July 29



The Phillies complete the deal for Lee and outfielder Ben Francisco for Carrasco, Donald, Marson and Jason Knapp.

Amaro enters the Phillies clubhouse at Chase Field in Phoenix to applause.

Players respect the Smug

Bahahah

First, how many teams were interested in him? Probably 29.

Secondly, how many interested teams could afford to pay him both in 2010 and do a long-term deal past that $20 million US per year? Maybe eight: The Philadelphia Phillies, New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, Los Angeles Angels, Los Angeles Dodgers, Chicago Cubs, Tampa Bay Rays and New York Mets.

Next, how many teams had the pieces to make a deal for Halladay? Scratch the Mets.

Fantastic read, and the "scratch the Mets" line had me rolling.

For them to demand Gillies over Saunders must mean that they've done a ton of homework on Gillies. Or they like the rhyming aspect for marketing purposes, either or.

Gillies over Saunders is a no-brainer. Saunders is MLB-ready. After they traded one outfielder with nowhere to play in Taylor, they would have been getting one right back.

HillMD wrote:Gillies over Saunders is a no-brainer. Saunders is MLB-ready. After they traded one outfielder with nowhere to play in Taylor, they would have been getting one right back.

Wait. So it was better to get the less good player who is farther away than the more good player who is closer?

SQUIRE

Halladay and Landry fly to Philadelphia.

And what happened next?

Squire wrote:

HillMD wrote:Gillies over Saunders is a no-brainer. Saunders is MLB-ready. After they traded one outfielder with nowhere to play in Taylor, they would have been getting one right back.

Wait. So it was better to get the less good player who is farther away than the more good player who is closer?

SQUIRE

Well, I don't think Gillies is going to be the worse player either way. When you're not sure, it is still better to get the younger player who isn't blocked for two years. In the mini situation you briefly described, you did not mention how the closer player would have nowhere to play besides AAA, while the younger one progresses toward his level.

mcare89 wrote:Or they like the rhyming aspect for marketing purposes, either or.

Would've been fun but I've heard it pronounced "GILL-us" like Dobie

I really wish there was a way to find out what the Rangers and Yankee offers for Cliff Lee were.

SQUIRE

I would have been pissed if they traded him to the Yankees.

Squire wrote:

HillMD wrote:Gillies over Saunders is a no-brainer. Saunders is MLB-ready. After they traded one outfielder with nowhere to play in Taylor, they would have been getting one right back.

Wait. So it was better to get the less good player who is farther away than the more good player who is closer?

SQUIRE

fwiw, I like Gillies more than Saunders now that I've spent a decent amount of time studying Gillies. He's our CF of the future.

FTN wrote:fwiw, I like Gillies more than Saunders now that I've spent a decent amount of time studying Gillies. He's our CF of the future.

ETA?

FTN wrote:

Squire wrote:

HillMD wrote:Gillies over Saunders is a no-brainer. Saunders is MLB-ready. After they traded one outfielder with nowhere to play in Taylor, they would have been getting one right back.

Wait. So it was better to get the less good player who is farther away than the more good player who is closer?

SQUIRE

fwiw, I like Gillies more than Saunders now that I've spent a decent amount of time studying Gillies. He's our CF of the future.

That's good to hear. In general, I tend to prefer the prospect with power potential and it seems like Gillies power is going to disappear outside of High Desert. That and the fact that we have a half-dozen CF prospects behind him. Hopefully, one of Gose, Dugan, Hudson, James, etc. shows some aptitude at hitting the ball out of the park this year.

Squire wrote:

FTN wrote:

Squire wrote:

HillMD wrote:Gillies over Saunders is a no-brainer. Saunders is MLB-ready. After they traded one outfielder with nowhere to play in Taylor, they would have been getting one right back.

Wait. So it was better to get the less good player who is farther away than the more good player who is closer?

SQUIRE

fwiw, I like Gillies more than Saunders now that I've spent a decent amount of time studying Gillies. He's our CF of the future.

That's good to hear.

Oh no you didn't.

Gillies numbers were SICK last year.

LongDrive wrote:Gillies numbers were SICK last year.

Yeah. Like a walking Juan Pierre on steroids. Too bad it was in the best hitting environment since Mile High.

Halfbearded Marauder wrote:

LongDrive wrote:Gillies numbers were SICK last year.

Yeah. Like a walking Juan Pierre on steroids. Too bad it was in the best hitting environment since Mile High.

I was thinking more like Ichiro

Take out the steroids and "a walking Juan Pierre" is still pretty good.

And I'm not certain he'll never develop at least a little power. IIRC he's not built like Pierre (though he isn't a Brown/Taylor/Werth behemoth either). It wouldn't shock me if he filled out into a 10-15 HR a year guy, and reputedly he's so fast that even a little extra girth wouldn't much reduce that aspect of his game.

I don't know much about Saunders, but I'm fairly excited about Gillies.

Could end up the best Phils leadoff hitter since The Dude.

Gillies has gone from deaf-joke-throw-in to best leadoff hitter since Dykstra in a matter of two weeks. Amazing.