.

That only becomes more likely in the coming days, with Tim Lincecum on the cusp of becoming the fifth $20 million pitcher in history, following a wake set by Sabathia, Johan Santana, Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee, and blazing a green paper trail for Hamels. Last night, word broke that Lincecum’s camp offered the Giants $21.5 million. San Francisco countered with a flimsy $17 million that won’t hold up.

That only inflates Hamels’ value, maybe beyond the Phillies budget.

Whether the team can’t spill into luxury tax spending or doesn’t want to, the organization has been clear about its intentions to keep it (relatively) cheap. You might scoff at that—the Phillies have spent their way up the MLB team payroll ladder from No. 13 in 2007 to No. 2 a year ago, almost doubling from $89.3 million to $172.9 million—but it’s reasonable to believe their pockets all stretched out.  

“I think it’s going to be very difficult,” said Verducci. “(Re-signing Hamels) is going to be a squeeze no doubt.”

Think about it: Where’s the money supposed to come from? Save for $28.5 million in savings on Brad Lidge and Roy Oswalt—the team declined their options in October—the Phillies don’t have money coming off the books any time soon. And you can consider that money all but already spent, with a new deal for Jonathan Papelbon (four years and $50 million) and a presumed future option for Roy Halladay ($20 million in 2014).

Then what? Without the profit potential of unsold tickets—the count on the consecutive home sellouts your fandom has funded is up to 204—what’s there to be optimistic about?

Will the team bump ticket prices? On Aug. 1, the height of the summer and peak of a record-setting regular season, the average Phillies game ran fans for $69.39, according to SeatGeeks.com, the third-highest in the sport, behind only the Red Sox ($83.13) and Cubs ($77.38).

Think the Philly faithful will go for that?

Is an upstart TV station (think: YES Network) really practical? The ceiling on expected inflows from a team-run network was set by the Yankees, whose 34 percent-owned regional sports channel pulled $400 million in revenue in 2011. True, even broaching that ballpark would give the Phillies money to buy Hamels three times over.

But what’s the likelihood of such a power move, especially in time to make Hamels happen?

The Phillies have one more year left on their cable deal with PHL 17, and their agreement with Comcast ends in 2015, the sum of which were worth $24 million a year ago. That number is bound to climb; the Rangers new TV deal with Fox Sports Southwest will pay out $75 million per year in a market that can’t touch the ratings of a Big 4 like Philadelphia.

Even then: If a boost for Texas wasn’t enough to land the Rangers C.J. Wilson, what’s to think something similar (and something later) guarantees the Phillies Cole Hamels?

When Hamels does hit the market … What? Still holding out hope that he’ll sign an extension? Even now, this far into the process and this near to free agent waters?

That’s unlikely.

Said ESPN’s Keith Law, also to Gill yesterday: “I think once you get this close to free agency, and you’re a player of Hamels’ caliber, you probably want to just get to free agency.”

And why wouldn’t he? Remember: It’s not this often that players that good make it this far.  Most coveted players, top pitchers especially, settle for extensions well before buyers get a chance to bid. Take Jered Weaver, for instance, who agreed to nestle in Los Angeles with the Angels for five years and $85 million. You have to believe with the Yankees, Red Sox and Cubs—all high rollers, all viable, all desperate for starting arms, all itching for a lefty—Hamels has the opportunity to get what Weaver didn’t.

And that doesn’t even include the Dodger Effect. The once-hallowed franchise is about to get solvent and relevant, and quick. When it does, what the Dodgers offer as a destination—competitiveness, promise, opportunity of a weak division, excitement of a reclamation project, weather, lifestyle—rounds out everything on every ball player’s wish list.

“Let’s face it: the landscape is going to change next winter when the Los Angeles Dodgers become a big player,” said Verducci. “Knowing Cole is from Southern California, why not at least see what the options are at the end of the season.”

And then there’s that.

Some aren’t as sold on Hamels affinity to his roots. Said Comcast SportsNet’s Jim Salisbury: “If its’ the perception that he wants to play in Southern California, it’s probably wrong,” alluding to the stars that aligned in 2002, when the San Diego Padres could’ve taken him in the player draft, and Hamels’ happiness that they didn’t.

“He’s flat-out said he’s happy they didn’t take him.”

But that was then, with one franchise bound for a 66-96 (last in NL West) finish. What’s to say that’s not different now, with the Dodgers? What’s to exclude the rest of the sport?

“If I’m any other club looking at a potential free agent starter, I’m looking at Hamels,” said Law.

Starting to make some of the deals Amaro swung sting. That $125 million deal through 2016 for Ryan Howard hurt bad enough on the last pitches of the Phillies last two seasons. That’s like salt in the eyes now.

“I wasn’t a fan of the Howard extension the day it was signed,” said Law. “But it looks a lot worse now.”

Especially with Hunter Pence due up for arbitration, a situation still unsettled.

But that’s not even the worst of it. What if talks between the sides stall? What if the Phillies chances slip? What if 2012 goes the other way, and the team is coasting easier than it did all through 2011?

Could a perfect storm converge on an ultimatum: to trade Cole Hamels?

“I would say that that’s ridiculous, but they traded Cliff Lee in less dire circumstances,” said Law. “I suppose it’s possible.”

Like I said: This Cole Hamels thing just got complicated. 

Matt Hammond is a producer for 97.3 ESPN Radio Atlantic City, and writes for 973ESPN.com. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattHammond973.

Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com