Comments on: The Dip: “Project Wells”: Lunacy or Visionary?

By: The Dipsy

The Dipsy — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 22:13:54 +0000

I thought about that. But I figure they do NOT want to give up the farm nor do they like to give up draft picks for free agents. If think what I should have stressed a little bit more in this fantastical fact pattern is that the Phils would already have a deal in place for Wells before they make the trade for Halladay.

The Dipsy

By: Kennedy

Kennedy — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 21:34:23 +0000

Yes, Dipsy, the pricetag is pretty much the #1 reason why this could never work. You are way overestimating the amount of Wells’ contract that another team would cover. Phils might want to get Halladay and not give up their farm, but at the price you’ve suggested, they could give up the farm and get 2 quality free agents. Wells is way overpayed.

By: The Dipsy

The Dipsy — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:43:07 +0000

I would not suggest such a thing if I didn’t think they Phillies were willing to, in effect, pay a 5-6m “surcharge” to keep their farm system intact. One of the reasons I believe this is that they do have a history of eating money. See: Thome, Jim. This year they are paying 15m to keep guys from playing for them (Jenkins, Eaton). And to all of those who do not believe that the Phillies are stinkin rich, wake up. There may be good reasons NOT to do such a deal, but not being able to afford the pricetag would NOT be one of them.

The Dipsy

By: happy noose

happy noose — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 11:03:57 +0000

If im doing my math right we would owe former blue jays (stairs excluded) 30mm next year. if we had that kinda scratch to spend we would have signed derrick lowe instead of jamie moyer and this wouldnt be a problem right now.

By: RJ Swooner

RJ Swooner — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:07:00 +0000

i now see why they call you “Dipsy”.

By: Baseballbriefs.com

Baseballbriefs.com — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 05:31:05 +0000

Baseballbriefs.com tracking back The Dip: “Project Wells”: Lunacy or Visionary?…

Baseballbriefs.com tracking back The Dip: “Project Wells”: Lunacy or Visionary?…

By: Evan

Evan — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 04:22:51 +0000

Completely unrealistic.

By: Nationals#1

Nationals#1 — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 03:03:52 +0000

Way to suggest that your own idea is “visionary”, you jerk.

By: AdamC

AdamC — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 23:47:42 +0000

Sorry, this is laughable crazy….why would toronto want marson, donald, and even carasco, for halladay. Whats the basis? They are fringe prospects…

By: Kennedy

Kennedy — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 23:11:31 +0000

Dipsy:

Who is this mythical team paying Vernon Wells 1 million more per year on a 5 year deal then what Bobby Abreu, who is significantly better than Wells, got in a 1 year deal. Significantly better.

By: Papa Thompson

Papa Thompson — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 23:04:12 +0000

I’m sold. Let’s do this thing.

By: The Dipsy

The Dipsy — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:52:51 +0000

No. Forget about what Halladay is worth. You’re gonna pay him what you’re gonna pay him. Lets round out the numbers. Wells has 107 left on his deal form 1010 on. Lets say, for the ease of numbers that the Jays eat 52m. Thats leaves us with 5 years of Wells at 55m or 11m a year. We trade him to a team that will pay him 6m a year over the last five years of his deal. We’re stuck with 25m. Now, you say he’s not worth 6m a year and I have no problem with that. But I disagree he’s worth only 3m a year. I think the Phils would actually have to sweeten the pot for the other team (prospect), but not to the point where is the end of the world for the Phils, so they would take Wells.

The Dipsy

By: Kennedy

Kennedy — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:38:45 +0000

Dipsy, yes i would give up 5 million a year and 3 “fringe prospects”, but that isn’t the deal you suggested. Remember 1.5 years of Halladay + 5.5 years of Wells, right now, is 130 Million dollars. If the Jays eat half of the Wells salary, it is still 77 Million. If we can find somebody willing to pay 20 million for the rights to 5.5 years of Wells (a long, long, shot), that is still 57 million. I would pay 37 million for the rights to Halladay for 1.5 years. That leaves a 20 million dollar gap. You are way overestimating the amount of the Wells deal a team would take on without gaining significant prospects. Wells is barely better than average offensively for a corner outfielder, which is what he would be on most teams. He is not a player you commit big money to.

If Wells were a free agent who could only sign a 5 year deal, he would get 12 million dollars total max. 3 million a year for the first 3 years, 1.5 million for the next 2 years. Does the term, “declining” mean anything to you. Because it sure does to MLB teams trying to determine how much a player is worth.

By: Whack8888

Whack8888 — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:34:08 +0000

Yeah it is a good idea but Wells contract is so horrible, i dont think it could work. Maybe if he only had 3 years at 20 million, or 5 at 12 or some other such thing. 5 at 20 though is a ton.

By: The Dipsy

The Dipsy — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:33:55 +0000

Whack – J.P. Ricciardi has bigger problems than looking stupid. He already looks stupid. I think they’re in damage control mode. When I looked at that Wells contract for the first time last night, my eyes almost popped outta my head. Did the Blue Jays think that Wells was gonna exercise his opt out? That he would retire before the obscene years kicked in? That he would somehow die before 2010 (but his estate would still get the cash, oh well).

The Dipsy

By: The Dipsy

The Dipsy — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:27:58 +0000

Ah…..I’m glad that when people boil it all down that they realize that might be a deal worth doing for the Phils. Truth be told, though. I don’t think we’d get much of anything for Wells.

The Dipsy

By: Whack8888

Whack8888 — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:27:53 +0000

Oops, in all my hypotheticals I forgot that Team X would also have to trade some prospects etc. so maybe it could work out. Even so, who wants to give up something for 5 million a year for Wells. I imagine people would be reluctant to just have to have him for free for 5 million a year

and that still leaves the Phillies with 50 million for Wells, without having him play at all

By: Whack8888

Whack8888 — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:24:48 +0000

I dont see how you can get Wells down to 5 million a year though — that means 15+ has to be taken off for each of those years which adds up to 75 million. Who pays that, if the Phillies only pay 5 million for 5 years?

I think maybe the best situation would be the Blue Jays pay 15-25 million of the salary, get 1 A, B C prospect or 2 Bs (whatever correlates to not really a lot but a decent amount of prospects), trade Halladay to the Phils, Wells to Team X, and the Phills pay ??

Hehe, see this is where the deal breaks down. If the Jays take on 25 million of Wells contract, that means they are going to want a lot more prospects for Halladay then the Phillies want to give them, considering the Phillies have to still pay 50 million in order for Team X to get Wells for 5 million a year.

Maybe if you could convince Team X to take Wells for 8 million a year, the Jays could do 15 million and the Phils could do 35 and give up 2 Bs, but who wants Wells for 8 million a year?

Also, if the Jays do some deal like above, ie, where they basically trade Halladay for low prospects and the dumping of Wells, it makes them look idiotic. I think that perhaps the GM might rather pretend everything is cool rather than officially admit too such a horrific failure.

35 million is also still a lot of money for the Phils.

By: psujoe

psujoe — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:22:32 +0000

oops, Phils trade Marson, Donald, Carasco and 25 mil over 5 years. We get more prospects in return although maybe not as good.

By: psujoe

psujoe — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:19:14 +0000

Seems way too good to be true and here’s why.

Phils trade Marson, Donald and Carasco for the following:

25 million over 5 years.
Halladay for 1.5 years.
two high draft choices when we lose Halladay.
Propsects in return for Wells

If this could be worked out it’s a no brainer, but there has to be a deal to move Wells before we acquite him.