HillMD wrote:

dajafi wrote:So here's something else that doesn't make sense:

supposedly the whole reason Seattle got involved was because they had prospects that Toronto wanted. The two Ms farmhands we keep hearing about, Aumont and Gillies, are Canadians. Anthopoulos reportedly wants Canadian players. Why then would the Phils make a bad trade to dump Lee for Canadian prospects if not to package them for the Jays?

I was thinking something along these lines: Amaro initially thought he was just going to give up Lee. Anthopolous agreed to it at first, receiving these Canadian prospects. Halladay and his agent flew to Philadelphia, Amaro is ecstatic that the love of his life is going to be a Phillie. Anthopolous calls and turns Amaro's world upside down. He says "We don't want to do this anymore. We're not getting enough. Seriously. I don't care, I'll keep him unless you give me your prospects instead of Seattle's." Amaro, in the midst of negotiating a contract with Halladay, begins to panic and absolutely has to make the deal work now that he is so immersed into everything and doesn't want to tell Roy and his agent that there's no deal after all. He agrees to give Toronto the prospects they wanted all along, and ends up having to take the prospects that were supposed to go to the Blue Jays in an effort to somehow avoid depleting the entire system.

Um, Halladay and his agent would put that kabash on that. I mean, Amaro is sitting there with $60m reasons why Halladay and his agent should call Anthopolous back and suggest that the Phillies are the only team he'll accept a trade to.

It feels likes it's turned into chinese whispers ever since rosenthal's article. first we were shipping some prospects to toronto and other than lee keeping our rotation and prospects intact. then we're moving our prospects plus some rotation plus their prospects to toronto but getting back prospects, and it's all a salary dump.

I can understand the first set of rumours. how it morphed into the second set of rumours is fucking beyond me. it doesn't pass the bullshit test - i.e. rube didn't make the drabe/happ+prospects deal last summer, so why is he doing it now? they just keep saying 'he's desperate for halladay and needs to clear payroll'. But he was in a similar position last summer, no?

And why is everyone freaking about starks reports, when most of us are of the opinion that stark is rube's bullshit spraying-mouthpiece?

HillMD wrote:

dajafi wrote:So here's something else that doesn't make sense:

supposedly the whole reason Seattle got involved was because they had prospects that Toronto wanted. The two Ms farmhands we keep hearing about, Aumont and Gillies, are Canadians. Anthopoulos reportedly wants Canadian players. Why then would the Phils make a bad trade to dump Lee for Canadian prospects if not to package them for the Jays?

I was thinking something along these lines: Amaro initially thought he was just going to give up Lee. Anthopolous agreed to it at first, receiving these Canadian prospects. Halladay and his agent flew to Philadelphia, Amaro is ecstatic that the love of his life is going to be a Phillie. Anthopolous calls and turns Amaro's world upside down. He says "We don't want to do this anymore. We're not getting enough. Seriously. I don't care, I'll keep him unless you give me your prospects instead of Seattle's." Amaro, in the midst of negotiating a contract with Halladay, begins to panic and absolutely has to make the deal work now that he is so immersed into everything and doesn't want to tell Roy and his agent that there's no deal after all. He agrees to give Toronto the prospects they wanted all along, and ends up having to take the prospects that were supposed to go to the Blue Jays in an effort to somehow avoid depleting the entire system.

That sounds like Ed Wade, not Smug-O.

The Savior wrote:

HillMD wrote:

dajafi wrote:So here's something else that doesn't make sense:

supposedly the whole reason Seattle got involved was because they had prospects that Toronto wanted. The two Ms farmhands we keep hearing about, Aumont and Gillies, are Canadians. Anthopoulos reportedly wants Canadian players. Why then would the Phils make a bad trade to dump Lee for Canadian prospects if not to package them for the Jays?

I was thinking something along these lines: Amaro initially thought he was just going to give up Lee. Anthopolous agreed to it at first, receiving these Canadian prospects. Halladay and his agent flew to Philadelphia, Amaro is ecstatic that the love of his life is going to be a Phillie. Anthopolous calls and turns Amaro's world upside down. He says "We don't want to do this anymore. We're not getting enough. Seriously. I don't care, I'll keep him unless you give me your prospects instead of Seattle's." Amaro, in the midst of negotiating a contract with Halladay, begins to panic and absolutely has to make the deal work now that he is so immersed into everything and doesn't want to tell Roy and his agent that there's no deal after all. He agrees to give Toronto the prospects they wanted all along, and ends up having to take the prospects that were supposed to go to the Blue Jays in an effort to somehow avoid depleting the entire system.

Um, Halladay and his agent would put that kabash on that. I mean, Amaro is sitting there with $60m reasons why Halladay and his agent should call Anthopolous back and suggest that the Phillies are the only team he'll accept a trade to.

Sure. Even if that did happen, Anthopolous then says OK, you're not going anywhere then. I'll take the two draft picks. Enjoy your flight back to Canada.

THIS is our stud catching prospect:

Wizlah wrote: And why is everyone freaking about starks reports, when most of us are of the opinion that stark is rube's $#@! spraying-mouthpiece?

I agree this seems far from certain, but Salisbury and Rosenthal are reporting the same thing.

Woody wrote:THIS is our stud catching prospect:

A young Edward James Almost

So basically we made a lateral move prospect wise but we get a slightly better pitcher who is willing to take an extension under his true value right now?

I would think Drabek is rated higher than both these guys.

Soren wrote:So basically we made a lateral move prospect wise but we get a slightly better pitcher who is willing to take an extension under his true value right now?

Yeah except for the part where we made a lateral move prospect wise.

Yeah, I'd rather have Taylor and Drabek by quite a bit over these Seattle dudes

jerseyhoya wrote:

dajafi wrote:So here's something else that doesn't make sense:

supposedly the whole reason Seattle got involved was because they had prospects that Toronto wanted. The two Ms farmhands we keep hearing about, Aumont and Gillies, are Canadians. Anthopoulos reportedly wants Canadian players. Why then would the Phils make a bad trade to dump Lee for Canadian prospects if not to package them for the Jays?

I'm still waiting for the "Oh, now that makes sense" moment too

Maybe that moment will come when we know what the trade actual is.

that's the part I wasn't sure of obviously. Doesn't the value of Halladay and his apparent forthcoming extension make up for what we lost prospect wise?

The Savior wrote:Yeah, I'd rather have Taylor and Drabek by quite a bit over these Seattle dudes

But isn't it more the Seattle dudes vs. the dudes we sent to Cleveland?

And weren't people here in recent days saying they would do Taylor and Drabek for Halladay?

Is isn't his rumored extension a really good and cool thing?

I think the Lee and Halladay thing, which never a real option because of ownership, is distorting public opinion here.

The Savior wrote:Yeah, I'd rather have Taylor and Drabek by quite a bit over these Seattle dudes

Don't forget about D’Arnaud. In the past four months we go from having 2 promising catching prospect to none.

kimbatiste wrote:

Soren wrote:So basically we made a lateral move prospect wise but we get a slightly better pitcher who is willing to take an extension under his true value right now?

Yeah except for the part where we made a lateral move prospect wise.

I agree here. We took a big step down in prospects. Drabek and Taylor were both going to be Top 25-30 prospects leaguewide I think. I think maybe 1 of the Seattle guys cracks the Top 100 leaguewide. Also, in a system overloaded with OFs and devoid of SS, 3Bs we took another OF back? (Liddi or Triunfel would have at least made more sense). If we lose Werth in a year, I'm going to be pizzed.

SQUIRE

cartersDad26 wrote:Let's wait for this to shake out. I think Rube is going to surprise us - I have faith in the smug.

Salisbury was adamant on the radio this morning that Drabek is gone.

Is it possible that Amaro & Co. are crafty enough to leak a false rumor about Drabek in order to make the real deal go down easier with the fans?

If you had told me yesterday morning that we were trading Lee alone for Seattle prospects and then sending those prospects to Toronto for Halladay and a long-term deal, I would have said that was a good, wise trade - essentially a Lee for Halladay trade, plus a bargain extension. But if you then told me at the last minute that we'd have to give up Taylor and d'Arnaud to get the deal done, I would have been upset. But if you let me be upset about a false rumor about losing Drabek for 12 or 14 hours, then I end up happy with losing "just" Lee, Taylor, and d'Arnaud.

Or maybe Amaro could pull a real shocker and pull out of the trade with Seattle at the last minute and send Drabek and other top prospects directly to Toronto, again leaving us relieved to have Halladay and Lee at the top of the rotation in 2010 (albeit with a decimated farm system).

Maybe I'm just too optimistic.

Grotewold wrote:
I think the Lee and Halladay thing, which never a real option because of ownership, is distorting public opinion here.

That's one way of looking at it. I tend to think of it as the Lee and Halladay thing never being a real option because of Rube's mistake on Jamie Moyer's contract last year.

I think we can stop acting like something else is going to happen. We're getting Gilles, Aumont, and a 3rd prospect, probably Ramirez.

Squire wrote:

Grotewold wrote:
I think the Lee and Halladay thing, which never a real option because of ownership, is distorting public opinion here.

That's one way of looking at it. I tend to think of it as the Lee and Halladay thing never being a real option because of Rube's mistake on Jamie Moyer's contract last year.

No GM is perfect. And ownership could still approve an extra $9MM in 2010.