JFLNYC wrote:In a competitive market for a unique asset which you really want and which will be sold, there is only one immutable constant: Whoever bids the highest wins. Not the lowest, not the smartest, not the toughest, not the shrewdest, but the highest. Obviously you don't want to overpay. But, if you really, really want that unique asset, overpaying is a distant second in importance to outbidding your competitors. And, the response to the argument that you've offered more than what the Twins got for Santana for the A's for Haren is: "So?" If your bid is the highest, you win. If not, you lose.

I don't agree with with what seems to be the implication here - bid whatever it takes to get him. Ever hear of the phenomenon of the winner's curse in auctions/M&A situations?

From Wiki:

The winner's curse is a phenomenon which can occur in common value settings--when the actual values to the different bidders are unknown but correlated, and the bidders make bidding decisions based on estimated values. In such cases, the winner will tend to be the bidder with the highest estimate, and that winner will frequently have bid too much for the auctioned item.

All this being said, trading Victorino this month would be a P.R. disaster and is completely undo-able, which is why I suggested trading Werth.

nycphils wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:In a competitive market for a unique asset which you really want and which will be sold, there is only one immutable constant: Whoever bids the highest wins. Not the lowest, not the smartest, not the toughest, not the shrewdest, but the highest. Obviously you don't want to overpay. But, if you really, really want that unique asset, overpaying is a distant second in importance to outbidding your competitors. And, the response to the argument that you've offered more than what the Twins got for Santana for the A's for Haren is: "So?" If your bid is the highest, you win. If not, you lose.

I don't agree with with what seems to be the implication here - bid whatever it takes to get him. Ever hear of the phenomenon of the winner's curse in auctions/M&A situations?

I don't mean to imply too much nor to guess at Rube's motivation. All I'm saying is that if he really wants Halladay, he's going to outbid the big guys. And trying to be too cute or assuming JP is an idiot ain't gonna get it done.

Negotiations aren't "well, this is what we offer, take it or leave it"

Im sure Amaro has talked to JP. I'm sure they have a basic idea. I'm sure JP has fielded other calls, and im sure he'll receive other offers. Two things will happen;

1. Halladay's willingness to go to City X will have to be determined
2. Then you have to compare the offers available

Its not a silent, sealed bid. Rumored packages will leak. If Halladay is open to coming to Philly, then we are at the bargaining table. We should have firm valuations on all of our players. We shouldn't grossly outbid everyone else. We should evaluate what we are willing to give up, assess what Toronto is asking for, and then keep our ear to the ground to find out what other teams are reasonably willing to offer.

Toronto has a big incentive to keep Halladay out of the AL East if he can. He won't take 10 cents on the dollar to get him in the NL, but if two offers are equal or very close, his preference has to be trade him to a non-Yankees/Red Sox team.

There's no use blowing your wad with your first offer. But you also dont want to insult him to the point of them not wanting to do business with you

nycphils wrote:From Wiki:

The winner's curse is a phenomenon which can occur in common value settings--when the actual values to the different bidders are unknown but correlated, and the bidders make bidding decisions based on estimated values. In such cases, the winner will tend to be the bidder with the highest estimate, and that winner will frequently have bid too much for the auctioned item.

And if Halladay helps the Phils win another WFC this year or next, then leaves to sign with the Mets and the players Rube trades all have HOF careers, will the Phils have bid too much? Maybe you know the answer to that question, because I sure don't.

ek wrote:I would like to see him improve against RHP though. and they both seem to be a little worse with the throws this year

Werth was scared for his life after he got brushed back last night. He struck out two straight times after this and only bounced back when they were pitching a ss. Buzz his tower and he will be a waste the rest of the game.

GMAN wrote:

ek wrote:I would like to see him improve against RHP though. and they both seem to be a little worse with the throws this year

Werth was scared for his life after he got brushed back last night. He struck out two straight times after this and only bounced back when they were pitching a ss. Buzz his tower and he will be a waste the rest of the game.

I see no evidence of this. Maybe he didn't give a crap when he struck out those two times since we were up by 15.

FWIW- lauber says the jays have a scout at CBP tonight...

philliesphhan wrote:

GMAN wrote:

ek wrote:I would like to see him improve against RHP though. and they both seem to be a little worse with the throws this year

Werth was scared for his life after he got brushed back last night. He struck out two straight times after this and only bounced back when they were pitching a ss. Buzz his tower and he will be a waste the rest of the game.

I see no evidence of this. Maybe he didn't give a crap when he struck out those two times since we were up by 15.

No, he's clearly a weak-kneed coward like Senior (sic) Tin.

1 wrote:FWIW- lauber says the jays have a scout at CBP tonight...

Obviously there to see Werth. Definitely not Happ.

1 wrote:FWIW- lauber says the jays have a scout at CBP tonight...

I'm getting excited

Possibly just for a big letdown, but excited nonetheless.

No surprise they'd want Happ. Guess it just matters how much they value ML readiness when discussing what else goes with him. I see the center of any deal as being Happ + Taylor

JFLNYC wrote:

nycphils wrote:From Wiki:

The winner's curse is a phenomenon which can occur in common value settings--when the actual values to the different bidders are unknown but correlated, and the bidders make bidding decisions based on estimated values. In such cases, the winner will tend to be the bidder with the highest estimate, and that winner will frequently have bid too much for the auctioned item.

And if Halladay helps the Phils win another WFC this year or next, then leaves to sign with the Mets and the players Rube trades all have HOF careers, will the Phils have bid too much? Maybe you know the answer to that question, because I sure don't.

If you could tell me that Halladay was a guaranteed WS championship, this might make sense, but he isn't and he doesn't. If he blows out his shoulder in his first Phillies start, you'll care how much the Phillies paid. Worth a lot? Yes. Worth a whole lot? Probably. Worth everything (i.e. Drabek, Carrasco, Taylor and Brown)? No. There is always a price that is too high.

Drabek is untouchable- I fully believe that. One of Taylor or Brown is available and all signs point to it being Taylor, which I would not be thrilled with but could live with given that we don't have a glaring need this or next year in OF and Brown will be beating down the door by the time we do

karn wrote:No surprise they'd want Happ. Guess it just matters how much they value ML readiness when discussing what else goes with him. I see the center of any deal as being Happ + Taylor

I'd drive them both across the border.

Then just sign Petey as the #5 when Rodrigo gets bombed, and we've got a rotation of

Halladay
Hamels
Blanton
Moyer
Pedro

I'll take it

ek wrote:

GMAN wrote:

ek wrote:I would like to see him improve against RHP though. and they both seem to be a little worse with the throws this year

Werth was scared for his life after he got brushed back last night. He struck out two straight times after this and only bounced back when they were pitching a ss. Buzz his tower and he will be a waste the rest of the game.

seriously doubt it.

You know it's true and if this was Philaphans you would agree with me.

philliesphhan wrote:

1 wrote:FWIW- lauber says the jays have a scout at CBP tonight...

I'm getting excited

Possibly just for a big letdown, but excited nonetheless.

Same here. This is fun times.

nycphils wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:

nycphils wrote:From Wiki:

The winner's curse is a phenomenon which can occur in common value settings--when the actual values to the different bidders are unknown but correlated, and the bidders make bidding decisions based on estimated values. In such cases, the winner will tend to be the bidder with the highest estimate, and that winner will frequently have bid too much for the auctioned item.

And if Halladay helps the Phils win another WFC this year or next, then leaves to sign with the Mets and the players Rube trades all have HOF careers, will the Phils have bid too much? Maybe you know the answer to that question, because I sure don't.

If you could tell me that Halladay was a guaranteed WS championship, this might make sense, but he isn't and he doesn't. If he blows out his shoulder in his first Phillies start, you'll care how much the Phillies paid. Worth a lot? Yes. Worth a whole lot? Probably. Worth everything (i.e. Drabek, Carrasco, Taylor and Brown)? No. There is always a price that is too high.

That doesn't answer my question. It's easy to say who wins if the player(s) one one side of the trade end up stinking or get injured. The point is you're dealing with imperfect information. What I've attempted to do is frame the question with all the variables answered in their most positive -- the way each side hopes it will work for them. Under those circumstances, have the Phillies suffered the winner's curse?

JFLNYC wrote:

nycphils wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:

nycphils wrote:From Wiki:

The winner's curse is a phenomenon which can occur in common value settings--when the actual values to the different bidders are unknown but correlated, and the bidders make bidding decisions based on estimated values. In such cases, the winner will tend to be the bidder with the highest estimate, and that winner will frequently have bid too much for the auctioned item.

And if Halladay helps the Phils win another WFC this year or next, then leaves to sign with the Mets and the players Rube trades all have HOF careers, will the Phils have bid too much? Maybe you know the answer to that question, because I sure don't.

If you could tell me that Halladay was a guaranteed WS championship, this might make sense, but he isn't and he doesn't. If he blows out his shoulder in his first Phillies start, you'll care how much the Phillies paid. Worth a lot? Yes. Worth a whole lot? Probably. Worth everything (i.e. Drabek, Carrasco, Taylor and Brown)? No. There is always a price that is too high.

That doesn't answer my question. It's easy to say who wins if the player(s) one one side of the trade end up stinking or get injured. The point is you're dealing with imperfect information. What I've attempted to do is frame the question with all the variables answered in their most positive -- the way each side hopes it will work for them. Under those circumstances, have the Phillies suffered the winner's curse?

I don't want to get too off track, and certainly don't mean to be condescending, but I don't think you understand the "winner's curse" theory based on that response. The whole point is that the party that thinks the acquisition will be worth the most to them - in your example, that Halladay continues to be great, leads Phils directly to WS, collect $200 - bids the most. The problem arises when it turns out that the asset wasn't worth the highest estimate - say, Halladay has nagging injuries and only posts a 12-10, 4.50 ERA, or other players get injuries and there are no replacements - and thus the winner suffers for having overpaid.

The winners curse doesn't apply to something like this, and I understand it perfectly.

No one knows what tomorrow may bring. Halladay is one of the 5 best pitchers in baseball, and has been over the last 6+ years. He could get hurt tomorrow. But the odds of him posting an ERA over 4 are pretty slim. His worst season since 2000 (64 IP that year) was 4.20 in 2004, in only 133 IP.

You make a deal based on what you know today and can reasonably expect tomorrow. If he suffers a freak injury, you don't regret the deal. We gave up a ton for Blanton last year. And no matter how well Cardenas and Outman perform, that trade was a win for the Phillies.

Flags certainly do fly forever.