Clearing up mis-conceptions, Part I
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Clearing up mis-conceptions, Part I
David Murphy, Daily News Staff Writer
My original plan was to file another detailed blog post later tonight after I'd had a day to mull over the Halladay and Cliff Lee deals. But I ended up listening to a healthy dose of sports talk radio while running errands today - side note, they really should put cupholders on shopping carts - and kept hearing several illogical statements (insert joke about sports talk radio here) that need to be corrected.
Illogical Statement I: The Phillies should have just swung a trade for Halladay last deadline and had Cliff Lee and Halladay for two postseason runs.
Answer: While it is true that the package of prospects the Phillies ended up shipping to Toronto isn't a heck of a lot less than what the Blue Jays were reportedly offering last summer, the big issue here is money. Roy Halladay earned $14.25 million last season. The Phillies would have been on the hook for roughly $6.5 million of that. Add in the roughly $3.5 million they took on in salary for Cliff Lee, and you are talking $10 million extra dollars dumped into the budget midway through the fiscal sports year. That would be difficult for any business to absorb. Plus, the Phillies would have owed Halladay all of his $15.75 million salary for this season. Keep in mind the Blue Jays are kicking in $6 million toward Halladay's salary (at least that is what has been reported - I do not have that independently confirmed). And keep in mind that the Blue Jays were reportedly asking for Drabek AND Brown, along with Anthony Gose, with J.A. Happ and Jason Knapp (who was a key to the Lee trade) being kicked around. So the assertion that the Phillies are parting with the same package of prospects is a misnomer too. But even if it were the same package of prospects, the Phillies would have been taking on $12.5 million in salary in 2009 and 2010, in addition to Lee's salary.
You can argue that the Phils still could have swung the deal with the prospects they had. And given Lee's performance in the playoffs, you can argue that they very likely would have won a second straight World Series with Halladay and Lee perhaps starting Games 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7. But you can't argue the finances of it all.
Illogical Statement 2: Hamels is no longer a bona fide No. 2 starter in the majors and never will be because he is a two-pitch pitcher.
Answer: Look, nobody will argue that Hamels had a down year. And nobody will argue that he would be better suited for success -- particularly against lefties -- with a reliable third pitch. But even in 2008, when Hamels was a playoff stud, he threw his curveball on just 13.7 percent of his pitches (according to FanGraphs.com). That dropped to 10.5 percent last season. But he threw the curve just 10.6 percent of the time in 2007, when he was far more successful than last season. Hamels biggest problem wasn't with his curve ball. It was with his command of his fastball and change-up. Hamels can succeed with just two pitches, but to do so he needs to be in complete control of them. Last year, he wasn't. You can argue that he will never be in control of his fastball and change-up again. And you can argue that he needs to better develop a third pitch. But I don't think you can argue that he is done for his career because he doesn't have a third pitch. Keep in mind, this guy was outstanding in 2008, and was pretty darn good in 2007. He is 25 years old, for crying out loud. Cliff Lee's first full big league season was at the age of 25.
Illogical Statement 3: The Phillies were forced to choose between one year of Cliff Lee and four years of Roy Halladay.
Answer: Not true. They did not trade for four years of Roy Halladay. They traded for one year of Roy Halladay, plus exclusive negotiating rights with him. Keep in mind the Phillies will be paying $20 million a year to Halladay for at least three seasons, and maybe four and five. That's a lot of money. The Phillies could have kept Cliff Lee and their prospects this year and then invested the money they would be paying Halladay into a guy like Javier Vazquez, and likely had plenty of cash left over to invest in other areas of the team. But they wanted Halladay. You can easily argue that it was a wise investment, since Halladay likely would have commanded more on the open market. And if you look at our previous post, you'll see that plenty of elite pitchers have thrived between the ages of 33-36. But the Phillies did not trade for an elite pitcher who was under contract for the next four seasons. They traded for one year of him, and in the process negotiated an extension for the next three.
There. I feel better now.
Poll: Who would you rather have, Roy Halladay or Cliff Lee?
Comment removed.
I worry less about the Halladay trade and more aboutr Hamels. If Amaro did not have Hamels lined up with a psychiatrist at the end of the season, he's not doing his job. Hamels statements were inconsistent, in some cases incoherent - he needs professional help before we worry about his two pitch repertoire.— hlc10- Gbentzel -- so if there were some unforeseen injuries and the Phils missed the playoffs (remember, there are years our baseball team DOESN'T make the playoffs), you're asking the owners to risk operating at a $30 million loss? Maybe $40 million if they have both Lee and Halladay and things go awry... Believe me, I want them to spend the money on both pitchers. I'd pay more for tickets, though that's unfair to many fans. But if the numbers out there in Forbes and other sources are accurate, then a payroll with Lee and Halladay and a full bullpen and whatever players are added during the season, considering all the revenue and expenses of a major league franchise, would have the Phillies operating at a steep loss if they DON'T make the World Series, and perhaps a small loss if they do. Is that fair to ask of them? I sort of want to say it is -- they have been in the black for a few years now, and this is a rare window -- but the argument can't be predicated on the misconception that the team has many millions to spare in its 2010 budget.— PhilaLogic
- The real mystery in all of this is offering Joe Blanton arbitration just two days ago. If they don't offer him arbitration, he becomes a free agent and the Phils are off the hook for the $7.5 million (estimate) he'll make this year. So what if you don't get anything back for him... you get to keep Cliff Lee. Then, your biggest problem is too many lefties in the rotation, but with Halladay, Lee, Hamels, Happ and Kendrick/Moyer, that's not a bad problem to have.— NJguy
- Yo. Ruben. Call Curveball.
- The man on the move should be Rollins. Love him. But. Salary vs performance and trade value now. A 250 hitter who is no leadoff hitter. Not willing to learn. Not willing to change. Lee was a bargain but he wants CC money. Sorry. Blanton was Phils best starter in 09 why no respect? Good thing they have Moyer locked in sheesh.— edallen33
- Or the Phillies could have not signed Polonco, traded Michael Taylor DIRECTLY to the A for Brett Wallace, kept Cliff Lee, Halladay, and Hamels and told Toronto....look, we'll give you Kyle Drabek, Travis d'Arnaud, and Anthony Gose...nontendered Blanton if they couldnt get prospects for him, and had a rotation of Halladay, Lee, Hamels, Happ, Moyer/Kendrick...for the same money as currently..plus they'd have a stud 3B. It's insane to me that the phils didnt know the As would trade Wallace for Taylor...that's inexcusable. we needed a 3b, we had an OF to give...and we didnt get that guy. That's a joke.— nicknac21
- Who gives a rats arse what happens in 2011? With Lee, Halladay, a healthy and fully prepared Cole Hamels plus the return of all the bullpen arms who were out for various periods in 2009, they could have won the NL East in 2010 by the end of August. Can any team in the NL seriously expect to beat the Phillies in a seven game series much less a short series with a 1-2-3 punch like that? Please... all over 9 million dollars. What a joke. In 20 years we'll look back on this lost opportunity and rue the day Lee was dealt to Seattle for a couple of bags of balls.— Jerome99RIP
- Cliff lee's off years were far worse than Cole Hamels off years...— bluejfk
- Alot of people don't understand baseball nor its finances. The Phillies only directly get a small commission on MLB licensed merchandise they actually sell at the stadium. Baseball teams generally only make significant playoff revenue for home games played after the minimum number of contests are played. I.E. the Phillies are more or less maxed out on revenue in the short-term unless they increase prices or get people to eat and drink more. Meanwhile their payroll has increased from $98 million two years ago (with $23 million in profit) to $140+ million in 2010 excluding benefits and bonuses. Plus they needed to restock the farm and face it, people don't want to take on Blanton or Moyer's contracts let alone give up prospects for them right now (maybe Blanton at the deadline).— jtj06
- Curveball...I like the way you think and sure hope your scenario is what might take place. Even if our hopes are dashed tomorrow with this expected announcement, it's sure nice thinking this is how it will pan out. The 2010 season would sure be fun to watch with both Lee and Halladay.— PhiLEE fan
- I find it odd that there has been no word of Lee getting a physical— Westphilfan
- What's with all the lengthy posts? Can we please limit this to grunts and sentence fragments?— BudSelig_isthenext_MrBurns
- Philalogic - don't forget about the luxury box leases, which aren't included in the ticket revenue. Also, parking revenue, and merchandising revenue has gone thru the roof as this team has picked up fans across the nation (everyone loves a winner). The Phillies have the highest TV ratings behind only the Yanks and BoSox, so they are sure to see a significant increase in TV revenue when they negotiate a new deal. (Also, if Moyer doesn't recover, I am sure the Phils will cash in on an insurance policy to recoup his $8M) Its a shame Comcast didn't but the Phils. Instead of wasting money on the Flyers and Sixers, we could have the opportunity to witness the greatest baseball dynasty in a long time. Now, we have to worry about "payroll constraints" which doesn't bold well when some of our younger players hit the free agent market (Howard, Werth, Victorino, Hamels) plus Rollins. And considering we just traded away two of our only ML ready players, I think our window of opportunity just got smaller (unless the $140M budget has plans on expanding to $200M in the next 3 years). Maybe the owners of this "small market" team will do the smart thing and sell now while the team's value has peaked. Othe wise, the nucleus of this team will have to be broken apart with nothing waiting in its wings to replace it! Is anybody else embarrassed by the fact the Phillies asked for $6M from Toronto of all places?— dankil13
- What is it worth to the Phillies to be in the post season and the world series in attendance, concessions and tv revenue. Let's suppose by keeping Lee they get two more years of it. Please explain to me why This doesn't pay for Lee. The Man's performances pay for themselves— wdrdon
