Forum
Forum Navigation
Pham vs Profar
#1 · September 5, 2020, 1:42 pm
Some have suggested Profar should replace Pham in LF full time next year, partly to save $. I think the recent hot streak for Profar might be fool's gold. I will happily bet on a healthy Tommy Pham on a GREAT offensive team... going into a contract year.
Here are both guys' Career Numbers (a few days ago):
Age AB BA / OBP / OPS
PHAM 32.5 1901 .274 / .370 / .834
PROFAR 27.5 1725 .234 / .316 / .711
I get there are definite red flags with Pham's age, health, & early performance (especially lack of power). But a healthy, 5 yrs younger, "hot" Profar in 129 PA's has.... ONE 2B?! (Yes, I admit so does Pham in 94 PA's). His potential budget roster replacement, Jorge Mateo has 2 2B's in his first 14 (now 17) PA's. The stat that REALLY jumps off the page to me is that during Pham's "terrible" (it is pretty bad) start to the season... his OBP of .316 = Profar's career OBP.
If it were a 3 year decision, obviously the calculus would be different, but it's not. It's a 1 year decision of who plays LF next year. The top 100 MLB player we did a major trade for, who's getting older & with an injury history continuing into this year? Or a former #1 MLB PROSPECT Infielder/utility guy who's playing there because the guy just mentioned is injured, and we traded away 4 MLB but green OF (Cordero, Olivares, Naylor, Trammell)?
My vote is for Pham. Profar has filled a vital role this year, and his versatility, patience at plate, and seemingly always good nature have value... but he would HAVE to come back at way less than 5.7 MM next year. Don't think he gets that much anywhere else either, but likely to get the opportunity to start elsewhere he won't have here. His opportunity to DH (3 C's) or play 2B (Nola) vs LHP, which is his real value in 2021, has really decreased...
Think about this. If you can only bring back 1 FA at a reduced salary in 2021, Yates or Profar, who do you choose? To me Yates is a no-brainer there on an incentive heavy contract.
#2 · September 5, 2020, 1:50 pm
I’ll take Pham any day of the week.
I look at it this way...if you prefer Profar because he’s less expensive then we may as well just go with Mateo if the offensive production isn’t the important factor.
162 games of Pham and there is no contest.
#3 · September 5, 2020, 2:57 pm
Well the best option is keeping both ... Pham LF/DH and Profar the "super utility" role for the INF/OF. Both would get a lot of playing time.
If the money is not an issue ... that should be a very good plan given there is nothing for the OF (or INF) to back up the 26 man roster that is ML quality for 2021. Mateo, Almonte, Allen struggle to be ML players and Garcia has some limits. One injury away from a gaping hole in the line-up. Then add that Pham and Garcia are FA after 2021.
However, does some money need to be redirected to a RH closer?
Money is always an issue ... the key will be the best way to distribute it to maximize the production of the 26 man roster. So, not a Pham vs. Profar question ... have to include what hole(s) is covered with the cost differential.
Big arbitration increases are coming for Clevinger, Davies, and Lamet that does a lot to eliminate the payroll drop from FA / Olivera ... that is why the decision around Pham and Moreland come into play financially and any potential FA signings (or trades that add payroll). 2020 losses are real and the potential of reduced revenue in 2021 with restricted attendance.
I put early money on Pham in LF ... not re-signing Profar ... and non-tender Moreland. Then comb the league for some low cost upgrades over Mateo/Allen/Almonte (should be easy) and someone to complement Garcia in the INF. Not re-signing Profar (about $5.7MM) and Moreland ($2.5MM net) should get them multiple decent upgrades in what looks to be a "difficult" FA market. Plus they still have some trade chips if they find someone that are low cost with multi-year control ... especially to cover the OF in anticipation of Pham going FA in 2022.
LynchMob has reacted to this post.
LynchMob
#4 · September 6, 2020, 10:44 am
Well the best option is keeping both ... Pham LF/DH and Profar the "super utility" role for the INF/OF. Both would get a lot of playing time.
If the money is not an issue ... that should be a very good plan given there is nothing for the OF (or INF) to back up the 26 man roster that is ML quality for 2021.
However, does some money need to be redirected to a RH closer?
Absolutely! I think of Profar this way; if Pham hadn't gotten injured, he would probably be on the bench... and would be majority of time next year when: 30 MM Machado, 20 MM Hosmer, 10 MM (Pham), NL MVP, & NL ROY are healthy. You CAN'T pay Profar anything close to the 5.7 MM full salary he received this year. It will come down to what the market will bear for him, and whether he wants to return to a really good arrow up team as a backup, or try to prove (1800+ AB's into career) that he's a full-time starter somewhere else.
We DO need a RH closer.... if only there were a good one coming off a lost season who might take a 1 year incentive heavy deal....
I believe Pads can & should return Profar & Yates. But both have to be significantly less $ than this year... Yates could maybe be incentive based to get back to this year's salary if his perfomance = 2019's.
#5 · September 6, 2020, 11:57 am
Given that most baseball players have a relatively short shelf life, I think it would be difficult to retain Profar at a lower salary over a short-term contract. Yates, given his age and injury, might be more realistic. Agree that both would be beneficial to the Padres if we can keep them, since not going to overpay for Richards or Rosenthal. If we do re-sign Profar, Garcia is probably on his way out based on a 26 man roster.
#6 · September 6, 2020, 12:47 pm
Quote from Randy Manese on September 6, 2020, 11:57 amGiven that most baseball players have a relatively short shelf life, I think it would be difficult to retain Profar at a lower salary over a short-term contract. Yates, given his age and injury, might be more realistic. Agree that both would be beneficial to the Padres if we can keep them, since not going to overpay for Richards or Rosenthal. If we do re-sign Profar, Garcia is probably on his way out based on a 26 man roster.
Except for a couple of "elite" FA (and Profar / Yates are probably not in the elite category his winter) ... think all the FA will struggle to get their expected money. Other options could be out there at a reasonable cost but that may pressure both Profar and Yates to come in lower than 2020. One possible route is the Padres (since they apparently like both) might try to sweeten the offer to 2 years keeping the AAV down ... maybe with incentives / options.
From the Padres perspective they may want both in 2022 with no clear lock down RH end of game arm in the mix and Pham is a FA after 2021 and Profar could serve as insurance since not sure internally who would show up in LF in 2022. Remember they signed both Stammen and Johnson to two year deals last winter when a one year deal would have seemed more logical.
#7 · September 6, 2020, 10:21 pm
Quote from Randy Manese on September 6, 2020, 11:57 amGiven that most baseball players have a relatively short shelf life, I think it would be difficult to retain Profar at a lower salary over a short-term contract. Yates, given his age and injury, might be more realistic. Agree that both would be beneficial to the Padres if we can keep them, since not going to overpay for Richards or Rosenthal. If we do re-sign Profar, Garcia is probably on his way out based on a 26 man roster.
GG is a "pro's pro" & a great dependable long AB, good PH, etc. But I really think he won't be back even if Profar isn't. LH JC has locked down 2B, which really is his only fielding position. Nola can be an occassional RH vs LHP complement @ 2B. Garcia's bad vs LHP, limited defensively at other positons, and Moreland is a way better fit at DH vs RHP. . Moreland is "only" a 2.5 MM decision (3 MM vs 0.5 option). Garcia would probably get 2.0 MM in last yr of Arb... think he's non-tendered.
#8 · September 6, 2020, 10:58 pm
Quote from fenn68 on September 6, 2020, 12:47 pmQuote from Randy Manese on September 6, 2020, 11:57 amGiven that most baseball players have a relatively short shelf life, I think it would be difficult to retain Profar at a lower salary over a short-term contract. Yates, given his age and injury, might be more realistic. Agree that both would be beneficial to the Padres if we can keep them, since not going to overpay for Richards or Rosenthal. If we do re-sign Profar, Garcia is probably on his way out based on a 26 man roster.
Except for a couple of "elite" FA (and Profar / Yates are probably not in the elite category his winter) ... think all the FA will struggle to get their expected money. Other options could be out there at a reasonable cost but that may pressure both Profar and Yates to come in lower than 2020. One possible route is the Padres (since they apparently like both) might try to sweeten the offer to 2 years keeping the AAV down ... maybe with incentives / options.
From the Padres perspective they may want both in 2022 with no clear lock down RH end of game arm in the mix and Pham is a FA after 2021 and Profar could serve as insurance since not sure internally who would show up in LF in 2022. Remember they signed both Stammen and Johnson to two year deals last winter when a one year deal would have seemed more logical.
A good idea from the Padres perspective. Specifically, a relatively large buyout / club option in 2022 would hold some appeal to players who might face a strike or lockout. Remember, buyouts are paid 100%, not prorated. So if Yates for example had a 2MM vs 10 MM (or whatever) in 2022, he's guaranteed to get at least the 2 MM; the players who were bought out this year actually made more in some cases than guys on full salary prorated down to 37%.
BUT even though it might be acrimonious, assuming negotiations finally do result in a new CBA, guys may want to be hitting FA right then... Yates knows he's not going to get the multi-year deal he wanted after this season. Has to take a "rebuild value" contract. Might as well be with Pads who are good now. He has SOME leverage there.
When Pads traded for Profar in December, I wasn't thrilled, but more about what HE cost than the trade cost. Just felt like they had other 2B options for less $ out there. Of course could not have anticipated then getting JC & what he's become. But my bottom line on Profar is he's simply not worth anywhere near 5.7 MM in a full season. The versatility, patience at plate, SH, athleticism worth SOMEthing, but hard to say how much. Think he's the type of player who is going to get killed in FA this offseason... may end up back with Pads for less than we think.
#9 · September 7, 2020, 5:31 am
Four factors need to be considered in structuring the 5 bench slots for 2021 (the 8 starting position slots appear locked down):
- Money ... not a huge issue with really only Moreland ($2.5MM), Garcia ($1.5MM+/-) ... Profar gone
- 162 games schedule ... more injuries / more days off for starters
- Tingler's desire to use the DH and a rotation slot of starters to keep their bats in the line-up while resting them from the field
- Options ... not many on the 40 man and most are out of minor league options (plus not very good).
Pick 5 (options remaining for 2021):
Moreland (no options) LHH ... DH / 1B
Garcia (no options) LHH ... DH / 2B / 3B
Mateo (no options) RHH ... INF/OF
Allen (no options) RLHH ... OF
Almonte (no options) RLHH ... OF
Ona (2 options) RHH .... OF
Mejia (1 option) RLHH ... C/DH and maybe OF/1B
Campusano (3 options) ... RHH ... C/DH and maybe 1B
My bias is keeping starters at their prime position (unless DH) and use the bench options to cover all the slots when starters don't play. Don't want to see (for both the player's sake and avoid a drop in quality in two positions) moving players like Myers or Nola around the field to allow a bench player to play. Just because they can doesn't mean they should.
Not a compelling or flexible group (except catcher back-up) ... see Preller this winter making some moves on adding some other alternatives ... even if they are non-roster options for AAA as insurance. 162 game season will end up using bench players in critical moments.
#10 · September 7, 2020, 9:12 am
I sure hope Moreland shows a little bit more before they decide to pencil him as next years DH/ 1B backup.
Hasn't looked good at the dish and yesterday looked completely inept in the field.
Obviously Mitch has had a decent career and for $3 million not really a huge risk but I would think Preller would choose production over pedigree.