Placido Polanco to Phillies? Really?

The scuttlebutt is that the Philadelphia Phillies are set to sign Placido Polanco to be their third baseman. On a two-year deal, this is a pretty nice signing by the Phi— wait, it’s three years? At $18 million? With a mutual option for a fourth year? What is Philadelphia thinking?

Tigers vs. Royals

Let’s look at the good first.

Polanco will give the Phillies fine defense at third base. His career UZR/150 is 8.6, just below 9.9. Polanco hasn’t played third since 2005 and his extensive experience came back in 2001-2, so he’s probably not a 8.6 UZR/150 player today. However, giving him a 3-5 number in this regard is logical. For comparison, Feliz was at 5 this past year.

Polanco also handles the stick very well. He’s expected to slot into the No. 2 spot in the lineup and could have a bevy of hit-and-run opportunities with Jimmy Rollins ahead of him. Shane Victorino is expected to move down in the order, which gives the Flyin’ Hawaiian more RBI opportunities and should actually lengthen the lineup. For the next couple of years, the Polanco acquisition is good.

Polanco hit .297/.352/.439 in his former tenure with the Phillies from 2002-5 (he was part of the Scott Rolen trade) and should do a good job approximating that line again, even five years later. (In Detroit, he hit .311/.355/.418 — it seems to me a small uptick in power given his new confines with a requisite downtick in average is rather logical.)

Polanco should give the Phillies a big upgrade over Pedro Feliz. The detractors cry for Mark DeRosa and Adrian Beltre in place of Polanco. Over the next two years, I might actually bank on Polanco more than DeRosa. Word is that his defense at third is eroding and he’s been dinged up recently. While DeRo certainly would provide more pop, Polanco is the safer option — and unlike most instances where that’s a derogatory term to refer to a move, safer in this case is likely better.

As for Beltre, he was likely priced out of the Phillies’ market. There’s no question that Beltre was the better bat, but could the Phillies afford him? The Phillies may have increased their ticket prices, but they plan on holding payroll steady. Without theorizing as to why they’re not raising the payroll or if they’re pocketing the profit or not, the fact of the matter is that the Phillies seem to be operating within a strict budget. Do they really want to burn an extra $2 million a year — which may not even be enough — on Beltre? As good as Beltre is, his offense since leaving Los Angeles after 2004 is a question mark. Looking strictly at OPS, Polanco bested Beltre in 2005, 2007 and 2009. Beltre took the honors in the other two years. (Detroit and Seattle are pitcher’s parks.) That doesn’t scream “massive upgrade” to me, and I bet that’s what Ruben Amaro looked at when evaluating cost effectiveness.

The flip side of the coin is the years that have been committed to Polanco.

Was Polanco really going to get a a deal longer than two years from anyone else? Polanco will be 36 during the third season and likely on his last legs as a starter. For the next two years, you can bank on Polanco. Anything past that is just silly. By that point, Polanco will probably have denigrated into an empty .270s hitter — which is still an upgrade over Pedro Feliz but certainly becomes a liability at that stage, especially given that the Phillies will be confronted with issues with their current stars and arbitration looming for the youngsters they will work into the team this year. I don’t like the third year at all.

The mutual option for a fourth year has the chance to really get me worked up, but I’ve decided to defer judgment until I hear the parameters. If the mutual option has the Philles exercising at $4 million to potentially remain as a starter at either third or second base (can’t discount Utley not being a Phillie at that time), then that’s logical. On Polanco’s end, if the figure is around $2 million then that’s also defensible from a team perspective: they can get away with Polanco as a utilityman if Polly no longer can hit well enough to start.

For the next two years, I really like this deal. It’s the extra years that really befuddle me.

Print Friendly
 Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone
« Previous: Offer: get paid to watch baseball
Next: This brings me no joy »


  1. Adam B. said...

    Polanco just turned 34 two months ago. How do you get 35 during the third year?

    And mutual option almost never get exercised by both sides, so I don’t know what’s to get worked up about.

  2. Evan Brunell said...

    Thanks for catching the typo. I’m not sure how I pulled that off.

    It seems to me that this mutual option may have a great chance of being exercised, but statistically, you are right.

  3. Ralph B. said...

    I think it’s a good deal, third year are not, especially if you consider the Phils don’t give up any compensatory draft picks.  All other options – Figgins, Beltre and DeRosa I think – came with that baggage in addition to a higher price tag.

    Polanco is a solid hitter and fielder and I don’t believe we’ll see them cut ties like we did with Feliz and Wes Helms.

    Third base has been a black hole for a long time.  Anyone developing in the minors?

  4. Phillies Red said...

    Seems to be a fair analysis. I think you are right that Polanco is a safe bet to be an upgrade over Feliz for this year, and likely next. For the Phils, a team that seems and ought to be focused on winning in those two years, the move looks ok. The third year is curious, but perhaps Rube, realizing that he is “operating within a strict budget” decided to use what flexibility he does have: the 2012 budget, where he only has one player locked up.

    I also find it interesting that the Phils are so hellbent on signing these players so fast: Castro, Schneider, and now Placido. Perhaps the Phils, realizing that their offense is already one of the best in the NL, decided to lock in safe money on Placido early, allowing them to use what flexibility they have left to pursue pitching over the rest of the off season. I’m not trying to be an apologist here, but that off season strategy makes sense to me: lock-in cheap(ish) offense and defense early, and then turn full attention to the pitching market, where the team will certainly need to upgrade.

  5. Ralph B. said...

    Good comments.  Given that it really is a lousy free agent market, locking up Placido is a good idea.  As for pitching, who knows what the market is going to look like?  It’s Lacky and then…. ?  There are some pricey closers out there but I don’t believe that makes sense here.  Braves did a good thing by signing Wagner and now Saito, it seems.

  6. YankeesfanLen said...

    I just can’t figure out what the Tigers are thinking. Their payroll just couldn’t (and historically can’t) keep up with the Twins.For the small marginal difference ove Sizemore in salary, I think they should have kept him.

  7. schenkman said...

    “(Detroit and Seattle are pitcher’s parks.) “
    Park factors for the past three years:
    Detroit – 1.05, 1.08, 1.03
    Seattle – 0.95, 0.93, 0.95
    Phila   – 1.03, 1.03, 1.03

    All are fairly neutral.  Seattle is the only one I might call a pitcher’s park.

  8. shmenkman said...

    Agreed on the analysis.  Pedro Feliz was 3rd from the bottom in the NL in pitches per plate appearance, and I was hoping whoever the Phillies got would improve on that, but Polanco is not that guy.  They walk about the same, but Polanco will strike out only half as much.  The Phillies were already 6th toughest in the NL to strike out (PA’s per K), and look to get slightly better.  All in all, a nice pickup.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>