It's Official: Lee to Seattle for Aumont, Gillies, Ramirez
Zolecki tweet: "Phillies officially announce that Cliff Lee has been traded to Seattle for Aumont, Gillies and Ramirez."
Halladay press conference at 5pm.
7 months ago
David S. Cohen
211 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
So no more phantom pitches to second base.
Aw, hamburgers. I regret not making it to one of Cliff’s starts.
by ThinMountainAir on Dec 16, 2009 3:07 PM EST reply actions
If it makes you feel better
I got to see Lee pitch once last year. Against the Braves in late August when he imploded.
(Yeah, I’m rationalizing because this sucks, but what else is there to do at this point?)
I had tickets to that game
Something came up and I had to go out of town, so I gave the tickets to my parents, who told me I didn’t miss anything. Later, I had a chance to go to another one of his starts, but again couldn’t make it and he threw a complete game.
Oh well, no more self pity. Time to look on the bright side. After all, we’ve got Roy Halladay and his crazy awesome two-seamer now.
by ThinMountainAir on Dec 16, 2009 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
Dude, over at Lookout Landing, they’re celebrating much like Phils fans were when Amaro landed Lee. That does not make me feel great about this trade.
by ThinMountainAir on Dec 16, 2009 4:09 PM EST up reply actions
In the abstract, your team obtains one of the five best pitchers in the game today, you should be ecstatic…way to go Ruben, you messed even that up
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:10 PM EST reply actions
This is awful.
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
by foos05 on Dec 16, 2009 3:10 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Aroldis Chapman hit 97 on the gun during his workout. 15 teams present, including Yanks, BoSox and even Ed Wade. Does not say if the Phils sent anyone. He apparently is looking for $24 million to sign. Maybe we could use the 6 mil from the Jays as a downpayment :(
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-chapmanworkout121509&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
I saw a Martino tweet that said they did send two people to watch him, but that they are not seriously looking to acquire him.
yeah… why would they. We already have had the 4th best farm in all of baseball :(
by Boundforbeach on Dec 16, 2009 3:24 PM EST up reply actions
If the red sox were willing to offer him 15 mil already the budget conscious phils won’t even bother…he’s going to the yankees or the sox or the angels.
Now that the mets have been ponzi’d and the dodgers are dealing with divorce, is there anyone else out there left as ‘big spenders’ – maybe the cubs but they have the new ownership right?
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:24 PM EST up reply actions
I only take issue with throwing in d’arnaud because now we’re down to Valle unless we find another backstop in Panama City working at the Cinnabon.
Now I’d move Victorino for a reliever or prospects, move Werth to center for the time being and let Francisco play. Polanco, depsite his bad year last year, can hit second and Victorino’s value will never be higher for a bit of a hacker. Then when Werth bolts for cash, bring up Brown.
But no matter what happens we can all can enjoy watching two more shots at the series in’10 and ’11, regardless of what we think of this trade.
We already had an almost-equally good shot in 2010. I guess we’ll have a better shot in 2011, unless Drabek and Taylor (who are both likely to be ready by that year) turn out to be very good young players, in which case we might have a worse shot even in 2011.
with rollins polanco and ibanez being a couple years older in 2011, I wouldn’t say that the shot will be better in 2011…
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t necessarily believe that they’d have a better shot in 2011 with these trades, as the depth of the system is no longer extant.
Plus there’s the whole ‘one player making a large percentage of payroll and you usually don’t win the world series’ thing…Roy Halladay will be close to 15% of the phillies payroll for a few years
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
Unless it some how gets to 200 million dollars it will be always over 10%
Do ou see the phillies upping their payroll a total over 40% over the next few years?
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:01 PM EST up reply actions
Victorino is way to important to trade. we got some good young guys for the pen. and they have enough to sign someone
by IndianEagle on Dec 16, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions
Yes – cause they just saved 9 million dollars by trading cliff lee, the phils are rolling in dough
And I think Victorino might be slightly over rated by a portion of the fan base for things not baseball related
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions
I think a lot of the fan base loves Vic primarily because he runs really fast and says crazy things in interviews.
by ThinMountainAir on Dec 16, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions
Everyone’s overrated by some and underrated by some. The only important questions are how good a player is and how much he costs. Spending time and mental energy on the meta-question of whether other people think of him too highly or not is a waste.
You are of course correct
I just get kinda irritated when people absolutely love baseball players for reasons that are barely related to how good they are at baseball.
by ThinMountainAir on Dec 16, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
i wouldn’t sat vic is over rated at all. hes better than polanco and francisco is no where close
by IndianEagle on Dec 16, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions
I’ve never seen Shane Victorino play 2nd base or 3rd base so i’m not sure how polanco matters…I think his perceived value and actual value are two different things and when the phillies had taylor AND brown i thought trading him when that perceived value is so high would have been a smart move.
Of course now they only have brown, ibanez is old and werth probably won’t be re-signed after next season, so keep him until you can’t afford him
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
I think Francisco is underrated actually and will show even more this year. And he’s making nothing compared to Vic.
No offense to outfielders everywhere but I’ve heard us “needing” Burrell, or Abreu, or Rowand before. It’s not all that hard to pick up a good outfielder. So I’m not worried about Ibanez-Werth-Francisco with even a Mayberry as a 4th. I don’t think it makes us any worse at all and we can get something for Vic.
Then what’s Conlin’s excuse? Greatest centerfielder in team history. Gag.
by Boundforbeach on Dec 16, 2009 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
M's fan
As an M’s fan again, thank you for cliff lee!! best of luck with halladay, your team is still stacked, and lastly, it would have been interesting if the phills kept lee for 1 more year and had halladay and hamels esp if hamels was the 07 version…
How does it feel to get away with highway robbery? Pretty good I bet…
by philiafan14364 on Dec 16, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
Highway robbery was trading Yuniesky Betancourt to KC.
This is just slightly lopsided by comparison.
I like using semi-colons; they make me feel smart.
The most infuriating thing here is that even if this is a bad deal, Ruben has likely insulated himself from blame. Halladay will almost certainly do well the next couple of years. If all of the prospects in this deal end up even at the middle of their bell curves (if not better), expectations-wise, this deal will be awful for us, but the consequences won’t show up for years and many fans will be unable to connect the dots. This is a great deal for Ruben personally, but not for the franchise whose benefit he’s supposed to be acting for.
by taco pal on Dec 16, 2009 3:38 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Very machiavellian, but I don’t see it. Ruben wants to be here for more than a few years. I’m not so sure we’ll all forget who emptied our cupboards. And I’m not so sure this is another ‘bask in the glow’ moment for Ruben either. I’m sure he wants it to be, but alot of people are pissed about Cliff Lee and trading top prospects. I can’t wait to see if he gets roughed up in the presser.
by Boundforbeach on Dec 16, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
This is what gets me
because it’s amazing that a team that’s landing Roy Halladay is definitively the loser of the bunch.
Ryne Sandberg at the time was bad throw-in luck, a bolt of real bad lightning, highly unlikely to happen again. His minor league stats in no way indicate what was to come. But Ferguson Jenkins was absolute insanity.
by Wet Luzinski on Dec 16, 2009 11:00 PM EST up reply actions
Rec'd
There are two ways to judge any deal that involves prospects: immediately, and some substantial period down the line (let’s say 10 years).
I’m more a fan of the first way, because while I do believe that scouting departments can identify underrated players, the fact of the matter is that everyone’s going on similar information with these prospects, and everyone’s dealing in probabilities. Sure, we could look back in 10 years to see that Halladay led us to a World Series, Aumont gave us above-average production out of the pen, Gillies became starting center fielder for a few years, and Drabek shifted to reliever because of arm troubles — and we could say, “See! That was a great deal!”
But that’s hindsight, and the relative success of these prospects from here on out doesn’t change the simple fact that we flipped two Top 25 prospects, and another solid one, for two fringe Top 100 guys, and another solid prospect. We have to look at it as a set of probabilities, and when we do that, it’s pretty clear that Amaro F’ed up royally on this deal.
1. Deeper system
2. Much larger flexible salary scale
3. When did Josh Beckett start making 20 mil per year?
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:50 PM EST up reply actions
1.Deeper system? Really?
2. I don’t think Boston really started spending money until they won a world series…I know they were always loved, but did they really have crazy sell outs like they do now. I feel like we still have a chance to be them.
3.when was Josh Beckett the best pitcher in baseball?
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions
Well do you want to compare apples or oranges
Yes, the red sox had a deeper system than the phillies back then cause the phillies system until recently was pretty mediocre as I understand it
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
I dunno…I like Apples and Oranges.
I am trying to be positive here, maybe this wasn’t the WORST decision in the world, the Sox did something very similar. The sox still required their home grown talent to be just that…talent. We NEED Cole Hamels. Even if we kept Lee, we would still need Cole Hamels.
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 4:09 PM EST up reply actions
Did the sox simultaneously trade away an ace when they obtained josh beckett? The situations do not compare I don’t think….I’m willing to bet if you go back and look they had a pretty high payroll back then too
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, it is a completely different situation…but same result. Team gives up best prospect for very good pitching.
To be fair, I do think Halladay is a much much safer bet long term then Lee. 2.5 years ago Lee was in the minors trying to get his control back. Halladay has been consistently dominate.
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 4:13 PM EST up reply actions
People keep talking about 2.5 years ago to justify getting rid of lee.
That was 2.5 years ago, maybe he got his control back, he’s pitched pretty damn consistently overall the past 2 seasons, he was a playoff gem this past season and you build a winning team no only through trades for stars and free agency but developing your own prospects, and the phillies just got rid of 3 of their best and replaced them with less good prospects and still have nothing in the pipeline at 3rd or short stop….cacher they’re now weaker but to me that’s less of a concern cause ruiz is younger.
Team gives up best prospect for VERY good young pitching that had won a world series and still was making controllable money – again comparing the two trades is like comparing apples and cow manure and calling them similar cause both are coated in chocolate
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:16 PM EST up reply actions
Point taken.
lets not forget Lee had some games where he imploded this season. He was also much better for us then he was for Cleveland.
I do believe that they gave Beckett 13 mil a year shortly after trading for him.
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
He wasn’t much better for the phillies then he was in cleveland
he had crap run support in cleveland so if you’re looking at his W/L recordin cleveland i’m not sure how to help you…
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
no, I remember him having a 4 something ERA. For us he has an ERA less than 1 for like 6 games.
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
and lets not get started on the ERA stat argument please.
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
What you remember and what is fact are two entirely different things – you can’t just pick 6 games – you have to look at all the games he pitched for the phils and the indians
Here -
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
13 million is a lot less than 20 – plus he was a lot younger…
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
13 million before CC’s 161 million contract is alot different. The economics have change.
I guess I just proved your apples and oranges point
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
Interesting article from Fangraphs
Don’t know if it’s been posted here yet, but it discusses why Cliff Lee seems to have less trade value than others seemingly his equal. Click here.
An excerpt: “The only thing that makes sense to me is that teams are still a bit skeptical of Lee’s rapid rise to greatness. And while we’re the first ones to point out that you want to make decisions on large samples, Lee’s thrown 450 innings over the last two years and racked up +13.8 wins in that time. You can’t fluke your way into that kind of performance.”
So I guess Drabeck wasn’t untouchable after all. I just remember all the praise Amaro got after making the Lee deal for getting a good pitcher and not depleting the farm going after Halladay. Now we gave up some good prospects for a rental of Lee (albeit in a return trip to the WS) and then ended up giving up the guy we refused to trade last year. We just postponed this trade and yes probably got a better deal then the raping the Jays wanted to give us last year but still I feel violated.
Doesn’t make sense to me but hey that’s why I’m a fan I suppose.
Jim Johnson 1941-2009
"The 0-2 pitch, swing and a miss! STRUCK HIM OUT! The Philadelphia Phillies are 2008 World Champions of baseball! And let the city celebrate! " - Harry Kalas 1936-2009
to be fair…I still think we got more in return for Lee than we gave up for Lee.
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
they have a bunch HD on youtube. and the vid form the wbc
by IndianEagle on Dec 16, 2009 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
I never could see Donald starting for us, even if he did hit the ball pretty well for a couple of months. Marson never had any power, we had two higher ceiling guys in the system.
I was excited about Knapp….but he just had surgery.
by Clyde Simmons on Dec 16, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Main question was did we have to trade Lee to the Mariners in the end. I feel the question was yes and maybe a main reason why the Angels didnt get Lee or Halladay. Both teams wanted prospects still in minors but pretty much ready. With the Angels you got two major league players really and we don’t have a need for Aybar unless we then traded Rollins for prospects (I would have LOVED it too!)
More or less what the Angels were offering for Halladay in general… still the question why not go to the Angels for the 3rd team if we were the team in the end giving the prospects to the Jays. Yes Mariners have ties with us because of Gillick, but besides the point.
The Angels offered Erick Aybar, Joe Saunders, and prospect Peter Bourjos.
It’s a flashier package than what we gave up because Aybar and Saunders are both major leaguers, but it’s definitely less valuable. Aybar and Saunders are both heading into their arbitration phases, so they’re getting increasingly expensive, and Bourjos is similar to Gillies, but I’d give Gillies a slight edge.
And if Dave Cameron’s suspicions are correct — and I think they are — the Angels wouldn’t even have given up that much for Lee.
Only other question I have is was that offer made before or after they knew they were losing Lackey or did the Angels always know they weren’t going to re-sign him?
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry for the delay…
Before they lost Lackey. Either way, if the Phillies were dealing them Cliff Lee, they’d likely request a vastly different package. Personally, I’d ask for Brandon Wood, Maicer Izturis, and Fabio Martinez, but I’m sure the Phils would just ask for every athletic outfielder they have.
Ok, so now that they’ve lost lackey maybe the motivation is higher, do we know if Amaro even CALLED the angels or did he just stick with the ‘gillick troika’ to get this deal done?
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
He was asked about it at the press conference and said he’d talk about it at another time since the PC was about Halladay but that he’d address it afterwards. Dunno if he did that or not.
Hmmm – oh crap they caught me, how do i avoid answering this question until i can come up with some rational reason for not talking to the angels after the red sox signed lackey
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 6:17 PM EST up reply actions
Just think, Ruben’s idiotic move of signing Moyer to that ridiculous 2 year contract likely kept us for having both Lee and Halladay on the same team.
He’s not a good GM, he made one good trade and a series of dubious signings to date.
Fire him.
Well the only signing so far that has worked out per se is ibanez – but he’s also only played 1/3 of that contract yet, there’s time for him to become an albatross making 10 mil a year (i say by the ASB next season)
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions
As I recall, part of the justification Amaro used to sign Ibanez was that he’s a great clubhouse presence and that “he’s in the best shape of his life.” These are not good enough reasons to give a 37-year old power hitter who up to that point had played terrible defense 10 million a year for 3 years, Ruben.
by ThinMountainAir on Dec 16, 2009 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
Ibanez was a good sign...
of course on a two year deal, like Moyer would have been on a 1 year deal and same goes eventually for Polanco
Thus they are bad signs…because that’s not what happened
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Yes true, Amaro caves for the years in the end to make sure he gets his signing. Only one to question is who else really wanted Gload we offered him 2 years….
but he jumped the market – it was classic billy king – he negotiated against himself and jumped the market and billy king was a horrible GM
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
Pedro Martinez worked out, I would say. But that was actually one of his less dubious signings. Very low risk, high reward…which is how it SHOULD be.
Pedro would be a great signing this off season if the phils committed to pitching him only once ever 10 days as opposed to 5
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:05 PM EST up reply actions
boom boom boom . I’ve been banging the drum of the alternating 2000-era all-stars since Pedro kicked Moyer to the pen.
by Wet Luzinski on Dec 16, 2009 11:12 PM EST up reply actions
And I forgot about Pedro cause at the time it just seemed like a no brainer at the time because of the risk reward thing you menttioned
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 4:05 PM EST up reply actions
I need to make sure
I can now get my Halladay jersey….sucks for those with Lee ones or getting one for xmas (doubt the stores will take returns on them)
Per Rosenthal:
Holdup in Holliday trade was TOR concern over Brett Wallace’s shoulder. He had an MRI, everything checked out fine. Goes to TOR for Taylor.
Anybody got a live feed on the press conference
by Sept.28.Oct.27.Dec.28.2008 on Dec 16, 2009 4:58 PM EST reply actions
Shows how much he wanted Halladay to begin with
by Sept.28.Oct.27.Dec.28.2008 on Dec 16, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
I am starting to despise that man. Actually, I kinda always have, but mainly because I thought he was a smug prick.
I like him to be honest. Young asshole types usually do well in business. Kinda like the Red Sox’s young GM
by Sept.28.Oct.27.Dec.28.2008 on Dec 16, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
Theo Epstein isn’t an asshole though
There’s young and stupid and young and smart
Ruben is one, epstein is another
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions
PS – there’s young and brash with reason to be and young and smug with no reason to be
Amaro smells like the second
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
Theo’s anything but an asshole. The old school curmudgeon types think he’s young and smug, but that’s really only because he’s one of the new school, statistically savvy GMs.
Plus he went and made that really stupid move of hiring BIll James :)
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
Just to be clear – i was kidding – i have no idea – and i’m not watching the PC
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions
Who gives a damn?
They’re supposed to show some kind of reverence to a guy that was here for a few months? Halladay is signed to be a cornerstone of the franchise for the next 4 or 5 years. Lee, as it turned out was a few month rental.
Doc gets whatever jersey he wants.
We owe much of our World Series run to Lee. Indeed, this team was willing to give a shit load of reverence to Brad Lidge after what he did to get us to the WS in 08, why shouldn’t they show a little respect to Cliff Lee? At least in showing Cliff Lee respect wouldn’t mean losing games unnecessarily.
Because he’s gone so he means nothing – don’t you get it – this is awesomeness personified the phillies are set for life now – who cares about cliff lee or the fact that the phillies decimated the minor league system, they are paying one guy 14% of the payroll to play every 5 days….that’s awesome – don’t you get it.
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions
You called him a cornerstone, not me, you’re the one who said the cornerstone of the franchise is the guy who only works every fifth game.
Not Chase Utley
Not Ryan Howard
But the guy who only plays in about 20-25% of the games is the cornerstone.
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 6:18 PM EST up reply actions
jem, stop. it’s intellectually dishonest to suggest that a dominant starting pitcher can’t be of tremendous importance to a team. I know you’re just breaking balls here by parsing out the word “cornerstone” but really. Every statistical model/metric bears out the immense value of a Lincecum/Halladay type starting pitcher.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
And we had one in Cliff Lee – but some don’t want to appreciate that
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 6:50 PM EST up reply actions
Is that the one with cole slaw? I don’t really like cole slaw
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 7:45 PM EST up reply actions
Again, so what?
They shouldn’t give a jersey number away out of “respect?” Really?
Everyone respects what Cliff Lee did in his short time here. That doesn’t mean Roy Halladay shouldn’t get whatever jersey number he wants.
I do. And it kinda breaks my heart, haha. But, life goes on. We have Roy Halladay. We gave up (a lot) more than I would have liked, but we have Roy Halladay. I guess I will be forced to look on the bright side of life… ; )
curt
Remember when we used to HAVE a guy like Roy Halladay (Curt Schilling, 2000)? And we traded him away for a baseball-hating first baseman, a lefty turd, a Nicaraguan sociopath, and, um, Nelson Figueroa?
http://www.thegoodphight.com
I noticed too and thought: Low class. Just low class. The man won you two WS games and put your goddamned team on his back in the postseason. Wasn’t his fault he couldn’t win three games in the WS.
I’ll bet you anything it had to do with the huge warehouse of unembroidered 34 jerseys out there that can get returned and stitched over.
by Wet Luzinski on Dec 16, 2009 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
I’m expecting at least a few people to replace “LEE” with “HALLADAY” on their #34 shirts/jerseys with a Sharpie.
by ThinMountainAir on Dec 16, 2009 11:25 PM EST up reply actions
And he says he had to trade Lee because he didn’t want to leave the cupboard bare in terms of prospects…but if that’s the case, he could have done a lot better than the prospects he brought in for Lee if he had used the enormous amount of leverage he already had. It’s also possible that he didn’t even have to empty the upper tiers of OUR cupboard to get Halladay in the first place.
Don’t make me angry mr amaro
you wouldn’t like me when i’m angry
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
And again. God dammit. “We had to move them on the same day because we had to feel comfortable we would be replenishing the system.” What an absolute moron.
At least learn how to spin your stupid decisions better if you’re going to run our team, please.
You know – they could tell BUD to shove his slotting system – i bet that would help replenish the system too without having to give away Cliff Lee
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:16 PM EST reply actions
get some!
go phils! they’ve become a free agent eating monster like the yankees and red sox used to be.
And they didn’t exactly sign ‘coveted’ guys by getting Polanco and Ibanez :)
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:34 PM EST up reply actions
Yankees/Sox
a) Are still Free Agent Eating Monsters (FAEM?)
and
b) Would have kept Lee to go with Halladay
Doc is better.
Last 6 yrs Lee has had 3 times with an ERA over 4.40, 2x being 5.43 or above. Doc in his last 6 years has never had an era over 4.20 & 3 times he has an ERA of 2.79 or below. Lee-18 CGs(4 SHOs) in that time, Doc H-18 CGs in the last 2 yrs and he doubled Lee’s 6 yr total with 36 CGs (10 SHOs). Lee’s career high in Ks came last yr with 181, Doc H has 3 years of 200 Ks. Halladay is a better pitcher! Period! End of Story!
To be fair
Minor upgrades aside, most would tend to think of the Phils 1-8 as being a strength. It’s that 9th spot that needed the most work.
Still does, in fact.
But one could argue, at least for next season, the upgrade they just made isn’t enough to improve upon last years outcome (since lee was phenomenal in playoff time) but the cupboard is now more bare to work on upcoming issues like 3rd base, short stop, corner outfield spots, and the bottom portion of the rotation if needed :)
Not to mention the whole – don’t pay one guy a large percentage of your payroll maxim – not sure if it’s purely apocryphal or not – but i do recall reading that no team with a guy whose salary was ‘x’ amount of the payroll won a world series – i want to say 15% but i could be wrong
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, sure
And I have made the first argument before. I was approaching your statement in a different way then you obviously meant it.
As for the payroll percentage bit, between the (ugh) Lee trade and the $6m they recieve from Toronto, that’s pretty much a wash for this year. Going forward, it might hamper them or it might not. A smart salary manager would be able to make it work pretty easily. We don’t have one of those, but if we did it would work.
And no one has said that halladay isn’t a great pitcher, probably better than Lee, your post ignores most of the arguments made regarding the halladay trade and the lee trade and the way amaro is gutting the future of the phillies
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:36 PM EST up reply actions
My questions are this:
-Where does Taylor fit? We have four OFs! At best next yr he has a shot if Werth leaves or Ibanez after the year after that. By that time it is Brown’s spot-he ie better than Taylor.
-d’Arnaud was our best catching prospect of bad catching prospects, we lost our future catcher to get Lee.
-Drabek is a #2/#3 at best. Phillies do not hav a great history of developing pitchers (Since the early 1990s only All-Stars we developed are Cole and Tyler Green). What happened to Gavin Floyd he was supposed to be great. Saying all that I do not like trading Drabek but still get best pitcher in the game.
-We got younger prospects, that are highly rated, that will be ready when we have major holes to fill. We do not have any now, except for bullpen.
-Also some places think Phillippe Aumont could be ready by next yr as a bullpen guy. I like Tyson Gillies upside a lot as a future OF in 3 yrs (batter .341 with a .430 OBP @ A+ last yr and is only 20, so should be @ Reading this yr while still 21).
Also we had zero chance of signing Lee or Doc next offseason.
Drabek is a #2/#3 at best but you think the mariners prospects are better, NONE of them are rated higher than Drabek I’m pretty sure…
Stop it
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:46 PM EST up reply actions
Also we had zero chance of signing Lee or Doc next offseason.
You’re right, but i bet you the phillies had a chance at one of them
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions
A chance? Absolutely
Would I have wanted to take it?
With Lee looking for top dollar (as is his right) and Doc looking for the right situation (let’s limit it to the teams he’d approve a trade to), the Phillies would be paying top dollar for either.
The other players in the market?
-As of now, Beckett’s going to be a free agent. Let’s say for a second he gets there. Boston is now in the hunt for another big ticket pitcher.
-The Yankees were prepared to grab Lackey before he went to Boston. Even if they’re trying to limit payroll, I’d imagine they’d be after one of those two to fill that void (or to potentially replace Pettite if he hangs it up). So now you have a Yankees/Sox bidding war.
-The Angels have lost Lackey and there isn’t anyone out there who looks like they can replace him. Add in the Angels to the mix.
Could the Phillies win a bidding war for Halladay or Lee over those three and whoever else decided to make a play? Sure they could. Would you want them to? That I’m not so sure of.
again though, if halladay wanted to be here that badily, i’d assume he’d take a similar deal as a FA… i’m also assuming that the small number of teams he’d approve a trade to would also be the only teams he’d deal with as a FA
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
It’s impossible to say if he would have gotten the same terms. But I just named the other teams he’d approve a trade to, and they’re three of the biggest FA players in baseball who could all have a distinct need. Even if he WOULD accept the offer, chances are the Yankees or Sox or Angels could come up with a little sweeter offer to raise the bar.
I dunno about that. I suppose we can assume that Halladay wanted to be here now. We can’t also assume he’d still be focused on coming to the Phillies a year from now as well.
I’m not saying that’s a compelling reason to make the trade now… but I don’t think it’s fair to say they could have just waited and got Halladay.
Of course
But I don’t think the main reason people are upset is because they think Lee is better than Halladay. Obviously he isn’t.
Keith Law
I didn’t call them losers, and they only traded for one year of Doc. The extension is a separate transaction.
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:43 PM EST reply actions
A. The TRADE is an agreement between the phillies and the blue jays
B. The EXTENSION is an agreement between the phillies and Roy Halladay
The phillies over paid in terms of prospects to the blue jays for one year of roy halladay, the rest is the equivalent of signing him as a free agent.
And it’s how a lot of people look at trades like this – people who aren’t ruben amaro for instance
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
If you’ve convinced yourself or apparently if Keith Law has convinced you that the signability of Halladay had nothing to do with the trade, then there’s not much to talk about.
Either that, or you’re just nitpicking and arguing semantics.
Well you did have one over all point in there that’s accurate
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:57 PM EST up reply actions
WE’re referring to two entirely different points, but that’s ok, i understand, you’ll figure it out
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:59 PM EST up reply actions
PS – what do people think of this ‘no six year’ philosophy of the phillies regarding pitchers?
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:48 PM EST reply actions
JasonB is right: it will still be right.
If you’re the Yankees and can afford to eat $100 million of Sabathia’s contract if his arm falls off, then sure, go ahead and sign guys beyond 3 years. But for just about everyone else, I can see giving a free agent pitcher 4 years max, but only in special cases; the 3 year rule is a damn good one.
I don’t know jem. It’s just one of those things that can work for you in some situaitons but against in others.
If Cole Hamels stays healthy and extremely productive and we don’t retain him, then yes it’s a bad thing.
If Cole Hamels becomes injury prone or suddenly becomes unproductive, then your stuck with him for X amount of years while he chews up money
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
Mike Hampton
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
personally it’s got to do with the level of risk you’re willing to assume and it’s a philosophy that each team approaches differently… my personal view is that the long term risk outweighs the reward
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
And it’s not as if Cole is a model of toughness and consistency. Let’s just be honest about our players here.
As soon as you show an honest comprehension of how they played and pitched we can all start being honest…
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:59 PM EST up reply actions
And If halladay tears his ACL next year – then that 3 year deal sucked too…
Cole Hamels baseball injury history is different than his ’i’m a really stupid kid in the minors doing dumb crap’ injury history
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions
i know (re: halladay) but i’d rather have to put up with 3 years of horrible deal than 6
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
like i said though, it’s the level of risk you’re willing to assume that dictates your philosophy
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
There’s got to be studies out there that look at the value of these guys who have signed 6 or 7 year deals in the late years of those deals.
if not, it would be a great one to do
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
I think the RASAS needs something higher than disgust
by jemagee on Dec 16, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions
I really like it when people come and tell proprietors/readers of other teams’ sites how great their new acquisitions are. Really, I don’t have ESPN, I don’t read about the game, never heard of this “Roy Halladay” guy, is he any good? etc. Thanks for enlightening me.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
Is he realted to Roy Rodgers?
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
Philadelphia Phillies
@
Washington Nationals
Sunday, Aug 1, 2010, 1:35 PM EDT
Nationals Park
Partly cloudy,rain. Winds blowing out to left field at 5-10 m.p.h. Game time temperature around 85.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
