Halladay IV: A New Hope

by **Woody** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:32:01

This is all posturing and dick wagging at this point. We're going to get Halladay, that much I know. Some of you may not like what we give up but then again some of you suckle at the teat of potential's bosom

by **Wizlah** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:35:42

Woody wrote:This is all posturing and dick wagging at this point. We're going to get Halladay, that much I know. Some of you may not like what we give up but then again some of you suckle at the teat of potential's bosom

It's all their momma's fault. should have weaned them off that potential years ago. disgusting, is what it is.

by **Trent Steele** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:36:04

Woody wrote:This is all posturing and dick wagging at this point. We're going to get Halladay, that much I know. Some of you may not like what we give up but then again some of you suckle at the teat of potential's bosom

Listen to this man. This brilliant, understated, bear-pawed, beast of a man. He's not the board ombudsman for nothing, you know.

by **702** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:36:17

If I could choose from the OR's i'd say

Happ + Brown + Donald + Carrasco

by **Wizlah** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:37:22

Trent Steele wrote:
Woody wrote:This is all posturing and dick wagging at this point. We're going to get Halladay, that much I know. Some of you may not like what we give up but then again some of you suckle at the teat of potential's bosom

Listen to this man. This brilliant, understated, bear-pawed, beast of a man. He's not the board ombudsman for nothing, you know.

is he like a panther, or a really big, really quiet black bear?

by **jeff2sf** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:38:43

Trent Steele wrote:
Woody wrote:This is all posturing and dick wagging at this point. We're going to get Halladay, that much I know. Some of you may not like what we give up but then again some of you suckle at the teat of potential's bosom

Listen to this man. This brilliant, understated, bear-pawed, beast of a man. He's not the board ombudsman for nothing, you know.

the fuck, trent? the fuck ?

by **Woody** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:39:23

I'm sorry, jeff. You have been relieved of your duties

by **Trent Steele** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:39:37

Wizlah wrote:
Trent Steele wrote:
Woody wrote:This is all posturing and dick wagging at this point. We're going to get Halladay, that much I know. Some of you may not like what we give up but then again some of you suckle at the teat of potential's bosom

Listen to this man. This brilliant, understated, bear-pawed, beast of a man. He's not the board ombudsman for nothing, you know.

is he like a panther, or a really big, really quiet black bear?

artist's rendering

by **Woody** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:40:39

The only inaccuracy in that picture is that Scarlett Johansson isn't sitting on my shoulders...facing backwards

by **gpicaro** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:41:21

Warszawa wrote:Happ has to goes anyway because they need room for both Halladay and Pedro in the rotation. And really......where is Taylor or Donald going to play for this team anyway? I doubt they will be moving Werth or Victorino anytime soon to make room for Taylor and Rollins ain't going anywhere soon.

I agree about Donald, but not about Taylor. Say the Phillies get Halladay and do want to extend him. That's going to cost a lot of money. Taylor can, and most likely will, spend most of next year in AAA. Werth is a FA after that and having Taylor replace him will be considerably cheaper than resigning Werth. The Phillies will need to save money at certain positions if they want to keep Halladay past next season.

by **pperc15** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:46:12

That's great and it would appear from those comments by Gillick that Happ isn't part of this trade since a rotation of Hamels, Halladay, Blanton and any combo Moyer, Pedro and Lopez won't win you a WS but a rotation of Halladay, Hamels, Happ, Blanton and the Moyer/Pedro and Lopez combo will.

by **stevemc** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:47:37

pperc15 wrote:
That's great and it would appear from those comments by Gillick that Happ isn't part of this trade since a rotation of Hamels, Halladay, Blanton and any combo Moyer, Pedro and Lopez won't win you a WS but a rotation of Halladay, Hamels, Happ, Blanton and the Moyer/Pedro and Lopez combo will.

FAIL

by **stevemc** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:51:23

ek wrote:looks like we are also scouting Jarrod Washburn

I didn't realize Washburn is about to turn 35. With that said, not a bad fallback rental.

by **jamiethekiller** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:52:13

stevemc wrote:
ek wrote:looks like we are also scouting Jarrod Washburn

I didn't realize Washburn is about to turn 35. With that said, not a bad fallback rental.

carrasco and donald?

by **GrizzledVeteran** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:54:01

Washburn's numbers are better at home than on the road. Not so sure I want him, Safeco and all that considered.

by **lowcountry** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:54:44

ek wrote:looks like we are also scouting Jarrod Washburn

Isn't he pretty much exclusively a flyball pitcher? In an enormous park?

by **Trent Steele** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:55:17

pperc15 wrote:
That's great and it would appear from those comments by Gillick that Happ isn't part of this trade since a rotation of Hamels, Halladay, Blanton and any combo Moyer, Pedro and Lopez won't win you a WS but a rotation of Halladay, Hamels, Happ, Blanton and the Moyer/Pedro and Lopez combo will.

This is such silly talk. They dont need 5 good starters to make to playoffs. In the playoffs, with Halladay, the No. 4 starter (assuming Happ is traded, either Pedro or Moyer) probably won't make more than 3 starts if the Phils went to the World Series.

In the NLDS, Moyer/Pedro only starts game 4 if the Phils are up 2-1, if at all.

In the NLCS, Moyer Moyer/Pedro only starts game 4, period. Even if Halladay had to pitch Game 5 of the NLDS, he would be ready for Game 3, allowing you to go - Hamels, Blanton, Halladay, Pedro/Moyer, Hamels, Blanton, Halladay.

Assuming a 7 game NLCS and two off days between Game 7 and Game 1 of the WS, you can keep the same NLCS rotation. If the NLCS goes less than 7, Halladay can pitch Games 1, 4, and 7 of the WS, and you don't even need a 4th starter.

by **Trent Steele** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:01:24

Statements by Blue Jays general manager J.P. Ricciardi yesterday that Roy Halladay would test the free-agent market in 2010 threatened to cause a rift with the Blue Jays’ star right-hander.

After learning that Halladay had been irked by his revelation, Ricciardi moved last night to dispel any notion of a split.

“Roy Halladay has not demanded a trade,” Ricciardi said. “We know what he wants and he knows what he wants. He hasn’t given us a list of teams. We’ve run teams by him to see if he has any interest in going there – yes or no. There is no secret, hidden agenda. We’re not playing divide and conquer … and, again, my gut tells me that I just don’t see anything happening.”

Speaking to reporters yesterday afternoon as he was getting on an elevator at the Rogers Centre, Ricciardi said: “I think I made this clear really early that Doc wanted to test the free-agent market. That’s the reason we’re going down this whole avenue.”

Ricciardi also indicated to reporters that Halladay, who has a no-trade clause, provided a list of teams to the Blue Jays.

Halladay appeared testy after yesterday’s 5-4 loss to the Cleveland Indians when reporters approached him for comment on the impromptu interview with Ricciardi.

“I don’t want to address it,” Halladay said. “I don’t even know what he [Ricciardi] said. I’ll do it after I pitch.”

According to Rogers Sportsnet, Halladay’s initial reaction when approached by one of their reporters was: “This is not good.”

Toronto Sun

by **Brantt** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:02:41

He wants out...........obviously.

by **uncle milt** » Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:12:13

atta boy JP! now make fun of his wife!!!

Archived

Halladay IV: A New Hope