A Dirty Little Word from a Few Years Back...Contraction

In the absense of any real baseball news, I just wanted to touch on a recent issue since forgotten...contraction in baseball.

I'll start by saying that I'm all for it. I think that there are a number of reasons baseball should elinimate teams:

The lack of good pitching available
The imbalance of the leagues
The imbalance of the divisions
Lack of competition and parity

When Selig introduced this idea back around 2001, the talks originally called for the Marlins and the Expos to be purchased by MLB and eventually folded. Somehow, Florida is traded for the Twins in the following discussion. The idea eventually gets rejected, even after the Expos are purchased by MLB and moved to Washington.

I never wanted to fold the Twins. There is way too much history and two World Series Championship teams from Minnesota. I understand the small market concept, but the team has recently managed to compete even with a low budget. I believe the Twins may also be one of the few things keeping Minnesota from defecting to Canada, eh.

I wasn't happy about the Marlins leaving, either. They may not have a lot of support down there, but look at those women. The Florida Marlins Mermaids? Anyway, they also managed to win 2 World Series in their short history, and are on the up and up about to compete again. They are really geniuses when you think about it, the ultimate sell high, buy low strategy. Every GM should be using similar tactics, only not to the extreme where the team goes dormant for 5 years until everyone comes up from the farm. But in order to stay competitive for a long time, you need to trade your aging veterans for high level prospects. It's been the mantra of Andy Reid and the Eagles to continually replace guys in their 30s with younger, cheaper players, except for the important few (Dawkins, Runyan).

I was fine with folding the Expos until they came to DC. This city has embraced this team more than anyone imagined with the Orioles just 45 minutes up 95. They may be a bad team, but they are still rebounding from spending a season playing in 3 different countries. The non-trade of Soriano was a huge mistake, but I think they will come around in a few years.

So who does that leave? How about the Tamba Bay Devil Rays for one. Since they came into the league, they have been a perennial doormat for the AL. They have a bunch of good outfielders and no pitching, nor fans. Plus, apparently the elderly just can't take the summer heat, since neither Florida team draws many fans. Let the state root for one team, and let it be the one with 2 Championships and potential.

My other inclination would be to go with one of the other recent expansion teams, the Rockies or the Diamondbacks. Each team, however, has gained quite a following, and Arizona has a Championship to their credit, while the Mile High Stadium in Denver has created a unique offensive ballpark which has created a nice niche for the team in baseball history. So who else do we turn to? Ah, the Kansas City Royals. The Royals were a semi-recent expansion team, coming into the league in 1968. Other than their 1980 Series loss to our beloveds, they haven't done much for themselves, or the game. Recently, they've been a bad, small market team. Their team salary in 2006 was 47 Million, ranking 26th. Tampa Bay was 29th at 35 Million, though they should have been last since Floridia was playing all rookies, and their 15 Million payroll will come up in the next few years as they add a few veterans to complete their next championship team. KC is also 25th in total franchise value at 239 Million, while Tampa is dead last at 209 Million. The other small market teams are finding ways to compete, while these two teams are just laughing stocks.

So that's my advice to Bud Selig, contract Tampa and KC, then restack the league so you have 14 on each side, either 5, 5, 4 or back to 7 and 7. That way each league will have an equal chance at making the playoffs. Hold a draft for the players in their respective systems, with a major and minor league portion. The worst records over the last 5 years pick first. Expand the rosters and coaching staffs for a year while everything shakes out, and then pick up and move on. The world will be a better place.

One side note: If anyone wondered how Danny Jackson ended up on the 1993 Phils World Series team, the Marlins took him with their 27th pick (the Rockies were also picking, so he was essentially taken 54th) from the Pirates, and then traded him to the Phils for Joel Adamson and Matt Whisenant. Those two combined to go 14-14 over 4 years with ERAs of almost 5. Robert Person went 4 picks earlier to the Fish in that draft. Couple that trade with Kevin Stocker for Bobby Abreu, and the Phils should be rooting for expansion, not contraction.

Protecting Ryan Howard

Since Pat Gillick apparently can't hire Jack Bauer, it looks like he'll have to find someone else to protect Ryan Howard in 2007. Speaking of Jack Bauer, some of you may know that after someone released Chuck Norris Facts, it was followed up with Jack Bauer Facts. But did you know that someone trumped them both with a list of facts for our very own stud lefty, Cole Hamels Facts?

My favorites:

When Delmon Young heard Cole was promoted to triple-A, he went and got himself suspended.
Cole Hamels only needs two seams to throw a four seam fastball.
Cole Hamels once struck a man out looking. Literally. Cole just gazed at him and the batter was retired on strikes.

Back to Ryan Howard, or actually, Pat Burrell. While everyone focuses on Burrell having a down year offensively (still hitting 29 homers and 95 rbis in limited action), especially his timid numbers with RISP, the case has also already been made that his numbers with RISP were very good two years ago and the kicker, that Burrell hit .423 following a Howard walk. I won't retell that story, you can read one take here.

The question that I want to pose is who will protect Pat Burrell? Pat Burrell led the league in pitches per plate appearance, taking over where Abreu left off. He actually walked more frequently than Ryan Howard last year. Howard walked in 15.5% of his PAs, Burrell in 17%. Burrell also struck out less than Ryan Howard, as Howard struck out in 31.2% of Abs to Burrell’s 28.4%. No I’m clearly not saying Burrell’s a better hitter, but he’s a very good hitter coming off of a sub par year. Power hitters are streaky, and Burrell seems to be an extreme example as he internalizes things and dwells on the negatives. Even while he was having a bad year (by his standards) he still displayed a better eye at the plate than Howard even. That peripheral stat means that 2007 should be a good year and Burrell’s stats will equalize eventually to show what a good hitter he is.

Burrell’s walk rate is actually rather alarming. Concerns about his aggressiveness aside, Burrell does what he should in protecting Howard, he is feared by the opposing team translating into walks. The problem is, the Phillies don’t have someone to protect Burrell. The Phillies used various 6th hole hitters last year, but this year it will appear to be Wes Helms, Aaron Rowand, or Rod Barajas/Carlos Ruiz. If none of these four players are playing well, the other team will continue to walk Burrell regardless of what Howard does. If one of these players has a great season, most likely to get a shot is Helms, then that player will rack up RBIs until teams stop walking Howard and Burrell, which should then increase both of their production.

I recently responded to a comment made by someone on a phillies.scout.com message board saying that the Phillies would be better with Jimmy Rollins protecting Howard. Now, aside from this screwing up the entire lineup, can you imagine the pitcher for the opposing team staring down Ryan Howard, then glancing into the on deck circle to see 5’8” Jimmy Rollins and being intimidated? I didn’t think so. None of the other Phillies can protect Howard. And in my mind, even if we acquired a bona fide power hitter to play 3rd or right, I would put them behind Burrell in the lineup, which would greatly increase his production, making the lineup even more of a terror for opposing pitching. Remember, the Phillies led the NL in runs. They have a fabulous 1-5, one of the best in baseball...it will be the success of batters 6-8 which could put them in a league of their own.

Latest Trade Rumors

Recently, there are stories going around the Hot Stove about the Phils. I'll recap some of the stories and my thoughts.

1. Rowand for Scott Linebrink and a mid level prospect.

Supposedly, the Padres are interested in Rowand and are willing to part with Linebrink. Linebrink is a 30 year old reliever with a 3.12 career ERA (3.57 last season). The knock on him is that he supposedly has only converted 3 of 22 save chances or something, which prompted the author or these rumors to explain that the Phils would demand at least a mid level prospect to go with Linebrink.

2. Lieber for Ryan Church

I don't know if I heard this or made the connection in my head, but if the Phils deal Rowand, then they absolutely need another proven outfielder, and the Nats are shopping Church and in need of pitching. I checked the stats comparing Rowand to Church, and they are eerily close in a lot of categories. They are both the same size (6'1") and nearly the same weight (Rowand at 200 has 10 pounds on Church). They both hit about .270 with 15-20 homeruns and 60 RBI. They are actually only 1 year apart in age (Church is 28 I believe), but Church came into the league 3 years after Rowand, meaning he's not yet into his arbitration years. You would lose defense with Church, but he's still got a little more potential than Rowand at the plate.

3. Lieber for Akinori Otsuka

If the previous deals don't happen, another option would be to use Lieber to get Texas' former closer. Otsuka is 35, and has only pitched 3 seasons in the MLB. He has thrown to a 2.43 ERA (2.11 last season) and has closer experience, closing 32 games for Texas last season.

With the first pair of deals, you are essentially trading Lieber for Linebrink and a prospect, and returning a slightly younger and cheaper version of Aaron Rowand to play right instead of center. While that sounds like an ok deal, I hesitate to trade Rowand for essentially the same type of player, even indirectly. Unless they can get a top 5 closer, I don't think we should trade Lieber and Rowand. Rowand shouldn't be traded unless we can upgrade the outfield.

That leaves the Lieber for Otsuka deal. I don't know how I feel about this one either. At 35, I feel like he'd be a short term fix to our bullpen situation. I'd rather look for a guy right around 30, who we can count on to sure up our pen for at least a few years. And with Jeff Weaver getting 8 Mil for one year with Seattle, I think we may be able to get a better option than Otsuka for Lieber.

These are simply rumors, and we all know that rumors usually get leaked once the potential deal dies, or at least cools.

Phillies Notes

Alfonseca finally signed his deal at the conclusion of winter ball (look at the sixth finger!). To recap, it's 380k guarenteed, and 700k if he appears on the roster, with incentives up to 1.1 mil. I will not be confident in this team if he is the 8th inning set up guy. At 34, he's a shell of his former self, and only lasted 19 games last season, being shut down with elbow problems and finally deactivated. After putting up a 1.69 ERA through his first 11 appearances, he finished with a 5.63 ERA. He gave up 8 earned runs in his last 5.1 innings. This move was dubbed a low risk, moderate reward signing. The problem is, it's only low risk if this guy pitches well in spring training and surprises people by making the roster. Right now, he's got the most experience in a young bullpen and is a candidate to be the set up guy to Flash. If he makes the team out of spring training, he should be at least 4th on the depth chart behind Madson, Geary, and hopefully a proven guy we get for Lieber.

Speaking of the bullpen, a minor transaction took place recently as the A's sent Kirk Saarloos to the Reds for a 25 yr old AA closer with a decent stuff and a chance to one day crack a major league bullpen as a set up guy. There were players to be named on both sides of this deal. Saarloos is a 5th starter/bullpen arm with average ground ball producing stuff. He won't blow anyone away, nor has great control, instead relying on the defense, especially up the middle, to make outs for him. Now here's the kicker, he only makes 1.2 mil this year. While Gillick has been stockpiling arms, why didn't he take a chance on Saarloos? Once we trade Lieber, we're going to be relying heavily on guys like Eude Brito if a starter gets injured (see Hamels, Eaton). Saarloos would have been a perfect guy to pitch the 6/7th inning, and provide spot starts for injuries. You can never have enough ground ball pitchers at the Bank, either. Unless they are getting a stud back in the "to be named" portion, couldn't we have traded a guy like, say Ryan Cameron (Who? Exactly. Who is David Schafer, the guy traded for Saarloos? Cameron is our AAA closer who projects as a middle bullpen guy and is ranked 42nd on scout.com's Phillies list.) I'd rather pay Saarloos 1.2 mil than Alfonseca 1.1 mil. But maybe Gillick never got wind of his availability. Who knows.

As anxious as I am for the Phils to trade Lieber, I do not want them to give him away. I trust Gillick to "Stand Pat" and wait for the best offer, even if it takes until spring training. If Clemens burns the Yanks, I'd imagine they would take a flier on Lieber, but they don't have much they'd let go from their pen. I would consider Lieber for Farnsworth and a minor prospect. Farnsworth had good years for the Cubbies in '01, '03, and then in '05 split between Detroit and Atlanta when he amassed 16 saves. That puts him on pace to have a good 07, right? But seriously, I would trust him a lot more than Alfonseca, and I would like Geary and Madson a lot more if they both got knocked down a peg on the pecking order.

By the way, I figured this out a while back and shared it with Jeff. In a weird twist of fate...when the Phils signed Lieber from the Yanks, they gave up their first round pick in the following draft. Who did the Yankees draft with that pick? CJ Henry, acquired in the Abreu trade. Funny how things work out. Henry is still only 20 (man I feel old) but he's striking out in a quarter of his ABs (call it the Jimmy Rollins effect), though he did hit .253 while at Lakewood. Even more alarming, he makes an error every other game in the field, with 13 in 25 games at Lakewood and 25 errors in 58 games with Charleston before the trade. The Abreu trade was necessary, and while his salary looks a lot better in the exploded market, Gillick couldn't predict that, and at least we aren't paying any of it.

Baseball Economics: Breaking Down Utley's Contract

In response to Jeff's comments regarding his disproval over the backloading of Utley's contract hurting the ability to trade him after his peak years, I decided to mix my finance background and love of sports to do an analysis of the VALUE of Utley's contract.

First off, the Phillies would never trade Chase Utley, Jeff, and prepare for an afterlife in Phillies purgatory for even mentioning that slander. Second, if Chase were to suffer a career ending injury, we have to pay him the money either way, so it wouldn't matter how much of the contract was left.

Now, let's get into the contract as it was originally signed:

Signing Bonus: 2 Mil
2007: 4.5 Mil
2008: 7.5 Mil
2009: 11 Mil
2010: 15 Mil
2011: 15 Mil
2012: 15 Mil
2013: 15 Mil

Total: 85 Mil/7 years

Now, Chase Utley will never actually see that 85 Mil, and not just because of taxes. To illustrate the VALUE of Utley's contract, I'm going to use the compound interest formula to show what Utley's contract will be worth at the receipt of his last paycheck. Then, I'm going to use the Time Value of Money formula to find the value of the contract in today's dollars. I'll compare that to a balanced contract, as Jeff suggested, and also a contract built around paying the highest dollar for "peak" performance, meaning his 29-32 aged years.

Before we start, we're going to throw out the signing bonus, since it will be a constant for all 3 contract types, and simply make extra work. The compound interest formula will calculate the future value of each contract year, by assuming that every penny is invested. It doesn't matter if Chase invests his money or not, this rate will only serve as a constant and will work both ways (when we find the Present value, too). Otherwise, we could just be boring and adjust the future rate for inflation. Anyway, the generally accepted finance rate of return for standard investments is 8% (11% Stock Market historical average - 3% accepted inflation). Here is the formula for compound interest:

Total = Principal x (1+Rate)^years

The first year, for instance, would read:

Total = 4.5 Mil x (1.08)^7
Total = 4.5 Mil x 1.71
Total = 7.71 Mil

So the first year of the contract will be worth 7.71 Mil in 2013. If you do this for each year, raising it to one less year each time (for example, year two would be raised to the 6th power) and add up all of the totals, you get 108.78 Mil.

Next, we find the Present Value of that sum using the Time Value of Money. The Time Value of Money formula states:

Future Value = Present Value x (1+r)^years

The math works as follows:

108.78 Mil = PV x (1.08)^7
108.78 Mil = PV x 1.71
63.61 Mil = Present Value

That means that if Chase's contract was settled in one lump sum today, he would be entitled to a check for almost 64 Mil, not the 85 Mil reported in the contract. The 85 Mil does not represent an actual number that will ever be realized. It's the addition of 7 static payments, at 7 different times (in actuality, the contract will be paid in hundreds, if not thousands of small increments, and may even be deferred with interest until well after his playing years).

Back to the point, though, on to the other contract types. The balanced payment model is actually a lot easier to compute since it represents an annuity and requires only one calculation for the compound interest instead of 7 (a lot of this could actually be simplified into one calculation, but I've taken the long way to illustrate things better). The annuity formula reads:



Now subtracting the signing bonus from the contract gives us 83 Mil. Over 7 years, that's an average of 11.86 Mil per year. So the math reads like this:

Total = 11.86 Mil x [((1.08)^8 - 1)/.08] - 11.86 Mil
Total = 11.86 Mil x [((1.85) - 1)/.08] - 11.86 Mil
Total = 11.86 Mil x [.85/.08] - 11.86 Mil
Total = 11.86 Mil x 10.63 - 11.86 Mil
Total = 126.15 Mil

We use the same Present Value formula from before to get 73.77 Mil. That means that the Phillies would be paying almost 10 Mil more in today's dollars to sign Utley for a balanced contract. So yes, the Phillies may have trouble trading his 15 Mil per season for the final 4 seasons. The net savings of 10 Mil in today's dollars, however, more than offsets any contract they have to eat down the road. In fact, the value of the final year of his contract in today's dollars is 9.5 Mil, which is less than the money they save by backloading it to being with. That means that they essentially get the final year out of him for FREE compared to a balanced contract that was one year shorter. So if worst came to worst and they had to trade him in the offseason before his final year, they could eat his entire remaining 15 Mil in order to net a few prospects, and still turn a small profit over a balanced contract of one year shorter. Or they could trade him with two years left and pay half his salary, while netting out at 0 or a slight profit and get players in return. All of this ignores the fact that given the market, and Utley's natural abilities, he may still be a bargain in 2012 and 2013 at 15 Mil.

I also did one more calculation, just to round out the picture. If the contract was built around his peak years, maybe resembling this:

2007: 7 Mil
2008: 10 Mil
2009: 12 Mil
2010: 15 Mil
2011: 12 Mil
2012: 10 Mil
2013: 7 Mil

It still adds up to 83 Mil (without the signing bonus) over 7 years. The math for this contract gives you a future value of 121.84 Mil and a Present Value of 71.25 Mil. That is a slight improvement over the balanced contract (because you're paying him less early on) but still doesn't compare to the current contract.

So what does this all mean...that the Phillies have some bright accountants who know how to design a contract. Chase also had no bargaining power and couldn't really squabble over details anyway, but he'll get his money and the Phillies will get their man (right after his wife is finished with him, that is).

On a sadder note, Vern Ruhle, former Phillies pitching coach died at 55 from cancer. That's a tragicly young age for anyone to pass. Vern was only with the Phils for a couple tough years, but reports around baseball say he was outgoing and a good man.

Phillies sign Utley through 2013

The Phillies signed Chase Utley to a 7yr/85 Million dollar contract extension. Every Phillie fan in the nation is breathing a sigh of relief, knowing that, barring injury, Chase will be patroling the right side of the infield for the foreseeable future. Yes the Phillies could have settled on a one year deal, or tried their hand in arbitration, but Utley deserved to be rewarded, and Pat Gillick smartly realized that the time was now. With Rollins singed through 2010, the most productive middle infield combination in the history of the National League gives Phils fans reason to cheer for years to come.

Not to diminish Utley's moment in the sun, but I wanted to compare this deal to another current Phillie, Pat Burrell. Everyone remembers (and now disdains) Burrell's long contract extension after he powered his way onto the scene in 2002.

Let's compare the numbers:
Utley


Burrell


While the numbers are similar, Utley has been head and shoulders above Burrell, considering that the power numbers are close, and Utley is not a prototype power hitter. Utley has a slight edge in games played, but the most important factor here
is consistency. Look at the gap between the year before the extension and the career numbers. Utley's career averages were close to his most recent year, suggesting a stable, consistent trend. Burrell's averages were far from his breakout year, hinting that it could have been a fluke, or simply a slight aberration from a streaky player.

There are other factors here that I am overlooking, namely that power hitters are streaky by nature and the fact that Burrell had established himself in college, as one of the greatest collegiate hitters of all time. But if contracts were given on college stats, we would have signed JD Drew. And because power hitters are streaky, maybe that requires a little more time before locking them up long term if they don't find consistency early. Ed Wade chose to hope for the best, and locked Burrell up on a 6 yr/50 Million dollar contract, heavily back loaded, as we are experiencing now.

While you can't predict how Utley will fare for the next few years (same as you couldn't with Burrell), you can control when you give the extension, making sure the player has established himself, so it is less likely that their numbers will regress. Utley has shown consistency for two and a half seasons, as he's established himself as arguably the best second basemen in the league.

And while fans were clamoring for Aramis Ramirez this offseason (who eventually took a reported 'hometown discount' to stay with the Cubs at 5yr/75 Million), I can only say that Utley's deal is not only more important to this franchise (than Aramis to the Cubs), but Utley is a better players, and will make slightly less money per year over a longer term (though it's noted that Utley had no bargaining power as he could not yet test Free Agency). It can be argued that the drop off from the top tier second basemen is greater than the drop off from the top tier third basemen, making Utley's position even more valuable, too.

Regardless, this is a great signing by the Phillies, as Utley has put up incredible numbers, and shown promise and consistency. I can't guarantee, but I would be extremely surprised if we ever heard Utley's deal compared to Pat Burrell's (at least in the light of unrealized expectations) again.

Philadelphia Optimism?

Leave it to Chase Utley to pick the city of Philadelphia up when it's down (certainly no easy task). Excerps from his interview in the Inquirer:

"I'm very excited," Utley said. "I expect Ryan to come out and be ready. I actually think he still has room for improvement. The same with Jimmy, as well as myself. I think I can play better. I hope - actually, I don't hope - I expect everyone to want to get better."

"Two years in a row, we've been one or two games out of the playoffs, and I don't want that to happen again," Utley said. "We need to come into spring training from day one and be ready to go. We know what it takes to win - we've just got to do it."

And if for some unknown reason you still need proof:

'They were the most productive trio of infielders in baseball last year. None exceeded the group's 362 runs, 576 hits, 115 home runs or 334 RBIs. The trio outproduced Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez and Jason Giambi of the New York Yankees, and Carlos Delgado, David Wright and Jose Reyes of the New York Mets.'

So the future of Philadelphia sports isn't as gloomy as the last few weeks.

The full article can be found here: http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/baseball/16467919.htm

Stockpiling Arms...Antonio Alfonseca?

The Phillies have signed Antonio Alfonseca to a one year contract, non-guarenteed, at the veteran's minimum with incentives up to $1.1 Mil. Not quite the solid arm we were looking for but what this bullpen lacks in quality, it hopefully makes up for in quantity. In related news, the Phillies avoided arbitration with Ryan Madson by signing him to a one year deal, at $1.1 Mil for one year.

Let's take a look at the Phillies bullpen makeover:

2006 Spring Training:

• Gordon
• Rhodes
• Franklin
• Fultz
• Cormier
• Santana
• Geary

2006 Season's End:

• Gordon
• White
• Castro
• Condrey
• Sanchez
• Madson
• Smith
• Geary
  

2007 Spring Training potential:

• Gordon
• Madson
• Smith
• Geary
  
• Alfonseca
• Garcia
• Warden
• Simon
• Livingston
• Castro
• Brito

Gordon and Geary are the only ones on all three lists, while Madson was a starter going into the Spring last year before returning to the pen. The first 4 spots for this year are most likely set to the first four guys listed. That leaves the final 7 guys to compete for 2 spots assuming they carry the usual 6 guys. They still make pick up another proven reliver from a series of trades beginning with Lieber. From this cast, I'd say that Brito and Livingston are long shots. Castro is an interesting case, and I've heard conflicting reports about whether he will compete for the bullpen or become a starter in AAA Ottawa. That leaves the Rule 5 guys Simon and Warden who both have the stuff to pitch but with makeup and consistency questions, waiver pick up Garcia, and recently acquired Alfonseca, who supposedly dropped 28 pounds and is pitching well in winter ball. The 12 fingered pitcher, formerly of a handful fo teams, known for his Marlins success, is dubbed the Octopus.

It seems every year the Phillies sign a couple second tier relievers for big bucks, who are handed spots in the bullpen, and seemingly stink up the joint (I won't even start with names). This year, they are saving the money, getting a bunch of cheap arms with potential, for an open competition in spring training, and liekly going with the best showings for the '07 pen. I'm all for this, since they can cut most of these guys at little or no cost (what we all wished they could have done with Franklin and Rhodes last season...and there I go naming names).

One mistake they made, in my opinion, was not offering Aaron Fultz arbitration, making him an unrestricted FA. I belive Fultz would have signed elsewhere and netted us 2 picks as he was a Type 1 FA. Even if he accepted arbitration, he is one year removed from his 2.24 ERA year with us (clearly not his norm), but even his 4.54 ERA last year wasn't that bad. I understand we don't want to settle for "not that bad" but my point is that he had value, and ended up with the Indians, along with David Dellucci. And the Indians would still have signed him, even if they had to give up a pick, because their 1st rounder is protected, and Dellucci got bumped to a 3rd rounder because they also signed Roberto Hernandez, who was somehow rated higher than Dellucci. That would have meant they would only have to give up an extra 4th round pick for Fultz, while we would have gotten another sandwich pick. I really think Gillick dropped the ball on the chance to aquire two valuable picks there, or if nothing else, acquire a solid long reliever in the pen for a slightly inflated price.

Spring training should at least be interesting to watch. The last few spots could be wide open for a large cast of guys.

Webber's Departure

So far this season, Billy King has traded the face of the franchise for the last 10 years, brought back the coach that coached them to their last Finals appearance, and now paid Chris Webber almost 30 million dollars not to play for our team anymore. I'm not ok with the terrible landslide that Billy King orchestrated to get the team into this position, but I am ok with the AI trade and bringing Brown back as an assistant VP to the GM or whatever the hell his title is. I wouldn't be opposed to him coaching again here down the road, either. I also believe Andre Miller will get traded before the trade deadline, and possibly a few other players. The only players I can't see being traded are Iggy, Korver, Green, Williams (whom Brown drafted out of high school), Carney and possibly Dalembart (and Joe Smith's contract). No one else would surprise me.

More on Webber:
I hate buyouts. It's paying something (in this case a lot) for nothing. Every basketball GM could tell Webber was declining on Sacramento, so Billy King has no excuse for not seeing this coming.

The funny thing is, while Webber has essentially no value to this franchise this season, being a young rebuilding team, he will have value next season as an expiring contract. He's essentially last season's Joe Smith with 3 times the contract.

Let's look at the facts:
The Sixers save about 5 Mil with the buyout, and King claims that figure, along with Iverson's departure, will get them under the luxury tax threshold. So adjust that for the tax they don't pay, and I don't know the specifics, but possibly add the money they get back, and we'll take a stab and say it saves $6.5 Mil. The other positive is the obvious removal of a distraction, and the increased playing time for the younger guys.

The question, however, will be would keeping Webber until next year, and trading his expiring contract, net more value to the Sixers than the proposed $6.5 Mil and other benefits? If this were baseball, the Sixers could pay 3/4 of his contract (essentially the buyout) and trade him to a contender for a 2nd round pick and a young backup player or something similar. Instead he gets to sign with Detroit for a veteran's exception or something. If the Sixers could have gotten under the salary cap this offseason (not impossible, even with Webber if they traded Miller, Ollie, etc.), then they could have acted as the third team facilitator in next year's superstar trade (like this year's Iverson trade, possibly Garnett next year), and provided a team under the cap (a requirement so salaries don't have to line up), a 20+ Million dollar expiring contract (almost matches Garnett exactly, but one year shorter), and they could have gotten a pick or a young player in the process. Webber would also be ENTIRELY off the books from the moment of the trade (even at the trade deadline, it would save them 5 Mil +). I'm not sure how feasible this whole thing would be (I'm no expert on the NBA's detailed trading rules), but I just wanted to illustrate the value of an expiring contract.

So what does this mean in the end? The jury is still out. Holding onto Webber may have brought a extra pick in the '08 draft or maybe a young player and still saving a few million though trading his contract, but getting rid of him now gives you instant savings as well as changing the culture of the team. I just hate to see him helping the Pistons in the playoffs this year while collecting a huge paycheck from the Sixers.

In the end, the Sixers are still dismantling and will not even begin to rebuild a team until the draft and then once Webber's contract comes off the books. We'll check back in around the trade deadline, but no one's expecting anything until at least '09 (even if they landed Oden).

In other NBA news, I received a random text message last week stating, "Saw you got 29 last night- move over Arenas! Congrats from all of us. Say hi to your pop. Kevin, Mona, & crew." After being really confused, I realized with the points and Arenas reference that my number was being confused with that off a Wizards player. I checked the box score to find out that the player is Caron Butler. So if Kevin, Mona, or crew happen to be reading, Caron did not receive your congratulations, and you should double check his number in your phone. My basketball career ended with senior year of CYO basketball, though I think I may have had 29 once in my life.

Hall of Fame Debate

There are two major storylines coming out of the election of Cal Ripken Jr. and Tony Gwynn to the MLB Hall of Fame yesterday. The first has to deal with the issue of a unanimous election. Ripken received the 3rd highest vote percentage of anyone elected to the hall, which raises the important question - who the hell didn't vote for Cal Ripken Jr.? Two voters submitted blank protest ballots, and I'll deal with that in a minute. But there were some who did not vote for Ripken and Gwynn because they don't think anyone should be unanimous. The argument here is that Ruth, Mays, Aaron, etc. were not unanimous, so how could someone else be? These voters pretend that they have to maintain the standard and tradition that was handed down to them. This, unfortunately, is really stupid.

Where did some baseball writers in the 1930s get this moral authority from? I'm sure that was a diverse group including women and minorities that could decide for all future baseball fans what the Hall of Fame meant. They probably all got together and decided who wouldn't vote for each member of the first class so no one would get 100% of the vote, intentionally setting that standard that we must respect for the rest of time. Has anyone ever researched why someone didn't vote for Babe Ruth? Maybe he thought baseball players should be in shape, didn't like home runs, didn't like the Yankees, didn't have a stamp to mail in his ballot, thought Ruth looked at his wife funny, or the Babe didn't wave to him in the hallway after 3rd period. There isn't a good reason, so why have we sanctified that decision? There is no ranking system in the Hall for people who were first ballot vs. 6th, or between guys who got 95% and guys who only got 80%. Give me a break! Ripken is deserving or he isn't, and if you don't think he is, you should be turning in that BBWAA card immediately.

The other major issue of course is the steroids question. The two voters who submitted blank ballots may have completely abdicated their responsibility, but at least they were consistent. I don't know if McGwire belongs in the Hall - I think his legacy and impact on the game has yet to be determined, and I think he was a pretty lousy hitter. The best first basemen of his generation were Jeff Bagwell, Rafael Palmeiro, and Frank Thomas. If McGwire wasn't hurt as often as he was in his career, he would probably be in there for me. I have no problem not electing him this year - I think votes can go up as people reconsider a player's career over time. But more important than whether McGwire is being held out this year, perhaps a valuable statement against a guy with nearly 600 home runs, is the ridiculous stuff that is being said about how he will never get in now. People look at the stats and see how if a player starts with 23% of the vote, he almost never gets in...sure, if we are talking about a normal situation. This is anything but! How many of those voters were just sending a message that McGwire doesn't get in on the first ballot? We'll find out next year, and in the meantime, calm the hell down about McGwire and celebrate the careers of Gwynn and Ripken.

Playoffs? Playoffs?

Does anyone feel confident in the Eagles this weekend against the Giants? I've been worrying about this game all week. Here are the problems I face in picking the Eagles:
1. Andy Reid, a great coach, has crapped the bed in big games many times.
2. Tiki Barber ran for 200 yards last week, doesn't want to lose his last game (you'd think), and the Eagles struggle against the run.
3. We lost with a big lead against the Giants once.
4. I hate playing teams 3 times in one season.

Still, you have to think the Eagles are the better team, the healthier team (Garcia is playing great, and if they continue to run the ball, he isn't much of a drop off from McNabb right now), and the better coached team. We've seen better Eagles teams on both sides of the ball, but the play calling hasn't been better than the last few weeks with Mornhinweg and Garcia clicking and calling runs. That should prevent a big game flop, and blowing a big lead. Beating the Cowboys in Dallas a few weeks ago was a huge game that was brilliantly run by the coaches.

Plus, the Giants are not a team, have key injuries (Strahan), and Eli Manning on the road on the playoffs...I'll take the Eagles and the 7 point spread.