March 5, 2015

Wow! Phillies Get Halladay,
Trade Lee in Megadeal: Tuesday Update

Halladay Phillies

Update, 4:21pm Wednesday:

It’s done, my full analysis of the deal can be found here.

Update, 10:46am Tuesday:

Buster Olney is reporting that the contract extension between the Phils and Roy Halladay had been agreed one and that his is taking his physical this morning. ~ ESPN

Update, 8:46am Tuesday:

The most recent update doesn’t change much about what I had last night. BUT, it seems like we will be getting more from Seattle for Lee, potentially above average pitching prospect Juan Ramirez.

If this is true, Aumont, Gillies and Ramirez for Drabek, Taylor and d’Arnaud (the trade if you remove the pitchers) really isn’t that bad a deal. Drabek is a slightly better prospect that Aumont and Ramirez, but not by much. Considering the other end of the deal (Halladay for 4 years vs. Lee for 1) is definitely in our favor, I still think this is a good move.

I have an all-day meeting, so I likely won’t be able to contribute much today. I’ll ask Dannie to put up any major updates.

Update, 9:49pm Monday

So, if you believe everything you read on the internet, the Phillies are about to trade Cliff Lee, Domonic Brown, Michael Taylor, Kyle Drabek, Travis d’Arnaud, JA Happ and Joe Blanton for Roy Halladay, Phillipe Aumont, Brandon Morrow, Bob Gibson and Satchel Paige. Good times all around.

Here is the most recent update from Jayson Stark, who is usually correct when it comes to the Phillies.

He is reporting this is not a 3-team trade, but rather 2 separate trades. And the result for the Phillies would be as follows:

Phillies trade: LHP Cliff Lee, RHP Kyle Drabek, OF Michael Taylor, C Travis d’Arnaud

Phillies recieve: RHP Roy Halladay, RHP Phillipe Aumont, OF Tyson Gillies

Halladay would then sign a 3 year, $60 million extension with vesting options for future years.

This deal would not be as much of a slam dunk as the original report, but I still think it is positive for the Phillies. It seems as though they are simply replacing Drabek and Taylor with younger players with similar upside and adding d’Arnaud to get the deal done. Taylor is not a big deal to lose, considering our outfield is currently full and our top prospect, Domonic Brown, will be ready once Werth or Ibanez is done. Drabek will ruffle some feathers, but Aumont seems like a similar pitcher, though he hasn’t been starting much in the minors for Seattle.

Here is what I could dig up on Aumont and Gillies, if they are the guys

  • Baseball America ranked Aumont as the 5th best prospect in the California League, and Gillies as the 13th best.
  • ranked Aumont as the 33rd best prospect in baseball in 2008 and have his upside as a “top of the rotation ace.”
  • Gillies played in the Futures Game at the All Star game

Original Post, Posted 4:25pm Monday,


So I guess this was the worst possible day that I could have an all-day meeting at work huh?

Jon Heyman of CNNSI is reporting that the Phillies have agreed to a deal to send Cliff Lee to the Mariners and receive Roy Halladay from the Blue Jays. He is not reporting what prospects changed hands. Update (4:35pm): Heyman has backed off saying Lee is definitely involved, saying that part hasn’t been confirmed.


He is also reporting that the deal includes an extension for Halladay.


It’s going to take me a little bit to digest this, as it’s one of the most ridiculous moves I’ve ever seen by any team, in any sport. Ridiculous not meaning good or bad, just well…ridiculous.

At first look, I like the deal a lot. And here’s why:

  • We (likely) just locked in a top-5 pitcher in baseball for the next several years. We all wanted this to happen whether it was Lee or Halladay.
  • We traded away a pitcher that would have likely commanded more years and more money when he hit the market. We met with Lee’s agent at the Winter Meetings and my guess is he told us Lee wanted a Sabathia-type deal (Lee has referenced Sabathia’s deal as the reason he wouldn’t sign an extension before hitting the open market). We realized we wouldn’t be able to sign him, so we traded for an Ace we could.
  • I believe Halladay is a better pitcher than Lee. More on this in another post (note: It’s possible I will convince myself otherwise while researching that post).
  • We were Halladay’s first choice. I think there is something to a player being comfortable and wanting to prove his worth to a team.
  • Talk about outside-the-box thinking. Ruben deserves credit for thinking up something most GM’s wouldn’t have dreamed of.

The bottom line is this: The Phillies didn’t think they could re-sign Lee. They wanted to land Halladay or Lee long term, but doing that in 2010 free agency means dancing with the Yankees and Red Sox and you could wind up with nothing by draft picks for Lee. They simply couldn’t add the payroll for Halladay and didn’t want to lose prospects. Now? We have an ace locked up for several years, a top-5 farm system and only a slightly higher payroll.

A shorter version of the bottom line: If we didn’t give up major prospects (update 4:51pm: Heyman saying that we DID include prospects, we don’t know which yet. ALSO – he is now saying we will be GETTING prospects from Seattle), we essentially traded Carlos Carrasco, Lou Marson, Jason Knapp and Jason Donald for a brilliant half-year from Lee, and then replacing him with an extension-signed Roy Halladay.

Even shorter version: BRILLIANT!


If you liked this post...Help Spread the Word:
  • YardBarker
  • BallHype
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Google
  • Mixx
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz


  1. don says:

    I agree that Halladay is the better pitcher.  As long as he pitches like he has the last 5-10 years and Rollins and Utley keep eating up ground balls like they do he’s going to destoy the NL.

  2. bski says:

    I’m feeling the same way. Pete.

    Think I’m starting to believe the Phillies-are-becoming-the-Yankees-of-the-NL idea that Tom Verducci put out there last week…….and I’m liking it……a lot!

    Amaro sure isn’t afraid to go out and get what he feels is best for the club, and he doesn’t waste much time in doing it either.

    Gotta wait to see how it all shakes out (i.e. who we get for Lee and who we give up for Halladay), but it feels like another great move.

  3. Dan says:

    If this turns out to be basically a Lee for Haliday deal, that means we got Halliday and 1/2 season of Lee for our second tier prospects.  Interesting, and I have to say Rubin is showing quite a flair as GM.

  4. Ken Bland says:

    Still nothing on the phils website.  I don’t disbelieve it, just caught up in how fast it developed publicly.

    To me, its about a committmet from an ace.  No question, Roy has a strength over Cliff.  Durability.  And that’s huge.  But I think Cliff is gonna take some shots here.   Howard Eskin was just rambling about Roy being better and anyone in baseball would tell you so.  Well, Roy is terrific.  But Koufax was better than Marichal and Gibson, and did you really care as long as you had one of them?  But now we have an excellent pitcher for multiple years, and that is large.  The degree to which players want to come here just increased and that’s good.

    Love you, Ruben.  You’re the best. 

  5. phillyfan says:

    I gotta say I have very mixed motions.  I am having a hard time processing this.  A shocker.  I actually would have been less shocked to see hamels go than Lee. 

    I guess my initial thought it - Simply put – however good Halladay is it is very unlikely he matches the performace of lee in the postseason.  that was epic/historic stuff.  So overall I can’t see how we improved for next season.  I think Lee’s atitude will be missed as well.  I would have been fine just picking up Lee’s option and then letting him walk after next season and using the extra money this year to stock the bullpen.  Just go all-out this year.  Now we are back to wondering if Halladay will prove his worth in the playoffs.  An ace who has never done it in the playoffs is not an ace in my book.  He is a question mark.  With Lee, we knew we had it.

  6. gman says:

    Don’t kid yourself — the Phillies will be giving up two of their top prospects, or one of them plus Happ. Add to this, some of the talent they get back for Lee. This deal is going to cost. It is not Lee for Halladay at all. Anthopolous will not do the deal unless he gets QUALITY back – not QUANTITY!

  7. phillyfan says:


    no the yankees would have got Halladay and kept Lee.

  8. Richie says:

    Love it! We get rid of a guy who wanted out after this year and sign a guy who piched better than him in the AL East against the yanks and sox and rays 50 games a year for 4 more years. Can’t beat it!

  9. tk76 says:

    Trying to digest it all.
    As a Sixers fan I imagine its  as if 20 years ago when the Sixers had Barkley they traded some young talent for Patrick Ewing on the last year of his deal… then turned around the next year and traded Ewing  for Hakeem (and signed him to a 5 year deal.)

  10. Pete says:


    My guess is we gave up Taylor or Brown since we don’t really have room for both.

    Whatever prospects we gave up, consider it “tax” for getting Halladay for several years. Unless we gave up Drabek, Brown and Happ or something stupid like that, I can’t imagine reversing my opinion that this is a good deal (because of the extension).

  11. Dannie says:

    Damnit and I just got a fresh Cliff Lee t-shirt.

  12. Ken Bland says:

    As of 45 minutes ago, after the story broke, Lee’s agent had not heard from the Phils about the trade.  Lee doesn’t have a no trade clause, so that might not matter.

    Halladay might have pitched better than Lee in the post season.  We’ll never know exactly what transpired behind closed doors, but the fact known is that Lee didn’t pitch against the Yanks on 3 days rest.  I’m not making a mountain out of a mole hill, just statig fact, and you can draw your ow conclusions.

    As to the Phils definitely giving up a couple key prospects, that’s speculation.  You would think so, but we are speculating.  Until this deal is officially announced, its all peculation.  Safe to say some deal seems imminent, but what remains to be seen.  And Toronto is’t getting as much of the Phillies as they wanted.

  13. Ken Bland says:

    3:56pm: Morosi tweets that pitcher Phillippe Aumont of the Mariners and outfielder Michael Taylor of the Phillies are among the players heading to Toronto in the trade.

  14. Dannie says:

    And I can’t use my C.L. Smooth reference anymore.

    Phillyfan – While it’s not likely Halladay will match Lee’s performance in the playoffs this season, I think it’s equally less likely Cliff Lee matches that performance in back to back seasons either.

    But you get an overall better pitcher locked up for the next few years who absolutely has the potential to pitch at that level and his right arm helps balance the starting staff.

  15. tk76 says:

    Can Halladay hit like Lee?
    Seriously though… this basically means they made the Lee trade (the 4 prospects last year) + Taylor for Halladay.
    Sound fair, and no way they could have pulled off that deal last year, since they would have needed to throw in Happ or Drabek.  Keeping those two as Phillies really helps financially over the next 3-4 years.  Reasonably priced pitchers are more valuable right now to this team than position players.

  16. tk76 says:

    But I must admit that Taylor was the prospect that I most looked forward to seeing on the Phillies.  He sort of reminded me of Ryan Howard in the minors in that his consistent top level production in the minors was beyond any hype that he originally generated as a prospect.

  17. phillyfan says:

    Anybody sense the Phils and Eagles are playing off eachother for the city’s attention?  interesting how this news perks up just after the Eagles won that incredible game last night.

  18. Chris McC says:

    Well said Pete.  This is incomprehensible.  If this includes an extension there is almost no way that this deal is anything other than incredibly creative.
    One year of Lee or multiple years of Halladay.  That’s an easy decision.  If they weren’t going to be able to extend Lee then its a good move.
    Daily News Live is discussing that Drabek may be involved.  I don’t really want to see him go.  I would say that the big three pitching chips are Lee, Happ and Drabek.
    I think they have to get out of this with at least two of those guys – considering that Brown, D’Arnaud and or Taylor are likely to be involved.  I would prefer Happ and Drabek because of their potential.

  19. Ken Bland says:

    Now we are back to wondering if Halladay will prove his worth in the playoffs.  An ace who has never done it in the playoffs is not an ace in my book.  He is a question mark.  With Lee, we knew we had it.>>

    Know what that honestly reminds me of?  A friend the year LeBron James was a senior predicted he was going to be a complete bust.  I mean you can think it, but that’s awfully conservative thinking.  It will take a miracle for your statement not to be tested a minimum of 2 out of the next 3 years.

  20. jurnee16 says:

    I just heard on WIP from Seth Everett that the Phillies are maybe sending Dominic Brown to the Blue Jays and the Mariners are sending them Phillipe Aumont…I like the trade a lot more if its Taylor and thats it…Halladay, Hamels, Blanton, Happ is a great top 4 if Hamels gets his act together in the offseason….

  21. Zack says:

    YES!  YES!  YES!  YES!  YES!
    This is the guy I wanted all along, this was the right guy.  Phils are 2010 champs, book it!  Woo-hoo!  Bring on Phillies-Yankees, Round 2.  Good job Amaro Jr., damn good job!
    Two other possibilities:
    1) He helps the NL win the All-Star game, so we can finally have home-field in the WS.
    2) Doc is the early Cy Young favorite?

  22. jurnee16 says:

    I really don’t like the trade at all if either Brown or Drabek are involved because if that is the case they should have just traded for Halladay instead of Lee in the first place and probably would’t have given up as many prospects overall….

  23. Chris McC says:

    Don’t know if this has been posted here yet, but I’ve been watching the story and this was just posted:

    Halladay is in Philadelphia talking to the Phillies about an extension,’s Jayson Stark reports. Halladay has told friends he’d take less than market money to sign with the Phillies — something in the neighborhood of five years and $100 million.”

  24. Ed R. says:

    I knew Halladay would take less to win now but 5 years seems like a lot considering the Phillies organizationally don’t want to give pitchers more than 3 years. I could see 4 years and 80 mil, as crazy as that is but 5 years just seems nuts to me.

  25. Ken Bland says:

    Halladay has told friends he’d take less than market money to sign with the Phillies — something in the neighborhood of five years and $100 million.”>>

    That’s the market where the player walks in and says howdy partner to the ower.  And that’s less than market?

    It will be interesting to see the end result.  I believe Utley is the only one sgned through 2013, tht would be a 4 year extension.  Above the Phils norm, less than Roy could get elsewhere.

    I’m anxious to find out what made Brian Cashman decide to let it reach today’s clmactic point.

  26. Chris McC says:

    Given Rueben’s behavior that last 18 months, it’s tough for me to envision Halladay being here for 5 years, even if they sign to a 5 year deal.

  27. Ed R. says:

    Well supposedly the Yanks are trimming pay roll. So apparently even they have limits.

  28. Ed R. says:

    Well given that Amaro has basically stalked Halladay for the last two years, it seems like he may just give Halladay whateve he wants. He has gone this far, can’t pull out now.(words of wisdom from Tiger Woods)

  29. Pete says:

    I love Michael Taylor, but if he’s the guy and not Brown, I would be very happy.

    Also – CSN just said there might be something hanging up the deal…

    my guess would be the extension…

  30. Chris McC says:

    I love baseball.  I know uncapped payroll has plenty of drawbacks, but major league baseball is the only sport on the planet were the offseason is this exciting and the absence of a salary cap makes it possible.
    Imagine what would happen if the Phils can hold on to Lee and Hamels gets his shit together, PLUS they get Doc.
    I know the world almost never works out like that, but it’s entirely possible to have those three next year.  Just sit and think about that.  As Ronnie James Dio would say, “LOOK OUT!”

  31. Ken Bland says:

    This whole deal is really strange.  It’s said that a Halladay extension is a “formality.”  How is a 100 millon dollar deal with negotiating power against a contrained payroll a “formality.”

    Then, Cliff Lee is sent to Seattle.  And his agent is not even called.  What’s Seattle going to give up?  Enough to justify 1 year at 9 mil, or extended at a lot more justifying more quality sacrificed.

    Either they don’t make trades like they used to, or I don’t understand them like I used to. 

  32. Chris McC says:

    So, I’ve been flipping between ESPNEWS and CSN waiting for news on the deal and have come to realize that Daily News LIve is a terrible show.  It’s a mess and Barkan is a fucking idiot.

  33. Chris McC says:

    Phillies get:  Halladay and two SEA prospects
    Mariners get Lee
    Blue Jays get: Aumont (SEA), D’Arnaud and a prospect that is yet be agreed upon – either Brown or Taylor, Phils insist Taylor.
    Halladay’s extension is rumored to be 3 years at $60 million (starting next year)

  34. Ed R. says:

    I agree, everyone jumped the gun so early on this, I really am not sure its as close to a done deal as people say. I know Halladay said he would sign an extension wherever he goes, he clearly wants to win but even it a slight discount which Halladay is willing to give, we are still talking about a lot of cabbage.

  35. Dan says:

    Hmmm just heard on 950 that Lee may not be the pitcher going to Seattle and that it is actually Blanton.

  36. Chris McC says:

    Oh, and the extension would include some option clause for another one or two years.

  37. Pete says:

    If it’s Blanton, we’d have to give up a bunch of prospects. I think we would have heard if it was Blanton by now though.

    By the way, 37 comments in an hour? I think people are fired up!

  38. Pete says:

    ESPN is saying we’d give up Travis d’Arnaud as well. So maybe Taylor and d’Arnaud.

  39. Chris McC says:

    Noone saw this coming, Lee being available that is.  Either its all rumor or Rueben is willing to swing for the fences.  If that’s the case, anyone think it’s possible that Hamels is involved?  Just spit-balling here.

  40. Pete says:

    but we get 2 prospects from Seattle

  41. Chris McC says:

    It seems that the Mariners are only involved so Toronto can get Aumont.  Can’t the Phillies sweeten the prospect deal and thus, cut the Lee-to-Mariners bullshit and put Doc, Lee, Hamels Blanton and Happ?

  42. Ken Bland says:

    You guys keep quoting ESPN.  ESPN is coming up with angles so that when the deal is done, they can claim the world wide leader broke the story.  ESPN sucks.  Next, they’ll tell you the Phils also get the rights to add Steve Phillips to the Phils radio network.  When Ken Rosenthal or John Heyman post more, that’s what to go on.  Well, I think so anyway.

    This afternoon would have been an awesome tim for the 6ers to have reloated back to Syracuse.  Don’t you think?

  43. Ken Bland says:

    Can’t the Phillies sweeten the prospect deal and thus, cut the Lee-to-Mariners bullshit and put Doc, Lee, Hamels Blanton and Happ?>>

    budgetary constraints maybe?

  44. Pete says:

    Salisbury just said on CSN that he thinks the Phillies might be getting a reliever from the Blue Jays as well. Might explain the 2 prospects.

  45. Pete says:


    absolutely budgetary.

    I’m not going to complain about a $140+ million payroll (not saying you were)

    Salisburt just said that he thinks Drabek might be the prospect that goes. He was also completely and totally guessing.

  46. Ken Bland says:

    Hearing that an official announcement for the Halladay deal, barring physicals and Doc extension, would come Wednesday at the earliest. 30 minutes ago from TweetDeck >>

    from Jordan Bastian,

    I’m not sitting here til Wednesday.  Either they do it in the next 10 minutes, or the deal is off.

    Anyway, my prediction on the over under on ocmments on this thread before this deal is done is the over at 119.  I will personally get us there if you guys don’t do your part.

  47. Ed R. says:

    If its Drabek I would honestly rather the team had just kept Lee for a year and then lost him then lose our supposed future ace. Though given the prospect names I am hearing, it might have to be Drabek, nothing else makes sense.

  48. Pete says:

    Jayson Stark is reporting it though on ESPN. I have many problems with ESPN, but Stark isn’t one of them. He is dead-on on his Phillies stuff.

  49. Chris McC says:

    If they lose Drabek AND Lee I’ll be very, very unhappy.
    If that happens, Rueben goes from creative to crazy in about 1.3 seconds.

  50. Ken Bland says:

    Jayson Stark is reporting it though on ESPN.>>

    I lke Stark.

    If they lose Drabek AND Lee I’ll be very, very unhappy.>>

    I like Drabek, too.

    I would probably really like a Stark-Drabek interview by that logic.
    Then again, the Giants beat Dallas, and we beat the Giants, but we’re only goa split with Dallas.

  51. Chris McC says:

    I wonder if Rueben played hardball with Toronto…
    Halladay has said that if a deal isn’t done by spring training he’ll block any trades.  That gives Toronto a hard – and fast approaching – deadline.  Rueben could have used that to force Toronto into lowering their demands.  Maybe he did, not saying he didn’t, just interested how that went.  Shame we’ll never find out.
    I wonder what kind of deals from NYY, LAA, LAD we didn’t hear about.

  52. stu says:

    I wonder (if the rumor is true) who the reliever is from the Blue Jays?  They have some power arms in there.  I’d love Frasor or Downs.  That would be another piece in place and yes, would explain the prospects.

  53. Chris McC says:

    Jayson Stark is reporting it though on ESPN.>>
    I lke Stark.
    If they lose Drabek AND Lee I’ll be very, very unhappy.>>
    I like Drabek, too.
    I would probably really like a Stark-Drabek interview by that logic.Then again, the Giants beat Dallas, and we beat the Giants, but we’re only goa split with Dallas.

    I like this post.

  54. mw says:

    Besides the contract situation between the two, this trade makes sense in that lee is a gamer but halladay is the ultimate workhorse. I think if you put halladay in the WS situation, he would have gone on 3 days rest. Its rumored that Morrow is one of the “prospects” maybe solving one of our RP issues.

  55. Ken Bland says:

    While we’re all speculating about who’s in and who’s out, to drift a bit, I’ve never seen Michael Taylor play, heard a lot of good, etc, and if we keep him, he’d be around a while sice you can’t be a free agent for 6 years.

    But I must admit that I don’t know what everyone’s rush is to write of Jayson Werth so fast.  I know he’s a free agent after this year, and assuming he keeps improving even just a bit at this point, he’s got a chance to make some nice bucks, but I don’t know that he’d be so anxious to leave.  This atmosphere and environment appear to have been quite good to him.

    I would say its a longshot he’s here for economic reasons after this year, but I wouldn’t mind seeing him stick, and while next year’s free agent class might not contain a Bay or Holliday, I would think choices would be available.

    So if Michael Taylor goes, I like what I read about him, but Doc is pretty exciting.

  56. bski says:

    If Stark is right and D”arnaud is heading to Toronto, that means our catching cupboard, which was thinned when we dealt Marson for Lee,  will be pretty bare for a while (Sebastian Valle, who’s quite a ways away).

    In his article from Saturday, Ken Rosenthal mentioned that Mariners’ catching prospect Adam Moore could end up in the deal.  I hope that means we’re getting him.

    Also, from what I’m reading, it doesn’t seem like Halladay’s extension is holding up the deal.  Rather, it’s the prospects we will be sending to Toronto that is the major sticking point (i.e. They want Brown and we don’t want to give him up).

  57. Ken Bland says:

    Couple samples of opinions from the fans in Toronto (via the Globe and Mail newspaper) in reaction to today’s developments…

    Great for Roy! He deserves a chance. Classiest guy is sports. His value goes well beyond the field. Best of luck to him. Go Phillies!

    As for the jays…. RIP. They’ll never recover unless someone buys them and injects a lot of cash. Toronto will be lucky to have an MLB team in 10 years.


    First good for Doc.

    Second thank God he wasn’t traded to the Yanks or BoSox.

    Doc took less money to build a winner in TO and it didn’t work out. He let management know well in advance that he wouldn’t resign but never went public demanding a trade.

    He just wants to play for a winner. I don’t think any Jays fan will begrudge Doc that.

    It’s a tough blow for the Jays though. It could be a long time before another pitcher as good as Doc plays in TO.

    My comment…

    Looks like the Phils have done it again.  Acquiring another person that is real easy to root for.  We are pretty fortunate, indeed.

  58. Chris McC says:

    “Good for Doc?”  ”Go Phillies?”
    Wow, Canadians are some polite motherfuckers.

  59. Pete says:

    OK – so as of 730 – I think this is an accurate update.

    The deal on the table is something like this…

    Seattle gets: P Cliff Lee

    Toronto gets: P Phillipe Aumont (from SEA), C Travid d’Arnaud and OF Michael Taylor (from Phillies)

    Phillies get: P Roy Halladay and 2 unnamed prospects from Seattle

    Halladay is negotiating a 3-year extension (does not include next year) with options for 1 or 2 more seasons.

    FoxSports is also reporting that the Jays might pay some of Halladay’s 2010 salary.

    Unknowns at this point: There are rumors of a hold-up. Could be in the contract, could be that the Jays was Dom Brown. However, it doesn’t make sense to me that he would be here taking a physical if the prospects weren’t decided on.

    Also, I have to think there are more prospects in play. Perhaps minor ones, but it seems like Toronto will want more than 3 players.

    Also rumored that the Phillies might be getting a reliever in the deal. Whether that is from the Jays or one of the 2 rumored Seattle prospects is up in the air…

    Anyone hearing anything different than that?

  60. Ed R. says:

    I have heard either Taylor or Dom Brown, but not which one exactly. 

    I have not heard anything about the prospects from Seattle other than that the Phillies should receive two. 

    Haven’t heard a thing about the Phillies getting a bullpen arm.

  61. Adam says:

    This article adds confusion.  Why are Happ and Blanton taking physicals?

  62. Ed R. says:

    I think they are all taking physicals because they may or may not be in the trade. I just read that Drabek was included in the deal. Which I do not like at all. I’d rather have Lee for this year and let him walk than lose Drabek for 3 years of Halladay.

  63. Pete says:


    That is indeed strange. I will say that was about 2 hours late to the party and have never broken a story before the major sports websites, so I’m trusting them.

    On Drabek, where are you reading this? You gotta link stuff like that! I have 2 thoughts on Drabek. First, I highly doubt they would include him in a deal now when the absolutely refused before. Second, I think expectations for him are way out of whack right now. The kid has pitched ONE, count it, ONE professional season, and didn’t exactly dominate AA (3.64 ERA, 76 K in 96 IP). These aren’t Tim Lincecum, Dan Haren type numbers. Drabek is FAR from a sure thing.

  64. phillyfan says:

    wow – phils giving up Brown, Happ, and Blanton.  I hate this deal if true.

  65. Ed R. says:

    According to
    7:04pm: Drabek and “other top [Phillies] prospects” will be involved in the deal, according to Jim Salisbury of (via Twitter).  According to Salisbury, Brown will remain with the club.

    According to CSN
    All about Drabek being in the deal.

  66. Pete says:

    Ed R. -

    Interesting. Thanks. Doesn’t really make sense to give up Drabek now when they didn’t last year. I’ll believe that when I see it.

  67. Ed R. says:

    I think its very likely that Drabek is in the deal. I think the Phillies involved the Mariners for two reasons, someone to give Lee to, thus freeing some payroll and also someone that can give up some prospects to the Phillies. So far I have only heard of two prospects going from Seattle to Toronto, seems awfully cheap considering they are getting Lee from us. Maybe we are getting a good prospect or two from Seattle in return.
    I do agree that Drabek’s expectations are a bit jaded given what he has actually done but supposedly everyone is high on him, not just the Phillies organization, everyone.

  68. Pete says:

    If the trade is how Salisbury is reporting (Lee, Drabek, Taylor and d’Arnaud) that changes the whole deal. I would have to think the prospect(s) we get from Seattle would be have to be pretty damn good and we are just trading out ours for theres.

    Us trading Lee to Seattle and Seattle only sending 1 prospect to Toronto while we send 3 doesn’t really make sense.

  69. mw says:,-send-Lee-to-Seattle
    It names Morrow and Michael Saunders as the prospects in “play” from the Mariners.
    Also, Jayson Stark on Sportscenter had Morrow listed in the deal.

  70. bski says:

    Here’s the latest (8:26PM) from ESPN:
    According to a source who spoke with two teams involved in the trade, Toronto would get highly regarded Mariners pitching prospect Phillippe Aumont, Phillies catching prospect Travis d’Arnaud and another Phillies prospect in exchange for Halladay. Indications are that the Phillies have balked at Toronto’s repeated requests for outfielder Domonic Brown, and the Phillies are offering highly touted outfielder Michael Taylor instead.
    Seattle would send two additional prospects to Philadelphia in exchange for Lee, who is a year away from free agency.
    As of late Monday afternoon, the extension had not been agreed upon. And the Blue Jays and Phillies were still haggling over the final prospect. In addition, Phillies doctors would have to sign off on Halladay’s physical.
    The Associated Press reported that J.A. Happ, Joe Blanton, and Domonic Brown also took physicals in Philadelphia on Monday, but there’s no clear indication that they are a part of this trade.
    The AP also reported that the commissioner’s office granted a 72-hour window on Sunday for Toronto and Philadelphia to complete their trade.

  71. Ed R. says:

    That is what I am hoping, that we are getting some good prospects. Seattle has a pretty good farm system from what I have read. I actually follow the Mariners, been a fan of theirs as an AL team since the mid 90′s.
    Great Mariners website:

  72. bski says:

    Also from the same ESPN article:

    Before turning to Seattle, multiple sources say, the Phillies first attempted to complete a two-team deal with Toronto alone for Halladay. However, the Phillies refused — as they had last summer — to include their top pitching prospect, Kyle Drabek, in that trade. So they began looking for another team that could help them meet the Blue Jays’ price.
    Makes me think he won’t be included in this deal either.

  73. bball says:

    Bob Elliott of the Toronto Sun twittered :
    RHP Kyle Drabek is in the Halladay deal, no Phillippe Aumont

  74. Ken Bland says:

    The only thing extra that I have to add is that conflicting reports have come out as to how much evidence was given that Cliff didn’t want to give a discount and wanted CC money.  Ruben, according to speculation may have acted quickly and aggressively toward jumping to that conclusion. 


    Big Maybe, but remember it.

    Nice little ballclub Seattle looks to be putting together. 

    I might suggest that if there are players in this deal that you don’t like giving up and you hear they are not part of the deal, or vice versa, don’t start breathing sighs of relief, or conversely getting nervous.

    I would think a name or two might change as the swap is finalized.

    I assure you that Blanton and Happ are not going.  You don’t give up 2 starters that are no chopped liver for one.

  75. bball says:


  76. Adam says:

    There is no way they can trade Lee and Drabek.  They have to get some pretty damn good prospects back from Seattle for that to make sense.

  77. Ken Bland says:

    RHP Kyle Drabek is in the Halladay deal, no Phillippe Aumont>>

    Right, flipping the report of 4 hour ago.

    And what exactly are their sources that we get such varying information.

  78. bball says:

    I hope that report is false or that Lee isn’t involved because we definitely can’t give up both.

  79. Pete says:

    if they have a 72-hour deal, and physicals are happening, doesn’t that mean the deal is done personnel wise? I’m beginning to think no one knows anything.

  80. Pete says:


    why can’t we give up both? what do people think Drabek is going to be? If you brought him up this season he would not have a sub 4.00 ERA. He could blow out his arm like Knapp. Right now, he looks like a 2-3 starter, at best. Reminds me a lot of Myers in terms of talent and make-up and Myers never put it all together.

  81. Ed R. says:

    All we know for sure is that if this gets done, is that from the start we knew Halladay would be in Philly and Lee in Seattle.

  82. Pete says:

    Maybe Drabek, Taylor and d’Arnaud are all going because Lee isn’t…..

  83. bball says:

    I’m just saying that if they wanted Drabek and some other prospects in July we shouldn’t have to give up both he and Lee now

  84. stu says:

    What a freaking amazing display of the “new media” web 2.0.  Blogs (like this one), tweets from random talking heads, the juggernaut, and the local reporters in Philly, Seattle, and Toronto basically firing away seemingly baseless information.  Don’t forget who broke this story, it was actually commenter ”max” from the other Phillies Halladay thread on this very site who made a comment last night that his dad heard from an agent IN THE STANDS AT THE EAGLES-GIANTS GAME that the Halladay to the Phils trade was a done deal (seemingly correct since the commish’s office approved it on Sunday).

    BOOM!  Hilarious.  “max” is subject zero.

  85. Ed R. says:

    Lee is going for sure. For two reasons, to clear up cap space, giving up Lee for Halladay only costs us an additional 6.75, maybe less if Toronto is going to send some cash, which has been reported but at this point who knows. 

    The Phillies included Seattle in this deal because they know they are giving up a ton of prospects to get Halladay, Seattle is providing the final piece/prospect to Toronto and in return, Seattle is sending some prospects to the Phillies.

    That much I am sure of.

  86. Ed R. says:

    According to
    8:26pm: Check that.  Aumont is in the deal, but heading to the Phillies rather than the Jays, says Elliot (via Twitter).

    Aumont is a pitcher, a damn good one at that in my opinion.
    According to the Mariners website:

    Statistically speaking: Throwing with a very strict pitch count, Aumont was nonethless very impressive through the first two months of his first full season, allowing just six earned runs and 23 hits over his first 36 innings (1.50 ERA). He also struck out 35 while walking 11, holding hitters to a measly .177 batting average.
    Scouting report: A sore elbow slowed him down in the second half, but it’s not a big cause for concern. He throws his fastball, which has hard sink and is tough to pick up, up to 95 mph, with room for more. The breaking ball (curve) has a chance to be plus pitch, but his changeup is his third pitch and needs to be improved. He has pretty good command, especially for his age, and uses his size well for mound presence.
    Upside potential: Top-of-the-rotation ace.
    They said it: “He’s a potential workhorse with well above-average stuff. He has the ability to develop into a top-of-the-rotation type pitcher.” – Pedro Grifol, Mariners Director of Minor League operations
    He said it: “Growing up, I was not the best player. There were way better players than me. People kept telling me, ‘You have a chance, you just have to work.’ So I kept working and working.”

  87. Ken Bland says:

    I just don’t see a point to Seattle acquiring Cliff Lee for one season. 

    And I cannot find one item that suggests he and the Mariners have any sort of window to talk extension, and are doing so.

    I’m finding nothing from the Lee camp that carries any hint of not wanting to talk about extension with the Phils.  When he was with the Tribe, most definitely.

    I’m not ready to agree with the assertion above that says that all we know is Roy is here and Cliff is in Seattle.

    Pardon my prudene based largely on logic, and fractionally on being sad to see Cliff outtahere.

    I wonder what the heck this winds up translating to.

    Crash Allen on MLBTV tomorrow night, 1 hour with Bob Costas.

  88. Ed R. says:

    The Phillies are trading Lee because they need to clear cap space and could not find anyone willing to give enough back in the trade attempts they made to get rid of Blanton. I am sure the Phillies wanted to trade for Halladay and have Lee and Hamels in the rotation but clearly that is not happing.

  89. Ken Bland says:


    Good perspective on the lunacy of it all.  I learned a valuble lesson from the Maxman.  Believe everything you read.

  90. tk76 says:

    David St. Hubbins: I believe virtually everything I read, and I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone who doesn’t believe anything.

  91. Pete says:


    Really? The same reason we acquired Lee for one season. To make a playoff run. With the Angels losing players left and right, the Mariners two-headed monster of King Feliz and Cliff Lee could make them the favorite in that division.

  92. Pete says:

    It’s looking more and more to me like this isn’t a 3-way trade. It’s us trading Drabek, Taylor and d’Arnaud to Toronto for Halladay and then Lee to Seattle for Aumont (who is damn good) and another prospect. Perhaps no one going from Seattle to Toronto.

  93. John says:

    i was sick all day and just found out about the potential deal. are we really trading lee, drabek, brown or taylor and d’arnaud ? if we are than why didnt we just trade for halladay last year? im happy about halladay but im also upset and i’m selfish cus i dont want to trade away all our prospects. damn.

  94. stu says:

    Ken, I can’t even comprehend how it used to be when we’d read about a trade in the transactions section of the morning Inquirer or wait until the 6 PM news when Gary Papa would break it down.

    Web 2.0 is downright frightening and amazing at the same time, however there will be nights wasted like this one where everybody is just going nuts.

    “OMG, my girlfriend’s brother just saw COLE HAMMELS AT THE AIRPORT< He must be HEDED TO SEATTLE!!!!!1111111111!1!!”

  95. Ed R. says:

    Don’t forget they added Figgins as well and are still in the running for Bay. Most people don’t realize this because it gets no play on the east coast but the Mariners have the 2nd biggest baseball market in the majors, behind only NY. The reason being, all Mariners games are broadcast in China and Japan as well. The Mariners have a ton of money and this is not the first time they are using it. Hopefully this time it actually works out.

  96. Pete says:


    If we are indeed trading those prospects, we are likely getting prospects of relatively equal value back from Seattle.

  97. Ed R. says:

    Pete you are correct. I just got a call from a friend whose father is a sports agent, no one special but he said its two separate trades. Philly and Toronto being one and Philly and Seattle being the other.

  98. John says:

    Pete -
    i hope so. the mariners converted Aumont to a reliever last year (i think, cant remember). now to turn him back to a starter.

  99. Ed R. says:

    I am hearing that Aumont and Tyson Gillies who is an OF are headed to Philly from Seattle. Gillies is 21 and Aumont is Seattle’s top prospect.

  100. tk76 says:

    How does Aumont compare to Drabek as a top flight, MLB ready prospect?

  101. bball says:

    I don’t even know if I believe that there is a deal anymore.  This sounds like too many contradicting reports.  We’ll probably end up keeping Lee and not trading for Halladay after all this hoopla.  I’m not believing anymore trade rumors.  I’ll wait for Amaro to tell us…

  102. Ed R. says:

    Well I think most people thought Drabek would be in the majors this year, probably as a September call up. With Aumont from what I have read, he won’t be ready until sometime in 2011 at the earliest. 2012 is most likely. But I think he has more upside than Drabek.

  103. Mark says:

    How does us giving prospects make sense? We give Lee to Mariners they give prospects to Jays we get Halladay. But now we give prospects and get prospects?

  104. Pete says:

    Mark -

    Blue Jays like our prospects better, I guess.

  105. Mark says:

    How is Seattle’s farm system?

  106. Pete says:

    I just updated the main post with the most recent info

  107. tk76 says:

    It makes sense when you consider the Phils can’t afford to pay for both Lee and Halladay… and they see Halladay as the only pitcher they can keep liong term.
    The rest is all musical chairs with prospects to get Halladay here.
    I read Aumont was moved to the bullpen this year.  Is he still projected to be a starter?  Part of Drabek and Happ’s value is they project to be affordable starters for the next 4 years.  Having to bring in even an average FA starter is risky and expensive (Adam Eaton please raise your hand- if you can.)

  108. Ed R. says:

    Aumont was originally a starter, then converted to a reliever but from what I have read since he was drafted in 2007 is that he can do both but has a lot more upside as a starter. A lot of people see him as a staff ace. I don’t know if he is that good but I could very easily see him being a plus # 2.

  109. Mark says:

    This trade stuff is getting dumb fast Stark said happ/drabek and taylor and d’arnaud to toronto, halladay to philly and lee to seattle. Why would we get nothing for lee?

  110. Drolz says:

    While we’re waiting for this soap opera to unfold, can anyone make me feel better about the likelihood we’re going to deal Taylor instead of Brown? I’ve heard all the stories about Brown’s upside and it sounds great. But I’m biased towards Taylor because he’s already proven he can hit at every level in the minors. He looks like a more athletic version of Frank Thomas although he probably won’t hit as many home runs as the Big Hurt. It’ll be a big hurt to see him go, though. So again, can anyone explain to me why the Phillies value Brown more?   

    By the way, great coverage on all the latest developments. Have been checking back here incessantly (need my baseball fix!) while ignoring ESPN. This is the place to be — awesome blog and comments!

  111. Pete says:


    We would recieve Phillippe Aumont, their top pitching prospect, and probably Tyson Gillies, a very good OF prospect.

  112. Pete says:


    Brown is a more complete player (better defender and baserunner) and simply has more offensive upside.

  113. tk76 says:
  114. Mark says:

    yeah Aumont seems very promising but shouldn’t we be asking for a price similar to what toronto is asking?

  115. tk76 says:

    BTW- that link was from the 2008 MLB top 50.  To put that in perspective #28 was Carasco.

  116. Mark says:

    Now zolecki reports that no phillies prospect will be going to toronto. The contradictions are confusing me

  117. tk76 says:

    Here is the most recent MLB top 50 prospects (7/31/09):
    Taylor #20
    Brown #24
    Drabek #26
    Amazing considering this is after trading away 4 prospects for Lee.
    BTW, Aumont did not make the top 50 cut.

  118. Pete says:


    No. For 2 reasons.

    1. Halladay is better

    2. We are getting Halladay for 5 years, they are getting Lee for 1

  119. Pete says:

    Aumont seems more like Knapp than Drabek

  120. tk76 says:

    Interesting take on Aumont as a potential closser instead of a starter… worries about his arm/mechanics:

  121. John says:

    hate to see drabek go, but at this point any thing can happen. im so confused and i dont believe anyone. theres to much names floating around and i wont believe it until it actually happens. baseball is killing me even in the off season.

  122. Drolz says:

    Just looked up Gillies, check out the videos of him in this link:

  123. Pete says:

    I feel like we should get more than 2 prospects from the Mariners…

  124. stu says:

    At the end of the day, we’re getting Roy Halladay for 5 years.  Prospects are not a known quantity.  The Phils will buy a headlining FA if they need to fill a spot in the future, give me Halladay.  I am happy that we get to keep J.A. Happ and I guess Dom Brown since Pete loves that dude and sweats him hard.

    That guy Aumont is 6′ 7″ and has more potential that anbody we’re giving up.  I’ll gladly take him from Seattle rather than pay Lee $120+ million or whatever the Yankees will throw at him (they’ll need him and they won’t forget what he did to them in the 2009 Series).


  125. stu says:

    Keep in mind the asking price last summer was Drabek, Happ, and Dom Brown.  Now we’re only giving up one of those guys (Drabek, the most expendable in my opinion) and getting back this giant Quebecois Aumont and a Michael Bourn type if this is all true. 

  126. tk76 says:

    Zolecki viw Twitter (may have been posted here befoer):
    Sources say only Phillies would receive Seattle prospects for Lee. None would be shipped to Toronto. Kyle Drabek is involved.

  127. Mark says:

    tk- I saw that as well how does that work out?

  128. Pete says:

    Salisbury is now saying that the Phillies would get $6 million from Toronto, and 3 players from Seattle (one going to Toronto) and we might hang on to Taylor or d’Arnaud.

  129. Mark says:

    wait if we get that 6 mil why is there a need for lee to leave? I know that halladay has a big contract but why not use the 6 mil for lee?

  130. Pete says:

    Halladay makes $15 mill, Lee makes $9 mill

    $15-$9 = $6

    We get the $6 mill to break even, not save money

  131. Chris McC says:

    God I love baseball.  Even if all these rumors turn out to be bullshit and nothing happens it’s still a blast to watch the internet explode with all this.

  132. Mark says:

    Ruben Amaro Jr needs to talk to whoever he needs to convince about opening up the check book a little bit more. I am tired of the Mariners trying to jump in on this. I would do Happ and another good prospect and a mid-tier prospect for Halladay

  133. Ken Bland says:

    from Mark (right above)

    <<Ruben Amaro Jr needs to talk to whoever he needs to convince about opening up the check book a little bit more.>>

    snd from Pete (extremely above)

    <<Really? The same reason we acquired Lee for one season. To make a playoff run. With the Angels losing players left and right, the Mariners two-headed monster of King Felix and Cliff Lee could make them the favorite in that division

    and my response…
    Pete replied in response to my wondering why Lee does not seem to have any window to talk about an extension with Seattle.  As I originally stated, fractionally, and admittedly I was clinging to hope that Lee wasn’t leaving.  That said, I do wonder about Seattle’s strategy.  9 mil is not a lot for a Cliff Lee for 1 year, let alone the year and a half the Phils had.  But acquring a talent like him for that sole purpose is incredible.  Maybe they get the deal done, then talk to him, but how do you know what to give up without knowing how he fits your organization.  And the Phils knew they would win the division.  Seattle should with the Angels having lost some keys, but its still competitive.  The Phils were buildig for the post season, the Ms could build for 3-4 years and a better sense of what it would cost to keep he and Felix by talking to Lee and his agent.

    Tying Mark’s comment in, and its very very natural to do this, but lets not forget that it couldn’t have been more than 3 years ago the payroll was 88 mil.  So we’re up what, 60 % on that.  In that sense, nobody needs to tell RAJ to open the checkbook.  But…I appreciate the 140 mil when I look at the Tampas, Pirates, KC et al, but I’ll tell you what.  If Seattle is taking Cliff for 1 year, I find it hard to believe that we couldn’t send them somebody else, like Happ, and spend 150 mil.  The Bank will sell out 81 times  now, Lee or not, but we’d have generated an extra 10 mil with Roy and Cliff somehow, some way.  I can see where Cliff might have been resentful about the long term committment to Roy, but maybe you keep both long term and adjust.  Its not easy, but going from 88 mil to 140 wasn’t either.

  134. Mark says:

    So this has turned into being all about money? Now I am seeing we give Drabek, D’arnaud and Michael Taylor for Halladay and Trade Lee in an unrelated deal. I appreciate the effort that the Phillies have given the last 3 years to become a championship team, but having Lee and Halladay seems to be an outstanding way to have two very very good #1′s in the same rotation. And come playoff time having Halladay can set up a 3 man rotation because of his ability to pitch on short rest.

  135. Ed R. says:

    The more I think about these deals the less I like them. I honestly can’t say I have decided one way or the other how I feel as we still don’t know all of the pieces involved. But essentially what it comes down to, at the end of the day is that we will have:
    traded 4 prospects(Knapp, Carrasco, Donald, Marson) for Lee and Francisco
    traded 2-3 more prospects(Taylor, D’Arnaud, Drabek/Happ) for Halladay
    And we potentially get 2-3 prospects back from Seattle. 

    So really we are trading 6-7 prospects, getting 2-3 back, all for Halladay. We have essentially drained our entire system save Dom Brown for Halladay.
    Honestly, it just seems like way too much. Clearly the Phillies are trading Lee for 2 reasons: to save on payroll/break even, and to get some prospects back so their system is not completely depleted. And I appreciate that. But seriously, and maybe this is just me, I feel like it has to be one way or the other. Either you drain your system and keep Lee and make a run with Lee, Halladay and Hamels for this year, or you don’t make the trades at all and just lose Lee at the end of the year and get two picks.

    At this point the Angels are the only team who can trade for Halladay. Maybe we just hope he does not get traded and come the off season next year we can scoop him up. Clearly he wants to play in Philly.

  136. Antoine says:

    Personally I hate this trade. If you were keeping Lee and getting Halladay it is a good trade. I know we all love what Cole did in 2008 but this is a what have you done for me lately era. Bottomline Cole sucked last year and Cliff Lee was teriffic so if I were going to let someone go it would be Cole. Why not keep Lee and get Halladay I just dont understand the move someone help me please. Doesn’t Lee and Halladay make a whole lot of sense. Wouldn’t that us Damn near gurantee we when the NL? The object is to make the team better isn’t it. I think this move sucks Cliff Lee played his ass off for us in the World Series and this is how we repay him. BOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! Really Hate this trade. Get Halladay but don’t give up Lee.

  137. Pete says:

    Mark -

    All about money? We are signing arguable the best pitcher in baseball for 4 years at $20 million a year and you are hung up on the team being cheap?

    The POINT of this deal is to get Roy Halladay for the next 4-5 years.

  138. Pete says:

    Antoine -

    Lee and Halladay does make sense. But the money simply isn’t there. Every team has the limit they can reach, and the Phillies are at it. They are making the switch because Halladay would sign long-term, for a reasonable deal, right now. And Lee has stated he wants to his free agency, which probably means he’ll be a Yankee or Red Sox.


  139. Pete says:

    Reports are that we would get 3 prospects from the Mariners. If they are Phillippe Aumont, Tyson Gillies and J.C. Ramirez. We will hardly be losing anything farm system wise.

  140. Ed R. says:

    Pete I agree with you, the issue here is trading Lee for multiple years of Halladay. But if that is the case, why did we not pull the trigger back in July? Halladay would have signed an extension then as well. We are bleeding our system for what to me looks like a move we should have made 5 months ago.

  141. Pete says:


    We aren’t bleeding our system. Check the new update up top. Word is that we are getting a 3rd prospect from Seattle, potentially P Juan Ramirez, who is a very good prospect. That would be giving up 3 good prospects, and getting 3 good prospects. Our trio is probably SLIGHTLY better, but not by much.

  142. Ed R. says:

    We would be losing though Pete. Maybe not in this specific deal, 3 prospects out for 3 prospects in, but coupled with what we gave up for Lee, I can’t believe we are not losing out to a degree.

  143. Pete says:

    Ed R.

    Not really. The prospects in this deal technically cancel themselves out, so it’s just the original 4 prospects for Halladay, plus a slight loss in the 3 for 3 deal here. That’s it.

  144. Ed R. says:

    I agree that the prospects in this deal probably cancel each other out. Though I think our prospects are a little better. But again, in the span of 6 months we gave up 7 prospects. That is a lot. I was glad the team gave up 4 prospects to get Lee when I believed it was to get Lee for the stretch run and one more season. We could have made this same deal, or maybe one slightly different for Halladay back at the deadline and saved us a few prospects.

  145. Dannie says:

    I have no understanding how anyone could not like this deal.

    People are attached to our prospects (who are clearly really good) but more so because they are ours and succumbing to the recency effect with regards to Cliff Lee and how he pitched for US last season.

    On top of that I think the varying reports have confused people into a feeling of doubt that this really is a positive for the Phillies and likely the maximum outcome concerning all players and teams involved.

    I think that is blinding people and misguiding people’s reaction to this proposed (not done yet) deal.

  146. Antoine says:

    Thanks for clearing that up for me Pete. I just wish it was Cole instead of Cliff that had to go. I love the way Cliff Lee’s intensity level work ethic and commitment to the game.I also would love to pair him up with Halladay and just go for it all this year and worry about next season when it gets here. I guess thats why I dont have the job and Rubin does. Well I hope Cole looks better than he did last year maybe it was the injuries but I hope he can return to that 08 form. As for Cliff Lee I will be sad to see him go and he has my gratitude for his performance in the 09 playoffs. Thanks Cliff

  147. Ed R. says:

    I love Cliff Lee, the only pitcher’s  in baseball I love more are Jon Lester, Josh Beckett and Roy Halladay. So in theory I would love this deal. 

    When it comes to prospects, it’s not that I am in love with them as I am very much all about the guys who have proven it over the guys who are nothing more than possibilities and promise. However my reservation is in seeing the team deal away an entire farm system, which is effectively what the Phillies have just done. I have seen what not having a farm system can do to a team.
    Take the Yankees for example. They spent so much time dealing away prospects like they were nothing that eventually when they had  to trying to improve the team or fill holes their only option was to sign free agents, and pay more than anyone else was willing just to ensure that they got them. Look at how much credit Cashman has gotten recently for rebuilding the farm system. He wouldn’t have had to do that if he hadn’t traded it all away to begin with. 

    What happens when the Phillies are in that position? Unlike the Yankees they will not spend through the roof. They very clearly have a budget and if they have no prospects to deal away in order to get proven talent then their options are free agents or trading proven talent to get the same in return.

    I feel like Amaro has been so overwhelming with the prospect of Roy Halladay that he has literally blinded himself.
    When the Phillies traded for Lee everyone out there, the experts and the fans considered it a slam dunk. This time around, no such feelings exist, at least if they do, they are the silent minority. That has to mean something.

  148. phillyfan says:

    What makes this whole situation odd is that it is really a non-event.  We trade one great pitcher for another great pitcher and basically swapped out prospects.  you can argue our prospects are slightly better, but you can argue Halladay is slightly better than Lee also.  So talent wise , on the field now and on the field later you have one big wash.  At the end of the day it is just a financial move.  Which is fine.  But I think from a fan’s perspective it leads to a let-down.  We are no closer to a title NEXT YEAR than we were two days ago.  It seems like for all these mechinations we should be better on the field.

  149. Pete says:


    I disagree.

    Halladay is a better pitcher than Lee. Hands down. Look at the stats, and look at the division Halladay got those stats in. So we ARE better for 2010.

    Second, I’m not sure how signing a Cy Young caliber pitcher to a 3-year extension, when we WOULDN’T have signed Lee, can be considered a “non-event.”

    THAT is the point of the deal people. Halladay for FOUR + years. That is a BIG deal.

  150. Ed R. says:

    I agree, this is a big deal, and its a good deal. My only hang up, is all of the prospects we have given up over the course of the last 5 months when we could have given up half of that for Halladay back in July. That is my only real issue with this.

  151. phillyfan says:


    Halladay is a better regular season pitcher – although a career 3.4 era isn’t that great.  But let’s just agree that in a vacuum, Halladay is a bit better.  I still need to see him do it in the regular season. 

    Bottom line: I still would have rather traded Happ, Drabek and Taylor  and the cathing prospect if necessary straight up for Halladay (+extension) and one year of Lee.  And go with Halladay, Lee, and Hamels and Blanton for next year (110 wins and title?) and let the chips fall where they may in 2011.  Let Lee and Blanton go (since I agree we couldn’t afford them) and we still have Halladay and Hamels for 2011, which is all we are gaurenteed in this scenario.  Let’s remember that – while we are getting some decent prospects, we really don’t know how good Happ will be now that the league will have seen him.  I would have been willing to throw in Happ to keep Lee for a year. 

  152. Chris McC says:

    OK, so what we have given up for everyone looks like this, right?
    2009 Cliff Lee deal:
    Indians get: C Marson, SP Carrasco, SP Knapp and IF Donald
    Phillies get: Lee and Francisco (both bolstered big league needs)
    2009 Halladay/Lee mutant deal:
    Phillies get: SP Halladay, SP Aumont, OF Gilies and mystery pitching prospect.
    Jays get (from Phils): SP Drabek, OF Taylor, C d’Arnaud.
    Mariners get SP Lee.
    Theoretically Aumont cancels out Drabek; Gilies cancels out Taylor; and the third prospect would cancel out Knapp.
    So we essentially gave up 2 catchers, a starting pitcher and a plus infielder for Halladay, plus a 3 month rental on an ace that got us to the World Series.
    That’s not bad at all, convoluted, but not bad.  Plus, we still have Dom Brown, which is important because our corner outfielders are the next most pressing need in the future.
    Instead of spending a $100 million on Lee we got three prospects for him and signed Halladay for $60-70 million, a year before he would have hit the market.  So we save $40 million (money more or less spent of the lost prospects) and get cash and prospects from TOR and SEA to break even.
    My only concern with this is where do we get Rollins’ and Chooch’s replacements?  The farm system has two years to develop starters at those positions.  And they will have to come from the farm system because the team is running out of money.
    Four years of Halladay beats one year of Lee and two draft picks.

  153. Dannie says:

    Ed R. – I don’t really get your “hang up” and I think you might be a bit confused as to what Toronto was asking for last time and the overall impact on the farm system when this is all said and done.


    Toronto wanted Drabek, Happ, Brown and Gose in the deal during the season and they weren’t budging and neither were the Phillies on giving up that much.

    On top of that I don’t believe it was known that Halladay would give the Phillies a discount on the extension either.  I believe that to be completely new information this time around.


    In the Lee acquisition we gave up these prospects:

    1. Carrasco
    2. Donald
    3. Knapp
    4. Marson

    In the latest report regarding this 3-team deal we would be giving up these prospects:

    1. Drabek
    2. Taylor
    3. d’Arnaud

    We would be receiving these prospects:

    1. Aumont
    2. Gillies
    3. Ramirez

    The NET impact on the farm system is 4 total lost prospects.

    The overall impact is:

    • We get Roy Halladay for 4 or 5 years at a likely discount (and Toronto potentially pay part of his salary next season) without any fight and eliminate the threat of ending up with nothing  if Lee walks (not exactly since I believe we would get 2 1st rounders if Lee walked but the point still holds)
    • We didn’t have to give up Happ, Brown or Gose
    • We didn’t completely deplete our farm system by making sure we got the Mariners top prospects for Lee
    • AND don’t forget we STILL HAVE Ben Fransisco contributing on the big club

    Where exactly is the hang up?  I am trying to understand your side but when it’s all laid out I just don’t see it.

  154. Chris McC says:

    Plus we get a right handed ace in a lefty heavy rotation.   That was a big deal last year.

  155. Dannie says:

    Phillyfan – Your deal doesn’t work financially you do understand that right?  You are living in Yankee/BoSox fantasy world right now.

    Don’t you think the Phillies ideally would want to keep Lee?  But they simply can not afford to.

    This is always my problem with fan trade proposals.  They too often are fantasy.  Propose a deal within the Phillies payroll constraints.  Just because the league has no cap and the Yanks and Sox maximize that freedom to the fullest doesn’t mean we or any other team can, at least, not without landing in the red on the books which does matter much to people’s chagrin.

  156. Chris McC says:

    I don’t understand why some people here are OK with throwing Happ into the deal to cut Seattle out.  Why would they want to give up Happ’s future for one year of Lee.  At least this way, we are giving up Lee and thus have the futures of Happ and Aumont.

  157. Chris McC says:

    ESPN is calling the deal done.  Apparently the extension is done and Halladay is taking his physical this morning.

  158. Dannie says:

    The money quote for those who think the Phils would be completely depleting their farm system:

    If all of the names being bandied about wind up in this deal, the Phillies would get back what Baseball America rates as the Mariners’ top two pitching prospects, plus Gillies, an outfield prospect they view as being similar to Taylor. So although the Phillies would be giving up two of their most highly regarded prospects in Drabek and Taylor, they would look at this deal as not significantly depleting their system for the long haul.

  159. Ed R. says:

    “not significantly depleting their farm system”

    doesn’t mean they aren’t depleting it to a degree.

  160. phillyfan says:


    Yes, I think an extra 9 million on the payroll for only one year is a good long-term investment for the “business that is the Phillies” due to the excitement (return) it would creat.  I am not suggesting the phillies should sign both Lee and Halladay to long term deals as Yankees and boston would do.  So instead of 150mill, yes, go with a 159mill payroll for one year.  When you say, “it doesn’t work financially” you imply that you know the books of the phillies – as though they would default on some loan because of it – or the owners would have to sell their 2nd or 3rd house.  All we are really talking about is that they may not make quite as much for one year – but I am sure they would make it up and then some in the paper value of the club on sale if they add a second world title, don’t you think?

  161. Chris McC says:

    Buster Olney had an interesting idea.  He laid out a couple of other options the Phillies could have tried (and they may have).  The second one is a little ridiculous but the first one is interesting: screw any trades, keep Lee for the year and take Halladay’s money and try to sign Doc, Clifton or Josh Becket next winter.
    Probably would have cost the team more cash, but could have held on to Drabek and Taylor.
    I think that’s a little risky though when you consider what we are getting for Lee right now.

  162. Ed R. says:

    The Phillies can’t afford to try and resign Lee. He want’s too much money and too many years, and that’s his right. I don’t think Beckett will come cheap either, I also don’t think the Sox will let him go, even with Lackey and Lester. 

    At the end of the day, as much as I wish we could have kept a few prospect’s in doing all of this, I do think this was the only move the Phillies could have made to help their short and long term future.

  163. Dannie says:

    Ed R. – That’s not what you have been complaining about nor is getting Halladay for nothing realistic either.

    The expectation all along was that we would lose some prospects when looking to acquire the best pitcher in baseball.  The argument has been how many prospects and what will we have left.

    I explained this in the post you seemed to have overlooked above and simple math.

    7 prospects out, 3 prospects in = a net loss of 4 prospects to have Cliff Lee for the end of the regular season and the playoffs last season and to acquire the best pitcher in baseball for at least 4 years and the toss in of Ben Fransisco for a couple seasons.

    AGAIN, please explain to me the “hang up.”

  164. jkay says:

    i didnt like it. AT ALL. i have a enormous man-crush on Cliff Lee and would rather see him in Pinstripes than Halladay. but then with Pete’s explanation, seems like we made a very good move. whats the point if we can’t re-sign him.
    now we get a better pitcher who is right handed, ground ball type pitcher in CBP, long term deal, and basically an exhange of prospects. a shrewd move by Amaro, i’m impressed.
    they must have a lot of faith in both Hamels and Happ to do this.
    think I am beginnning to get over my depression and get excited again.
    thank goodness i didnt get the Lee jersey yet. dont suppose they’ll give refunds to the other guys who bought ‘em.
    this is why the Phils win a lot. cant be gun shy.

    ……err…now back to the Sixers (sigh!)

  165. Ed R. says:

    I appreciate that you consider one sharing their view as a complaint, by your logic, all you do on this site as it pertains to anything negative is therefore a complaint and not you providing your view on a particular person, event, team etc.

    Secondly I did not overlook anything. I submitted a reply to your math lesson but apparently it didn’t go through, not the first time that has happened, the internet does that from time to time. I also didn’t realize that post didn’t go through until you were kind enough to point it out to me. But as I spent a decent amount of time writing it up, I really didn’t want to take the time to do it a second time.
    Lastly, what I have been “complaining” about, or rather, stating was that my only issue was that I felt that we were giving up too many prospects to get this all done. That’s it. I never said I didn’t want Halladay, nor did I think the Phillies could trade to get him simply for a bag of bats. My issue is that in my opinion the team could have just as likely traded for Halladay back in July and worked out an extension then rather then going the route of getting Cliff Lee for half the year and then trading him away now. 

    I understand the Phillies need to trade now, I get that the Phillies can’t afford him and Halladay at the same time, I’m fine with it. The Phillies aren’t the Yankees nor will they ever be. I get that. All I am saying, all I ever said was that throughout this whole process and that includes the trade for Lee back at the deadline that I felt the Phillies gave up more prospects than they had too and I was worried about them having depleted, either margonaly or completely, their farm system.
    It seems to me like you are insistent on trying to show me that this deal is perfect and that I should welcome it with open arms, which I never said I wouldn’t do. People can have different view points, doesn’t make mine right and yours wrong, or vice versa.

  166. jkay says:

    i dont have the time to read what everyone’s been saying (163 plus comments) but if anyone is anguishing over giving up too much;

    if Halladay performs just up to 3/4 of what is advertised, then that alone will make this an absolute steal.

  167. bski says:

    Ed R.,

    I am also somewhat concerned about the Lee and Halladay deals depleteing the farm system——–more so about certain positions (catcher, for example) than over all——–but I still think this is a good deal for the Phils.

    I was in the process of putting together my own what-are-we-giving-up-and-what-are-we-getting post until I saw that both Chris McC and Dannie had already beaten me to it.

    I agree with Dannie.  The bottom line is that we are giving up 4 prospects for Halladay (+ Francisco).  What that means to me is that we’ve essentially traded Knapp, Carrasco, Marson, and Donald for Halladay.

    Any dropoff in quality from the 3 prospects we send to Toronto to the 3 we get from Seattle ends up being the price we paid for 1/2 a season of Lee.

    It will take years before we can make a final assessment of who got the best of this deal, what it truly cost us, and if it was all worth it————  chances are that,  since at least some of these prospects will be traded again in the future (not to mention possibly Lee or Halladay too), we will never really be able to————and we will probably drive ourselves crazy trying.

    As it stands, Ruben was able to land us a true ace for the next 4 years at a discounted rate (not a Santana or a Sabathia deal in either years or dollars required) without severley depleting the farm.  I think it’s worth it.

    (P.S.  Plus, in getting cash from Toronto, our payroll will only go up 750k beyond where it would have been this year had we done nothing and just kept Lee, which should mean that we still have room to address our bullpen needs.)

  168. Ed R. says:

    Thanks BSKI.
    I don’t disagree with you at all that essentially what the Phillies gave up for Halladay was really what they traded for Lee. At the end of the day the Phillies did what they had to do to improve their team now and for the future and I think they did that. 

    That doesn’t mean that I think our farm system is now going to have to rebuild to a degree as we clearly have a lot less tradeable assets that we once had.

  169. bski says:

    Here is another point of view (fron

    The trade has had moving parts all day long, but as we understand it currently, it looks something like this from the M’s perspective:

    Phillippe Aumont, Tyson Gillies, and a third player rumored to be J.C. Ramirez for Cliff Lee.

    There’s a bunch of other stuff going back and forth from the Blue Jays and Phillies, but this is the relevant portion of the trade to M’s fans. And, to that, I just have to say that this is so amazingly awesome, I’m still trying to figure out how on earth this is actually happening.

    Aumont is a good relief prospect. He could be in the majors this year, and he’s got all-star closer upside. Gillies is a potential high OBP center fielder with speed. Ramirez has the best arm in the system. They’re all prospects. And the whole lot of them aren’t worth three months of Cliff Lee, much less an entire season. Breaking it down numerically, since that’s what we do here.

    Lee projects as roughly a +5 win pitcher for 2010. Given the expected cost of wins on the market, that makes him worth about $20 to $25 million for the upcoming season. However, the dollar per win values for high end players are usually based on multi-year contracts, as players of this caliber trade a little bit of cash for long term security. Since the Mariners are assuming no long term risk, his value is probably more like $25 to $30 million.

    If the M’s can’t sign Lee to an extension, it’s almost a mortal lock that he’ll be a Type A free agent, which means that the team will get two draft picks if he leaves via free agency. The combined value of the two compensation picks is another $5 to $10 million, depending on what specific picks the M’s would receive.

    So, the asset that is Lee for 2010 plus potential draft picks is worth somewhere between $30 and $40 million. His 2010 salary? $8 million. He’s a $22 to $32 million net asset. That’s enormous – he’s one of the most valuable properties in baseball.

    The three prospects the M’s gave up? None of them are top notch, elite guys. They all have potential, but their risk-reward profiles do not put them in the top tier of minor leaguers. Based on the work of Victor Wang, we can quantify the present value of Aumont and Ramirez at about $5 million each and Gillies at about $3 million. That’s $13 million in total, or about half of what Lee is worth.

    This is, quite frankly, a heist. The Mariners are getting a Cy Young caliber pitcher for some decent-but-not-great prospects. They aren’t giving up Morrow. They aren’t giving up Saunders. They aren’t even giving up Triunfel. And yet, they walk away with one of the five or six best pitchers in baseball.

    Forget that we probably only have Lee for a year. We’re paying for about two months worth of his services and getting four months for free.

    Seriously, dance in the streets. Build a bust of Zduriencik and place it on your mantle. Name your first born son Jack and your daughter Jackie. When this becomes official, hug someone. This trade is that good.

  170. Tony says:

    If Mariners got a heist for Lee, Phillies should keep him and just eat the $9M for this year and get the 2 1st rd picks in 2010 when he walks.
    You can’t have a heist without one person stealing and the other person getting stolen from.
    Phils MUST DEMAND for than those 3 prospects for Lee!

  171. bski says:

    Of course the other side is the value we get from Halladay and what we gave to Toronto.  I don’t know what the present value of the 3 prospects we are sending to them is, but I do know that fangraphs pegged Halladay’s value at $33 mil last year.

    Even if we are indeed coming up short on the Lee to Seattle side, we should be coming out way ahead on the Halladay to Philly side of the deal.

  172. Ed R. says:

    Just read that the Jays are going to turn around and deal Michael Taylor to the A’s for Brett Wallace. Good for Taylor. I would much rather play for the A’s. They at least try and build a contending team.

  173. Tony says:


    It’s a heist for the M’s because the Phillies are not getting back enough for 1 year of a bargain Ace in Lee plus 2 1st rd picks after that.  Simple as that.
    Just because the Phils get Halladay shouldn’t detract from Lee’s value.  Why not wait longer and see if another team can outbid the M’s for Lee?  I’m sure the Angels feel desperate now.  We don’t have to deal Lee until at least Spring training if the Phils are dead-set on trading him.  Why do it now at a discount as it appears?

  174. Dannie says:

    Ed R. – I won’t go into how ones viewpoint can and often does include discontent (aka complaint – my word / issue – your word) with a topic whether it be blatant or subtle.

    Just do me a favor and quantify your “view”:  “I felt that we were giving up too many prospects to get this all done.”

    Too many meaning 4 (net after current proposed deal) vs. 3 (net if traded for Halladay straight up last season)?

    As BSKI points out an argument can be surely be made regarding the quality of outgoing prospects compared to incoming prospects.

    But again your “view” as articulated with the words you chose to use suggest quantity not quality.  And with respect to quantity I just don’t think there is much of an argument that can be made that says the Phillies are giving up “too many” prospects when the end result is a difference of 1.

    P.S. I at no point said you couldn’t have your own opinion, because I damn sure have my own.  But the comment section at it’s core is for civil debate and conversation between people interested in the topic with similar and varying opinions.  There’s been no name calling or personal attacks here.  Just me countering yours and others “view” with my own.

    If that’s not something you don’t like, sorry – that’s kind of the point of having comments enabled on a blog.

    P.P.Sthis site = my site” just for clarification.

  175. bski says:


    Definitely a valid point.  Since it turned out to be two separate two-team deals, rather than a 3-team deal, why did the Phils go through with the Lee to Seattle portion now?  They might have gotten a better haul for him from someone else.

    This view was also expressed in two separate articles on fangraphs.  See my next post.

  176. bski says:

    Since I’m on fangraphs, here is what they are saying about the deals.

    From Dave Cameron:

    So, let’s look at why each team made this deal.

    Let’s start with the Blue Jays. They were obviously over a barrel with Halladay after the debacle of trying to trade him this summer. New GM Alex Anthopolous knew he needed to move his ace for the best package he could get, but also come away with enough young talent to sell this as more than an admission that they screwed up in July. In the trio of young players they’re getting from the Phillies, they were able to do just that.

    Drabek, Taylor, and D’Arnaud are high quality prospects. For one year of Halladay (and $6 million in cash, which isn’t trivial but less useful to a Toronto team that won’t win in 2010), that’s a very strong return. Anthopolous did well to come away with that level of talent, given his leverage in the situation.

    On Philly’s end, the motivation for this move seems clear – get a #1 starter locked up beyond 2010. They didn’t feel that was possible with Lee, so they were willing to take a downgrade in the farm system to swap out an ace for one that they could lock up. The theory is pretty sound, I think, especially given the rumored 3 year, $60 million price tag that came with Halladay’s extension. That’s a bargain for a guy as good as Doc, and the extension provides significant value to the Phillies.

    Seattle’s aim is also pretty clear – win in 2010. Not content with adding Chone Figgins and making a few other small moves that would help them maintain their status as a .500ish club, the Mariners saw an opportunity to put themselves in the AL West race and took it. Lee is a huge upgrade for their pitching staff and a perfect fit for Safeco Field. The cost was fair to middling prospects, not premium guys who would help the team in 2010, and the Mariners saw this as a chance to add wins at a far below market price without sacrificing too much of their future.

    For all three franchises, the thought behind the deal is sound. There are legitimate reasons for fans of all three teams to be happy about this deal. However, I think Toroto and Seattle fans can feel comfortable that this was the best their team could have done. Philly fans, I don’t think you can feel that same way.

    The Cliff Lee to Seattle portion of this trade just seems very light in return for the Phillies. They’re getting two power arms with a lot of questions marks and a speedy center fielder without a lot of power. None of these guys are top tier prospects. This is the best Philadelphia could have gotten for Lee? Really? A pu-pu platter of interesting, high-risk guys not really close to the majors for a Cy Young quality pitcher who is already well on his way to Type A free agency?

    Halladay will help them, and the extension he signed is a great deal. But it just seems like they bent over backwards to make this particular deal, when there were so many other ways of going about it. It just seems to me that the Phillies could have had Halladay and Lee, and that reality would leave me pretty frustrated today if I was a Phillies fan.

    and a closer look at the 3 prospects we are getting from Seattle by Marc Hulet:

    To be honest, I’m not sure why this was a three-team deal. Toronto received nothing from Seattle. The Phillies organization could have done the deal and taken its the time to deal Lee for a better haul than what it got from Seattle. Perhaps the club wanted to soften the blow of trading off its post-season hero with the acquisition of Halladay? Or why not keep both Halladay and Lee and make a serious run at the World Series in 2010? That two-headed monster at the top of the rotation would have struck fear in any lineup.

    But it’s not my job to analyze the overall deal. I’m the prospects guy, so let’s get on to the fun stuff.

    Philadelphia Phillies’ Haul:
    You certainly cannot question Phillippe Aumont’s fastball. He has a high-90s fastball and good sink but his secondary stuff is raw and he prefers to just reach back and toss heat, which is the main reason why he was moved from the starting rotation to the bullpen at such a young age. An inexperienced Canadian prep pick, Aumont was pushed aggressively by Seattle after he dominated high-A ball in a very good hitter’s league. He allowed just 24 hits in 33.1 innings and posted a strikeout rate of 9.45 K/9. Moved up to double-A, Aumont’s control suffered as his walk rate jumped from 3.24 to 5.60 BB/9. Batters also managed 21 hits in 17.2 innings, and his BABIP jumped to .436 BABIP. His strikeout rate was an impressive 12.23 K/9. Like many Canadian hurlers, there have also been injury concerns with Aumont, and he missed significant time in ‘08 with elbow soreness.

    You’d think it was the Phillies club that played in Canada, not the Jays. Outfielder Tyson Gillies joins Aumont as the two Canadians on the move in the Halladay deal. The 21-year-old outfielder had a breakout season in ‘09 but some caution needs to be used with him. The left-handed hitter was playing in a very good hitter’s park and his overall line was .341/.430/.486. He hit .313 in ‘08 but that was aided by a BABIP of .403 (His BABIP was high in ‘09, as well, at .395). Gillies has a lot of speed and he stole 44 bases but was caught 19 times this past season, so he has some work to do on the base paths. On the positive side, he has solid plate rates for a speedster and he posted a walk rate of 10.8%, as well as a strikeout rate of 16.3%. Defensively, he’s considered a gifted fielder with an above-average arm.

    J.C. Ramirez has posted solid pro numbers but has yet to truly breakout. The right-hander spent ‘09 in high-A, while pitching in a good hitter’s park, and allowed 153 hits in 142.1 innings. His walk rate was respectable at 3.35 BB/9 and his strikeout rate was OK at 7.02, although it was down more than one strikeout per nine over his career mark. He was touched up for 18 homers (1.14 HR/9) but he held batters to a line-drive rate of just 12%. Ramirez has consistently struggled against left-handed batters in his career (.290 average, 4.32 BB/9 in ‘09), so he’s going to have to develop a weapon to combat them. His repertoire includes a fastball that sits in the low-90s but can hit the mid-to-upper 90s at times. Ramirez also has a solid slider and a developing change-up.

  177. Tony says:

    Thanks for that great post.
    If this Lee deal goes down as currently expected, it has a good chance of being remembered as one of the most lopsided trades over the last decade.
    I love Amaro’s aggressiveness but when you are selling, patience is a good trait to have.

  178. Ed R. says:

    It is impossible to say exactly what would have been needed to get the deal done with Halladay this past trade deadline. I know what we heard, the Phillies offered and what the Jays wanted, and at the time I felt that the Jays were being ridiculous.

    I agree with the view that the prospects the Mariners are giving us vs the prospects we are sending to Toronto is a complete wash. Actually, with that alone, I think the Phillies got more value from Seattle than what they just sent to Toronto. 

    But what I am saying is that I think if you look at all of these moves together as pieces of a pie, I think we gave up more than we had to when the end result was Roy Halladay. 

    Clearly this is just speculation on my part, I think if the Phillies had traded for Halladay last year, they would have had him for the stretch run and this year, and still probably worked out an extension and in the process given up less than what they have had to give up now in the two moves required to get this all done. 

    Obviously there is no real way to prove this, as I said, this is just my view point. It’s not a complaint. I am certainly more than happy to have Roy on the team and I think his contributions to this team and organization will go far beyond what we see from him on the diamond.
    Dannie I appreciate that this is your site and that you give people the opportunity to read what you and Pete write up and then comment on those write up’s. But I also think it is unfair to assume that someone is complaining simply by putting their view point out there. Just because someone’s view can be rooted in discontent doesn’t mean that it actually is.

  179. Pete says:

    Ed R.-

    I’ve read many reputable places that the Jays deal last summer would have been Drabek, Happ, Brown and Gose – and that they would not budge. Considering the hoops Amaro is going through now to get Halladay, my guess is that is the case.

    I do agree that there is probably a better way this could have been done, but I can’t complain with the result.

  180. Ed R. says:

    I also agree with the view that the Phillies seem to be jumping the gun with trading Lee and that they could hold out a little longer and possibly get better prospects. But then you also run the risk of the Mariners offer being taken off the table and then you could be left with taken less than what you had originally. I guess its a calculated risk for Amaro.

  181. Chris McC says:

    The bottom line is that we are giving up 4 prospects for Halladay (+ Francisco).  What that means to me is that we’ve essentially traded Knapp, Carrasco, Marson, and Donald for Halladay.

    Any dropoff in quality from the 3 prospects we send to Toronto to the 3 we get from Seattle ends up being the price we paid for 1/2 a season of Lee.”

    Bski, that’s an interesting way to look at it.
    After reading your post from I became a little more skeptical.  This is the only part of the deal that worries me, the quality of the prospects from Seattle.  That point about Cliff Lee being the most valuable property in baseball is valid.  His salary is waaay lower than his value and even if he walks after the season his old team gets two draft picks.  Draft picks can be a crapshoot but they’re still picks you didn’t have in the first place.
    I just wonder how hard Rueben is pushing Seattle, and how hard Seattle is leveraging the Halladay/salary point with Rueben.  If we make this Hallady deal than it seems to me that we NEED to move Lee (or Blanton, but really).  Seattle’s probably working us over on that.
    If they need to move Lee (and really, who doesn’t want Lee) why not open up a bidding war.  See what you can get out there, that’s assuming Rueben hasn’t already done that fairly quietly.

  182. Chris McC says:

    “The status of the other portions of a companion deal that would include the Seattle Mariners, however, is still uncertain at this point.”

    From ESPN, I hope this is because Rueben is trying to pry every last bit out of Seattle as he can.

  183. Tony says:

    That is exactly what I’d do.  The Phillies have a few months until Spring training to get as much as they can for Lee.  There is no need to rush this.

  184. Chris McC says:

    I mean, this works in theory.  You have to think, worst case scenario, you can find a team outside of the NL East, AL East or Dodgers to take Lee.  The Mariners are a great fit, we never play them, unlikely to make it all the way, we’d never have to face him.  But you can say the same about the White Sox, Tigers, Rays, A’s and Rangers.
    Again, maybe Rueben did his due diligence and this, in his opinion, is his only play.

  185. Chris McC says:

    And as a followup to my last post, you really only need one other offer.  And, not even a concrete offer at that, a rumor will bump his price up.  With all this back and forth going on over the last 24 hours it would take one tweet from Ken Rosenthal to send this Lee deal off into orbit.  It could get insane real fast.  It must be nice to be Ken Rosenthal.

  186. Tony says:

    I still think keeping Lee at $9M this year and 2 1sts is better than getting 3 ho-hum picks from Seattle or another AL club.
    Is taking -$9M in the brown for a single year that difficult for a big organization as the Phillies in light of the fact that they’d have a great chance at another WS title?
    That is the question.

  187. Chris McC says:

    I have to imagine that they have crunched the numbers on this and took into account their revenue from the last two years.  How much more money can the organization really make?  Back-to-Back World Series appearances.
    If they take on the extra $9 million for one season, do they think they can make $9 million more than they did last year to cover the cost?  What would suggest that’s possible?  I wish they could eat the cash and essentially buy a title for $9 million but I have to assume that they are moving Lee because they absolutely have to.  Let’s just hope they get “market value” for him.

  188. Pete says:

    Chris McC-

    Don’t read too much into the Mariners blog. Those fans have been dying for a move like this and would have given up anyone to do it.

  189. Chris McC says:

    Regardless of how Mariners fans feel, this has always been the aspect I was the most wary of.  I still think it’s a good deal, its just that I really hope those prospects work out (of course, as we all do).

  190. Tony says:

    $9M for something that is priceless and timeless…
    It’s a no-brainer.
    I’d rather win 1 more WS and suck for another decade than be runner-up the next several years.
    Also, I would assume that merchandise alone would make up the deficit and we haven’t even considered what another WS title does to the overall value of the organization.

    Just eat the $9M.

  191. adam says:

    This quote makes me sick:
    “Since the Phillies are trading Cliff Lee and his $9 million salary to the Mariners to help accomodate Roy Hallday’s salary, it is worth noting that the one thing standing in the way of one year of Halladay-Lee-Hamels might have been the two-year contract that Jamie Moyer signed last offseason that guarantees him $8 million this season.”

  192. Ed R. says:

    What number does Halladay wear since 32 is retired?

  193. bski says:

    Anybody wonder how much Gillick has to do with all of this?  I mean, it can’t be a coincidence that Seattle ended up being the 3rd team after the Phils couldn’t make it work straight up with the Jays, or that Lee is still going to Seattle even though this move now appears to be completely separate from the Halladay deal, or that during his career he was the GM of all 3 teams involved in these two deals, could it?

    It’s very possible that for either good (the Halladay side) or bad (the Lee side) these deals very possibly would not have ever been initiated, progressed, or completed without Gillick’s contacts and involvement along the way.

  194. Ed R. says:

    yeah that does make me want to vomit as well.

  195. Chris McC says:

    Is Jamie Moyer even playing this year?  I hadn’t even thought about that.  If that’s the case I’m going to throw up.

  196. Ed R. says:

    I think Jamie will be given a chance to be the 5th starter. Though I don’t know that he will be ready at the beginning of Spring Training due to his health problems. 

    Jamie will probably compete with Kendrick and maybe someone else for the 5th starters job.

  197. Pete says:

    Tony -

    Not an option.

    Fans need to stop pretending that sports franchises can just add on whatever they want cause their owners are billionaires. Franchises don’t function this way. None of them. Not even the Yankees (who are looking to CUT payroll this offseason, by the way).

    Fans say “but we have a billionaire owner.” So what is a respectable payroll? 250 million? 300 million? Why don’t any teams have these payrolls if they all have billionaire owners? No matter what happens, fans will always just “just eat the money” or “just dip into your own pockets.”  THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKS.

    The money they make from the team is put back into the team. You can criticize when they don’t put it all back into the team, as many franchises might do, but the Phillies are not one of them.

  198. Pete says:

    THREE years ago our payroll was $89 million. Now it’s $140+ million. That’s a $50 million increase in 3 years. And fans still complain.

  199. Pete says:

    Yeah, too bad it’s not set-up like football and we could just drop Moyer.

  200. Pete says:

    Comment #200!

  201. Chris McC says:

    From Lee’s agent on the rumor going around that the Phillies wouldn’t have had a shot to resign him.

    “All I can say is, Cliff really enjoyed Philadelphia,” Braunecker said. “Since the end of the postseason, his intent was to remain there beyond next season. That’s been the goal. Unfortunately, some circumstances transpired that we couldn’t control.”

  202. Pete says:

    Also, I’m VERY happy Taylor will go to Oakland, a franchise I love. He will be one of my favorite non-Philly players.

  203. Chris McC says:

    $8 million for a banged up senior citizen that might be our fifth starter takes away $9 million on one of the 5 best pitchers in baseball.  In the prime if his career.  Mulligan.

  204. Pete says:

    Chris McC-

    The circumstances were probably that he wanted CC’s contract

  205. Pete says:

    I hated the Moyer contract at the time, and I hate it more now.

    It’s $6.5 million, not $8 though

  206. Pete says:

    actually, sorry, it might be $8 after the “peformance” bonuses from ’09. Ouch.

  207. Ed R. says:

    Moyer’s contract in retrospect looks like one of the dumbest moves of all time. Talk about getting caught up in the moment.

  208. Chris McC says:

    I guess we can officially add Moyer’s contract to the list with Dalembert and Willie Green.

  209. bski says:

    Here is a reasonable take from Ken Rosenthal:

    Why don’t the Phillies just keep Cliff Lee?


    Follow the money. And the prospects.

    Yes, the Phillies are trading only their own players for Blue Jays right-hander Roy Halladay, proving they had the talent to land him without involving a third team.

    Yes, the Phillies could have had Halladay and Lee in the same glorious rotation, then tried to re-sign one or the other before both became free agents at the end of next season.

    But the Phils simply could not afford both at once.

    Not in money. Not in prospects.

    The Phillies will receive $6 million from the Jays in the pending three-team trade, then subtract $9 million by sending Lee to the Mariners. Their net of $15 million will nearly cover Halladay’s $15.75 million salary for 2010 — a near-wash.

    Perhaps a team coming off back-to-back World Series should be in better position to budget for both former Cy Young Award winners. But the Phillies’ owners stretched the payroll for ?09 by extending the contracts of several of their own stars, signing free-agent left fielder Raul Ibanez and adding Lee at the July 31 non-waiver deadline.

    There is a limit, particularly when the team still needs bullpen help.

    The Phillies traded four prospects for Lee. They will trade three for Halladay. Those seven players — if the names in our report are accurate — all ranked among their top 10 prospects a year ago, according to Baseball America. In fact, they were Nos. 2 through 7, plus No. 10.

    While the Phillies will keep their No. 1 prospect, outfielder Domonic Brown, their farm system would need years to recover if they lost that many young players without receiving any in return.

    That’s the other reason why the Phillies need to trade Lee to get Halladay -? they need the three prospects coming back from the Mariners.

    One, sources say, is right-hander Phillippe Aumont, the Mariners’ No. 3 prospect a year ago according to Baseball America. Another is outfielder Tyson Gillies, the No. 20 prospect. The third reportedly is right-hander Juan Ramirez, who was No. 5.

    All are quite familiar, however, to Phillies assistant general manager Benny Looper, who previously was the Mariners’ vice-president of player personnel.

    So, are the Phillies doing the right thing?

    We need to know all of the details, including the amount of Halladay’s extension, before passing initial judgment. But their motivation — to get an ace signed long-term — is clear. They obviously were not confident that they could lock up Lee.

    Their upgrade for next season — the exchange of Halladay for Lee — will be marginal at best. And the prospects they are getting for Lee probably are not as good as the ones they are trading for Halladay — right-hander Doug Drabek, outfielder Michael Taylor and catcher Travis D’Arnaud, according to sources.

    At least, they shouldn’t be.

    Remember, the Jays are sending the Phillies $6 million. The idea of including such a sum, from the Jays’ perspective, is to buy better players. The Phillies were not receiving any money last July when they refused to part with either Drabek or Brown for Halladay.

    In fact, for Halladay plus $6 million, the Jays’ return had better be good. Taylor would figure to step into their outfield almost immediately. Drabek projects as at least a No. 3 starter. D’Arnaud is not as highly regarded.

    From the Mariners’ perspective, the trade is more straight-forward -? three players for one year of Lee. That’s a deal that too many teams have grown reluctant to make; heaven forbid they trade their precious prospects.

    The M’s can recoup two high draft picks if they offer Lee salary arbitration and fail to retain him as a free agent. Or, they can sign both Lee and right-hander Felix Hernandez long-term to front a potentially dominant rotation.

    So, there you have it — a true blockbuster, one that will be debated for years, but at a first blurry glance appears to make sense for each club.

    It could not make sense without Cliff Lee.

  210. Chris McC says:

    Jerry Crasnick is now beginning to speculate on what the Blue Jays will do with Lyle Overbay since they “have” traded “their” outfielder Taylor to the A’s for Brett Wallace.
    Jesus, their are trade rumors about the trade rumors.

  211. Chris McC says:

    *there.  ugh, that was embarrassing.

  212. Pete says:

    Here’s why getting that $6 mill from TOR is important….

    “Once the deals for Halladay, Lee and Gload are final, the Phillies are expected to continue their pursuit for bullpen help. Their top two targets are believed to be right-handers Fernando Rodney and John Smoltz.”

  213. Ed R. says:

    Personally I’d rather they go after Capps. Smoltz has nothing left in the tank and Rodney is awful in non save situations, which is exactly what he would be brought here for.

  214. Bob says:

    Let’s not jump on the Phil’s for signing Moyer last year, Jamie was probably the second best starter on the team in ’08. and he was going to be a free agent.  I know that FLA was interestd in him, and I’m sure their were others.  The Phillies fans, if I remember, were about 80%-20% in favor of signing  jamie to another contract and the Phils were worried about the 4 & 5 slots in their rotation.  Jamie used the good year and the lack of quality pitching to parlay into that 2nd year, which was a smart move. 
    I still believe that jamie can bounce back and be a good #5 pitcher in our rotation, and get thru 5-6 quality innings (Chad Durban and the middle relievers must bounce back), but there are alot of worse options out there than Mr. Moyer.  Don’t forget all the pitching insights that the young staff gleened from Jamie (that “education” was and is well worth the extra $ the Phils anted up.

  215. Pete says:

    Ed R-

    Mike McDougal might not be a bad option either.

  216. bball says:

    Why couldn’t we have traded for Halladay, kept Lee and traded Blanton for Joe Schmo crappy minor leaguer.  Blanton is estimated to make 8 mil in arb. Lee makes 9.  Pretty much a wash.  Who cares if we get good value for Blanton if we get to keep the best rotation for 1 year.  We tender Lee next offseason take our 2 draft picks and replenish the farm that way.  In the end we’ll pay 1 mil more this season have a lack of AA and AAA minor league talent but will be deeper in single A  and hope for fast development.   Most importantly we have an all-time great offense matched with an all-time great starting pitching staff once Hamels rebounds.
    Am I missing something????

  217. bball says:

    BTW I like the deal we made but would have liked the above option better…

  218. Ed R. says:

    I agree Pete. I like Macdougal. He has a solid fastball, I have seen it top out around 98 but usually in the 95-96 mph range. He also has a pretty good slider, a decent curve and supposedly has a change up but I can’ t recall him using it much. I also can’t imagine him costing much.
    I guess at least we know now that Amaro will be focused on the bullpen for a little bit. Though the 5th starter is still a hole for me, though I have no problem giving it to Kendrick. It is after all the 5th starter. Not looking for a guy to win 15 games.

  219. Chris McC says:

    bball, I wouldn’t surprised if any trade scenario involving Blanton would have required the Phillies to pay part of his 2010 salary.  To simply dump his salary no strings attached we probably would have had to give him up for a pacing peanuts.  Plus, any GM worth his salt would see that it was a financial move to accommodate Halladay and hang us on it.

  220. Chris McC says:

    Although, trying to move Blanton to Seattle may have worked.  He probably would have been their number 2 starter had we gotten that done.  Maybe we give them Blanton for two prospects, rather than the three…
    I don’t know, I kind of just want this done already.

  221. Tony says:


    The problem with your argument is that in the 08 playoffs, Moyer was showing signs of falling apart.  He was terrible in every start and luckily we didn’t lose the WS game that he pitched in which the young Rays players fell for his garbage.

  222. Pete says:

    I was pretty adamant on this blog about not signing Moyer to more than a 1 year, incentive laden contract. Oh well.

    ESPN is reporting that the extension with Halladay is 3 years, $60 million, with a vesting option for a 4th year. That is so far below what he could get on the open market it’s ridiculous.

  223. Chris McC says:

    This is a ridiculous, four team trade that is going to end up landing us, arguably, the best pitcher in baseball for the exact number of years the Phillies like to sign pitchers.  The loss in terms of prospects may turn out to be a little disappointing, but the only pressing weaknesses are Ibanez’ age and Werth’s impending FA.  We’ve still got Francisco and Dom Brown to address those needs so I can look past that.
    Looks like Rueben locked up his ace for what he sees as the Phillies 5 year run at multiple titles.

  224. phillyfan says:

    What Ken Rosenthal fails to explain is why the Phils had to trade NOW with SEATTLE.  They still could have used Lee to replentish their farm system later in the winter after created a bidding war.  We still could have gotten $6 mill and Halladay from the Jays now.

  225. phillyfan says:

    Let us all remember.  We won a title with no true ace all season, until Hamels emerged in the playoffs.   I think there has been too much fixation on Halladay.  In my mind, we lost the Yanks because the offense underperformed.  Should have stuck with Lee for this year.  There was no downside.  We keep our prospects.  If for some reason we have a bad season (ton of injuries or something), then could have unloaded him at the trading deadline.  If he leaves, we get 2 first rounders.  Use extra money from losing Lee and Blanton to resign Werth and get a FA #3/4 starter after next year to add to Hamels, Happ and Drabek.

  226. phillyfan says:

    Chris McC:

    I think this site in particular clearly undervalues Jason Werth.  He is a five tool player with still more upside.  And on top of that – he is clutch and has an incredible eye at the plate.  I think he is the most complete offensive player on the entire team when you consider power, speed,  average and clutch (intangible).  He could bat anywhere from #2 to #6 in the lineup and you don’t lose a thing at any spot.  It will be a huge loss if he leaves.  Brown will not be ready to replace him in 2011.  Brown should be slated for replacing Ibanez in 2012.  And Francisco?  Come on.  That is why I like my post #225.  Phils should be manuevering to keep Werth, not leavering their future on one player that if he goes down the team is not able to compete for 3 years while being stuck fro 20mill per.

  227. John says:

    i think hamels will bounce back and halladay is hands down one of the best, but i do agree with phillyfan that we could have held on to lee and have a bidding war. i think we could of gotten more than what we got from seattle. i dont know that much about the guys we got but from what i read drabek is better than the 2 pitchers we recieved.
    “We won a title with no true ace all season, until Hamels emerged in the playoffs.” that is insane. i agree about what you said about werth and lee but your out of your mind to think that hamels only emerged in the playoffs.

  228. Mark says:

    Only reason I was a little shocked ANY prospects of our were going up north was because I thought the deal would truly be a 3 team deal where we give Lee to Mariners, they give prospects to Jays and Jays give is Halladay. Now the more I listen to you guys the more I like this deal. We would be getting from what I’ve heard and read a prospect of equal if not greater ability to that of Drabek, a very good pitching prospect and a good OF prospect. I only have a problem with the fact the phillies now have legitimate catching prospects.

  229. Pete says:


    One thing to consider.

    If we hang on to Lee, teams KNOW that we HAVE to trade him and that seriously hurts our bargaining power.

  230. phillyfan says:

    I mean Hamels was not a true established ace.  He definitely did not have season numbers like a carpenter, lincecum, santana,  He was seen as an emerging star but he wasn’t in the Cy young discussion that year or anything.  Fact remains, we had no true ace that season.

  231. tk76 says:

    Looking at $’s in 2011 I think losing Drabek might cost them.  If he projected to be their #3 or #4 I’m not sure how they replace him without having to go out and spend 8-10M?  Are their other candidates on the farm that really project to be solid starters in 2 years?  Savery?

  232. Chris McC says:

    Who’s undervaluing Werth.  I think Werth is a fantastic player.  But his FA is a fact, I was simply saying that we have Brown to put there if we lose Werth.  I’m not saying when the time comes we should just let Werth walk and move on, IF he walks we can go to Brown.
    And what’s wrong with Francisco?  You trying to tell me he isn’t starting in at least half the outfields in the majors?  Most teams don’t have three guys considerably better than Francisco, we’re lucky in the fact that we do.

  233. bski says:

    Meant to do this earlier but didn’t get the chance until now.  Here is a breakdown (pretty much every aspect) of the whole deal from It is very long, very detailed, and very good.  Definitely worth 15 minutes of your time, IMO.
    Also, here is a quick summation from another post on phuturephillies:
    After losing the prospects we lost, these are the 10 names I put down as our Top 10 of whats left
    Domonic Brown, Trevor May, Anthony Gose, Juan Ramirez, Tyson Gillies, Phillippe Aumont, Brody Colvin, Jarred Cosart, Jon Singleton. Arrange them any way you want.
    Now compare them to our Top 10 prospects, per Baseball America in their 2006 handbook, which was published before the 2006 season. So in essence, 4 seasons ago.
    Cole Hamels, Gio Gonzalez, Greg Golson, Michael Bourn, Scott Mathieson, Dan Haigwood, Welinson Baez, Mike Costanzo, Brad Harman, Jason Jaramillo
    Amaro traded away 7 prospects. And what we have left is still miles better than what we had four years ago without anything resembling the Cliff Lee or Roy Halladay deal in terms of a prospect exodus. I think when you look at it through this lens, and you remember that there are still at least 15 legitimate prospects in the system, it helps take some of the sting out of this. And our system is certainly not empty, we just lost a lot off the top.

  234. bski says:

    Pete and/or Dannie,
    Sorry to be a pain……AGAIN, but I’ve submitted a post (with only 1 link in it, btw) two or three times and it is not showing up here.  It must be caught in the spam filter again.

  235. Pete says:

    you are approved bski!

    Guys – anyone who wants to make a comment about how the Phillies can afford Lee and Halladay and are being cheap, please, just read this article about the business of baseball.

    It’s old, but still relevant :

    If you aren’t going to read it. The bottom line is only 60% of revenue goes to player salaries. The other 40% goes to other expenses.


  236. Pete says:

    Why is this so stressful? Everyone is freaking out.

    by the way – GREAT post by PhuturePhillies, Bski – good find!

  237. Mark says:

    Bski- Agreed, it was a very good find
    I am much more relaxed than I was. I am more excited to see how/if our lower level prospects will step it up 2011 and beyond. This farm system has been built around potential and it is still strong even after dealing 7 of our top 10 prospects, which is a very good sign for the Phillies as a whole

  238. brian says:

    From a Seattle Mariners blog:
    This trade is, to sum it up in one word, awesome. Not only are we significantly improving our chances of being serious contender in 2010, but we’re doing it without giving up all that much of the future. Yes, Aumont has really good stuff, but he’s a relief prospect, and there’s only so much value a relief prospect can have. JC Ramirez is a nice little pitching prospect, but he’s far from a sure thing, and I prefer Pineda anyway. As for Gillies – he’s really fast, which is cool, but there’s a pretty good chance he’ll never be much more than a fourth outfielder.

  239. Chris McC says:

    is that the blog that suggests you hug strangers and name your first born after the GM?

  240. Pete says:
  241. Mark says:

    We cannot keep Lee because of Moyers contract

  242. stu says:

    Mark, c’mon man.  Give it up already.  You can’t hang with the big boys on here.

  243. sfw says:
  244. tk76 says:

    Good stuff.  Keep all of the links coming.

  245. Ken Bland says:

    I get the impression that there are some people thinking the Phils could have gotten more for Cliff Lee than they did and there would have been a point to hanging on to him and trading him in the weeks ahead.

    How do you know they didn’t shop Lee around already? 
    <<The Yankees were interested in Lee, but the asking price from the Phillies was stud prospect Jesus Montero, Joba Chamberlain or Phil Hughes and several prospects.
    “That’s more than the Indians got from the Brewers for [CC] Sabathia and the Indians got from the Phillies for Lee,’’ a baseball official said of the Phillies’ asking price for Lee, who punched his ticket out of Philly when he turned down a contract extension. >>
    From George King at the NY Post.
    Also, on the subject of Jamie Moyer’s contract, let’s not forget that was signed off a 16 win, sub 4 ERA year.  13 mil for 2 years off those headline numbers is  dirt cheap in today’s market.  I get the age thing, but blaming Moyer for the choice not to keep Lee is reactionary.
    If you want to blame someone, blame Adam Eaton.  It’s the deals you make that aren’t productive that are the killers. 

  246. stu says:

    Thank you Ken, that was the point of my post #241.  Reactionary comments that are not thought out should be directed to or  We should be thrilled with what we got for Lee, considering it was more than what the Indians got for him last summer when he was arguably in higher demand.

    \dismounts high horse

  247. Pete says:
  248. Pete says:

    Also, I have a post done about my thoughts on this deal, but I’m waiting for the OFFICIAL word on the deal, to make sure all the prospects are correct.

    I’m also hesitant to steer people away from a post that’s going on 250 comments!

  249. adam says:

    Ken and Stu, I disagree with you about Moyer.  Yes, Moyer had a sub 4 ERA and 16 wins in 2008.  But he was also 45 and he was not good in the post-season and he wasn’t that great in 2007.  He throws slow and his whole game is based on location, i.e., accuracy.  He definitely deserved a contract for 2009.  But for someone of his age and his velocity, 2 years was not smart.  We all said this when he signed the contract.  It is not reactionary.  Why does Halladay have a vesting option in his extension?  We couldn’t have done the same thing with Moyer?  Considering Moyer reached incentives to up the contract to $8M, it is possible he would have earned that second year and this would all be moot.  But then arbitration probably would have been the smart move – this would guarantee one year.  Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but most of us didn’t like the two years then, and now it looks even worse.  Adam Eaton is already off the books, so that signing didn’t have any impact here.  The Phils have certainly wasted some money over the years (Jenkins, paying part of THome’s contract, Eaton) so it sucks to see them pay for those guys long after they are gone and then not have the money to have both Halladay and Lee in the rotation.
    Pete, can you link to your last post about the Phillies payroll situation.  Or at least wait until this trade is official and post an update.  I am curious as to where the Phils stand with the addition of Halladay’s $20M contract in 2011-2013.  Thanks.

  250. Pete says:


    The payroll analysis and organizational depth chart is now it’s own page on the right side bar. It’s updated to reflect Halladay (and Ross Gload!)

    Here’s a link to it:

  251. Ken Bland says:


    I wasn’t endorsing Moyer’s 2 year deal.  I just think its off the wall trying to tie an inability, or choice,  to exit Lee because Moyer is getting some 6 mil this year, and dollar wise signed a fair contract. 

    Again, the errors like Adam Eaton are the ones that kill you, but you give it your best shot, and move on.  Even if the money is off the books, it still effects the financial state, and future endeavors.

    Personally, I was shocked when Moyer got a 2 year deal.  I was never a huge fan of his, and wished the Phils would stop throwing half a loaf at fair results, and throw the money at a bona fide ace.  Perhaps they might actually do that someday. :)   But the fact of the matter is, it ain’t Moyer’s fault that Cliff is outtahere, and I can’t speak to why they went 2 years, but there are one helluva lot of deals I can’t explain.

    Since we’re not going to break the all time post record whhen this deal is official, I’ll keep it here.

    I read the analysis of the prospects from Pete’s link.  This Aumont character looks interesting.  Broke his hand with a tantrum following a blown save.  That’s pretty cool.  Youth is what it is, but you can’t teach that sort of passion. 

  252. adam says:

    Thanks Pete!

  253. adam says:

    Ken,  I get what you are saying now.  Makes sense.  The bigger issue in tying losing Lee to Moyer is the prospects.  I don’t think the Phillies wanted to decimate their minor leagues in such a short time frame.  Since the Phils are on a budget I think its fair to tie MOyer’s $8M to Lee’s $9M.  But the Phils may not have wanted to keep both and have a minor league system devoid of top prospects.  Yes the Phils could get two draft picks when Lee left, but those picks would be far away from helping the big club.
    After reviewing the 2011 payroll, I am now officially worried about that team.  The payroll is almost $140M already and there are a ton of holes and it is certainly not clear we have the players in the minors ready to step up and fill those holes, particularly our pitching situation.  Dominic Brown better be ready to fill in for Werth.  And maybe we can get some pitching for Werth rather than losing him for draft picks.

  254. Pete says:

    Olney on Halladay:


    It’s hard to imagine any superstar player who would have fit more perfectly into the Phillies clubhouse than Halladay will, between his work ethic and his demeanor and the way that he will go about his business. He is the Chase Utley of pitchers, and for at least the next three to four years, the Phillies’ clubhouse culture will be all about winning baseball games — and that is certainly not the case for some teams.

  255. Ken Bland says:

    Here’s Omar Mininaya’s assessment of the Hallday deal, courteousy th Toronto Globe and Mail.

    “Roy Halladay is one of the better pitchers in baseball,” Mets general manager Omar Minaya said. “I wish Alex would have traded him to the American League.”

    Doesn’t it remind you of the other NY team’s public relations policy?
    Never give an opponent too much credit.  Roy is one of the “better” pitchers in baseball?  Too funny.  

  256. Chris McC says:

    Keith Law’s take on the deal from The Phillies perspective:

    “The Philadelphia Phillies: They swap one ace for a very slightly better ace in Roy Halladay, whose value over Lee may be as much in his stronger track record as in pitching ability. The price they pay for this small improvement is a major dent in their farm system, trading a superior package of prospects to Toronto for the three players they landed from Seattle in the exchange for Lee. I’m not sure why the Phillies — who were the favorites to win the NL East in 2010 before this move — were motivated to make the trade; yes, they can sign Halladay to an extension and couldn’t sign Lee, but that’s independent of the deals used to obtain one pitcher and trade the other. They might be half a win better in 2010, a whole win at most, but deleted a lot of value from what was a solid farm system before they made the moves”

    Personally, I think he’s underestimating the value of the long term deal but, when it comes to baseball, there is little logic I trust more so than KL’s.

  257. Pete says:

    Chris McC-

    Keith Law has NEVER liked a move the Phillies have made, except maybe the Lee deal. He hated the Ibanez signing. He hated the Polanco signing. He hated the Blanton trade.

    He is too wrapped up in prospects and theoreticals. He completely disregards the fact that we signed Halladay to an extension as important. To call us “losers” in a deal where we got a top-3 pitcher in baseball for the next 4-5 years is absurd.

    Also – in the Mariners paragraph, he praises their prospects and says “So, it’s a large price to pay for one year of Lee because they’re giving up so many years of control of three almost-certain big leaguers” but yet he disses what we got in our summary.

    Furthermore, he wrote a gushing article on J.C. Ramirez in March of this,  calling him a #2 starter – or, exactly what he thinks Drabek is. No mention of that here.

    I respect Law’s opinions on prospects, because he is very picky, but he almost never cares about the here and now. He completely disagrees with the way the Phillies value players, and is one of the people who has picked against us in every playoff series the last 2 years.

  258. Chris McC says:

    Another interesting thought form Stark:
    “Nine years ago, Curt Schilling couldn’t wait to force his way out of this town. Now Philadelphia is a place where a Cy Young winner seems to burst through the door every 15 minutes. This makes three of them GM Ruben Amaro Jr. has acquired just in the last five months (Lee, Halladay and Pedro Martinez). Who’d have thunk it?”

  259. stu says:

    It simply cannot be overstated (and I think this will be Pete’s point in the next article) how important it is to have Roy locked up for 4 more years (possibly 5) for a total of $69 million.  Lee is going to cash in at $25 – $30 million per year and no guarantee that is coming from Philly.

    Now that Roy is on the payroll, locked up for a fixed number, Ruben has bought an extra year of time to crunch the numbers and mold this team with a better foreshadow of budget since he will not be in a bidding war in 2010.  While the Yankees, Sox, Angels, Mariners, Dodgers, etc, etc, etc will be focused on signing an ace, we can quietly go about our business elsewhere and dictate the rest of the market where we see fit.

    Its all about staying ahead of the market instead of chasing it.  Ruben knows how important it was to lock up an ACE (be it Lee or Roy) before this season started, now all of the usual suspects will continue to chase the market.  That is my take on the situation, and the fact that he did it with Roy at a MAJOR discount cannot be overlooked.  Roy Halladay, if he had another 17-10 season with the Jays this year, was looking at $33 per year in FA for 5-6 years.  We have saved ourselves $50 million.

    Seriously, whoever has an issue with this (Keith Law), you can suck it and should be embarrassed that you get paid to analyze baseball.

    Its all about the Benjamins.

  260. Pete says:

    Don’t the Mets realize they need a starter? What are they messing with Jason Bay for? More power to them…

  261. Ken Bland says:

    Maybe he’s overrating the value of the prospects as well.  What’s up with calling the 3 departees superstar prospects?  What is a superstar prospect?  It’s somebody who might be real good someday, and if Kyle Drabek winds up having 3 years at the ML level as good as Doc Halladay’s next 3 years, more power to him, but you know who’s more likely to do that of the 2, even 15 years out for Drabek.

    I assume Michael Taylor will be a real good ML at some point.  He’s such a superstar prospect that he spent 22 minutes in Canada.

    All this prospect talk reminds me of former Phil Ted Savage.  Terrific tools, came up with Don Money just before the Bowa-Schmidt–Bull-Boone run.  Good a prospect as he was, maybe a superstar prospect, Savage got crushed by major league pitching. 

  262. Chris McC says:

    Yeah, I hear that.  And I disagreed with his value of the extension.  I do like his insight into the game though.  I like the way he thinks about prospects, he’s thoughtful and – like you said – picky.
    I could honestly care less about who picks who in big games/series though, its all arbitrary anyway.  That doesn’t keep me from doing it though!

  263. Ken Bland says:
  264. Pete says:

    good god, just make it end already…

  265. stu says:

    Halladay and Lee passed (they stuided), it’s a minor leaguer who failed his physical. – the next tweet

  266. adam says:

    What does that twitter link say?  Twitter is blocked at work for me.
    Does anyone else think we aren’t getting enough for Lee?  I have not heard great things about the Seattle prospects.  Both pitchers sound like major league relievers.  Yet articles also call them Seattle’s top two pitchers.  Then I hear that Seattle is holding onto it’s top prospects, which includes pitcher Morrow.
    Also, am I the only one who like Taylor more than Brown?

  267. Ken Bland says:

    Frm Chris…

    “Nine years ago, Curt Schilling couldn’t wait to force his way out of this town. Now Philadelphia is a place where a Cy Young winner seems to burst through the door every 15 minutes. This makes three of them GM Ruben Amaro Jr. has acquired just in the last five months (Lee, Halladay and Pedro Martinez). Who’d have thunk it?”

    The world is filled with who’d have thunk it itonies, and in sports, its oft exemplified by losers becoming winners.  As ironic as that is, I’d say the ultimate who’d have thunk it for the Phils would be the liklihood that 81 games will sell out this year.  At Connie Mack Stadium, you’d walk to the ticket window and you could buy an entire section. 

  268. Ken Bland says:

    The latest bit of news kicking off today’s post: Bob Elliott of the Toronto Sun tweets that he heard someone involved in the trade flunked their physical (one of the minor leaguers). There appears to be seven prospects involved in the deal, if you include the Michael Taylor-Brett Wallace component. Drabek had Tommy John surgery in July of ’07, while Aumont had elbow issues toward the end of the ’08 season.

  269. Ken Bland says:

    Post 268 answers your question about Twitter, Adam

  270. Ken Bland says:

    A further look at Bob Elliott’s tweets reveals this

    Tyson Gillies “key player in the deal.”

    I have no idea who the quote marks around it are attributed to. 

  271. Chris McC says:

    I swear to god, if Brett Wallace ends up screwing this deal up I’m going to strangle somebody.

  272. Ken Bland says:

    I swear to god, if Brett Wallace ends up screwing this deal up I’m going to strangle somebody.>>

    I dunno, I think it’d be kinda cool to see Michael Taylor go from Reading to Toronto to Oakland to ______.  In 2 days, no less.

  273. Chris McC says:

    KB, re: mystery quotes.
    At this point, when you’ve got three number one’s and two Cy Young’s, isn’t everyone a key player in the deal?

  274. Chris McC says:

    Gee, how’d you like to be the guy that threatens the biggest trade in baseball history because you tripped over your nephew’s Tonka truck last over Thanksgiving?

  275. Pete says:

    how has there been 0 updates on this deal today? It’s 1:30! shouldn’t we be having the presser by now.

    I wonder what happens if it is one of Mariners prospects who is hurt…

  276. Tony says:

    I am hoping it IS a Mariners prospect so that the Phillies have another shot at doing the Cliff Lee deal right.
    Horrendous, horrendous, horrendous deal for Lee!

  277. Chris McC says:

    I was thinking the same thing.  When exactly does that 72-hour window, set by the commish, close?  He set that on Sunday and its now Wednesday.

  278. Pete says:

    I think the 72-hour window was for the Halladay extension? maybe the whole deal, I don’t know.

  279. bski says:

    I was wondering the same thing, Pete.  I’ve been checking everywhere.  I did find this from David Murphy (12:34PM)———— I don’t expect the press conference to be held until later this afternoon or early this evening, since Ruben Amaro Jr. and several other key figures are participating in a charity event at Noon————which might explain why everything is still under wraps.

  280. Tony says:

    I can’t be the only one that doesn’t feel bad if those whole thing doesn’t go through?

  281. Ken Bland says:

    maybe its Drabek……

    <<Someone part of the Roy Halladay deal has failed a physical, and sources are speculating that it is Kyle Drabek.  This could send this trade into a tailspin, and who knows what would happen from there.  Maybe it becomes a 3-way trade with Morrow going to the Jays?  Maybe Happ and another prospect goes to Toronto?  Or possibly Domonic Brown replaces Drabek in the deal.  If Brown came, the Jays would be extremely happy.  Although a pitching prospect would be nice as well.


  282. Pete says:

    Tony -

    If this thing doesn’t go through, what do you think happens with Lee and Halladay in 2010 free agency?

  283. Chris McC says:

    “maybe it’s Drabek…”
    Oh sweet jesus, that would get ugly real fast.

  284. Ken Bland says:

    12:38pm: Davidi passes along an AP report that has Phils GM Ruben Amaro Jr. saying he’s hopeful the trade can be completed today but talks may go into Thursday.

  285. Tony says:


    Halladay WANTS TO BE A PHILLIE.  He was willing to take a shortened under market contract extension.  I think it’s speculation to say he WON’T sign with the Phillies next summer as much I think he still will be.

  286. Ken Bland says:


    I don’t know exactly what’s true, what isn’t.  I suspect somebody failed a physical.  Just passing the info along.

  287. Pete says:


    OK – so you think that when the Yankees offer Halladay a 6 year, $150 million deal, he’s going to take our 3 year, $60 million deal?

  288. Ken Bland says:

     Larry Stone of the Seattle Times doesn’t expect the deal to unravel, and is hearing it’s not a Mariners prospect who failed a physical.

  289. Ken Bland says:

    OK – so you think that when the Yankees offer Halladay a 6 year, $150 million deal, he’s going to take our 3 year, $60 million deal?>>

    That’s either polygamy, cheating on your wife, or immitating Tiger Woods.  Take your pick.

  290. Pete says:


    im confused…

    also – excellent work digging up stuff…

  291. Tony says:

    Don’t you think Halladay is aware of that possibility RIGHT NOW.  He’s not stupid.  He signed 3 yrs for $60M knowing the Yankees/Red Sox might offer him $150M next summer.

  292. Pete says:


    It’s different when the money is actually sitting in front of you. Just ask CC Sabathia.

  293. Ken Bland says:


    You mean confused about all the rumors, or something specific?

    Its all nothing more than rumors right now, sure we’ll know facts within a couple hours.

  294. Pete says:


    No, I was confused about what my comment on the Yankees offering Halladay a huge deal had to do with Polygamy

  295. Ken Bland says:

    oh, Halladay is a Phillie.  He can’t play for the Yanks.  He’s a 2 headed monster with Cole, not a 2 timer.

  296. Chris McC says:

    Ok, so RAJ says talks may extend into Thursday.  Is he just posturing to stay ahead of the media or are they still talking about something?  If so, what?  Is this the Halladay deal or the Lee deal?
    Sure, it’s probably just bullshit, but what the hell is taking so long?

  297. Pete says:


    A source with direct knowledge of the situation tells the Inquirer that an official announcement of this trade could still come today.  There were other indications that there has been no deal-breaking issue.

    Larry Stone of the Seattle Times has tweeted that is is not a Mariners prospect.  If he is correct, that would make it a Phils prospect by default. You all know the potential questions about each player, and I’m not going to engage in premature speculation until I know more.

  298. Pete says:

    Did everyone know that after Hamels’ 3-year contract runs out, he still has 1 arbitration year with the Phillies? Meaning he’s under our control in 2012 as well?

    I knew the math didn’t add up when he signed the 3-year deal – but I assumed I just had something wrong.

  299. Tony says:

    If it’s Drabek or Taylor, how can it not be an impediment?

  300. Pete says:

    it could Drabek, but it’s something small, and they still want him.

  301. Bob says:

    Jason Stark has a new article on ESPN on how Baseball America now rates the phils farm system after the trade.:

  302. Bob says:

    they were rated 4th best in baseball before the trade.

  303. Ken Bland says:

    In case nobody else posted this yet.

    1:31pm: Jeff Blair of the Globe and Mail heard that the report of a failed physical is a “totally false rumour.”  ESPN’s Shannon Drayer tweets that the deal is official and Lee is a Mariner.’s Todd Zolecki agrees, saying a Halladay press conference is set for 4pm CST.

  304. bski says:

    From mlbtraderumors:
    1:31pm: Jeff Blair of the Globe and Mail heard that the report of a failed physical is a “totally false rumour.”  ESPN’s Shannon Drayer tweets that the deal is official and Lee is a Mariner.’s Todd Zolecki agrees, saying a Halladay press conference is set for 4pm CST.

  305. bski says:

    Wanted to read that Stark article Bob. Not an Insider, though.  What does it say about our farm system now?

  306. Chris McC says:

    It basically knocks us down a few pegs.  Still considered a top 10 system.

  307. Ken Bland says:

    1:48pm: The Mariners announced the trade in a press release, with GM Jack Zdruriencik congratulating the Phillies and Blue Jays on the way the deal was handled.

  308. Ken Bland says:

    Wanted to read that Stark article Bob. Not an Insider, though.  What does it say about our farm system now?>>

    Yeah, whats up with Bob not copying and pasting?  Must be spam from the world wide leader to get us to join.

  309. bski says:

    Thanks, Chris.

  310. Tony says:

    We lost 7 of our 10 prospects and gained 3 OK prospects from the M’s and are still in the top 10.  Wow.

  311. Bob says:

    New state of the Phillies’ farm system
    Wednesday, December 16, 2009 | Print Entry

    When the fine print settles from one of the biggest trades in the history of pitching-kind, I know exactly what people will be asking for at least the next 88 years:
    Were the Phillies really thinking sanely when they traded away Cliff Lee? Or had they just squirted too much Cheese Whiz on their cheesesteaks?
    Well, I’ve heard the logic explained to me: They can’t afford a $160-million payroll. And they had to replenish their system.
    OK, let’s get this part out of the way fast: The first point is a myth. They could have unloaded Joe Blanton — who’s headed for $7-8 million in arbitration — and barely affected their payroll. So it wasn’t about the money.
    This was about keeping their farm system stocked in the wake of deals for Lee and Halladay that cost them seven of their top 10 prospects — and six of their top SEVEN heading into last season — according to Baseball America.
    So was that mission really accomplished — by essentially swapping Kyle Drabek, Michael Taylor and Travis d’Arnaud for Phillippe Aumont, Tyson Gillies and J.C. Ramirez?
    I decided to ask North America’s foremost authority on topics like that, all-knowing Baseball America co-editor-in-chief John Manuel. That would be the same John Manuel who just ranked the Phillies’ system as the fourth-best in baseball a mere two weeks ago.
    Let’s take this one item at a time:
    Would the Phillies still be ranked as the No. 4 system in baseball?
    “I would say they are no longer No. 4,” Manuel said. “A big, big reason they were [No.] 4 was having a trio of close-to-the-majors guys in Taylor, Drabek and [Domonic] Brown who could be impact guys. They just lost two, and the one with the highest upside [Brown] is the least ready, especially defensively. Now their system still has talent, and I like the Mariners additions such as Aumont (No. 4 in the M’s list), Gillies (No. 8) and Ramirez (No. 18). But none of those guys is Drabek. At the upper levels, Philadelphia doesn’t have a guy who projects to be more than a fourth or fifth starter anymore, and many scouts think Mike Stutes, Vance Worley, Antonio Bastardo — all their top Double-A-and-up pitchers — are best suited as relievers on a championship team. And that’s clearly what Philly aspires to be and has been the last three seasons.”
    What would the Phillies’ top-10 prospect list look like?
    Just a couple of weeks ago, Baseball America ranked the Phillies’ top 10 this way: 1) Brown, 2) Drabek, 3) Taylor, 4) d’Arnaud, 5) RHP Trevor May, 6) OF Anthony Gose, 7) C Sebastian Valle, 8) RHP Jarred Cosart, 9) LHP Antonio Bastardo, 10) OF Domingo Santana.
    So they’ve now subtracted three of the top four. And Manuel said he wouldn’t place any of the Seattle imports that high. Which tells us something.
    “If I had to re-do my top 10, Brown would obviously be 1,” Manuel said. “But with 2-3-4 gone, I might skip Anthony Gose up to [No.] 2, have Trevor May 3, Valle 4. Cosart is now 5, followed by Aumont at 6. Now that’s probably lower than [fellow Baseball America prospect guru)] Jim Callis would have Aumont, but I really like Cosart, Valle and May. Valle was having a big winter in Mexico as one of the youngest players there, showing a lot of power. I suppose Aumont really could go anywhere from 3-to-6, but I feel pretty firm on Gose at 2. The people I have talked to since doing the Phils’ top 10 all thought I had Gose too low.”
    The rest of Manuel’s top 10: Bastardo 7th, Gillies at No. 8, Santana 9th and a healthy debate about who’s 10th — tools-laden outfielder Jiwan James or radar-gun hero Scott Mathieson, who is just making it back from his second Tommy John surgery.
    So how much damage have the Phillies done to their system with this trade?
    The most replaceable guys in this deal, by all accounts, were Taylor and d’Arnaud. And Manuel agreed. In Taylor’s case, “they have Brown, plus a plethora of A-ball outfielders led by Gose,” he said. “So they can spare Taylor.” And with the emergence of the onrushing 19-year-old Valle, along with Carlos Ruiz‘s step-up to be a top-tier catcher, “they could spare d’Arnaud,” Manuel said.
    But Drabek? “Well, that’s the tough one,” Manuel went on. “I really was on his bandwagon because of the athleticism and increased maturity. Trevor May and Jarred Cosart are now their top starting-pitching prospects. [But] May hasn’t pitched above A-ball, and Cosart hasn’t gotten out of rookie ball. Compare that to last year, when their top pitching prospects were [Carlos] Carrasco (who had double-A experience), Drabek (strong Hawaii Winter showing and first-round/big-league-bloodlines pedigree), Happ (who had MLB experience at the time) and Knapp (biggest arm in the system).
    “Three of those guys are gone, obviously,” Manuel said. “So they have lost some true impact arms, and Ramirez and Aumont don’t make up for it. I haven’t spoken to the Phils, but I wonder if they’ll try Aumont in the rotation again. Ramirez is hard to evaluate because of (his hitter’s-paradise ’09 home park in) High Desert. … But it sounds like most scouts see him eventually as a reliever, not as a starter.”
    So with Drabek outahere, what starter in their system would be the first call-up in 2010?
    If the Phillies left one major hole in their Farm Land with this trade, it would be this: Kyle Drabek was going to pitch in the big leagues next year. He was ticketed for a May-June-July ETA if somebody got hurt or Jamie Moyer discovered he really was 47.
    But now, with Drabek gone, a huge question is who assumes that vital Next Call-up role. Kyle Kendrick? Drew Carpenter? Stutes? None projects to be a top-of-the-rotation or even middle-rotation force. Or Bastardo? Right now, he’d be their top lefthanded reliever entering the season.
    “Stutes has a chance,” Manuel said, “because he has a plus slider, but he doesn’t really have a weapon for LH hitters, doesn’t change speeds effectively enough. Other options include Yohan Flande, whose breaking ball is short but who has had some Double-A success, and don’t forget Joe Savery.
    “I think Savery’s an option for them if he can become — I can’t believe I’m saying this — J.A. Happ Lite. That’s the template he has to follow. He does pitch downhill, but he doesn’t have Happ’s command. I have long been a Savery fan. Loved him in college. Excellent competitor. But his arm just isn’t the same as it once was. I think Bastardo is the most likely guy, despite the opening in the ‘pen for him and the need. Sergio Escalona might have to come through in the ‘pen to free him up for that role.”
    Last question: Are the Phillies still a top-five system? And if not, howmuch have they dropped
    “They’re top 10,” Manuel said, “because they have athletes that other organizations lack. I might be more bullish on them than others, but their athleticism stands out among the orgs that I do (Twins, Phillies, Yankees) and among the ones that I’ve looked at so far.”
    So to sum this up, even after this trade, this is still an organization with a ton of high-end prospects. But the Phillies clearly are not the same organization after this trade that they were before it, Roy Halladay or no Roy Halladay.
    You just have to wonder if one of these mornings, their GM, Ruben Amaro Jr., is going to wake up and scream: “I did WHAT? I traded Cliff Lee? Oh nooooo.”

  312. Chris McC says:

    Completely unrelated, but I was reading up on Gload a little and caught a video of  a walk off he hit in Florida last year.  Someone in the stands actually had a “Ross Gload Rocks” sign.  I just found that to be rather funny.  Kind of like Joe Beimel bobble head night.

  313. Bob says:

    Tried to send the whole article and not gettig thru.  Aument rated #6 and Gilles #8.

  314. Ken Bland says:

    More breaking news yous can use….

    My desktop wallpaper has changed.  It was Charlie and Dallas hugging at the mound.  Prior to that, an old black and white of Harry and Whitey.  Now, as of minutes ago, the shot from, with new Phil Roy “Doc” Halladay and a Sal Maglie stare right in front of the lens.

    I have no doubt we will see a late afternoon presser just in time to allow local TV news a chance to provide instant coverage.

    Done deal, baby.  Lets go DOC!

  315. bski says:

    I posted a quick, trade-adjusted assessment of the Phils’ farm system from last night (post #233)  Don’t know if you saw it, so here it is:
    Amaro traded away 7 prospects. And what we have left is still miles better than what we had four years ago without anything resembling the Cliff Lee or Roy Halladay deal in terms of a prospect exodus. I think when you look at it through this lens, and you remember that there are still at least 15 legitimate prospects in the system, it helps take some of the sting out of this. And our system is certainly not empty, we just lost a lot off the top.

  316. Pete says:

    Now that the deal is official – I have posted a new post on the trade…

    not sure we’ll get to 315 comments on it…

  317. jjg says:

    Ken Bland, re post #261:  Ted Savage was a rookie in ’62, long before Money’s debut.  I think you may be confusing Savage with Larry Hisle, who partnered with Money on Phillies’ timeline and high-touting (’68 Sept. peek; ’69 rookie year). 

    I saw Savage make a leaping catch in ’62 at Connie Mack Stadium’s ad-adorned left field wall (334 down line) on a Bob Aspromonte drive in one game of a twi-nighter; caught ball at top of well-timed leap, landed on his butt on gray warning track cinders to a long standing ovation.  Ted had a nice rookie year for Phils but fell off after that; ultimately, carved out a 9 yr. journeyman’s career. 

    Hisle, another outfield talent, showed early promise (20 & 56 rookie year; good speed & some power, solid baserunner) but sputtered with Phils (a lot of Ks); became a solid RBI man with Twins and Brewers (including 96, 115 & 119); had a fine overall 14 yr. career.  Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.