This is The Truth Injection's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following The Truth Injection's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
The Truth Injection
Recent Activity
I ignored it last week as an experiment and my hypothesis was proven true. Tal- nobody cares or has interest in the columns you post as you can tell by the exactly zero comments it led to on the content of the article. I will say again- if you want to actually discuss the Phillies and what is going on with them there are plenty of people willing to discuss it-some will agree and some will disagree. If not, then just go away and post your drivel filled articles elsewhere. And I know what you will say "I post different things because all other writers do is say the same thing blah blah blah..."well all you seem to want to do is have people agree with you and you are scared of disagreement. On another note- Fantastic to see Weitzel popping back into the phillies writing realm again.
1 reply
We should sign his twin....maybe we got the wrong brother again?
1 reply
I think Heyward might want more money than the discount you think he might sign for Fatalotti. The key will be if they can convince Heyward to stay there for less money than the open market. The Stanton deal may have set a new market and WAR favors them but Stanton is the better offensive player by a pretty considerable margin and still yet that will carry weight with teams over what Heyward does.
1 reply
" If the Phillies can't contend next year, why would you want Bonifacio taking PAs from a young player? And if they somehow CAN contend, I find it hard to believe that the upgrade from Cesar Hernandez to Emilio Bonifacio will be the difference between making or missing the playoffs." 1000 times this and it highlights the point I am trying to make to MG. We know Bonifacio stinks. The jury is out on Hernandez yet and on Galvis to a smaller degree. Hernandez has a tougher road to go if he can only play second but we need to give him a full shot. There is zero need to sign Bonifacio AND pay him 4 million a year. He serves no purpose to this team and would arguably be detrimental to the future health of the franchise. MG- you are off on this one and are not seeing the long term cost outside of the short term stuff.
1 reply
Jason Heyward and Jordan Walden to the Cardinals for Shelby Miller and Tyrell Jenkins
1 reply
"Bench can't afford to carry both Galvis/C. Hernandez with 2 OFs and a backup catcher. " Why can't the bench afford that? Do you think the Phillies are going to be able to compete this season? If you say yes- you contradict a ton of posts you have made. Here's my thinking: The Phillies- unless they make every right move and hit on every lottery ticket are not winning anything this season in baseball. Because of that it should be incumbent on them to try and find out whether a guy like Galvis or Hernandez could be a potentially useful bench piece come the next competitive Phillies team. There is no reason whatsoever to go sign a guy who is junk (other than he can play multiple spots a little more competently than Galvis or has more versatility than Hernandez) to a 4 million dollar a year deal. Yes Emilio might get paid but let someone else pay him. To me- this would be the Howard vs Ruf debate on a smaller monetary scale. You have two guys who could do the job competently and would cost far less AND it could have more future value if they grow. Emilio has a career OPS+ OF 79 (with an absurd 107 outlier in 2011) in ~2700 plate appearances. Hernandez has an OPS+ of 76 in ~250 plate appearances. Galvis is weaker offensively than both guys but still only has ~600 plate appearances. I would rather find out for sure going forward if Galvis and Hernandez truly stink. I know Emilio stinks and I don't need to pay 4 million to find out.
1 reply
Sign E. Bonifacio to 2 yr/$7.5-8M with an option buyout ($500k or $1M in '17) Bonifacio the past three years has posted OPS+ numbers of: 76, 72, and 81. He has never made more than 2.5 million in a season and you want to give him 3.7-4 million a year to play here. I would rather just let Galvis and Hernandez split the duties and hope that being here everyday might pay off in the long run. I know Emilio stinks and I don't need to pay him all that money to confirm it. The cost is better to see if one of the young guys could be useful as a bench piece in the future.
1 reply
MG: First off- I love that you felt the need to correct the Byrd mistake from the original post but not the one that begins the statement. Awesome stuff. Second- Do I believe that Amaro would work out a deal to trade Hamels and then would have to gain the approval of Gillick before pulling the trigger? No not necessarily. I think that whatever the structure of the team was before is probably how it will continue to operate with the obvious difference that Gillick is in the place of Montgomery. If Amaro would have had to run a deal like that past Montgomery in the past- he will have to run it by Gillick. That isn't a sea change of the organization but rather how this stuff works. Also, I would venture a guess that many owners or figureheads are in the loop on major deals being swung by their GM. I would bet Arte Moreno didn't wake up one morning and open the paper to the surprise of the team signing Albert Pujols. You and Rally Red think that Gillick symbolizes something. Fine if you believe that but it is not rooted in reality- which match your thoughts. Rally: It's not belittling Gillick at all. It is a simple fact that the narrative you are creating about him is not one that exists in reality. Again- please tell me one rebuild he was a part of. Just one.
1 reply
Rally Red: "I could give a rat's a$$ about what Gillick's prior team rebuild performance was..." ______________________________________________ All this basically means is that you have destroyed any legitimate reason as to why to engage with you on this topic. Gillick has never been part of a rebuild but damn you think he will do it this time, and you and MG think he is running the entire show now. Be careful going in concert with MG- he doesn't even know what he thinks from one page to the next.
1 reply
My fault Juums for not clarifying better my position. To me the reason I would be reluctant to trade Crawford is more in line with why I like #2. Clearly Addison Russell seems to be more regarded as a prospect and would probably be an upgrade. To me though trading Hamels for all prospects is putting a lot of money in one stock. I like deal #2 because it gets back a guy who is a capable major league shortstop for the short term while our prospect continues to grow. It opens up new avenues for us short and long term. Flipping Crawford for Russell in that first deal means we go from "Hopefully this guy can fill in for Rollins if we need it and he develops properly," to "Hopefully this other guy can fill in for Rollins if we need it and he develops properly." I like the idea of "This guy can fill in for Rollins AND maybe this other guy can come up and help in another 2 years if we need it and he develops properly."
1 reply
I am with BAP in that if I were the Phillies GM and presented trade scenario #2 I would be tempted to make that deal. I would be reluctant to part with Crawford in a deal like #1. Much can happen yet between now and when he comes up but he feels like a guy whose needle is point positively rather than negatively for the future. Getting Castro in a deal would help us two fold. He could slot into short if you found a taker for Rollins and then slide over to second if Crawford is ready in 2016 and seems to be able to stick at short. That would give us a nice young middle of the infield.
1 reply
TTI to MG at 11:37 am: "Other guys (including you 1 fvcking page ago) have talked about Gillick in the sense that he is the guy now pulling strings and making moves as if Amaro doesn't exist. " MG's response at 12:26: "This is all I said about Gillick "I have no doubt that Gillick is the one who is calling the shots this offseason and will have approval of any meaningful move the Phils make this offseason; Amaro is just an operations guy" It was no affirmation or statement about the quality of Gillick's decision-making. Just more of a guess on the operating structure concerning any significant move. Amaro may set the 'block and tackling' of a Hamels/Howard/Byrd trade but Gillick is going to be the one that say 'yes/no' and likely provides specifics to Amaro on a 'no' on what he wants to see in return intstead." You took 4 paragraphs to say basically "I agree with you TTI." It is always funny to me how you never see that you are agreeing with people.
1 reply
Okay MG (and whatever other troll is going to latch onto this discussion) let's be real here for a few minutes. First off- you have me completely pegged wrong. I'm actually a pretty optimistic, cheery guy and generally fun to be around. If someone says something stupid though I will absolutely call them on it though. Sorry that you (and again whatever troll wants to pile on) don't have people in your life that call you on your nonsensical posts and all of that. Second- I never mentioned "savior of the franchise" when referring to Gillick. You did that which was another "MG Land Construction." You do that often on here where you start arguments with your cats or teddy bears in your house and then act like someone is saying something counter to that on here. Thirdly- aksmith has pimped Gillick of late. So has Rally Red. Other guys (including you 1 fvcking page ago) have talked about Gillick in the sense that he is the guy now pulling strings and making moves as if Amaro doesn't exist. I don't even have a problem with people wanting to put their faith fully in Gillick. I even said as much when I pointed out that I understand why people would want to look for some beacon of light. I was just saying that the Book of Gillick and Book of Amaro have been adjusted and made into something they particularly are not at this point for the various reasons I outlined. Lastly- I can assure you there is no high school student or piece of literature that has broken my will so much that I feel the need to come on here and be angry. On the contrary, I love my job and who and what I encounter on a daily basis. However, if "MG Land construction," creates another stupid thought that trickles down the synapses of your mind and trickles onto the pages of Beerleaguer as you hurriedly pound you fingers into a keyboard I will respond to it with the proper amount of consideration, praise and/or derision it deserves. As I have told others before- if you don't want people to tell you your thoughts are stupid, stop saying stupid things. Tell your cat or whatever fake person you want to make up in some new town you are going to tell us you lived in. I'm sure they will be fascinated.
1 reply
MG: Quite a few posters on here have posited that Gillick is the savior. Perhaps read what others write instead of being stuck in MG Land.
1 reply
At best though you can say the jury is out on Carrasco
1 reply
The BL narratives on Pat Gillick and Ruben Amaro have far outstripped the reality at this point. Yes- Amaro might not be great at his job. He negotiates poorly with free agents (arguably), he signs long deals where it is not necessary, and doesn't seem to know when to move forward and when to hold onto what he has. However, he was very good at turning young assets at their peak value into something of real value to help the team- as Phillibuster outlined. Had Amaro held onto Happ for a few more months his value drops. Also, guys like Drabek, Villar, Donald, Marson, Gose- all have at best a spotty record of being a valuable asset. Gillick helped us win the 2008 World Series and has won World Series elsewhere but has never shown an ability to really build a team from the ground up. Furthermore, his moves which helped win the 2008 World Series were questioned across the board by many here on Beerleaguer as Lidge was viewed as a guy who looked like he had lost his nerve as a closer and Blanton was roundly mocked as a terrible move and we gave up way to much for him. Take Amaro and Gillick for what they are- which is similar to 90% of the other GM's out there- good at some things, bad at others. Stop trying to completely twist the narratives about them.
1 reply
FREEAEC may just be a serial killer in the waiting.
1 reply
I was assured by posters on here when I mentioned Lee having a bad attitude two summers ago that I was wrong. So these reports have to not be true because the BL faithful said otherwise.
1 reply
Mini: how do you know I wasn't trying to imply that he was flattering his own argument? Or that I was posting on an iPad that auto corrected what I wrote? Perhaps you should stick to posting stupid comments advocating for terrible players.
1 reply
As long as someone else changes their handle to "Dickie Head." It's just that Tal's lack of commenting on here other than to say "If you're interested..." is amusing to me. There is not a lot to say about the Phillies right now that hasn't already been said but it is not as if his poorly written nonsense is moving the needle in any one direction.
1 reply
Whoa whoa whoa! Stop the clock! Did Tal legitimately say Galvis could, or should, be the starting center fielder? Good lord that is dopey. And I even like Galvis. I thought the Phillies moving Asche to first mention in this latest column was off the mark.
1 reply
I do love how Tal is just hellbent to get clicks for his poorly written drivel by piggybacking on the actual coherent discussions that take place on Beerleaguer. Anyway- I was looking for amusement so I decided to be one of probably two people that click the link. I ask this in all seriousness Tal- Is English your first language? If it is- your English and writing instructors over the years have failed you miserably. Also, if it is I would say that you fall into the trap of many young writers I teach, trying to write smarter than you actually are. Also, you have quite a few grammar errors in there to compliment your incoherent argument. My favorite part though is how you added recently- apparently- the numerical Bible which is just statistics with no context. Brilliant stuff man.
1 reply
If M. Mrtinez agrees with you then you are about as wrong as wrong can be.
1 reply
Fatalotti: i've never cared enough to check into it but do those numbers on times through the order vary based off how many pitches the guy has thrown? For example- if a guy is on the third time through the order at 90 pitches less effective than a guy third time through the order on 65-70 pitches?
1 reply
Rally Red: I called your posts what I did because they are. You want me to offer counter proposals and rebuttals but there is nothing to rebut. Not because it is a reality based argument but rather because you are stuck in one opinion here and it is based on Gillick wearing the white hat for you. That is perfectly fine but let's recognize it for that instead of trying to extrapolate it to some idea that Gillick is a pied piper leading the Phillies FO out of the dark ages. Gillick wouldn't have said what he did unless the FO knew it. If he was out there going off script he would be moved from the organization. Perhaps Gillick is being put out there as the spokesperson because they know he is Teflon to some degree. But again- wild speculation. Phillibuster adds a solid post though that does counteract your thoughts. Gillick has shown no ability to lead a complete rebuild. He finsihed tweaking the Blue Jays. He came back to the Orioles and outright said the reason he did was because he thought they were close. Same thing with the Mariners and the Phillies. As far as Victorino- he was an Ed Wade signing. Werth was brought in because Gillick drafted him and knew there was talent there. So did everyone in baseball. It was widely believed if Werth could stay healthy the talent was there. Name one rebuilding effort Gillick was at the helm for. Please. Also, can we please stop with the nonsense of denigrating everything about Amaro. Yes he has made mistakes- but from 2009-2011 the Phillies were arguably the best team in baseball and got punched out in short series of games (kind of like the 116 win Mariners helmed by Gillick). I do think the Phillies are changing at the top. I don't think that is tied to Gillick. I don't think it is tied to Middleton necessarily either. I get why you want to believe it all is but really it is as I said- wild baseless speculation.
1 reply