Sorry to see him fading out the way he is. For a couple years there he was a beast. And the way he blew his Achilles tendon, he left it all on the field. Damn shame.
OT: It surely seems as if Ryan Howard is finished in Philadelphia.
- Thread starter LionJim
- Start date
probably , but I think he can refuse, which gives him his outright release, but he is still owed the money by Philly , whatever is left on his contract. Baseball is different than football,.as you know.
Good guy and good teammate. If he wants to hang around for the money he'll need to find someone willing to pay it unless he's happy settling for something cheap.
Last edited:
Might be the worst contract in baseball's recent history.
The Yankees have a few. And David Wright is signed through 2020 with a big contract and he's really breaking down.
He won't accept a demotion to the minors and then the Phils would either have retain or waive.
It ended up being a bad contract, but it was not that bad when he signed. At the time he was one of the most valuable players in MLB and the deal was about going rate for a player at his level. He just broke down really quickly.
While it may be the right thing to do from a fan perspective, would you bow out and give up almost $20mil? Easy to say yes until you are actually in that position.
Mets are STILL paying Bobby Bonilla and will until the year 2035.
Not baseball, but a horrible contract none the less, was Notre Dame's with Charlie Weis. Notre Dame paid Weis more money last year to NOT coach their team than they did Brian Kelly to coach their team.
He has been done for 5 years. He finished the 2011 season lying on the first base line like he was shot. He spent that whole season getting cortisone shots in his ankle.
When was he a beast for a couple years? 2007 and 2008? I will even give you 2009. He has been going downhill ever since.
Philly fans are soft. They spent years making excuses for Rollins, Utley and Howard. Ever year I had to hear the excuse they don't hit until it is warm. Then when it was 90degrees they would switch to the injury excuse. The last three years the fans used the family/money excuse for Howard.
Howard has not hit more thn 23 HRs for a season in FIVE years. 79HRs in 5 years.
Last edited:
Bull. It was a horrible contract when they signed. Howard's HRs went from 58 to 48 to 47 to 38 to 31. A 1st grader could see where the numbers were heading on a graph.
Agreed. It was horrible for the timing. He still had a few years left on his old one but Ruben got way too impatient.
That contract gets defended on this board but it was pretty much indefensible to many at the time it was being reworked.
That contract gets defended on this board but it was pretty much indefensible to many at the time it was being reworked.
Are you saying that he went to 38 and then 31 HRs before the contract was signed?
bwifan
Well-Known Member
Howard never ended a year with 38 HRs. zwick is an awful source for factual information.
Just points out the kind of money in sports (and other "systems") AND the massive tax write offs they take advantage of. What does that mean ??? Well, you and I pay the lion's share of this "loss" write off.
Got to love "our" system
The timing was the bad part. Reuben should have waited a little longer. That said, his numbers in the years leading up to the contract:
HRs- 58, 47, 48, 45
RBI - 149,136,146,141
BA - 313,268,251,249
OPS - 1.084, .976, .881, .931
1 world series win, 1 world series loss
Here are his career numbers. He was going downhill long before he got the new deal.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/howarry01.shtml
NO, it was not a terrible contract at the time. EVERY other team is baseball would have given him that contract. I know it did not work out but at the time it was justified. There is always a level of risk. It's not like the Phils or many teams had a Howard in the waiting. We still do NOT have a replacement. Even a poor one.
All of Zwick's inaccuracies aside, the basic premise is valid - they reworked his deal with 2 years left on his old deal in a panic. If Rube had done any due diligence he would have waited to see if signs of decline would show - as they do (and quckly) for aging sluggers. Here's a snippet from Grantland:
B Ryan Howard, Philadelphia Phillies: two years, $60 million (3)10
Howard is the original cautionary tale against extending star players two years before free agency, and his contract has been a source of near-universal mockery since the day it was announced. Putting the 35-year-old former MVP up for sale is the right move for the Phillies, but it’s doubtful any team would want Howard, even if the Phils paid the bulk of his freight. At this point in his career, even calling Howard a platoon DH is probably pushing it: His numbersover the last three years look startlingly similar to Luke Scott’s, and Scott had to go to Korea to find a job.11
B Ryan Howard, Philadelphia Phillies: two years, $60 million (3)10
Howard is the original cautionary tale against extending star players two years before free agency, and his contract has been a source of near-universal mockery since the day it was announced. Putting the 35-year-old former MVP up for sale is the right move for the Phillies, but it’s doubtful any team would want Howard, even if the Phils paid the bulk of his freight. At this point in his career, even calling Howard a platoon DH is probably pushing it: His numbersover the last three years look startlingly similar to Luke Scott’s, and Scott had to go to Korea to find a job.11
It was because his existing contract had 2 years to run. Totally different analysis. They were bidding against themselves at that time.
He had 45 not 38 which makes a bigger decrease. The premise does not change. His numbers were going DOWN.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/howarry01.shtml
2006 58 HRs.
2007 47 HRs.
2008 48 Hrs
2009 45
2010 31. Lets give him a new deal. HUH? Look at the production. His HR totals had already decreased 27 HRs a season.
2011 34.
2012 14
2013 11
2014 23 Big comeback year.
2015 23 HRs
2016 8 HRs.
The writing was on the wall. Howard was done 5 years ago.
Last edited:
ALL of my inaccuracies? YOu mean one HR total by memory that was slightly off? The premise did not change. Howard's production was going DOWN. Try to dispute that FACT!!
bwifan
Well-Known Member
Yes I can see how he was going downhill... At the time, Howard was coming off his second All-Star game appearance and his fourth straight year of finishing among the top-5 in the National League MVP voting. He was also worth 4.4 Wins Above Replacement (WAR) to the Phillies in 2009 alone.
The contract was signed at the start of the 2010 season - BEFORE HE HIT 31 HRs.
Again, you can argue that they should have waited, but don't misuse statistics.
Your numbers are incomplete. You left out the previous season. Kind of hurts your case if you add the previous season which was the MOST important season when giving a player a new deal. Once you add the 31 HR total it was obvious his production was going down.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
Here is a great article written in 2010 by Jayson Stark who I and many others respect greatly in his knowledge of the game and why the phillies had to resign Howard and at that price. The phillies didn't have much of a choice with no other power hitters in the lineup and no others available via FA... Howard did not take discounts as Stark states... http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=5138129&columnist=stark_jayson
At the end of the day his production was going DOWN and it was a bad contract. You want to argue if his production was down 27 or 28 HRs does not matter. It was DOWN either way. Not the time to give a guy a new deal.
Well, when you think about it, who wouldn't pay to keep Fat Charlie from coaching their team?
First, you said the decrease was in "a season". The decrease was over 5 seasons, not 1.
Second, you cannot expect ANY player to maintain hitting 58 HRs/season. I don't care who that player is.
Last edited:
They had a choice and they made the WRONG choice. Stark looks pretty stupid because he was wrong too.
The contract was signed on April 26, 2010. That was BEFORE he hit 31 HRs. I repeat. The contract was signed before he hit 31 HRs in a season. Do you understand that?
When the contract was signed, he had hit 45 HRs the previous season.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
Which makes it that much more accurate. Anyone can have one off season but when a player goes down over 5 years it is obvious his skills are declining. Your point makes the case for getting rid of Howard.
His numbers went down over 5 seasons. OK. Lets resign him. NO!!!!
You are right that you can't expect a player to hit 58 HRs a season which is why it was dumb to give howard an extension based on those big numbers that he was never going to hit again.
Most of you want to get rid of Howard now. Have you seen his numbers the last 5 years? They are pathetic.
