Comments on: Halladay or Prospects: Take Your Pick

By: Bernie Stublaski

Bernie Stublaski — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:54:10 +0000

I just lately purchased a refurbished Dolphin Diagnostic pool cleaner. I was a little bit greater than concerned after studying a few of the negative reviews. Nonetheless, I’m completely satisfied.

By: RyHo

RyHo — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:23:54 +0000

My gut says HALLADAY but my feelings say prospects. This could be the biggest blockbuster deal for Philly. The Phillies really are not known for getting superstar players even though interest was shown. Last year they wanted Manny now look at what happened. The pennant race in the NL is clear the Phillies and Dodgers maybe the Giants if they add a HollIday from the A’s to go along with that two-headed monster. Also Aaron Rowand is a solid player. I would rather contend for the next decade than be favorites for a year look at the BoSox last year. Tears and remorse. Halladay is the best pitcher but 1 player doesnt win a world series. The Phillies won last year with the same staff. The bad part is Hamels struggles but todays vs Cardinals we’ll see if he rebounds. The good part Raul Ibanez who was the clear cut pick up of the year, who is obviously better than Pat Burrell plus look at how we playing now with J-Roll back. Notice that last year we didnt have him. Plus we have a different Jayson Werth. Even if we dont get Halladay we can still win it all this year. Get Halladay without giving up Happ and Drabek. Its really hard to be better than 7-0!

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 14:19:18 +0000

I think the phils should take a shot at Fernando Valenzuela

By: j reed

j reed — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 06:34:40 +0000

NEPA- that is, ” Think back to the 2006 Rockies, at this time in their 2006 season….”

By: j reed

j reed — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 06:30:25 +0000

NEPA- I am not sure of how you calculated your probabilities but I think using the team’s current winning percentage is a valid initial condition if the regular season stopped now….Think back to the 2006 Rockies, at this time in their 2006 you’d never have even imagined using this model as it would have been pointless. And look at the us, we have in the recent pass, always finished strong. I think using a more Bayesian approach would ultimately create a model that more accurately corresponds to the data. The trick is calculating all the prior probabilities.

By: Chris.I

Chris.I — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 04:35:32 +0000

I say Keep our farm, and pass on Halladay..Happ is pushing for a strong rookie of the year this season. Think about it….Lose Happ, lose our farm, and come 2010 his asking price will be ”HIGHER” than we can imagine. Happ on the other hand has high potential, and could easily be a 15+ game winner for a much, much cheaper price, and we keep our prospects. As much as I hate the fact of Pedro being a Phillie, he gives us that extra depth this season if old man Moyer falls apart, or an injury comes about. I think were cool…Like I keep saying, don’t fix something that isn’t broken.

By: rob5000

rob5000 — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 04:21:42 +0000

Geoff,

Ya ok so he pitches in Toronto… But ypu don’t think pitchin on the road in Yankee Stadium and Fenway counts as pitching in a big-market high-pressure situation? Please… It has nothing to do with it.

By: Joel V.

Joel V. — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 03:30:19 +0000

NEPA Philly, your calculations are flawed. The Phillies winning percentage contains wins against losing teams. Last time I checked, only winning teams make the playoffs. I would only count the winning percentage against teams that are over .500 to give a fair analysis. Either way, I am on the trade for Halladay side. People forget that in order to be good for 7-8 years, you have to continute to develop talent. Not just in pitching but at all positions. Somehow I doubt the Phillies ability to CONTINUE doing that. Utley, Howard, Victorino, etc. are all in their primes. Remember the last WS ring? 1980. And didn’t they trade a young stud starting pitcher in rick wise to pick a veteran stud starting pitcher in steve carlton? Remember when we didn’t trade Tyler Green for Randy Johnson in 1993? What happened then??? Case closed.

By: Joel V.

Joel V. — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 03:18:21 +0000

If you want a BETTER chance to win a WORLD SERIES this year and next, it is ESSENTIAL that they get Halladay. If you want to roll the dice with what you’ve got, then go with what you have. Halladay can only increase our chances! While I love Drabek, he won’t be ready until our current stars are on the decline. I say do the trade even if it includes Drabek. Even better if it doesn’t. Remember, most of these prospects almost never become what they are projected to be. Chances are maybe one of the guys we give up will become anything, which to me is more than a fair deal.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 00:56:18 +0000

Right on man. Halladay is great and Id love to have him, but not for anything even close to what is being demanded.

By: NEPA Philly

NEPA Philly — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 00:43:57 +0000

To evaluate if the Phillies should trade for Halladay comes down to “how much Halladay increases the Phillies chances to win the World Series this year and next”.

I have done a probability analysis as to his value in improving their chances over continuing with their current pitchers. This is essentially a (VOR) value over replacement player analysis.

I value Halladay’s pitching ability very highly and assumed with him over an entire regular season the Phillies will win at least 28 of the 32 games he starts. He would replace the current pitchers who’s record in the games they start at 18 wins and 14 loses. This means that Halladay would increase the number of games that the team would win over the entire season from 90 to 100. If the Phillies trade for him by July 31, he would account for 4 more win over the remaining 12 starts in 2009.

To evaluate the chances of winning the World Series, I assumed that the teams would continue to play at their current winning percentage. The Phillies are currently at a .558 percentage. I used their winning percentage to calculate the percentage of winning the first round of the playoff, the percentage of winning the National League Championship and the percentage of winning the World Series both with and without Halliday.

These results are without Halladay:
Winning the First Round of the Playoff 50.9%
Winning the National League Championship 22.7%
Winning the World Series 9.5%

These results are with Halladay:
Winning the First Round of the Playoff 53.4%
Winning the National League Championship 24.4%
Winning the World Series 10.4%

So with Halladay, he gives the Phillies less than a 1% increase in their chances of winning the World Series both this year and next. For this, the Phillies are willing to trade away talent that will give them the possibility that they will be good for 7 to 10 years and have a 8 to 9% chance in each of those years of winning a World Series. If the Phillies are smart they will not trade the boatload of talent to the Blue Jays for Halladay.

By: The Dipsy

The Dipsy — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:32:03 +0000

WTF is J.P. Ricciardi thinking? This dumb bastard obviously doesn’t understand that he can get more by trading an Halladay who can work out an extension with the team he’s going to. There is a reason this guy won’t have a job come November.

The Dipsy

By: Chuck P

Chuck P — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:20:25 +0000

Mike/Manny- what other guys and how much will they cost? At some point you have to go, “I can get Halladay for this much more.” Arizona’s waiting for better offers for Doug Davis (who is destined to flop outside of Arizona) so they’re obviously not interested in what they’re hearing… given what the Mariners gave up for Bedard, I would assume that they’re going to try to recoup a decent amount…

I do like Bannister but we’re talking about Roy Halladay… we don’t need another stopgap #3 or #4 starter. We need someone that we can trust because Cole doesn’t look so great and besides that, all we have is #3/4 stopgap starters. That ain’t gonna cut it in October.

By: Papa Thompson

Papa Thompson — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:01:27 +0000

… on signing Halladay, then not having prospects left to replace him in 2010 … we’d have more than $15M in salary to buy another starting pitcher. I’m not saying it’s ever a good idea to try to field a winner with free agents, nor that we ought to deplete the farm system. But we’d have a lot of money to work with in replacing Halladay assuming the other parts are holding up.

By: psujoe

psujoe — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:14:15 +0000

Not being able to negotiate an extension until after a deal changes the whole situation for me. No Happ and no Drabek for a rental. I think that just about kills the deal, IMO. Have fun in New York Mr Halladay.

If we’re looking for someone to sure up the rotation for the season I like Brian Bannister. Playoffs is a different story. We’ll have to wait and see who falls out of contention over the next few weeks.

By: Manny

Manny — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:01:05 +0000

True that, Mike. Let’s look at other guys out there… it doesn’t HAVE to be Halladay.

By: Good Night Joe Carter

Good Night Joe Carter — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:48:27 +0000

Years ago, I would bemoan the fact that the Phillies wouldn’t be willing to trade their prospects for big name but short term solutions.

How glad I am that they didn’t listen to folks like me but instead held on to players like Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, and Cole Hamels, who I’ve gotten to enjoy and will continue to enjoy for many years.

If the deal is right, then make it, but don’t sell guys like Drabek and Taylor for a short term solution. I want to enjoy watching the next couple of years, but I’d also like to enjoy watching the next ten.

By: Gavin

Gavin — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:19:15 +0000

Zach Duke is not listed as someone who could be traded. Maholm is the most likely.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:09:50 +0000

I don’t get it. Why is the choice Holladay or bust?!!?!?!?!?!

Why don’t we look at the other guys in the market that will cost less but are more likely to make an impact than Pedro? There’s doug davis and zach duke and (maybe again) Penny. Why is it that we either spend $20M on Holladay and give up prospects or we sit here and do nothing?

By: Maverick

Maverick — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:08:46 +0000

Are we “overvaluing Happ”?

Absolutely….his stock is high right now and maybe thats why we should trade him..

Remember that guy Kyle Kendrick? His 1st year 8-3 with 3.79 era. I wonder if he was “untouchable” then. Also he was 5-1 through the end of July.

Not saying Happ will be another Kendrick.. but Happ isnt Halladay and if we need to give up Happ as part of a deal to get Halladay we do it.

I would rather see
Hamels/Halladay/Blanton/Pedro/Moyer
than
Hamels/Happ/…..