Pick an ace, any ace
Every time a bell rings, Cole Hamels gets another $10 million added on the contract he'll sign at some point before next Opening Day.
Pick an ace, any ace
David Murphy, Daily News Staff Writer
Every time a bell rings, Cole Hamels gets another $10 million added on the contract he'll sign at some point before next Opening Day.
Really, Philadelphia is one of the few places on Earth where Cole Hamels wouldn't be the ace of his staff. In fact, you can make an argument that he is the ace of this staff. Check out the table below, which features the numbers of each of the Phillies' top four starters over the last calendar year (May 13, 2011 through May 13, 2012). Specifically, check out Hamels' numbers as compared to Roy Halladay: negligible difference in ERA, slightly more strikeouts-per-nine and walks-per-nine, and slightly fewer innings, albeit in one less start. And check out that WHIP (walks+hits/innings).
The one category Hamels hold a decided advantage? He's only 28, giving him at least five years on Lee and seven years on Halladay. Think about that: Hamels could sign a seven-year deal like the ones C.C. Sabathia and Johan Santana signed and be the same age as Halladay is now when he is in the final year of that deal. So keep that in mind when you hear Ruben Amaro Jr. talk about the potential of being a seller at the trade deadline.
Which makes more sense: trading six months of 28-year-old Hamels in exchange for prospects and keeping 33-year-old Lee for at least three more seasons, or trading 3.5 years of Lee for prospects and then re-signing Hamels, who will be younger than Lee is now for the first five years of his next contract.
Lee does have a no trade clause, but my understanding is that it is not a full no trade clause. And speaking of no trade clauses, guess who received a full no-trade clause in his deal? Matt Cain, whose five-year, $112.5 million contract is often mentioned as the bare minimum that Hamels will receive. The Phillies don't like full no trade clauses. I can't recall them giving one out since I have been on the beat. So that's another potential sticking point.
That being said, it would still take a lot of losing to push the Phillies to the point of trading away any of their pitchers. At this point, I'd circle Shane Victorino as the first to head to the auction block if Amaro does make the deicision to sell. Even then, we're a long way from that.
| Player | Record |
ERA |
K/9 |
BB/9 | WHIP | GS | IP |
| Cole Hamels | 15-8 | 2.67 | 8.1 | 1.8 | 0.997 | 31 | 215.2 |
| Roy Halladay | 17-7 | 2.53 | 7.5 | 1.4 | 1.027 | 32 | 238.2 |
| Cliff Lee | 15-6 | 2.02 | 8.5 | 1.6 | 0.955 | 28 | 209.1 |
| Vance Worley | 12-5 | 3.19 | 8.4 | 3.1 | 1.288 | 26 | 160.2 |
Buy Phillies tickets 
Colbert is a psuedo ace and there's a reason the Phillies have hesitated in signing him. On what contending team would he be no. 1? He's a narcissistic player.— TomO- first of all, you're not going to trade the current best closer in the National League and second,....the franchise is hardly crippled-...225 straight sell outs, great TV-Radio deal, great market etc,.....i guess maybe they'll have to turn the lights out and stuff to save money,.....really crippled? or really stupid view?— SyddBarrett
- He won't be signing with the Phils. He is LA bound I almost guarentee it. He is a California guy and LA is going to be able to pay big bucks....— mbutley
- I'm losing faith in the GM.— ej610
- Just because you do not agree with the plan-it does not mean that they do not have one. The plan was to get as many of the best pitchers in baseball and sign them to multiple-year deals, to also sign the key position players Howard, Utley, Rollins to multiple-year deals and then to supplement them with interchangeable parts.
This plan is very similar to the plan that Atlanta used to win the division 11 years in a row.
Injuries happen and sometimes players decline faster than you think they will-but in order for any plan to succeed you need to have a little patience.
I do not know if they will be able to sign Hamels-in many ways that is up to Hamels and how much money he wants to make and how much risk the Phillies are willing to take.— Smoothellc - If Amaro is speculating about trading Hamels, he is less intelligent than I thought. Don't like talk of trading Cliff Lee either. Lee is a "low mileage" pitcher for his age, with significantly fewer innings pitched than Halladay, and, I believe, maybe only around 450 more than Hamels, if memory serves. The lack of movement on a deal for Hamles bothers me, and I'm beginning to fear the Phillies may not be able to afford him. I blame Amaro because of several of his earlier deals, the most egregious one being the Howard deal, which would be bad even if he were still healthy. RAJ should have had a deal for Hamels on the radar for the last few years, unless he was totally spooked by Cole's 2009 season, before he developed the cutter. Whether they keep Hamels or not, the rebuilding of the position roster, which should have incrementally started the past off-season, must begin in earnest once the snow starts flying.— ijj
- There is chronological age of the body and real age of the pitching arm. Hamels may be 28, but his elbow with bone chips having been removed is arguably atleast 5 years older. Neither Lee nor Halladay have ever had arm surgery. Tough to compare apples to oranges Murph. I still say Rube has to wait til atleast the AS break to see if Hamels' elbow has held up through 14-16 starts. Rightnow he looks good, very good. However if Amaro signs himto another $120 mil and he breaks down in July you same people will be calling for his head on a platter.— Mark1npt
- You're a little late to the party. The Phillies should have never supplanted Hamels from the #1 spot after his World Series heroics. I feel if Hamels had been the main starter in October 2010 & 2011, the Phillies would have at least one more title. While Halladay was good (3-2, 2.37 ERA), Hamels was GREAT (2-1, 0.87 ERA). Unfortunately, at this point, I think he is as good as gone and he should have been locked up when Howard was (instead of Howard). Amaro can't trade Lee at the deadline and risk losing Hamels too. He would have no leverage in either situation and would be better off waiting until the offseason to deal pitchers/sign Hamels at this point.— jtj10
- What makes more sense, taking the time to write an intelligent, well thought out article or throwing a bunch of garbage in the air and watching the seagulls fight over it? Unlike the way it's presented here, this is not just the Phillies decision. Everyone is talking about how horrible the team is and how the window has closed yet assume he still wants to sign here. If the Phillies have reason to believe he doesn't would it be smarter to trade him and get something in return or let him walk and get nothing? Why is Lee the one that has to be traded and not Halladay who seems pretty digusted and has what would seem to be an easier contract to move? Why aren't these questions addressed unless your just trying to stir the pot?— fhs77
