The OLD Halladay/Smug thread is HERE

by **Didn't I?** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 19:32:35

Maybe the ace in 2011 will be Cole Hamels.

by **CrashburnAlley** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 19:37:17

JFLNYC wrote:If it comes to that, you're OK with having neither in 2011 and starting next off-season with a rotation of Hamels, Happ & Drabek?

Why would trading Lee for Halladay ensure that the Phillies have Halladay in the starting rotation in 2011?

JFLNYC wrote:They don't do it to please the Jays. They do it if there's no other way to shave some payroll -- unless you think the PTB are going to OK a $155MM+ payroll this year.

If they're trying to shave payroll, why wouldn't they trade Blanton or Victorino? Trading Lee (who makes $9 million) for Halladay (who makes ~$16 million) is not shaving payroll.

JFLNYC wrote:It is a last-ditch effort but, as such, it makes a lot of sense and is better than the alternative.

The alternative: Lee + Halladay + Hamels + Happ + Moyer/Kendrick/P. Martinez/someone else for one year in which the Phillies can make it a cakewalk through the playoffs. Four draft picks if both Lee and Halladay hit free agency; lock up either (most likely Halladay) with two draft picks otherwise.

That looks pretty good to me.

JFLNYC wrote:A lateral move for 2010 with a manifestly better 2011 and beyond makes a whole lot of sense IMO.

The move doesn't make sense for a World Series-caliber team that will lose a lot of its team soon anyway.

Werth and Blanton are free agents after the 2010 season (Rollins if the team somehow does not pick up his 2011 option); Howard, Ibanez, Madson, and Victorino after 2011.

JFLNYC wrote:Again, hopefully trading Vic and/or Blanton to free up salary gets 'er done. But, if all else fails, it would be very short-sighted not to, in effect, swap Lee for Halladay if the former is going to leave after this season while the latter would sign an extension.

Why do you assume Halladay will sign an extension? It's certainly a possibility but not a foregone conclusion. Trading Lee to acquire Halladay for this reason is a very risky endeavor.

by **JFLNYC** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 20:22:59

CrashburnAlley wrote:
JFLNYC wrote:If it comes to that, you're OK with having neither in 2011 and starting next off-season with a rotation of Hamels, Happ & Drabek?

Why would trading Lee for Halladay ensure that the Phillies have Halladay in the starting rotation in 2011?

The Jays have already said they'd allow teams to negotiate an extension with Halladay. You only do the deal if you can come to terms with Halladay on an extension, thereby ensuring his presence beyond 2010.

CrashburnAlley wrote:
JFLNYC wrote:They don't do it to please the Jays. They do it if there's no other way to shave some payroll -- unless you think the PTB are going to OK a $155MM+ payroll this year.

If they're trying to shave payroll, why wouldn't they trade Blanton or Victorino? Trading Lee (who makes $9 million) for Halladay (who makes ~$16 million) is not shaving payroll.

Who said they wouldn't? Sorry to repeat myself again and again, but the goal would be, of course, to trade Victorino and/or Blanton. The Lee scenario is the last ditch if all else fails. And, in terms of shaving payroll, Victorino ($5MM est.) + Blanton ($7MM est.) is best. But, if they can't trade either of them or only one of them, strictly from a financial standpoint, trading Lee shaves more payroll.

CrashburnAlley wrote:
JFLNYC wrote:It is a last-ditch effort but, as such, it makes a lot of sense and is better than the alternative.

The alternative: Lee + Halladay + Hamels + Happ + Moyer/Kendrick/P. Martinez/someone else for one year in which the Phillies can make it a cakewalk through the playoffs. Four draft picks if both Lee and Halladay hit free agency; lock up either (most likely Halladay) with two draft picks otherwise.

That looks pretty good to me.

Again I ask: If it comes to that, you're OK with having neither in 2011 and starting next off-season with a rotation of Hamels, Happ & Drabek? I'm not. And I'm pretty certain RAJ isn't either. Again, unfortunately I have to repeat myself. You want both Halladay and Lee, I want both Halladay and Lee and, I imagine that's what RAJ wants. For 2010. But if the only way to make it work financially is to trade Lee, Halladay in 2011 and beyond is inarguably better than neither in 2011 and beyond.

CrashburnAlley wrote:
JFLNYC wrote:A lateral move for 2010 with a manifestly better 2011 and beyond makes a whole lot of sense IMO.

CrashburnAlley wrote:The move doesn't make sense for a World Series-caliber team that will lose a lot of its team soon anyway.

And it makes even less sense for a World Series-caliber team to miss the opportunity to have one ace pitcher when/if the alternative is neither. It's a pretty simple equation: If you have to choose (and, again, this is only if there's no other alternative) between 2 "pitcher years" of Halladay + Lee vs. 5 or 6 of Halladay alone, the latter is preferable.

CrashburnAlley wrote:Werth and Blanton are free agents after the 2010 season (Rollins if the team somehow does not pick up his 2011 option); Howard, Ibanez, Madson, and Victorino after 2011.

One of the reasons you trade Lee if absolutely necessary to ensure getting Halladay is exactly because Blanton probably won't be back. You want to ensure that you're not minus Halladay AND Lee AND Blanton after 2010. And the relatively short window when the current core of this team will be together is all the more reason to make sure you don't end up going into next off season with only 2 major-league starters (Hamels and Happ).

CrashburnAlley wrote:
JFLNYC wrote:Again, hopefully trading Vic and/or Blanton to free up salary gets 'er done. But, if all else fails, it would be very short-sighted not to, in effect, swap Lee for Halladay if the former is going to leave after this season while the latter would sign an extension.

Why do you assume Halladay will sign an extension? It's certainly a possibility but not a foregone conclusion. Trading Lee to acquire Halladay for this reason is a very risky endeavor.

Not so. As I mentioned above the Jays have already said they'd allow teams to negotiate an extension with Halladay. You only do the deal if you can come to terms with Halladay on an extension, thereby ensuring his presence beyond 2010. There's no risk.

You're thinking with your heart, which I understand. At the risk of repeating myself yet again, the goal is to do everything possible to have both Lee and Halladay in your 2010 rotation. The best solution is, of course, for the PTB to agree to expand the payroll for 2010. That way you can keep Blanton, too. But, if you assume (as I do) they're going to want some (if not all) of Halladay's 2010 to be saved elsewhere and if -- and only if -- there's no other way to effectuate those savings than to trade Lee, it would be very short-sighted not to, in effect, swap Lee for Halladay if the former is going to leave after this season while the latter would sign an extension.

We can hope and wish all we want that it doesn't come to that. But, if it does, keeping Lee for 2010 at the expense of getting Halladay for 2010 and beyond is the thing which makes zero sense IMO.

by **hoya** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 20:36:04

Still not seeing why we would trade Lee rather than Blanton . . .

by **FTN** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 20:38:32

hoya wrote:Still not seeing why we would trade Lee rather than Blanton . . .

Because Lee brings back better prospects.

But we should not be trading Lee.

by **Bakestar** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 20:48:14

Didn't I? wrote:Maybe the ace in 2011 will be Cole Hamels.

by **JFLNYC** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 20:52:15

Didn't I? wrote:Maybe the ace in 2011 will be Cole Hamels.

That would be great. But I'd much rather have Roy Halladay as my #2 than J.A. Happ.

by **Trent Steele** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 21:28:37

The Blue Jays will tender RHP Jeremy Accardo after all. Still awaiting official word from the club on all decisions.

This is a change from what was previously reported. I'm going to read positive things into those move because I want to even though it is unwarranted.

by **Woody** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 22:10:36

i'll kil all of you while you're sleeping especially jfly. this thread has become unreadable

by **phatj** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 01:13:18

Bakestar wrote:
Didn't I? wrote:Maybe the ace in 2011 will be Cole Hamels.

This.

Also...

JFLNYC wrote:Again I ask: If it comes to that, you're OK with having neither in 2011 and starting next off-season with a rotation of Hamels, Happ & Drabek? I'm not.

Why the hell not?

And why do you assume Blanton and Lee are both gone if a deal for Halladay doesn't get done?

by **jerseyhoya** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 01:30:29

Woody wrote:i'll kil all of you while you're sleeping especially jfly. this thread has become unreadable

I'm so glad I decided not to read it, then post in it, then not read it some more till we got to this page.

by **CFP** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 01:39:14

J. Salisbury:

Along with the Angels, Yankees and Red Sox, the Phillies are in what seems to be a Final Four for Halladay’s services. There is a belief among some baseball insiders that the Phils are actually the No. 1 seed in the contest to land the 32-year-old righthander.

Two factors put the Phils in that position:

1. Phils general manager Ruben Amaro Jr. is obsessed with Halladay. People close to Amaro say he began plotting strategy to get Halladay as far back as the summer of 2008.

2. Halladay has a full no-trade clause, so he has the power to dictate where he goes. Though he would find any of the above teams acceptable, the Phillies – according to people with knowledge of his wishes – are his top choice. Phillies officials are well aware of where they rank on Halladay’s wish list. In fact, according to people close to the situation, there is a growing feeling in the Phils front office that Halladay is right in the team’s lap – if it can pull off the complicated deal.

The Phillies encountered a big hurdle in their attempt to acquire Halladay last summer. They refused to meet the Jays’ price of pitchers J.A. Happ and Kyle Drabek and outfielders Domonic Brown and Anthony Gose. Six months later, the Phils aren’t just pondering how deeply they want to dig into their farm system; they are trying to figure out a way to fit Halladay’s $15.75 million salary into a $140-million gas tank, which is nearly full.

Website · by **Wolfgang622** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 01:48:51

CFP wrote:J. Salisbury:

Along with the Angels, Yankees and Red Sox, the Phillies are in what seems to be a Final Four for Halladay’s services. There is a belief among some baseball insiders that the Phils are actually the No. 1 seed in the contest to land the 32-year-old righthander.

Two factors put the Phils in that position:

1. Phils general manager Ruben Amaro Jr. is obsessed with Halladay. People close to Amaro say he began plotting strategy to get Halladay as far back as the summer of 2008.

2. Halladay has a full no-trade clause, so he has the power to dictate where he goes. Though he would find any of the above teams acceptable, the Phillies – according to people with knowledge of his wishes – are his top choice. Phillies officials are well aware of where they rank on Halladay’s wish list. In fact, according to people close to the situation, there is a growing feeling in the Phils front office that Halladay is right in the team’s lap – if it can pull off the complicated deal.

The Phillies encountered a big hurdle in their attempt to acquire Halladay last summer. They refused to meet the Jays’ price of pitchers J.A. Happ and Kyle Drabek and outfielders Domonic Brown and Anthony Gose. Six months later, the Phils aren’t just pondering how deeply they want to dig into their farm system; they are trying to figure out a way to fit Halladay’s $15.75 million salary into a $140-million gas tank, which is nearly full.

I gotta say, I absolutely love point one.

by **FTN** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 01:57:01

I think the solution to this whole situation is pretty simple. So Rube, if you're reading, or one of your lackeys is reading, here it is.

1. They want Drabek, Brown, Gose and Happ. They know they're not going to get that much. So you counter with Happ, Brown, Gose and either Pettibone, Worley, Cisco, Stutes, or Flande. They get an extra prospect, but in turn they pay $5M of Halladay's 2010 salary. The net cost of Halladay is now $10.75M

2. Trade Joe Blanton to a team looking for a starter, in exchange for a zero-two service time pitching arm and a prospect. You're not going to get a stud in return, but you can probably grab yourself a quality reliever. The prospect should be equivalent to the fourth prospect we give up in the Halladay deal.

If Blanton figures to make between 7 and 8 million in arbitration, you've basically gone from Blanton to Halladay, and you're paying about 3M more. The reliever you get in the Blanton deal will make 400K, the league minimum.

Problem solved. One extra prospect to the Blue Jays, and we'll get a prospect back in the Blanton deal.

by **philliesphhan** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 01:59:17

Who takes Happ's spot?

by **FTN** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 02:00:57

philliesphhan wrote:Who takes Happ's spot?

Pedro.

by **philliesphhan** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 02:03:09

Works for me

by **Monkeyboy** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 02:05:27

That's my biggest concern with trading both Happ and Blanton. I've seen way too many Phillies teams go under because of a few injuries to the starting pitching. The team was pretty well protected the past two years because of the depth on the staff and an unusual string of good health. But trade those two and we'll be right on the edge if something goes wrong. Halladay, as much as I love him, has a ton of mileage on that arm and Hamels is a sore elbow away from a long DL stint. If everything goes well, it's great, but it's risky.

I really think we need to find a way to keep Happ or Blanton. Since Happ costs so little, it makes sense for it to be him. Maybe the guy we get back for Blanton can be the extra piece for Halladay.

by **Monkeyboy** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 02:05:48

FTN wrote:
philliesphhan wrote:Who takes Happ's spot?

Pedro.

And he'll be free?

Website · by **Wolfgang622** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 02:06:49

Not sure the Blue Jays would willingly go from Gose + Brown + Happ + Drabek to Gose + Brown + Happ + one of Pettibone, Worley, Cisco, Stutes, or Flande + giving the Phillies $5M. If anything, they'd probably demand one of those players, minimally, if they give up Drabek.

The whole point of this to them is salary relief + some prospects. Can't imagine they would ever agree to pay anything. The fans in Toronto would have a conniption if the Blue Jays were paying Halladay to pitch in Philadelphia (or anywhere else).

Archived

The OLD Halladay/Smug thread is HERE