It's Done? Roy Halladay traded to Phils, Lee (?) to Mariners

by **Barry Jive** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:02:27

Seems like the Mariners are robbing the Phils blind on this unless they send us some prospects.

by **JFLNYC** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:03:27

Maybe the way to look at it is to take Lee and Halladay out of the equation for just a moment (bear with me).

Phils give up: Taylor, D'Arnaud, Pettibone

Philes get: TOR Reliever + Morrow + Gillies + Cash

Not a terribly exciting trade but, depending on how much you like Morrow and Gillies (or whoever it may end up being), more or less a wash once you factor in what should be a pretty good reliever from the Jays (which the Phils desperately need) plus the cash.

Now bring Lee and Halladay back into the equation:

Lee for 1 year + two 2011 draft picks

for

Halladay for 2010 thru 2014 (at least) and maybe 2015 & 2016.

If you net out Halladay and Lee for 2010, plus assume the other prospects are more or less a wash, it's:

Two 2011 draft picks

for

Halladay for 2011 thru 2014 (at least) and maybe 2015 & 2016.

P.S. Could Taylor, D'Arnuad and or Pettibone turn into studs for years to come? Sure. But so could Morrow or Gillies or whomever.

by **Wizlah** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:04:01

Barry Jive wrote:Seems like the Mariners are robbing the Phils blind on this unless they send us some prospects.

that's why I reckon we're getting prospects. only jamie moyer robs the his smugness blind.

by **joe table** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:04:57

If the deal ends up close to Stark reports (maybe a BJ pen arm tossed in) and we can get Roy for 3 guaranteed years in an extension, then this is really a bizarre confluence of circumstances--really mostly stemming from the fact that Roy was willing to take the rare earning power hit to play with us and near our ST facility--where all three parties would have made out quite well IMO

-SEA trades a good but somewhat risky (starter or reliever) arm and maybe some lesser pieces for an ace that could put them over the top in the West

-TOR does well for themselves considering Halladay's demands, exceeds Twins' Santana return or draft pick return letting him walk

-PHI turns an expiring ace into an intermediate term slightly better one without paying market value, and holds on to their top 2 prospects.

My assumption all week has been that this would be dumb to do assuming you have to pay Roy some semblance of market over 4-5 years. If not, and you make the somewhat safe assumption that 9 figures for Lee was excessive for the club, and Lee will take 3-60 with vesting options, that really changes everything.

by **S2D** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:05:08

joe table wrote:
S2D wrote:
Wizlah wrote:
lowcountry wrote:I know it's a dead horse, but I just don't see why the Phils should have to give up Lee *and* good prospects for a guy that's leaving Toronto at the end of the year and has told them to trade him by spring training or suck it.

because we also don't have the money. we'd love to believe we could take the extra 10 mill, but rube wouldn't be doing all this if we didn't have the 140 mill cap.

If this was really about money, why wouldn't we just trade Blanton? You wouldn't have gotten anything for him, but you'd have cleared enough salary to keep Lee. This deal was about keeping our prospects, which is fine btw; but I believe we would have been able to do that anyway if we had just waited out the Jays. They had no options what so ever.

One possibility: assuming we wanted to keep Drabek, we had to find a high-ceiling arm to pair with Taylor and D'Arnaud to complete a package for Halladay. Seattle may not be willing to part with Aumont for one year of Blanton at 7-8 mil. For one year of Lee at 9 mil? Definitely

Assuming we aren't willing to pay 9 figures for Lee and Halladay somehow would be willing to take 60 (really hard to believe that but those are the reports), then it makes a ton of sense to try to parlay a non-affordable Lee into an affordable locked up Roy if possible

This is true if you wanted to do the deal right now. If you waited, who knows what the Jays would've had to settle for? All I'm saying is the cost in dollars for Blanton and Lee is fairly similar; you need to dump one of them. I know you're not getting Aument for Blanton, but who's to say you need that to acquire Halladay? The Twins were talking about Phil Hughes, Melky and Austin Jackson. They ended up getting a lot less when they ultimately dealt Johan, and the situation was EXACTLY the same with the main piece having a FNTC on the last year of his deal.

The only way this deal is good is if we get two really good prospects from Seattle, preferably at least one that can help this season. Otherwise, it's completely preemptive.

by **Barry Jive** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:05:35

S2D wrote:If MattS is right, Hamels' luck regressed to the mean last year and we can expect him to be right around that in the future. I know this a very critical subject but you have to consider both evaluation tools.

um...I don't think you were reading Matt's posts correctly.

by **bleh** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:06:19

kimbatiste wrote:
bleh wrote:
Wizlah wrote:
bleh wrote:
BigEd76 wrote:
bleh wrote:1 year of Halladay (on a not so cheap 2010 contract)

4 years, possibly 6

That has nothing to do with the trade though, it's between the Phils and Halladay.

you don't get the opportunity to negotiate one on one with halladay with no other suitors bidding up the price unless you make it a condition of the trade. so it's everything to do with the trade.

ok so what do we get for giving up the right to do that with Lee?

I'm sure we tried and he said no.

http://zozone.mlblogs.com/archives/2009 ... _town.html

Lee's agent, Darek Braunecker, said:

Lee told The Cleveland Plain-Dealer in August that when the Indians decided not to talk about an extension in Spring Training 2009 that it made little sense for him to talk about one after the 2009 season when he was so close to free agency.

"It doesn't make sense to do it one year out when I just watched what CC (Sabathia) did," said Lee, referring to Sabathia's seven-year, $161 million contract.

Braunecker said Lee's comments pertained exclusively to negotiations with the Cleveland Indians, and not the Phillies.

"We had taken a position at the end of Spring Training with the Indians that Cliff was going to play out the remainder of his contract and enter the free agent market," Braunecker said. "We've never had any of those conversations with the Phillies of any sort. That was exclusive to the situation with Cleveland."

by **kimbatiste** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:08:35

It isn't that Lee wouldn't be willing to sign an extension here just that what would be required was prohibitive. Are you really not getting this?

by **JFLNYC** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:08:43

Just saw this graphic on ESPN News. It's Halladay's MLB ranks in these categories since 2002:

Wins - 1st
W Pct. - 1st
CG - 1st
SHO - 1st
ERA - 2nd

by **S2D** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:08:49

Barry Jive wrote:
S2D wrote:If MattS is right, Hamels' luck regressed to the mean last year and we can expect him to be right around that in the future. I know this a very critical subject but you have to consider both evaluation tools.

um...I don't think you were reading Matt's posts correctly.

Huh? I thought he was saying he won't be as good as 2008 Hamels, but isn't as bad as 2009.

by **Wizlah** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:09:00

joe table wrote:-SEA trades a good but somewhat risky (starter or reliever) arm and maybe some lesser pieces for an ace that could put them over the top in the West

-TOR does well for themselves considering Halladay's demands, exceeds Twins' Santana return or draft pick return letting him walk

-PHI turns an expiring ace into an intermediate term slightly better one without paying market value, and holds on to their top 2 prospects.

You forgot the bit where everyone listens when rube picks up the phone because he always seems to do such a nice deal which suits everyone's needs.

by **jerseyhoya** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:09:41

S2D wrote:
Barry Jive wrote:
S2D wrote:If MattS is right, Hamels' luck regressed to the mean last year and we can expect him to be right around that in the future. I know this a very critical subject but you have to consider both evaluation tools.

um...I don't think you were reading Matt's posts correctly.

Huh? I thought he was saying he won't be as good as 2008 Hamels, but isn't as bad as 2009.

That's not what you said in your first post at all

by **phorever** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:09:43

Wizlah wrote:

the blue jays always have one option. tell everyone to $#@! off and take two draft picks when halladay goes in free agency. and if we couldn't offer them something which they valued more than that, why deal with us?

great point. halladay isn't going to go on strike if not traded. he's going to pitch, and pitch well enough that the jays can make the playoffs with some luck. and at the end of the season, they get high draft picks for 2011, which can be pretty darn valuable.

by **bleh** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:09:45

ek wrote:yeah but that quote was in august and they just met last week in the winter meetings and apparently from reports, it didn't go very well

The bolded part is from today.

by **JFLNYC** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:09:55

kimbatiste wrote:It isn't that Lee wouldn't be willing to sign an extension here just that what would be required was prohibitive. Are you really not getting this?

Exactly. No way Lee signs right now for 4/80 with vesting options.

by **Barry Jive** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:10:56

S2D wrote:
Barry Jive wrote:
S2D wrote:If MattS is right, Hamels' luck regressed to the mean last year and we can expect him to be right around that in the future. I know this a very critical subject but you have to consider both evaluation tools.

um...I don't think you were reading Matt's posts correctly.

Huh? I thought he was saying he won't be as good as 2008 Hamels, but isn't as bad as 2009.

oh, by "last year" I thought you meant 2009. I thought you were saying he wouldn't get any better than he was in '09.

by **VFB** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:11:08

here we go again

AP relays report that Blanton, Happ and Dom Brown all took physicals today. This move may yet be bigger than we think. #Phillies

by **Wizlah** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:11:19

phorever wrote:
Wizlah wrote:

the blue jays always have one option. tell everyone to $#@! off and take two draft picks when halladay goes in free agency. and if we couldn't offer them something which they valued more than that, why deal with us?

great point. halladay isn't going to go on strike if not traded. he's going to pitch, and pitch well enough that the jays can make the playoffs with some luck. and at the end of the season, they get high draft picks for 2011, which can be pretty darn valuable.

we are both up way too late. you marking papers or somethin?

by **VFB** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:11:49

This trade could have a completely different dynamic than what we thought we knew.

by **hoya** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 20:12:11

just tell us already motherfuckers, i can't refresh nonstop for days and stay sane

Archived

It's Done? Roy Halladay traded to Phils, Lee (?) to Mariners