A cautionary/prodding trade tale
When it comes to trade deadline deals, everyone has their favorite cautionary/prodding tales. Mine concerns Frank Viola and David West. T
A cautionary/prodding trade tale
Sam Donnellon, Daily News Sports Columnist
When it comes to trade deadline deals, everyone has their favorite cautionary/prodding tales. Mine concerns Frank Viola and David West.
The year was 1989, the season after Viola won a Cy Young Award with the Twins, two years after he was the MVP of the World Series. Frank was an innings-eating, lefthanded horse, but he was headed to free agency and was going to cost the Twins too much to keep.
I was writing for the Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk at the time. Pitching for the Mets Triple-A farm team, The Tides, David West was the greatest young lefthander to come along since Sandy Koufax (sound familiar?). Each week in 1988, someone from one of the New York dailies or the big sports magazines came down to write about him. Dominating for the Mets Triple-A farm team, there were constant pleas in New York to simply promote him and keep him, rather than mortgage the future, and the Mets did showcase him a few times. But the Mets had much of the core that won a World Series in 1986, and should have been there in 1988, if not for the miracle work of Dodgers ace Orel Hershiser and Kirk Gibson.
Adding Frank Viola to that team, to a staff that already included David Cone, Ron Darling and Sid Fernandez (Dwight Gooden was hurt) seemed a no-brainer.
So West went to the Twins, along with middle reliever and occasional starter Rick Aguilera, and Kevin Tapani, who was at about the same juncture in his career as J.A. Happ is now. Viola gave the Mets 12 good-to-great regular-season starts, but the Cubs won the National League East by six games. Viola finished third in the Cy Young voting the following season – Houston’s Doug Drabek (Kyle’s daddy) won it – but the Mets again finished second, four games behind the Pirates.
The Twins? Thought you’d never ask. West never became Sandy Koufax, serving as a middle reliever for most of his career, including for that 1993 Phillies National League championship team. But Rick Aguilera developed into one of the game’s premier closers, and Tapani developed into a steady starter who won 19 games once and 16 games twice. Most importantly, the Twins reached the postseason again before the Mets did, winning another World Series in 1991. Aguilera collected two saves, a victory and a loss in their seven-game battle with the Braves. Tapani won a game, lost a game. West was a crucial middle relief piece.
The Phillies are feeling good about repeating as World Champs and Roy Halladay seems a no-brainer, even at the talent cost discussed. But understand: One of those guys they give up is likely to be a star.
If three or four are, well, ouch. And if the Phillies don’t win another title, well ouch again.
Touche'. Don't trade the future.— gulls3012- There are arguements for both sides. I just think with the way this Phillies team is hitting now, go for the sure thing, the 'horse' as Charlie Manuel calls him. It may hurt to see our prospects blossoming into stars with other teams but I really think I'd take that over a 'what if we'd traded for Halladay with that young nucleus'. The next few days will be very interesting.— wearethechampions
- At the time of the trade Tapani was nowhere near where Happ is now. Tapani had three middle relief appearances with The Mets(totaling 7 1/3 innings) and 0 Major League decisions.
- So basically you're saying that Halladay doesn't guarantee a World Series title just like Viola didn't guarantee one with the Mets. Well, keeping the prospects doesn't guarantee anything either. Pat Combs, Tyler Green, Bruce Ruffin, Ricky Jordan, Wes Chamberlain, etc. were all top prospects that had a decent season or two but were mostly duds. You can't argue for or against a trade on the basis of whether it guarantees us a title...that's ridiculous. There are no guarantees. It's all about whether you want to give us the best chance to win during the next two seasons or you'd rather give it a go with what we've got and hope the prospects develop down the road to keep us at contender status.— JimG
- Halladay is a drug. Just say no.— joey bagadonuts
- I'd trade every player in Reading & Reading itself ! The guy is a proven winner. Last year Carasco was an "untouchable". How is that working out ? The problem with prospects is just that, they are prospects. Halladay is a known. Go for it & the Phils will win 2 baby !— hancone
- How "likely" is it that one will become a star? I think it is much more likely to not become a star. It's possible, but it is even more possible that average, maybe even mediocre careers are ahead for the Phillies prospects that are potential Toronto trade bait. Still, the Jays are asking to much, and quite frankly, we are a contender right now. There seems now that there are plenty of options outside of Halliday that makes this team better. Why pay the premium for Halliday, when Lee, Washburn or Duke would be sufficent? We are more talented then the Brewers last year who need to rent Sabathia to even dream of contending.— SethGordon
- Prospects are simply pawns. How did Pulsipher, Isringhausen, and Wilson work out for Mets? Also, prospects should be taken in context. If we were rebuilding or out of the race, then I agree we should stockpile etc. At this point, prospects aren't going to do much good.— DennyP
- One of those guys is likely to be a star? We don't know that. You go back 20 years to find an example that didn't work as planned? Who was traded for Doyle Alexander the year he helped win a WS? Nobody knows. I don't have a crystal ball and am not claiming to know what will happen, but nobody can say that any of these prospects is 'likely' to be a star or a bust. Then again, if your definition of a 'star' is Tapani, Wells, or Aguilera, I guess it is likely.— smfree31
- hancone, you're a super-doofus...Reading's Mayor has offered you the key to the city. ______________________________________________________________________ Halladay should become a Phillie by week's end - something none of us, or the media, is mentioning, i.e., Halladay's communications with Mr. Ricciardi during all of this. Is he (his agent, of course) letting Ricciardi know what he thinks? I'd bet he is...Hopefully, Doc is saying, "Look, I understand you have to negotiate tough and ask for the moon, but, in the end, please get it done with Team A or Team B or Team C." Additionally, the self-imposed (by Ricciardi) trade deadline fits perfectly with his current strategy. It gives him 3 extra days to come off his exorbitant asking price and continue negotiations, on a more reasonable level, even after it may have appeared to be over and dead. Negotiating is an art, not a science, and, if you ask me, Ricciardi will get ALL he possibly can by doing what he's done. PK— PhillyTheKid
- Negotiating is a science that you can be creative with. Therefore, its an artful science. In my opinion, the Phils already offered too much. There is much we don't know about what is going on behind the scenes. It may have already been agreed on but the Toronto GM is playing it up for the papers to save some face. Ruben might be playing along to help out Gillick's buddy in Toronto. The Phillies are going to the WS again with or without Halliday. Halliday is a nice guy and Riccardi and Gillick want to get him a ring.— joey bagadonuts
- John Smoltz was traded for Doyle Alexander. Alexander was good for the short run but Smoltz was great for a number of years for the Braves and one of the reasons that they won the NL East 12 years running.— Original #11
- smfree31: not sure if you're joking or not, but the guy who was traded for Doyle Alexander in 1987 was a future Hall-of-Famer, John Smoltz. If you're trying to make Sam Donnellon's "cautionary tale" point even more strongly, that trade would do it. Alexander helped the Tigers to the postseason in 1987, going 9-0, but was that worth giving up Smoltz (they didn't win the WS that year)? In the Phillies' case, it's not even so much a question of making the postseason but of improving their chances once there. But one final question that no one has brought up: how do we know Halladay will be a clutch postseason pitcher? He's *never* pitched in the postseason before. How do we know he won't be like Sabathia (7.92 career postseason ERA in 5 starts)? My take: given the current price (Happ, Drabek, Brown), there's no way I would do the trade.— Statman
- Statman, you make excellent points. Of course, no one knew what Blanton would do in the post-season and he came up big. Halladay has a ton of great attributes and there is no reason to believe that he wouldn't dominate in the playoffs, especially since he is from the AL and has always handled the Bosox. But there are no certainties. That's why they play 'em all and is also why baseball is such a great game!— Original #11
- What about the bullpen. Halladay makes the bullpen better only once every fifth day. We need bullpen and a bat and a starter like Lee and still have Drabek and Brown. This is not rocket science nor is it Christmas in Toronto.— raywright
Reach Sam at donnels@phillynews.com.
