The Phillies have done a good job of avoiding toxic contracts, but they also don’t have much in the way of homegrown stars in the upper levels of the minors, Matt Gelb of the Athletic notes. It seems obvious, then, that the route to improve this offseason is the free agent market, and they have been one of the teams with assumed interest in free agency’s biggest fishes, to wit, Bryce Harper and Manny Machado. That said, owner John Middleton once balked at a perceived lack of on-field hustle from former Phillies shortstop Freddy Galvis, which would seem at odds with a willingness to go all-in on Machado, given his growing reputation. Generational talents or not, it’s Middleton’s money, and it’ll ultimately be his decision whether or not Machado and Harper are worth the long-term investment.
- Regardless of what happens with Machado and Harper, the Phillies do not appear inclined to overreach in the secondary market, per MLB.com’s Todd Zolecki, specifically as it pertains to their outfield, where in-house options Nick Williams, Odubel Herrera, Roman Quinn, and Aaron Altherr are comparable-to and cheaper-than the middle class of talent available in free agency. GM Matt Klentak also says the Phillies are unlikely to explore the starting pitching market, despite potential interest in upgrading in that area. They are hypothetically interested in a left-handed starter, but Patrick Corbin, the top name on the market, figures to command more money than the Phillies are willing to spend on him.
- Cole Hamels is open to signing an extension with the Cubs, or at least that’s the impression 670 The Score’s Bruce Levine came away with after speaking with his agent, John Boggs. The Cubs have until Thursday to decide whether to pick up Hamels’ $20MM option for the 2019 season or let the Texas Rangers pay his $6MM buyout. His impressive turnaround with the Cubs (12 starts, 2.36 ERA, 3.59 xFIP) leads many to believe the team option will be exercised, but nothing official has come down from Chicago yet. If the Cubs do pick up the option, they could begin negotiating an extension as early as Friday with the soon-to-be 35-year-old lefty. In theory, the Cubs could decline their option and negotiate a new contract with Hamels from there. This is unlikely, however, as the Rangers would be on the hook for the $6MM buyout, and they’d have grounds to file a grievance in that circumstance. However it happens, we should know by Thursday if Hamels will play his 2019 home games at Wrigley Field.
- The Marlins are open to being active in free agency this offseason, albeit for moderately-priced, low-risk veterans, per MLB.com’s Joe Frisaro. With six arbitration cases and only three hefty contracts on the books, the Marlins are better positioned than in recent seasons to bring in some reinforcements from the outside to help build culture and mentor their younger players. One of those arbitration cases, last year’s Opening Day starter Jose Urena, has been rumored to be available via trade, but according to Frisaro he is much more likely to be the Opening Day starter in Miami for the second consecutive season.
Harper has also had criticism for his lack of hustle as well.
Lol. Harper has gotten criticized more for that haircut. But nice try. If you want to get serious for one sec that one injury on the rainy day with the slippery base was a result of him HUSTLING.
So your saying it’s okay for players who are paid millions who play baseball for a living to not hustle?
No, I’m saying feel he’s the complete opposite of Manny Machado in that department.
I’m saying it’s proof of his hustle play
But you basically said if Harper wasn’t hustling he wouldn’t have gotten hurt, but um k
He didn’t say: “If he hadn’t hustled he wouldn’t have gotten hurt.”
He DID say: He hustled and got hurt.
But nowhere did he say he shouldn’t have hustled. The difference in the two phrases is one of context. The statement he DID say rather than the one you put in his mouth was a refutation to your statement that Harper doesn’t hustle and not an endorsement of any multi million dollar player not hustling.
Thank you
He’s a jerk just like Manny!
@c1234
Give it a rest. Xabial never said what you implied
Maybe he means to hustle but he is more concerned with wearing pants that are so tight that you see every square inch of his butt to actually want to move quickly. Just because his helmet falls off every time he runs doesn’t mean he is hustling either. Why have a nice haircut when you have to wear a helmet all the time? Have you ever seen him chase down any single ball that is hit to him? He’s either lazy or both of his knees are much balkier than his age shows.
None of those things have anything to do with talent. I hadn’t noticed. People hate Bryce for the most bizarre things.
I don’t know. The way he describes Harpers hair and butt, yankees500 might be struggling with some personal feelings >=}
Exactly. Yankee fan too. No clue what he said.
I did notice… Machado blowing bubbles while trying to beat hit, that happened to be the final out in a WS game! https://mobile.twitter.com/barstoolsports/status/1056397733278482434?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1056397733278482434&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Flarrybrownsports.com%2Fbaseball%2Fmanny-machado-blow-bubble-world-series%2F470542
I do not mind tight pants on baseball players as long as they can still run.
Good luck spending your money on Machado. If the dude’s this nonchalant in WS, one can only imagine how he does after $200M…+ (Supposedly, the lower end of what he’ll get)
Harper all day regardless of greater “need”
In the midst of a battle with insomnia I got curious and searched “bryce harper not hustling”. He’s played for 4 managers and in the first page of the search there is this one https://www.mlb.com/news/nationals-manager-matt-williams-sits-bryce-harper-for-lack-of-hustle/c-72664620 with Williams then this one https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/washington-nationals/dusty-baker-spoke-bryce-harper-about-hustling-first-base with Baker and this one https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/nats-manager-dave-martinez-meets-with-bryce-harper-after-failure-to-run-out-ground-ball/ with Martinez.
I am sure there is some with Johnson in 2012-13 but I looked no further than the first page. He has always had issues with not hustling to the extent that multiple managers have either benched him or had to sit him down for a talk. To say otherwise is disingenuous.
Insomnia is right. Had to go back 2+ years. 2012-13 was more than half a decade ago. Nothing in 2017 or 2018?
We’re talking about the here and now. Machado’s lack of hustle in the WS, not more than TWO days ago is a cause for concern.
Far as Im concerned, other than injury which where out of his control, slipped on wet base, running on a ***ing raining day, disingenuous to suggest Harper’s hustle is a major concern.
I know that when a person is blinded by adulation they see what they want…I have done it….you have done it with Reynolds whose entire season numbers were bolstered by 10 days when called up and one week in July.
The CBS link I gave has this dateline…by Mike Axisa
@mikeaxisa Jul 14, 2018 • 1 min read.. If all you could find was two years ago your search skills are awful…that story was literally on my first page of searches. He has a history of not hustling at times whether you admit it or not.
Harper is just so streaky and sometimes he does hustle and sometimes he does not. Depends on his mood and haircut.
Maybe lately but early on I remember seeing him stretch out singles to doubles
He also dealt with injuries as well due to his early aggression
Harper’s biggest criticism is being injury-prone. You can’t commit that much money to someone who can’t stay on the field, but they were fluke injuries. Can’t blame him for getting injured like one above: if anything, he’s tougher than people give him credit for; ended up being bone bruise, thought for sure that would end his season. Sorry guys. He’s one of my favorite players.
https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/6tcow9/bryce_harper_slips_on_a_wet_first_base_against/
If I remember correctly a few years ago he got hurt playing hard running into a wall, and they needed him to be more conservative, playing hard but smart. I have no doubt the guy will play hard, if given a huge contract. His availability and durability, can and should be in question though
Bryce gets a ton of flak for many different reasons, perhaps mostly unfairly. Even the umpires had seemed to target him as a heel. If he’s on you’re team though, I have little doubt you will love him. Should be interesting to see what team he chooses
Harper had a 1.3 WAR, this year. Jose Bautista had a 1.4 WAR. Guess Jose is in line for a bigger payday than Bryce, right mathletes? Lolol
Yes, because WAR and WAR only is what people use to judge a player’s ability.
Not sure if you meant to be correct, but correct.
WAR is not the best way to judge a player.
That being said, Harper had a down season in a contract year. That can be brutal in FA.
Another way to judge a player’s ability: If they were a phenom and super prospect in college and in the minors, every season he has that isn’t MVP caliber is obviously simply a fluke.
The issue with hustle when it comes to 162 games is the fact that you would be hard pressed to find a player that can sustain that on such a schedule and still remain productive.
There are moments that players don’t hustle, but some have more of those moments than others.
Truth
Plus if a player admits that they won’t hustle in the final few series of the season with a championship on the line and the end in site it becomes an issue. I get that 162 grind, as a college athlete(swimming), I understand it’s impossible to come with your best effort for every practice or even every race. But come championship season there is no excuse not to push for your best
Y solarte
He hustled all the time
Hunter Pence always aired it all out on every play!
But, you should hustle in the playoffs. This wasn’t a random Tuesday night in August in a 9-2 game. It was the playoffs with a player entering his biggest off-season.
If you don’t want to hustle then, then how much will you hustle in a 10 year contract? How hard will you work when things are difficult?
If the Phils don’t get Manny or Bryce I can’t see them making another leap in standings. It’s a must getting 1 of them. Painfully average lineup right now. If they make a run at a SP I can see a solid offer for Ryu possibly
Agreed. I am nuts about either of their personalities, but I will take them if the Phillies can win.
Phillies Phan….
Agreed and I agree with your other statement about Harper being too streaky. If the Phils are going to sign one or the other I would rather it be MM, personality flaws and all. I just hope he can handle the boos when he does phone it in. Remember the boos and criticism J-Roll (or Jimmy Popup as some used to refer to him as) used to get?
Even Michael Jack got booed (but not for lack of hustle). I just don’t see MM donning a wig to break the tension though.
NOT nuts
I read it as not nuts
Disagree. With as much young, still developing talent they have they should be better regardless. Their real problem was defense and hopefully they learned their lesson regrading playing guys out of position
I’m not saying the offense was great but if the defense was better they’d have been a much better team.
Why could the Rangers file a grievance if say the Cubs gave Hamels a 1 year/$16mil contract, and let the Rangers pay the $6mil buyout? Saves the Cubs a few million, and Hamels isn’t a $20 million pitcher. Or the Cubs could say – “hey we will give you two years, $14mil each year, you get your $6mil buyout, and you’re essentially pitching for $17mil/year.” That’s not bad business. That’s smart for Hamels, smart for the Cubs.
Because it would be circumventing the the spirit of the trade agreement and not dealing in good faith.
The Rangers agreed to pay the Cubs the $6M if and only if they use the buyout and let Hamels walk. Using the buyout as a backdoor way to sign Hamels will not sit well with Texas or MLB.
Of course they wouldn’t like it but they did agree to the trade knowing that they might have to pay the $6 million.
On the condition that the $6 they would pay the Cubs for Hamels buyout was used only for that reason….not as a backdoor tactic.
I would be shocked if there is not language in the trade deal stipulating that.
My guess is that the buyout either says it, or doesn’t. Captain Obvious, right? Well this matters because the agreement probably has a merger clause in it too… which means that the agreement is the entire agreement and no other verbal, written, or other agreements are in effect any longer. If it does, the Rangers have absolutely no grounds to win a grievance, even if they file it. That said, if it wasn’t contemplated by the Rangers, it could hurt the trade relationship between the teams, which has historically been good, and I’m not sure the Cubs want to do that.
Scenario…..Cubs do the buyout. and pay Hamels $6M….Texas pays the Cubs the $6M per the trade agreement….a week later the Cubs announce that they have signed Hamels to a 1 year contract at $18M per (as some have suggested) meaning Hamels was viewed as a high dollar pitcher by the Cubs to begin with.
The Rangers object as they should. as It would be obvious that it was a backdoor attempt by the Cubs to save a few million. Under the rules of the MLB Constitution the Commish is the sole arbitrator. How do you think he would view such a deal? Is something like that in the best interest of the game? As you said “it could hurt the trade relationship between the teams” and it would also hurt the Cubs chances of making other trades. That is not in baseballs best interest. Whereas the Commissioners “best interest” powers are somewhat limited in the CBA the same does not hold true between the teams.
Under Aticle II Section 3 (a) the Commissioner can levy a fine of $2M on the club and $500,000 against any owner or officer.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx4PW47PiAi-ZjJlMzY0YmYtNmMzNi00MDhlLThmYzQtZWE5N2RkYWYwNDQw/view
‘We were in discussion for a contract, but we couldn’t agree to terms, so we let the Rangers buy him out of his $20mm option because we didn’t think he was a $20mm player’
‘After another few weeks of negotiating, we agreed to terms on a completely new contract that will pay him $15mm annually for 2 years’
This is what is going to happen, please please PLEASE stop with this none sense that they are going to file a grievance – on what grounds? They made the trade not in good faith? It’s too late to redo the deal and this is the deal that Texas agreed to. They had the option of saying we’ll cover half of the buyout regardless, and they didn’t, so you reap what you sow. Make a smarter trade next time and don’t wind up in this position.
joshua.barron1…
Watch and see. If I am wrong I will admit it on these boards. Will you?
Teams are required by MLB to deal in good faith with each other, failure to do so can have consequences.
Cole Hamels signing a longer term contract wiyh a lower AAV ias beneficial to the Cuba whether they were on the hook for the $6 mil buyout or not. Could the Rangers file a grievance? Sure… but they can’t prove their claim.
Common sense proves it.
What makes you think it would take so little to sign Hamels as a free agent? He’d likely get more than that, especially on a 2 year deal. Probably closer to $40M. So why would the Cubs play that game? If they want Hamels back exercising the option is far less risky than hoping he doesn’t get a better offer and then having to either beat it or watch him leave. Makes zero sense to decline the option just to save the $6M and then possibly to have to spend millions more.
Barron go back to trolling, your baseball opinions suck!
Sure, I’ve been consistent on this. If they do exercise the option, I take a big fat L
You are grasping at straws dying on that hill.
Cat, I pretty much agree with your angle of thinking, but how do you know that the Rangers agreed to the $6M “if and only if”. What kind of legal talk is “if and only if” and what proof do you have that this is documented. Texas would have been responsible for the $6M buyout if they didn’t trade him and the Cubs did pick up, at least a portion of his salary this current season. I agree that teams probably should deal in good faith, but for you to say that the agreement was “if and only if” is slightly off base. For all we know, after last season, the Cubs don’t retain him, he sits on the market until March and signs back with the Cubs for less than $20M. (That won’t happen–the Cubs will pick up the option and this whole chain will be moot, but it could happen).
I never said it was documented, I said “I would be shocked if there is not language in the trade deal stipulating that.” and it’s just my opinion. There must be at least several dozen posts over the last few weeks suggesting scenarios such as “the Cubs decline the option and then sign Hamels for $17M so that the Cubs save $3M and Hamels makes $3M extra”. It seems likely that a blatant “decline and sign” backdoor attempt like that may have been addressed in the trade.
If there is no such language in the deal, naturally with more specificity, it has also been my stance that such a flagrant back door deal would draw the ire of Texas and MLB. I did state “On the condition that the $6 (million) they would pay the Cubs for Hamels buyout was used only for that reason” and in the context of this thread I believe it’s clear what I meant.
If Hamels had fully imploded after the trade and the consensus was he was worth no more than a 1 year contract for $2M with incentives it would be a different case and no one would be suggesting backdoor agreements, which is what I have been addressing here and here https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/10/heymans-latest-hamels-smoak-nunez-bregman-padres.html
if the Cubs bought him out on a handshake agreement to sign him before buying him out that would arguably be a violation of baseball rules, since it essentially agreeing to a contract before he’s officially a free agent just to screw over another team.
It would be incredibly difficult to prove that Hamels and the Cubs basically colluded, but yeah, the buyout then the new contract would have to be negotiated as separate deals, otherwise it’s effectively a contract extension.
it may seem arcane, but the process has to be Hamels getting bought out and the Cubs and Rangers finalizing their deal. Hamels filing for free agency, then Hamels agreeing to terms with the Cubs. Any deal struck between Hamels and the Cubs before all that plays out (officially or unofficially) would give Texas grounds for a grievance.
If that happens, Texas will file a grievance. The question is how MLB will respond.
Even if the Cubs were to approach Hamels with this theoretical “deal”, what would possess Hamels to take it? If they’re going to let him become a free agent, why wouldn’t he look at all of his options before deciding what to do? He’s made well over $150M in his career, has pitched in and won the World Series. And he pitched damn well in Chicago so he’ll have his share of teams interested. A 2 year deal for Hamels, even at 35+, and at a high AAV ($25m?) might be more enticing than spending $125M+ on Corbin or Kershaw.
personally i think he’d be a fool not to test to market. But if he does then, as it pertains to the Cubs/Rangers deal, the Rangers wouldn’t have a leg to stand on if he does and then signs with the Cubs anyway.
MacPhail has already alluded to next seasons FA market. Machado , Harper and Corbin combined couldn’t make this team a legitimate contender. Count on the Phillies doing nothing of consequence.
Phillies need to make sure they have enough money to sign Trout in a couple years.
Waiting on Casey to weigh-in.
pretty sure he took his asinine comments somewhere else, possibly to csnphilly where he would fit right in. he was clamoring for Harper AND Machado before anyone else, though, but he will also be the first to whine about being stuck with two albatross contracts.
You’re probably the only person who cares what he thinks
I think casey got blocked
One can only hope wiggysf. He was banned once but then he changed his ISP and came back. I know he was banned on everything from Twitter to Fox Sports. He has said as much in his incredibly obsessive (and at times scary) blog.
He did post here a few days ago.
Whoever signs Machado is going to regret it. He doesn’t hustle, is a dirty player, and his defense at SS is average.
I really miss dirty players with tempers. What ever happened to Nyjer Morgan? Man, that little guy was such a great target for ridicule from the stands. He loved it so much. Sure, it’s great if your players are more like Jeff Francoeur buying opposing fans pizza, but it’s great to have a good villain so easy to hate.
Jim Edmonds.
Average is generous.
I guess that Carlos Santana deal stinks, but not toxic, and the Arrieta deal is weighed more by the short-term and less than it was a $30MM AAV, though he did have a 3-WAR season.
What? Arrieta’s deal is 3/75. That’s 25 AAV. He’s more of a middle of the rotation pitcher at this point but it’s only a 2 year deal now.
Ya the “toxic” contracts must be the ones that are too much for too long. Davis, Pujols, Cabrera etc.
If Machado is not a hustle guy now…whats he gonna be after getting more than $200 million?
Cubs need to do what they need to do to bring Hamels back. They need to bring Strop and Chavez back. I am a Cubs fan who really wants them to get Harper although I can understand why that makes other Cubs fans nervous. I think we can solve SS in house so no need for Machado. We got Baez to put there and plenty of options at 2B. I would not be opposed to bringing Murphy back. Bottom line is we are not that far off. We don’t need a rebuild just a tweak. Bringing back Hamels will give us a deep and talented rotation. If we retain Strop and Chavez and sign a couple more decent arms our bullpen will be deep and talented. Signing Harper will give us a fearsome and balanced lineup. That would keep us from losing any of our core for yet another off-season. We would retain our young, talented and now experienced roster for a deep postseason run in 19.
The Cubs need a first rate bat in the worse way. Machado, attitude aside, is consistently elite. Harper is not. I would sign Machado if he is interested before I offer Harper a contract if I’m the Cubs.
Machado’s OBP is consistently pretty pedestrian, though, where as Harper’s is consistently better. So Harper’s bat actually profiles a lot better to what the Cubs need… and position wise it’s not even close. replacing Almora/Heyward’s bat with Harper is so much more of a straight upgrade than moving Bryant off 3b and then moving Schwarber
mind you i’m not trying to talk down Machado, just pointing out what he’s good at is not what the Cubs critically need when you look deeper.
You make a valid point about Harper. Still, considering the ballpark and the Cubs’ pitching staff, I’d take the 40 HRs Machado gives me over the 3+ walks a game from Harper. A guy like Baez carried the team on his back last year with his slugging. Imagine what Machado could do for that lineup.
Phil’s should go hard after Corbin. They haven’t had any kind of effective left starter since trading Cole.