I'm really having a hard time getting a grip on the proposed Halladay trade. The more I read, it sounds like two separate deals. The Halladay deal and then the Cliff Lee salary dump. However, the more information that comes out, I don't understand the Phils' logic.
While I understand the need to give up Lee after picking up Halladay's contract and how it is better to have Hallday for five years than Lee for just next year, I can't figure out why the Phils decided to finally trade Drabek and Michael Taylor. After refusing to give them up last year, why do it now? I really don't understand. I thought it would have been a smarter move to use the prospects picked up in the Lee trade to use in the Halladay deal.
I hope Ruben Amaro knows what he's doing because I'm a bit skeptical about whether this deal makes a ton of sense.
*****By the way, how about the Phils knocking the Birds off the back page after they won a Giants game that put them in first place in the NFC East? Don't see that every day.
2 comments:
They go right back to the small market mentality and try to give us this BS about not having enough money for payroll. Just pay Lee the $9 million for this year for the ultimate chance at the World Series and let him walk at the end of the year if you want to be cheap. Don't pretend that you aren't raking in more money than God right now and that $9 million is such a big deal. The prospects that came back from Seattle aren't likely to turn into much. Very few ever do.
Yeah, not sure I love this...can't argue getting Halladay, obviously, but sounds more and more like they didn't have to move Lee this year at all. While I don't love the move, I can't criticize Ruben yet, he stole Lee anyway, and got baseball's best pitcher, I'm gonna wait and see on this one!!
Post a Comment