Nov
17

Drilling down on Roy Halladay

By

When it comes to pitchers on the block, the Yankees are always a likely destination simply because, for the last 15 years, landing pitchers has been the team’s modus operandi. They acquired David Cone in 1995, David Wells after the 1996 season and Roger Clemens prior to 1999 campaign. In the 2000s, the names — Javier Vazquez, Randy Johnson — kept coming but with less success, and just a year ago, the Yankees nabbed CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett out of the clutches of free agency.

So we arrive in the winter of 2009-2010 with Roy Halladay seemingly filling the role Johan Santana played in 2007-2008. Already, the Yankees have been rumored to be interested in Roy Halladay, and the new Blue Jays’ GM Alex Anthopoulos seems both willing to ship off Halladay and willing to send him to an AL East competitor.

The parallels to Santana are obvious. Halladay is one of the American League’s top five pitchers, and as he has aged, he’s become a smarter and better pitcher. Over the last two years, he’s 37-21 with a 2.78 ERA and 414 strike outs in 485 innings. He has thrown a whopping 18 complete games over the last two years. As a comparison, the Yankees’ entire pitching staffs have thrown just four complete games in that same span.

Similar to Santana, Halladay is playing out the last year of his contract, and the Blue Jays are unlikely to resign him after 2010. Furthermore, as the Twins were in 2007, the Blue Jays are living through their first off-season under a new General Manager. While Bill Smith inherited a healthy organization, Anthopoulos has his work cut out for him as he tries to compete with the big guns of the East while uncoupled Toronto from a few bad contracts.

So what, then, would a potential trade partner expect the Blue Jays to want, at least initially? For Anthopoulus, trading Halladay will be a defining moment of this off-season. He’ll be trading one of the best pitchers to throw in Toronto and big crowd favorite at a time when the team is hurting for attendance. He’ll need to recoup that investment while stocking up for the future. In that sense, I don’t see him settling for a package as weak as the one Minnesota received for Santana.

If I were a betting man, I’d guess that Anthopoulus would initially ask for Jesus Montero. At that point, Brian Cashman would hang up the phone. But the point remains: Toronto will need an impact, near-can’t miss prospect to give up Halladay right now. Since the Doc has but one year left on his contract, a team acquiring him may have to give up just one prospect, but it will be a costly one. Would Austin Jackson get the job done? Would the Yankees feel comfortable trading him? Does Toronto, as many others do, feel Jackson’s stock is low right now?

In writing about John Lackey last week, Joe mentioned how Halladay is a desired piece potentially available next winter. That, of course, is where the Yanks found themselves with Santana, but Johan never hit free agency. Brian Cashman will have to ask himself if he wants Halladay enough to pay in prospects and later in cash or if the team is willing to chance it and wait. Josh Beckett and Cliff Lee loom large in 2011 as well.

Right now, this is sheer speculation and the framework for a discussion on Halladay. The rumor mill is quiet in advance of the Winter Meetings, and teams are waiting to see how the market shakes down. When the Hot Stove warms up, Halladay will be front and center. Let’s see how the Yanks approach a big-name pitcher this time around.

Categories : Musings

154 Comments»

  1. chriskeo says:

    He’ll be trading one of the best pitchers to throw in Toronto and big crowd favorite at a team time when the team is hurting for attendance.

    Fixed

    • How many times do we have to ask people to email us corrections? Seriously. I didn’t read these comments until 90 minutes after you posted it, but I’ve had my email open all morning. This isn’t tough.

  2. Preemptively:

    NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, we’re NOT taking on Vernon Wells.

    Nobody is trading for Vernon Wells. Nobody. He is unmovable. Do NOT dream up a lowball offer where we eat Wells’s contract in order to decrease the prospect cost for Halladay. It’s not going to happen. Wells is an albatross. His contract is one of the three worst contracts in North American sports history. Cashman doesn’t want him, and he is right to not want him, and he is right to not take him on just to lower the prospect cost for Halladay, which, by the way, the Jays aren’t interested in doing anyway.

    Do not suggest the Wells/Halladay combo deal. Because it’s not going to happen. Your trade proposal will suck.

    That is all. Commence hurling things at one another.

  3. Reggie C. says:

    Here is an example of where acquiring a dominant SP would simply be cost-prohibitive in prospects and then in contract length. Halladay is worth whatever AAS he’ll get, but he’s already 32.

    I bet you that Epstein and Minaya and most GMs will balk at adding Halladay at the cost of prospects + years down the road.

    I’d rather pay a lefty Pettitte is nearing the end. Cliff Lee would make an awesome fit (but I wonder if he’s as good as he showed in the playoffs).

  4. Bob Stone says:

    The Yankees are not going after Halladay, with or without Wells to lower the prospect cost.

    Cash set the team’s philosophical precedent in the Santana trade market. Why pay in cash AND prospects when, with a little patience, you have options that require ONLY cash.

    The Yankees wait until 2011 for Lee.

    • All Praise Be To Mo says:

      I agree, be patient for a year, see what Joba and Phil can do with the training wheels taken off and if we need someone then we have our pick of (assuming they all get to fa) Halladay, Webb, Beckett, Lee. Even if 1-2 of them get resigned we still have our pick of an ace to slot in between CC and AJ.

      • Bo says:

        Why wont Philly sign Lee?

        • Bo says:
          November 17th, 2009 at 9:48 am

          Why wont Philly sign Lee?

          aaaaaaaaaand…

          Bo says:
          November 17th, 2009 at 8:58 am

          Well what if Holliday says I’d come here for 3 yrs and 10 mil a yr? what if Damon signs in SF and Bay in Bost?

          Would they be interested now???

          Let the market develop before you put out proclamations about players and where they will end up.
          http://riveraveblues.com/2009/.....ent-688870

          So, what you’re saying is:
          A) It’s dumb to assume that Holliday would NOT accept a below-market deal in advance of the actual 2009-2010 free agency winter; we should wait to see what actually happens
          B) It’s NOT dumb to assume that Cliff Lee will resign with Philadelphia, we don’t need to wait until the 2010-2011 offseason gets here to declare it fait accompli that the Phillies will convince Lee to forgo free agency and sign an extension (that would, by definition, be below market since he’d never actually get to the market and would have his leverage reduced).

          So, we should let the market develop before we make proclamations about where Holliday will end up this winter, but we don’t need to let the market develop for Lee next winter, we can go right ahead and make a proclamation right now about where he’ll end up two years from now.

          Is that right?

          • Bo says:

            You make it sound like Philadelphia isnt a win now team in the nations 4th largest market.

            And this pitcher just carried them to another WS appearance.

            WHY WOUDLNT THEY SIGN HIM?

            This isnt Milwaukee here, Eric.

            Lee is under Phil control isnt he? Holliday is a FA. A guy who craved to be a FA for yrs.

            • You make it sound like Philadelphia isnt a win now team in the nations 4th largest market.

              You made it sound in your previous post that Matt Holliday wasn’t the premier bat available in free agency.

              And this pitcher just carried them to another WS appearance.

              And that he might do something ridiculously stupid, like price himself as a 3 year/10M AAV player.

              WHY WOUDLNT THEY SIGN HIM?

              WHY WOULD HE DO THAT?

              This isnt Milwaukee here, Eric.

              And Matt Holliday isn’t Bobby Abreu here, Robert Grant.

              Lee is under Phil control isnt he? Holliday is a FA. A guy who craved to be a FA for yrs.

              Which means that your statement that we can expect that the Phillies would try to, and probably succeed in locking up Lee (which is an accurate statement) is bizarre when juxtaposed with your batshit insane statement that we shouldn’t rule out acquiring Matt Holliday because he might say “I’d come here for 3 yrs and 10 mil a yr?”

              MATT HOLLIDAY WOULD NEVER EVER COME HERE FOR 3 YEARS AND 10 MIL A YEAR, ROBERT GRANT. So it’s disingenuous for you to use your deductive reasoning to correctly assume that Philadelphia would lock up Lee on the heels of pissing all over everyone else’s deductive reasoning in correctly assuming that Matt Holliday would never price himself that low, and that we need to do the exact OPPOSITE of what you’re doing, which is “wait and see what happens”.

        • All Praise Be To Mo says:

          Hmmmm, Lee is friends with CC, even during the World Series he was over at CC’s house for dinner. He’s a FA to be and the Yanks are known to love him. Why not go to FA and see HOW much the Yanks are interested? What could it cost him? At worst the Yanks being involved gets at least another 20-30 million in his pocket from Philly.

      • CountryClub says:

        Maybe. There’s a legit chance that none of them hit the FA market.

    • I’m not so sure that’s right. I think the precedent Cashman set with the Santana deal was that they didn’t want to give up TOP prospects in a trade when there were likely to be other good options available through free agency. Namely he didn’t want to trade Phil Hughes when there was a very good chance of signing CC Sabathia a year later. I don’t necessarily think that would carry over to ALL potential trades.

  5. All Praise Be To Mo says:

    Only way I’d take Wells back would be as a side condition of the deal being straight up IPK for Halladay.

    • The Scout says:

      If you take back the nearly-worthless Wells, in effect you will end up paying Halladay $40 million/year, and that doesn’t even take into account the luxury tax. Not gonna happen.

  6. Bo says:

    Will a team really beat an offer of Joba/Jackson for Halladay plus sign him to a 6 yr deal?

    They can have him if they want him.

  7. Mac says:

    1 Year of Halladay in the Bronx? I would give up Joba as a center piece, then fill in with 1 of the following: Melancon or Aceves, and then 1 other lower level guy.

    If they can extend his contract 4 more years then I may consider some more. Such as Brackman and Betances.

  8. A.D. says:

    Toronto will need an impact, near-can’t miss prospect to give up Halladay right now.

    Well the Twins certainly didn’t get that, though the Jays can learn from the Twins mistakes.

  9. Will says:

    Lee and Beckett are simply not as good as Halladay, so the parallel isn’t exact. In the Santana scenario, not only could Cashman be more certain that Sabathia would wind up being a free agent, but he could also reasonably expect CC to be better than Santana. I don’t think you can expect Beckett and Lee to be better than Halladay, nor do I think it is a given that each with go free agent. Also, while Santana was definitely going to get a long-term deal, it is very possible that Halladay could be a one year rental, which would make him a free agent in 2010.

    The bottom line, of course, is whether Halladay is worth both a long-term deal and prospects. It really is a tough a call.

  10. MattG says:

    The Yankees will be in this only to drive up the price. The play is to invest in one year deals for 2010, and back-up the truck again in 2011. Halladay will be there then if they want him, as will Cliff Lee, Josh Beckett and maybe even Joe Mauer.

    • Bo says:

      The plan is to win another title.

      Adding Halladay would help that wouldnt it?

      • No, the plan is not to win another title.

        The plan is to win titles EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Trading for Halladay may in fact increase our chances of winning the 2010 title, and dramatically decrease our chances of winning titles in the years after that.

        • Riddering says:

          Haha, yes.

          It’s like bunting for one run when you need three to tie the game in the ninth inning. But on a bigger scale!

        • currambayankees says:

          Well put the game plan is to win a WS every year, which means you keep prospects that could be future super stars once you have your ACE in place and have pretty good pitchers in AJ and hopefully Andy. In the process you also let some of your young pitchers develop and see what they can become. btw, nothing wrong with trying to bring back Matsui and Damon on one year deals and like you said back the truck up again in 2010.

          • Bo says:

            Wouldnt a healthy Halladay help win titles the next 5 yrs??

            hes in his prime. This isnt a 41 yr old starter here.

            • You know who else would help us win titles in the next 5 years?

              24-25-26-27-28 year old Joba Chamberlain, entering his prime. Yes, Roy Halladay is one of the best 5 starters in baseball today. No, it would not shock anyone if Joba Chamberlain was as good or better than him in the next few years.

              Bonus: Joba will also still be good beyond that.

              • Bo says:

                You love assuming that Joba will be an elite pitcher.

                I’ll play along. What did you see this yr that in anyway shows that?

                Dont confuse the great reliever with the average starter who cant go over 5 innings.

                You should help figure out what happened to that fastball of Joba’s before you proclaim him a cant miss frontline starter.

  11. guy says:

    one big advantage to a halladay acquisition would be his effect on AJ. halladay seemed to help AJ ‘grow up’ in toronto, and it would be interesting to see him bring AJ along to the next level for the yanks.

  12. TLVP says:

    Personally I think Halladay want’s to test FA, next year the economy should be better and moe teams would be in the running. This could be a huge problem for Toronto because no one will want to pay up for a 1 year rental.

    I think the Yankees should hold back and see if Halladay is available next year or if Lee comes to the market.

    However if Pettitte isn’t coming back we’ll need another starter. Who? I know he’s likely to come back but what if?

  13. Just wait it out a year.

  14. Rose says:

    If Toronto asks for Montero, we hang up the phone.

    If the Yankees offer a package based around Austin Jackson, they hang up the phone.

    No deal gets done.

    Unless, Vernon Wells is unloaded with Halladay.

    In which I repeat. No deal gets done.

    Maybe they want some Kei Igawa? They’re notorious for having mediocre starters thrive for whatever reason…maybe they can turn him around.

  15. Will says:

    I think everyone agrees that the Yankees should not give up on Montero IF the Yankees scouts really believe he has the potential to be as good as so many external scouts seems to suggest.

    Aside from Montero, I don’t think anything should be considered off the table, but that doesn’t mean a trade is a no brainer for the Yankees.

  16. Rey22 says:

    If Jackson were to qualify as the can’t miss prospect, I’d ship him off in a hurry with a couple of other good young players (Excluding Montero, Hughes and Joba) for the chance to sign him. Of course, there’s no way A-Jax falls under that category.

    • But if he was considered a “can’t miss” guy, why would you want to ship him off? If Jackson was in the Montero category, I’d say keeping on to him would be better, considering the need for a CF in the next year or so is going to be semi-pressing for the Yankees (barring any crazy development in the Gardbrera sector). But, it’s all hypothetical ’cause Jackson’s definitely not can’t miss.

      • Agreed. It’s a Catch-22.

        If Jackson by himself was good enough to land Roy Halladay, we shouldn’t be trading him for Roy Halladay, because he’d have more value to us. If Jackson by himself is not good enough to land Roy Halladay, then we’d want to use him to land Halladay but he wouldn’t be enough.

      • Rey22 says:

        Agreed, which is why this deal won’t get done.

        …Unless Kenny Williams is hired as the Jays GM in the near future. In which case, Melky + IPK might actually be enough.

      • “But if he was considered a “can’t miss” guy, why would you want to ship him off? “

        Because the only impression that matters is Toronto’s. If he’s considered a can’t-miss guy by Toronto, you’d want to ship him off, because the Yankees aren’t going to change their internal evaluation of a player (assuming they don’t view him as a can’t-miss guy) and hold onto him at all costs just because Alex Anthopoulos thinks he’s a can’t-miss prospect.

        At least that’s what I thought Rey22 meant.

        • Rose says:

          Exactly. Boston’s chances of landing Adrian Gonzalez got worse when one of their boys took over as the San Diego GM. He know’s the ins and outs of their farm system so they can’t add deceiving or misleading junk into a package…his perception is on point with Boston’s own impression of their talent.

        • Tubby says:

          Right. You also have to consider what type of “can’t miss” player he will be. Is he a “can’t miss” 110-120 OPS+ guy? If he is, you ship him because you can replace that level of production fairly cheaply through FA. If he’s a “can’t miss” 140-160 Bernie Williams type of player, you keep him.

        • Rey22 says:

          Yeah, that’s what I was going for, commenting on Ben’s part of the article.

          “Would Austin Jackson get the job done? Would the Yankees feel comfortable trading him? Does Toronto, as many others do, feel Jackson’s stock is low right now?”

          If Toronto would go for it, which I don’t think is the case, I’d definitely send him off.

    • Bo says:

      makes no sense. if he is a cant miss prospect you would be crazy to ship him anywhere.

  17. Riddering says:

    As much I appreciate and covet Halladay’s skills, I don’t see him becoming a Yankee through trade. The Yankees have prospects that the Jays would like to have, no doubt, but Cashman can’t give them up for one year of an ace pitcher when he already has a sweet, sweet rotation.

    Like you said, next year’s free agents have two top-notch pitchers and then King Felix the year after that. Money > money + prospects.

  18. pete says:

    i’ve said it before, i’ll say it again. 2009-20010 offseason plans for yankees:
    1. Resign Pettitte
    2. Resign Damon
    3. Resign Matsui
    4. Sign Cameron
    5. Steaks, blowjobs, and pussytubing

    • Rose says:

      I like this plan. Although it’s not as easy as it sounds.

      Damon, Matsui, and Cameron will all want more than 1 year deals.

      And we shouldn’t sign Damon, Matsui, AND Cameron all on 2+ year deals.

      So the plan sounds nice…but is unlikely.

      • Rey22 says:

        Considering how the market has been lately for older players, I wouldn’t be too surprised to see Cashman pull it off. The only older player out of those 4 that I see that could realistically get more than 1 year is Damon.

        • Rose says:

          Johnny Damon has the star power but Cameron can still play the field and very well for that matter. Damon technically can still play…but he looks like an old wash woman out there. Damon’s the better hitter…although Cameron still has some pop in his bat…and we have yet to see if his numbers will inflate playing at YSIII also.

          I guess it could be a coin flip…but my bet would be all 3 are going to be looking to get multi-year deals…

          • I guess it could be a coin flip…but my bet would be all 3 are going to be looking to get multi-year deals…

            But:
            1. Resign Pettitte – Only wants to play for the Yankees. Leverage is thus limited. Will accept a one year deal in the 10-14M range.
            2. Resign Damon – Only wants to play for the Yankees. Leverage is thus limited. Will accept a one year deal in the 10-14M range.
            3. Resign Matsui – Only wants to play for the Yankees. Leverage is thus limited. Will accept a one year deal in the 10-14M range.
            4. Sign Cameron – Is 37. Has value, but due to advancing age, only realistically makes sense for contending teams (as he’s just a quality stopgap) on a one year deal. Yankees can outbid other contending teams (if so inclined) for said one year deal.

            All three internal vets have basically wedded themselves to the Yankees and would only realistically go elsewhere if we pushed them out. One year deals will probably be more palatable to them than two year deals elsewhere, and on the off chance that someone offers one of them a three year deal, a 1+1 deal from us would still be more desirable to them than said three year offers, particularly if we are willing to go to a higher AAV, which we likely would. Cameron, meanwhile, is not the offensive force that either Damon or Matsui is, and thus, since offense is slightly overvalued and defense slightly undervalued, he’s less likely to command a multi-year offer than the other two hitters are.

            • Bo says:

              Theres no chance they sign Cameron when they have Gardner and Melky and Jackson.

              None.

            • “All three internal vets have basically wedded themselves to the Yankees and would only realistically go elsewhere if we pushed them out.”

              I’d be careful about putting too much stock into the importance of a player saying they want to stay with the Yankees. Pettitte, sure, but he seems to be a different case than the other two since we’ve already seen that he actually does want to stay (last offseason). Matsui is a decent bet to take somewhat of a hometown discount, but we don’t really know whether he’d jump at more money/years elsewhere. But Damon is just a different case altogether, since we’ve seen him in this exact situation before, with Boston in the role of incumbent, and we’ve seen him walk away from a team he publicly said he wanted to stay with in order to sign elsewhere for more money/years. I put zero stock into the importance of him saying he wants to stay in the Bronx since he has a history of going where the money is. He may in fact stay for somewhat of a discount, but based on historical precedent, it’d be foolish to expect him to.

            • Rose says:

              Assuming they’re all thinking this way, sure. You’re right about the turn out. But nobody knows what they’re thinking…especially with their agents whispering sweet somethings in their ears. You have Boras who always wants the most out of everything…and then the other guys agents want the most because it’s their job to do so…and they don’t have nearly the security (slew of other expensive clients) Scott Boras does.

              But in the end, it’s the players decision…and winning the World Series certainly wets the pallet as well.

            • theyankeewarrior says:

              Agreeeeed

    • MattG says:

      Add to this making a run at Granderson, and I agree. For all those hot for Carl Crawford, CG is actually the better player, already signed for 3 years for much less than it will take to get Crawford (and not signed for any of those mid-30′s years).

      You give up Austin Jackson for that. Any trade that does not include Montero or Phil is one the Yankees need to look at a long time.

      • Carl Crawford vs RHP – .305/.342/.460 (.802)
        Curtis Granderson vs RHP – .292/.367/.528 (.894)

        Carl Crawford vs LHP – .272/.316/.381 (.697)
        Curtis Granderson vs LHP – .210/.270/.344 (.614)

        One half of Curtis Granderson >>>>>>> one half of Carl Crawford
        The other half of Carl Crawford >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other half of Curtis Granderson

        • Bo says:

          The fact that Granderson cannot hit lefty’s has to give you major pause.

          Hes basically a platoon player.

        • Rose says:

          Carl Crawford > Curtis Granderson

          Although, Carl hasn’t played CF in quite some time.

          • MattG says:

            Based on what, exactly? Granderson’s a fair (sometimes better than fair) centerfielder and a better hitter.

            Oh, Crawford steals more bases. Big deal.

            You don’t want Crawford in the lineup vs lefties either. At least if you platoon Granderson, you’re getting a really good hitter vs RHP.

        • MattG says:

          More right-handed pitching + Mike Cameron and Melky Cabrera on the same roster would make Granderson a fine fit. Add to it you can:

          * have him in 2010
          * have him at a fair salary
          * unload him before he reaches his decline

          and I find him more attractive than Carl Crawford.

          All I am saying is I would give up a package headlined by Austin Jackson for that. If AJ as the prize doesn’t work for Detroit, I pass.

  19. currambayankees says:

    I honestly hope they follow the same path they followed with Santana. Let the Jays trade him somewhere else. No need to give up both prospects and money for one guy who is on the wrong side of 30. Now, if it was King Felix, it might be a different story.

  20. wiljaq1 says:

    Whether the Yanks do or don’t make a play at Halladay you KNOW that Boston will. And if they succeed:

    1. Halladay
    2. Beckett
    3. Lester
    4. Daisuke

    5. AL East Champs
    6. World Series Champs

    Cash has got to make a play!

    • Rose says:

      Boston would have to overpay for Halladay due to them being in the same division…and they have more important things to worry about right now. Their pitching wasn’t necessarily the problem last year…their offense has taken a HUGE hit even WITH Jason Bay…and now there’s no guarantee he’s even coming back.

      They’ll dabble in the Halladay trade rumors but I don’t think they’ll pull the trigger unless it’s an absolute steal.

    • theyankeewarrior says:

      Depends on what they give up for Doc. And how Beckett does next season. Maybe the Jays ask for Lester? Also, the Sox have to commit big cash to Bay and are already trying to trade for a big bat. They don’t exactly have the resources anymore to pull off these big-time deals. And they loooooove their farm system over there

  21. theyankeewarrior says:

    Between this offseason and next, the Yankees are going to have a chance at Halladay, Lee, Beckett, Mauer, Crawford, Holliday, Lackey etc. etc. etc. Chances are that two of them will be acquired. Why in Mo’s name would they want to give up Joba, Ajax, Hughes, IPK or anyone else and still end up with TWO of the above prospects when they could give up NONE?

    Like we’re said 100,000 times already. Cash is not going to trade for any big name pitchers when he can just sign them or an equivalent to them less than one year later.

    Joba + Ajax + Lee >>>>> Halladay

    King Felix? Maybe a different story. That’s a guy who can be an Ace for a decade.

    • “Why in Mo’s name would they want to give up Joba, Ajax, Hughes, IPK or anyone else and still end up with TWO of the above prospects when they could give up NONE?”

      Because some prospects are going to be the odd men out with regards to the roster and run out of options eventually.

  22. mryankee says:

    Now we are talking my kind of players when it comes to Halladay. I cant see how Cashman cannot be in on Halladay especially when it means a rotation of CJ AJ DOC. I know popular theory right now is to wait on the young pitchers. Go for felix in 2011-I dont understand one of two things. 1-what happens if Felix is not a f/a and signs with Seattle 2: why not have both Halladay and Felix?

  23. Ian says:

    I think the biggest thing the Yankees have going for them in the Roy Halladay sweepstakes is obviously the chance for Doc to pitch in the playoffs. It sounds like winning is at the top of Halladay’s priority list, and siding with the defending World Champs would give him the best opportunity to finally get his own World Series ring.

    The problem with this though is that I don’t see Halladay signing long-term in New York. Any team in baseball would be willing to give him the money he deserves, so Doc could easily pick up and move on to another team if the Yankees do in fact win it all again next year. The silver lining for New York in that situation though is that they would get two first round draft picks if Halladay walks.

  24. Steve S says:

    They can’t move a position prospect at this point. They have infused a lot of youth into the pitching in the last three years but now its time to add to Cano with respect to young impact bats. I know everyone will say you can do Jackson but considering the fact that John Lackey is available, if you really want to add a front end starter, then why not just do that and have Jackson as depth in case you do resign Damon and he gets hurt or if Swisher regresses at all. They are at a crossroads now. They have Cano, Tex, Swisher as guys who are in their peak years and can be great to good players. They have Arod, Jeter and Posada as guys who have crossed the age 35 year and you have to anticipate some decline in the results (if it doesnt happen great but you have to expect it to some extent). Its a nice mix but giving up those young position prospects for a guy like Halladay when you have other options (not as good) seems like a mistake.

    Now that I have had time to reflect on it, the argument over Johan shouldn’t be over the result of 2008 and essentially tieing him to Joba and Phil, rather the Johan decision became so difficult because they had invested so much in these kids while wasting so much on other veterans. They are probably a couple of years (and a couple of more solid drafts) away from being in a position where they really contemplate dealing high end prospects for veterans. Now if a guy like Felix Hernandez becomes available, then you think about it.

  25. [...] a follow-up to yesterday’s discussion on Roy Halladay, Jordian Bastian of MLB.com throws a wrench into the plans. According to Bastian’s sources, [...]

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.