More on Moyer, Burrell
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
More on Moyer, Burrell
Todd Zolecki
The Phillies said it's about flexibility.
Ruben Amaro Jr. explained why the Phillies didn't offer salary arbitration to Jamie Moyer or Pat Burrell.
“First, we still have the ability to negotiate with both of them,” he said. “The fact that we didn’t choose to offer them arbitration really doesn’t have much to do with letting them go or not having a relationship with them anymore. We can still bring them back. But the problem with offering them arbitration is that, if in fact they were to accept arbitration, we would be locked into a number that would not give us the flexibility that we have to have to do some other things. Plus, it would delay the process of knowing what those numbers actually would be, possibly until February. So for us to be able to do our business and try to improve our club in other ways, it would kind of handcuff us because there would be some uncertainty with what we can do.”
The Phillies must feel they can bring back Moyer and/or Burrell at a more reasonable rate. Burrell made $14 million last season. Moyer made $7 million. Both would have received raises had they accepted and gone to arbitration. So what Amaro is saying is that if they had offered arbitration and both had accepted -- I believe Burrell would have accepted because he wouldn't have been able to make more than $14 million anywhere else next season -- that it could prevent them from pursuing other avenues to improve the club (i.e. signing a relief pitcher like Juan Cruz). Amaro is saying is that it didn't make sense to offer arbitration to Moyer and Burrell just becuase they could. They feel their money would be better spent by not spending so much on just two players, when they can potentially bring them back for less and spend money in more places in better ways.
I guess one thing I've learend covering baseball the past six seasons is that it's not how much you spend, it's how you spend it. Look at the Yankees and Mets. But in time we will see how these two decisions ultimatley paid off for the Phillies.
*
Some of the players the Phillies have expressed interested in – Cruz, Derek Lowe, A.J. Burnett and Raul Ibanez – were offered arbitration from their respective teams. Because those players are classified as Type A free agents, the Phillies would forfeit a first-round pick to sign one of them.
“We certainly have to weigh our options,” Amaro said. “Obviously, when some of the big boys who were offered arbitration are going to make you lose a first-round pick, we have to at least weight it and consider it. That doesn’t necessarily mean we will shy away from it.”
*
It's good to win the World Series.
A full postseason share for the Phillies is a cool $351,504.48. The Phillies awarded 45 full shares, 7.039 partial shares and 15 cash awards.
*
What is Adam Eaton's future with the Phillies? Tenuous.
“He’s still part of the club at this particular time,” Amaro said. “If he’s in spring training he will be competing for one of the spots in our rotation. That said, he hasn’t proven to us that he’s a lock by any means. Frankly, we’ll have to see how things shape up as far as rotation is concerned. Some of it may depend on whether we have Jamie back or someone else.”
If Moyer returns, Kyle Kendrick, J.A. Happ, Carlos Carrasco and Drew Carpenter are expected to compete for the final spot in the rotation. If Eaton is in camp with the Phillies, he also will be competing for a spot in the rotation, but I think he would be a long shot.
*
It sounds like any interest the Phillies have in free agent infielder Mark Loretta is faint. And I've been getting a few questions about Chicago White Sox outfielder Jermaine Dye, who would fit in nicely with the Phillies. But Dye has a limited no-trade clause and the Phillies are one of the teams he can't be traded to.
*
John Gonzalez, Phil Sheridan and Ashley Fox talk about the chances for Moyer coming back.
jeffgross..are you kidding? 7039 shares at 351000 a share is 2 billion 450 million dollars...it is a period not a comma— COMMISH78- I think they gave Eaton the .039 share. On second thought, that would be like $13,700. Nevermind, give the .039 share to Elvis (Burrell's dog). Elvis did more for this team than Eaton did.— J C
- Wiseoldowl has a damaged hooter.— mick314
- I'm pretty sure the players didn't award 7,039 shares, they would have had little time to play ball if they had that many shares to award. I think RUTH got the .39 share, probably at Ryan Howards behest...LOL.— jimmymack
- I vote try to keep Burrell, He's worth up to a 3 year deal at 10-11 m per year. If that's not enough we have to let him walk. Moyer would be nice to have back too, but at no more than a 2 year deal at 6 m per year.— jeffso
- COMMISH - you're right, it is a period, not a comma, but it was probably meant to be a comma. The 7.039 were *partial* shares awarded; the $351K is the amount of a *full share*. A partial share could be as little as a $20 bonus to Day-of-Game staff (security, ushers, concessionaires, ticket-takers, etc.). Knowing how the Phillies run their organization, and how well they treat their employees, it is likely they gave everyone a little something, so that is probably meant to be a comma and not a period.— RollinsWasRight
- RWR: as tehj person who originally thought that, i think I'm wrong. I think that a total of 7.039 total shares were handed out as partial shares. In other words, teh bat boy got 1/10 of a share, the equipment guy got 1/4 a share so together they received 7/20 of a share. Overall the Phils handed out about 2.5 million in partial shares. Zo, wanna jump in and tell us who is right here?— jeff gross
- jeff gross wrote, "Better to spend more money in locking up some of our young talent (Werth, Victorino, Hammel, Howard, Madson etc) then overspending for a one year rental of Pat. Every dollar offered in salary this year to one year players, is less money to be offered long term to the core of the team." I think this is exactly what Amaro is trying to say. I think if the Phillies had the choice between bringing back Burrell at $16 million for one season or potentially locking up Madson or Werth past 2009, they would take Madson or Werth.
- Thanks for the commant Todd. Any help on the puncuation question we're having? Is it a coma or a period? 7.039 shares or 7,039 shares?? HELP— jeff gross
- It's 7.039 shares.
- is there any way we can see a partial list of the payouts to certain people connected to team?— jeff gross
- is there any way we can see a partial list of the payouts to certain people connected to team?— jeff gross
- You know, it's great being the defending champs, and I apologize in advance if I am being greedy or a malcontent or something to that effect, but speaking just as your average, run-of-the-mill baseball fan, I am really getting BORED WITH THIS OFF-SEASON! Not just from a Phillies persepctive, but no one is doing anything. I know most off-season movement happens during or shortly following the winter meetings, but usually SOMETHING has happened by now. Good grief. Anyone else? Oh wait, I forgot, "Glass Joe" Mike Hampton got a one-year, incentive laden deal. EXCITING STUFF! WOO HOO!!— RollinsWasRight
- Following the previous threads on why we didn't offer arbitration to any of our FA's, here is a take on it from Buster Olney at ESPN.com: "A month ago, the notion of Abreu as a $16 million player didn't seem so outrageous. In the current climate, however, executives with other teams believe Abreu might be fortunate to make $8 million. It appears that no other team will offer Abreu anything close to what he would make in arbitration with the Yankees. So the Yankees could no longer justify gambling an arbitration offer to Abreu for the sake of draft picks. It isn't that the Yankees don't have money. But the perceived value of players is plummeting rapidly within the industry, and just like investors who are waiting to see when the bottom of the stock market is really bottom -- the Dow Jones didn't hit bottom at 10,000, nor at 9,000, apparently -- teams are waiting to see how far the salaries will fall." I think this not only answers your complaint RWR, but explains the Rube's thinking this year as well— jeff gross
- I'm expecting the MLPA to file a collusion lawsuit against the owners anytime soon like the one they won in 1985 or 86. A 50% pay cut for a guy who almost hit .300 (.297 actually) with 20 HRs, 100 RBI and 100 runs is way too much. In arbitration teams are allowed to offer only a 15% pay cut, I believe. This whole thing hasn’t happened since the 60’s when owners used to slash the players salaries whenever they wanted, including the biggest stars.— EL Zorro
