Halladay Bait
by PhillyFriar on Jul 26, 2009 4:43 PM EDT
Email
Print
Hello loyal TGP readers, this will be the first of what I hope to be many posts here regarding Phillies prospects. I'll generally do a weekly prospect roundup early in the week, but for my debut, the folks here at TGP thought it would be a good idea to deal with a more timely issue: the prospects at stake in the Halladay negotiations. I couldn't agree more.
So consider this your prospect primer for the Halladay deal -- we'll discuss each player's merits in one paragraph, then his value to any potential deal in another. We all know J.A. Happ, so let's start with a look at who else the Blue Jays have been reported to initially demand: Kyle Drabek and Dominic Brown.
Kyle Drabek, RHP, Reading
The top prospect in the Phillies' system, Drabek is a 21-year old righty with top-of-the-rotation stuff. A full two years removed from Tommy John surgery, Drabek now features much smoother mechanics, but still flashes the mid-90s fastball and spike curve that made him the 18th overall pick in the 2006 draft. He ripped through High-A Clearwater this year, posting a 1.82 FIP and 10.8 K/9 in 61.2 IP, and is currently adjusting to Double-A Reading, with a 3.53 FIP and 6.5 K/9. For a guy with only 110 pro innings before this year's that not half bad.
Drabek is the type of deal centerpiece that J.P. Ricciardi covets. He's not on the Buchholz, Hughes, or Chamberlain level, but he's got ace stuff and could be ready to pitch in a big league rotation next year. If he stays healthy, his worst case scenario is as a mid-rotation starter or dominant reliever. It's dubious whether the Phils can get a deal done without including Drabek.
Dominic Brown, L-OF, Clearwater
The top hitting prospect in the Phillies' system, Brown is a 21-year old outfielder with the kind of tools that make scouts drool. A .300/.379/.507 line in the pitcher-dominated High-A Florida State League is highly impressive, particularly the power; the .207 ISO, while still maintaining the solid plate discipline (12.1% BB, 20.7% K) that made him such an intriguing prospect in the first place, is evidence of a big-time breakout.
In Brown and Michael Taylor (see below), the Phillies have a pair of athletic, toolsy outfielders with high ceilings and the performance to back it up. Because of his age, Brown is probably a touch better prospect than Taylor at this point, but he's also a level further away and has yet to make the jump to Double-A. The Jays will certainly require one of the two to make a deal, and Brown looks like their preference; whatever the case, the Phillies can't afford to surrender both.
Check below the jump for the other usual suspects.
Carlos Carrasco, RHP, Lehigh Valley
Carrasco is your typical post-hype prospect: the 22-year old been on the prospect radar for a long time, but hasn't shown the kind of dramatic improvement that might have vaulted him to the top of the prospect charts. His fastball sits 93 or so with good life, and he has a developing curveball, but reports on the quality of his changeup are mixed -- some scouts see it as a real plus pitch, while others think he slows his arm down too much for the pitch to really be effective. All scouts agree on one thing: Carrasco's mental makeup is the biggest thing holding him back, as he has a tendency to let bloop singles and errors turn into big innings. His 4.01 FIP and 2.95 K/BB this year are solid numbers, but his 14 HR in 114.2 IP are not.
Word has it that the Phils would love to replace either of Happ or Drabek with Carrasco, but there's no way Toronto does a straight 1-for-1 swap on either count; Carlos would have to be accompanied by another prospect (or 3) for that to work. Now would be a good time for the Blue Jays to buy low on Carlos, though.
Michael Taylor, R-OF, Lehigh Valley
One of the biggest risers on prospect lists this year, Taylor's 6'6", 250-lb. frame, NFL-style athleticism, and Stanford intelligence have Bill Conlin drooling. After junking the notorious "Stanford swing" before last offseason, Taylor has gone on an absolute tear, culminating in a promotion to Lehigh Valley the other week after posting a .333/.408/.569 line in 363 Double-A plate appearances (with solid 9.9% BB and 16.0% K rates, and an 18:4 SB:CS ratio to boot).
It seems that the Jays prefer Brown to Taylor, and when it comes down to it, the Phillies probably do too. Still, you won't see them complaining if they can get a Halladay deal and hang onto a guy who legitimately projects as a middle-of-the-lineup right fielder with all five tools.
Jason Donald, R-SS, Lehigh Valley
A disappointing year for Donald in Triple-A (.230/.293/.324, 25.5% K) has put a dent in his perceived upside. As a shortstop with solid hands, a good arm, but questionable range, he projects better as a second baseman or a utility infielder at this point, as his bat probably won't play at third base. Donald's been rehabbing in the Gulf Coast League the past few weeks as he struggles to recover from injury.
The Blue Jays were apparently very high on Donald this time last year, as the Phils traded names with Toronto regarding A.J. Burnett, but his stock is certainly down. With Toronto rejecting the Phils' latest offer including Donald, it's questionable at this point how much interest Toronto has in Donald.
Jason Knapp, RHP, Lakewood
The organization's 3rd round pick in the 2008 draft, Knapp is a big-bodied (6'5", 215-lb.) starter with a big-time fastball. His full-season debut as an 18-year old has been nothing short of remarkable: a 2.85 FIP and 11.7 K/9 in 85.1 IP. He needs to cut down on the walks (4.1 BB/9) and develop his secondary offerings, but he has all the tools to be a front-end starter.
That being said, Knapp is a long, long way away, and plenty of things can go wrong in the meantime. The organization seems to value him very highly -- he's not untouchable, but it's likely the Phils will do everything they can to hang on to the young fireballer. With Knapp on the DL now with shoulder fatigue, it looks unlikely that he'll be any part of a Halladay deal.
Lou Marson, R-C, Lehigh Valley
Marson had a breakout campaign at Reading last year, posting a .314/.433/.416 line with an impressive 17.4% BB rate. After a rough start to his Triple-A campaign, Marson got back in the groove in June and July, raising his season averages to .299/.382/.376. He's still hitting for no power, but his plate discipline is still solid, and he's still in line to be the Phillies starting backstop, possibly starting in 2010.
We haven't heard Marson's name much with regard to the Halladay talks. Toronto has Marson's polar opposite -- plenty of power, no plate discipline -- J.P. Arencibia, in Triple-A, but his .234/.285/.421 line this year might have the Jays looking elsewhere for their catcher of the future. The Phils remain high on Marson, though, so it remains to be seen whether they'd be willing to part with him.
Travis d'Arnaud, R-C, Lakewood
The Phils' supplemental round selection in the 2007 draft, d'Arnaud was praised by scouts for his defensive ability first and foremost. When his bat suddenly came around last year (.305/.367/.464 across two levels), he jumped up prospect charts. With that backdrop, d'Arnaud's .244/.308/.408 line in Low-A this year seems like an abject disappointment, but the poor surface numbers mask the fact that d'Arnaud hasn't really been hitting all that terribly this year. In fact, d'Arnaud still projects as an above-average major league catcher provided he continues to develop over the next 3-4 years.
The Blue Jays were apparently very high on d'Arnaud heading into the 2007 draft, and they sent scouts to Lakewood -- presumably to watch him -- earlier this month. He wouldn't be the key cog in any deal, but d'Arnaud has good value as a complimentary piece, and it wouldn't surprise me at all for the Blue Jays to ask for d'Arnaud's inclusion in any deal that gets done.
---
A Blue Jays club official told Jayson Stark the other day that there is "a list of seven or eight names" that the Toronto has interest in, and it's likely that the eight above players comprise that list. Ricciardi and Ruben Amaro will mix and match from the above pool of players (and Happ, of course), trying to come up with a package that both sides are happy with. It may or may not get done, but rest assured: the guys listed above will be discussed ad nauseum over the next five days.
73 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice article. Just had a few comments.
1. What does “toolsy” mean? I’ve never really seen anyone properly define that word. I’ve most often seen it used in a derogatory sense, as in “That guy’s a great athlete but he can’t hit.” If that’s the definition, then it wouldn’t seem to fit Taylor or Brown. If toolsy just means “athletic” (with or without hitting skills), then why not just say “athletic”?
2. Is Carrasco’s home run rate really that bad? It’s barely above 1 per 9 IP. What’s the cutoff for a solid rate?
3. Third base isn’t really that strong a hitting position these days. It’s stronger than second base but not by all that much. If Donald can’t field at third, that’s obviously a problem, but I don’t think the difference between those two positions offensively should rule out a move.
The difference between toolsy and athletic is that someone who is toolsy already has baseball skills. If someone is toolsy, it means they have some combination of hitting for power, avg., field, run, and arm strength.
If someone is just an athlete or athletic, it means they have raw athletic ability, with little or no developed baseball-specific skills. They might have strength, speed, and great hand-eye coordination.
Put another way, athletic means a lump of clay. Toolsy means a lump of clay that’s already been shaped a bit.
Well, the 5 tools are hitting for power, hitting for avg., arm strength, fielding, and running speed.
Oh and an athletic player can turn into a toolsy player. But toolsy and athletic are similar when talking about prospects. Everyone is looking for 5-tool players at the major league level. Someone like Hanley Ramirez. Whether they are toolsy or athletic in the minors isn’t all that important, its how they project.
Here’s an example. Chase Utley would have been considered more toolsy than athletic. He already knew how to hit and field when he hit the minors. Matt Kemp, on the other hand, would have been considered more athletic than toolsy. Even though he’s doing great in the majors already, he is still figuring out the strike zone and hitting and needs improvement in fielding(routes and jump). But his athletic ability is so high that he is still succeeding.
The definition gets pretty sketch historically when dealing with Phils prospects.
Greg Golson was uber toolsy if I recall.
by andyreidswaistline on Jul 26, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I honestly haven’t heard the distinction The R makes between toolsy and athletic — not that it means it couldn’t be accurate. Toolsy doesn’t get used in a derogatory manner sometimes — Anthony Hewitt is toolsy because of his incredible raw power, his speed, etc., but toolsy takes on a negative connotation in that context. To answer your original question, taco pal: the way I understand it, the phrase I used — “toolsy, athletic” — is kind of redundant.
Carrasco’s home run rate isn’t terrible, but it’s certainly below average. A good pitching prospect should really be below 1.0 HR/9 unless he pitches in a bandbox and/or in the California league.
Finally, your point about 3B versus 2B is well taken (MLB EqA this years are .268 and .263, respectively), but I think we’re just seeing a golden age for 2B right now. In either case, Donald really has to get it going this year — as soon as he’s healthy, that is — for his bat to play anywhere right now. I’m not writing him off by any means, but his line thus far this year is disappointing.
Oh, and one more thing. Taylor’s playing LF at AAA, isn’t he? Do we know that he’s capable of playing RF as well?
good point
He’s probably not cracking left field until 2012, barring injury/collapse from Ibanez.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
I’m still pushing my one-man “Trade Ibanez” (in the offseason) campaign. Not that I don’t love the guy, but it’s just business.
I believe he was playing RF at Reading. Those who have seen him play live say that he’s got a great arm, and if his speed score (6.9 in Reading) and stolen base totals (18 in 22 attempts) are anything to go on, he’s probably got solid range. Obviously he could wind up playing either corner, but if he’s a legit RF, then that’s a big plus.
Taylor's played all the OF positions:
71 games at Right Field, 55 at Center Field, and 194 at Left Field (plus 20 as a DH).
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
Good stuff
I’d give up any combination of 4 or 5 (minus Taylor AND Brown) for Halladay.
Go big or go home.
by andyreidswaistline on Jul 26, 2009 5:11 PM EDT reply actions
i hear ya...
i’m not sure about 4 or 5 guys, (and i would rather keep drabek and happ) but you don’t know how these pospects are going to pan out. halladay is a garauntee. do or die.
You know what else is a guarantee? That Halladay’s contract will expire at the end of next season.
You know what isn’t a guarantee? That Halladay will change the outcome of our postseason run in either 2009 or 2010.
No single prospect is a guarantee, but if you have a group of several very good prospects, the chances are high that some of them will become very good players. These aren’t just lottery tickets.
drabek, taylor, or brown won’t change the outcome of the 2009 or 2010 postseason either. if we can get our hands on holladay and a couple more pieces (relief pitcher/right handed bat), we’re looking at a possibility of a couple more legitimate world series runs.
i’m a huge eagles fan and i’m sick and tired of watching the eagles come up short. yeah, it’s great that they go deep into the playoffs year after year, but i’m done with that. the 2008 phillies were the first philly championship that i ever experienced and i was born in ‘83. the phillies are right there, but they need more and this is our chance. they could win another one or two rings. i’m willing to give up a few minor league players for that.
Why do they “need” more? Are they worse than they were last year? Why do you think there’s no “possibility of a couple more legitimate world series runs” without Halladay? Will a world series run be illegitimate without him?
I will grant you that Halladay would improve our chances to a degree, but that’s all he would do. He would raise our odds by X number of percentage points. Having him won’t guarantee success, nor would his absence guarantee failure.
The most you can do if you’re a GM (especially in baseball) is get your team into the playoffs with a reasonable chance to compete. After that, you start to get diminishing returns. It’s impossible to guarantee playoff success, or even raise your odds by that much. Maybe if you gave up every single one of your prospects, you could get your odds of winning the World Series from 12.5% to maybe 20% or so, but would that really be worth it? You really can’t do any better than that.
Why do we need more? Can you honestly say you have the same confidence in Hamels today as you did this time last season?
by andyreidswaistline on Jul 26, 2009 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions
well
would u trade maclin and mccoy for one year of randy moss? cuz thats basically what you are doing .. trading the future for a better chance to win now .. taylor is nasty .. i think he should be untouchable .. trade victorino and play taylor .. works out better .. marson needs to stay .. i cant suffer through another season with ruiz .. the worst hiting catcher in mlb
by jack is better than asante on Jul 27, 2009 2:34 AM EDT up reply actions
DOesn’t hold water. Baseball prospects and NFL draftees are VERY VERY different. The success rate for guys picked high in the nFL draft is probably much higher than baseball prospects.
sure it does
your trading two potential all stars for a guy who can help u win now .. and one of the best in the game .. same thing
by jack is better than asante on Jul 28, 2009 4:21 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn’t ask you whether you wanted more. I asked why it was the case that we “needed” more. I don’t know what sport you’ve been watching all these years, but in baseball, in individual games and short series, the worse pitcher beats the better pitcher a pretty substantial percentage of the time. Of course a better rotation would give us better odds, but that’s all it would do: increase our odds a bit. We can win with our current pitching staff, and we can also lose with an improved pitching staff, and the difference between the two in a short series is not that large.
I don’t know what sport you’ve been watching all these years, but in baseball, in individual games and short series, the worse pitcher beats the better pitcher a pretty substantial percentage of the time.
more often than not, when a worse pitcher beats a better pitcher, it’s because the worse pitcher has a much better offense. phillies have hit the most run in the national league (3rd most in the mlb). however, the phillies are currently 22nd in the mlb when it comes to era. that is unacceptable.
We can win with our current pitching staff, and we can also lose with an improved pitching staff, and the difference between the two in a short series is not that large.
i agree with the fact that we can win with our current pitching staff, but i don’t want to just win the nl east. pitching wins games. look what happened last year when we added blanton and myers came back. in a short series, every game matters. a player like halladay could make a tremendous difference.
One thing, and one thing only, "wins games"
Scoring more runs than your opponent. That’s it.
by David S. Cohen on Jul 27, 2009 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions
The fact that you have to use weasel words to make your argument should tell you something.
“in a short series, every game matters. a player like halladay could make a tremendous difference.” Yeah, he “could”. Or he could not. The odds that he will are actually not that large. In order for him to make a “tremendous difference,” you have to presuppose that (1) he’ll pitch better on that given day than the alternative (likely but not guaranteed), (2) the game is close enough that his performance will matter (possible but not unusually likely), and (3) the series is close enough that his games will matter (also possible but not unusually likely). Sure, all of those things “could” happen at once, but there’s also a good chance that they won’t, and so there comes a point when the price you have to pay isn’t worth it.
Pitching does not win games, by the way. Ending a game with a higher score than the other team wins games. Offense is just as important as pitching, and there’s no basis for emphasizing one over the other.
And incidentally, there’s more to statistical analysis than just looking at full-season totals. First of all, you’re looking at raw ERAs instead of ballpark-adjusted ERAs. Second, you’re failing to account for the fact that the Phillies’ bad ERA comes almost exclusively from their terrible April. Since May 1, their ERA is 4.14, which would be good for 9th in MLB (without even adjusting for ballpark) if projected over a full season. Since June 1, their ERA is 3.89, which would be good for 7th in MLB if projected over a full season (again, without adjusting for ballpark).
I’m not saying we can just ignore the April stats, but they clearly have less predictive value than the more recent stats. Especially considering that in April, Chan Ho Park was in the rotation, Cole Hamels was still getting stretched out, and J.C. Romero was suspended.
thanks for the link to weasel words… i guess when i say "could, " it’s a weasel word, but likely but not guaranteed and possible but not unusually likely would be acceptable… yeah, that makes sense.
…and for those who were ripping me about saying that “pitching wins games,” there was some guy named connie mack who once said the phrase: “pitching wins championships.” perhaps you’ve heard of him? he won five championships… but what would he know?
it may not be my own analysis, but i’m sorry… i have a job.
Actually, it makes perfect sense. Context and purpose matter in determining whether something is a weasel word. “Could” is a weasel word when the point of one’s argument is to prove certainty or a very strong likelihood, as yours was. Words like “likely” and “possible” are precisely the opposite of weasel words when the point of one’s argument is to prove uncertainty, as mine was.
As for whether pitching wins championships, surely you can find better experts than someone who’s been dead for 50 years and this guy.
funny… i looked at your wikipedia page and “could” wasn’t considered a weasel word… oh, but i’m sure your attempt at deviating from the point at hand… i mean making fun of my usage of the word “could” is valid. whatever makes you feel like a bigger man.
regardless, in most playoff series, the team with the better pitchers will win. that’s a fact… whether it’s a quote from a 5-time world champion or a website whose writers fact-check their content. the facts are there… look it up.
You can’t really project what one player will do in a short period like the playoffs. Over the long haul like the regular season, yes, Halladay’s talent will show and translate into wins. But in a short series anything can happen. Also, Halladay has never been in the post-season. Never. So who knows, he could pitch like a nervous rookie or turn out to be like CC. I doubt it, but until he gets there no one knows for sure.
CC
“or turn out to be like CC” – who has a 7.92 ERA in the post-season.
by David S. Cohen on Jul 27, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Taylor and Brown are very similar, just at different stages of development. Taylor should be able to play in the majors next year and Brown in 2-3 years. Brown projects higher, but he is more unknown. Why do you want to keep both of them? Do you see the Phils getting rid of their outfield in the next year or two? Taylor is an obvious trade, based on his age and the fact he is blocked from moving up. The Phils need to either trade him or trade Werth or Ibanez.
Great piece
Thanks for this great piece and welcome to TGP! Two questions to join in the ones above:
1) Why was Drabek given a C+ rating by Sickels coming into the season?
2) How would these guys stack up for the Indians for Cliff Lee?
C+
I think that rating was based on the fact that we didn’t know fully how he’d bounce back from TJS. So far, so good, I would say, and Sickels agrees.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
I’d also love to hear an answer on no. 2
People seem so über focused on halladay, I think it’s important to realize that there might be another really good pitcher out there that could be had cheaper.
I’d still love halladay, but cliff lee would be a really nice consolation prize, especially if next years rotation also features drabek.
by JasonB on Jul 26, 2009 5:27 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
1.) What WholeCamels said.
2.) Personally, I wouldn’t give up as much for Lee as for Halladay. That’s not a knock on the reigning AL Cy Young winner; he’s obviously a very good pitcher, he’s just not the best pitcher in baseball.
The problem with trading for Lee is that the Indians are probably going to want more for Lee than the Jays will want for Halladay. That may sound backwards, but think about it: Ricciardi practically needs to deal Halladay, since his value is at its peak right now, and the Blue Jays sure as hell aren’t making the playoffs in Halladay’s last year next year. The Indians, on the other hand, can legitimately win the AL Central next year with Lee — that division’s not good, and they’re probably only a couple of pieces away from posting the 88 wins that will take down that division. So Shapiro can afford to hold onto Lee unless he’s bowled over. Lee’s contract situation plays a role here too: he’s got an $8 million option for next year, while Halladay makes $15.75 million.
What you wind up with is a paradox: Halladay is a better pitcher and can probably be had for cheaper. The Phils are right to inquire after Lee to try to drive Halladay’s price down, but unless Shapiro was bluffing when he said he would hold onto Lee, Halladay honestly makes more sense.
Indians
The impressions that Ive gotten are that theyre really overvalueing thier players. I read somewhere that they turned the Red Sox down when they offered Bucholz for VMart. I dont know how credible this was, but if Im the Indians, I do that trade in a heartbeat.
It will probably be the same thing with Lee.
by philiafan14364 on Jul 26, 2009 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Pretty much my thinking on Lee: he’s more useful as a negotiating tool vs. Ricciardi than he is a fully equal alternative to Halladay. Which isn’t to say he wouldn’t be an upgrade, probably the best pitcher in our rotation unless you believe that July Blanton is the guy we’ll see for the next three months as well.
You also have to factor in the fact that Lee is signed for a longer period. I think at least through next year(maybe 2) with an option(for sure) at a reasonable salary. That’s one of the reasons the Indians aren’t in any hurry to move him. That longer and cheaper contract somewhat offsets the talent drop compared to Halladay.
thanks, nice compilation. What of Savery?
You have to figure Taylor/Mayberry/Brown function as insurance polices (w/ unknown VORP) pending an Achillies pop or somesuch to any one of the three of our all-star OF. Don’t know that we need all three, but we will need one at least through the duration of the Ibanez contract.
Also agree re Cliff Lee. Getting a deal all but worked out with Cleveland could also be a good bargaining strategy to finagle a better deal from Toronto, who really has this week to work out the most value for Halladay.
It feels like we’re losing perspective on what an offensive machine this Phillies team is. I get the bromide that pitching wins in the playoffs. But then I also read the bromide that one you get to the LCS, it’s a crapshoot. So if the latter is more true than the former (and I believe it is), let’s get the guy who gives us a chance in this year’s final four while giving the organization a shot at the next couple as well.
Just a Fan's observation
Meaning not an expert, just a fan. It seems as though we are giving up too much for Halladay, and if we need even more for Lee, than that’s out of the question. Blanton is pitching lights out over the last 7 starts, Happ (last start notwithstanding) has been excellent, and Cole Hamels will come around as August progresses. Any team would love to have three top quality starters like these, and to have Moyer and Lopez/Bastardo as th 4th/5th?? Seems like a good lineup.
Throw in the fact that Myers could be back in the bullpen mid August, and Pedro could be in the 5th spot by Mid to late August, and it would seems as though even all of these DL’s don’t cloudy the pitching picture for the Phils.
It looks like we could be dealing with Dodgers, Cardinals/Cubs, and Rockies/Giants for the wildcard. We’ve handled Cubs and Cardinals easily, and I suspect we’ll do well vs the Giants the end of the week. Plus, with this offense…..it sure forgives alot of sins!!
Like I said, maybe this is why I’m just a fan, but the Phillies are sitting pretty good right now and I believe are well positioned to go far into the playoffs, if not take another WS. Are we giving up 3-4 top prospects just to gain another 5% chance to win the World Series? Gain 10%?
"Dig In....Hit Hard"
“Cole Hamels will come around as August progresses”
What evidence do you have for this? Besides the fact that he’s been inconsistent all year and likely suffering the aftereffects of his 260+ IP last season, that is.
“Moyer and Lopez/Bastardo as the 4th/5th…seems like a good lineup”
Moyer is a 46-year old pitcher with a 5.65 ERA and who-knows-what left in the tank. Bastardo is (a) hurt, (b) not ready for regular turns in an MLB rotation, and (c ) hurt. Lopez has been a pleasant surprise, but has an injury history and will likely give way to Martinez in early August. Who else? Carpenter and Kendrick have been ineffective in limited spots. Carrasco is mucking around in Lehigh.
How about a reality check: the Phillies have 3 reliable or semi-reliable starters (Hamels/Blanton/Happ) and a lot of question marks beyond that. Last season we used four starters in the playoffs. Who starts Game 4 of a 7-game playoff series this year? Ugh.
Obviously it would look better with Halladay/Hamels/Blanton/Happ as the top 4 heading into the playoffs. But Halladay, Hamels, and Blanton (assuming Happ gets traded) is a hell of a lot better than the current arrangement, especially given Hamels’ struggles.
While reasonable people can agree to disagree about the merits of Halladay vs. the assorted prospects, it is not reasonable to be confident in the current makeup of our rotation in a playoff series.
A reality check...
“How about a reality check: the Phillies have 3 reliable or semi-reliable starters”
You understand that if Happ were part of the deal, than the statement you just made is still true. Sure, Halladay is an obvious upgrade over Happ… but the rotation still has the same amount of quality starters.
You could change one name and everything you wrote is the same.
“How about a reality check: the Phillies have 3 reliable or semi-reliable starters (Hamels/Blanton/Halladay) and a lot of question marks beyond that. Last season we used four starters in the playoffs. Who starts Game 4 of a 7-game playoff series this year? Ugh.”
Replacing Happ with Halladay makes it go from “Ugh” to “Plan the parade route?”
This is the only thing that worries me about the Halladay deal. Obviously he’s a great pitcher who would be a major upgrade over Happ, but the fact is that a rotation with Halladay gives us a real good chance to win 3 out of 5 turns… which is what does now.
I tend to think a Drabek trade would be more prudent than a Happ trade mainly for this reason. It seems kind of silly to go short term for a Halladay trade but then trade away one of the more consistent (though lucky) starting pitchers we have had this year instead of a guy who may compete for a spot next year at best (though that is a very good best).
You said it Whack – Happ has been exceptionally lucky. Look at his peripherals. There is an excellent chance he will regress between now and the playoffs. Also, this is his first MLB season, what will the extra workload mean in terms of fatigue and late-season performance? I think it’s unrealistic – perhaps very unrealistic – to expect him to continue to perform at a level even close to where he’s at now.
I agree JasonB that keeping Happ and getting Halladay would be the best upgrade. Realistically, it would seem unlikely that would happen. However, Halladay/Hamels/Blanton is MUCH better, for the regular season and the playoffs, than Hamels/Blanton/Happ. Yes we still have the 4th (and 5th) starter issue. But I like our chances to win every 3 out of 5 with the former much more so than with the latter.
So the argument is, to balance the uncertainty in the back of the rotation we increase our certainty in the front end?
I do see the logic here.
Right back at you
“There is an excellent chance he will regress between now and the playoffs. " To quote you, what proof do you have of this? This is strictly an assumption on your part, and no more on sound basis than assuming that Cole Hamels will work things out in August.
“"Cole Hamels will come around as August progresses"
What evidence do you have for this? "
Simple, the same faith that Jimmy Rollins was going to turn his season around. If Cole Hamels tanks, the Halladay trade will be for naught. The Phillies success is contingent upon Hamels turning into ’08 form, the offense churning out major numbers, and at least Happ and Blanton continuing to perform.
“Moyer is a 46-year old pitcher with a 5.65 ERA and who-knows-what left in the tank. ". Yeah, but he’s 9-7, and he has a 5.42 ERA after 5 innings in Az. If you go strictly by the numbers, would we even trade for Cliff Lee, given his 7-9 record?
In summary, I don’t think it’s as bleak as you make it out to be, never under estimate true professionals down the stretch….
"Dig In....Hit Hard"
Great writeup (as normal). I really do not like trading Drabek. I definitely think Happ should go while he is hot (or was and not too late). I like the way the Phils are handling it as I don’t think it is a MUST DO deal but would like to see the deal done. Looking at what the Cards gave up for Holiday, it probably is going to cost more that it should. I trust Rueben to make the right decision. If we do the deal, it will hurt in a few years when 1 or 2 of our prospects are MLB stars but if we do 1 more World Series, I guess it really does not matter..
My opinion is if the Jays want more than Happ, Taylor, Carrasco, and Donald then no deal. A lot of people are panicky about our starting pitching, but they are doing alright. Other teams, teams in contention, have a lot more problems than we do. Think about Boston, they got Smotlz and penny for christ sake. Hamels, Blanton and Happ should be ok in the playoffs, and then the best of Moyer, Pedro and Lopez can handle a game or two if necessary. Also, there is no real need to write off Moyer at this stage. He did just pitch a 7 inning 1 hitter not to long ago (I know followed by a blow up, but still). Plus the Phillies win with their bats anyway. They also match up well against the other contenders, except perhaps for LA Dodgers (though they looking a little more vulnerable) and the LA Angels. Red Sox and Yankees will fade – to many old dudes.
Hopefully, though the Jays just didnt like the players from the Happ, Taylor, Carrasco, Donald deal and something similar but with a few different names will get a deal done. If they want more value than that though, I dont think the Phils should trade.
I thought I mentioned this, but the Happ, Taylor, Carrasco Donald deal was announced on various sites etc as being rejected by the Jays, that is why I am talking about those 4 guys
I would be ok if Taylor was replaced with Brown. That might turn the tides. But, from looking at that trade, it was a really lowball offer. Im pretty sure the Jays know Happs playing over his head (not gonna beat a dead horse on this one), and that Donalds going to be at best an shortstop in the majors. Plus the fact that Carrasco isnt very good…
I think if we gave Happ/Knapp/Taylor/Donald that might get things done. On paper that looks bad for us, but if you look deeper, I think its a good trade. As I said before, Happs not that good, and Knapp has a fastball, thats it. This is where TINSTAAPP comes into play. And as far as Donald goes, he will probably only be nothing more than an average MLB SS. Losing Taylor sucks, but hes the only one of the four that I think has a legit shot at being very good.
by philiafan14364 on Jul 27, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions
We are older that the red sox and Yankees…by a decent amount.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jul 27, 2009 9:00 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Being the favorite
One thing I’ve thought about a few times the last week is whether adding Roy Halladay and becoming the odds-on favorite to make/win the World Series would be a particularly good thing. Not from the standpoint of an improved team, which getting Halladay most certainly would mean, but from the standpoint of how this Phillies team deals with expectations.
I can only remember two times when the Phillies were picked as pre-season favorites by a national publication (SI) – 1966 and 1979, if I’m remembering right. Both of those seasons ultimately turned out to be disappointing, although 1979 did lay the framework for the next year’s success. I don’t know how differently, if at all, the players will feel if they have Roy Halladay on the team, but you know the media will play up the “NL favorites, the Philadelphia Phillies,” through the rest of the season – and at the first sign of slippage the articles will appear asking whether Halladay has helped or hurt. In some ways, I think the team as constituted today is doing quite nicely already, so I, for one, won’t be upset if no deal is done.
by phillyinportland on Jul 27, 2009 2:30 AM EDT reply actions
happ
you guys are seriously bitching about an average pitcher .. there are 10000 ja happs .. hes not that good .. his stuff is not that good .. hes a 3 at best .. if he pans out the best he could be is doug davis .. drabek is a stud .. and projects as a number one .. and i love taylor .. so i would prefer to keep taylor .. i would trade happ in a second along with carrasco donald and brown .. that prob is going to be the deal .. and i like it. . we keep drabek .. we keep taylor. .. trade vic in the offseason .. and both those guys have a chance to make the team out of spring training
by jack is better than asante on Jul 27, 2009 2:40 AM EDT reply actions
Happ/Carrasco/Donald/Brown
I like it too, but I think the Jays will reject
by philiafan14364 on Jul 27, 2009 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
i dont
i think they are high on brown .. it makes the most sense
by jack is better than asante on Jul 27, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Your friend tell you this?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Jul 27, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I really enjoyed this post, and hope you do more of them. For me, I would be interested in seeing a top prospect by position list, ie, who is our next guy for 2nd, 1st, etc. I am not sure how valuable a strict run down would be because I guess guys change positions in the minors. Still, with Marson and Donald gone now, I would be interested in seeing what the rest of our position player depth looks like.
It’s the world series and all but with rollins poor start this year i’ve been paying more attention to the play of cardenas this year (who last i checked was up in AAA but having some adjustment issues
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Jul 30, 2009 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
