The risk-reward of trading Cole Hamels

CLEARWATER, Fla. - Pat Gillick sat back in his chair and considered the hypothetical dilemma.

You can have Cole Hamels on your team for as many as 5 more years, including this season. If you wanted to be able to compete as soon as, say, 2017, would you be in better shape with a 33-year-old Hamels on your roster, atop your rotation, or instead with the possible collection of prospects you might get back for him in a trade?

"That's a hard question to answer - and I'm not trying to dodge it," Gillick said.

Gillick, a 77-year-old, three-time world champion Hall of Fame baseball executive, has been around long enough to understand there are often no right or easy answers when attempting to solve such questions. Since the future is unknown, it's kind of the damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't problem.

"Because in a hypothetical case," Gillick continued, "if you trade someone like Cole Hamels, or any player with that sort of talent, you have to really evaluate what you're going to get back. And what you get back might get you to the finish line faster than holding onto Cole Hamels. So whatever you want to say, [whether it's] 2017 or 2018, you get there and say, 'Well, we held onto Cole and we're at the finish line,' which is great. And on the other hand, you don't get to the finish line and you have him and you think, 'Well, we could have moved him and got a couple of players that would have helped us down the road.' "

You really don't need a translator: The rebuilding Phillies will trade Cole Hamels at some point in the next 4 months if they get a package of prospects they deem is worthy enough to build around. The likelihood they get that kind of package increases as the season progresses and the trade deadline nears.

So this is going to work out completely fine, right? Not so fast.

But clearly for the Phillies, the most important thing they can do during the 2015 season is this: capitalize on Hamels' value through a trade . . . but without screwing up said trade.

Examples of how not to screw up a trade?

Don't limit your options to one team, and trade a pitcher in his prime for a trio of uncertain prospects like Phillippe Aumont, Tyson Gillies and J.C. Ramirez. Work diligently enough and keep your player in the loop so you don't alienate him (which could mean using no-trade protection, picking up option year in contract) so he steers his way to one team, which limits your potential return.

Omar Daal, Vicente Padilla, Nelson Figueroa and Travis Lee, anyone? Placido Polanco, Bud Smith and Mike Timlin?

Given that the current front office is the same front office that received one of those aforementioned returns in a trade (the Aumont package from Seattle for Cliff Lee), it's fair to be skeptical. But these are professionals with jobs on the line who, like anyone else, learn from their mistakes.

Hamels will be in a Phillies uniform at Citizens Bank Park today, pitching against Boston, because Gillick, general manager Ruben Amaro Jr. and company did not simply give in to the best offer this offseason. They're not going to trade a franchise icon and World Series MVP without getting a return that "wows" them, verbiage that manager Ryne Sandberg used when the rumors began to swirl at the winter meetings 4 months ago.

The best-case scenario for the Phillies is this: The Dodgers and Red Sox contend, as expected, but neither is running away with its division as July nears; divisional foes Cubs and Cardinals are also highly competitive, but locked in a three-team battle with Pittsburgh; the Yankees play well enough in the first 2 months to believe their aging, 2014-Phillies-ish roster can continue to contend; the team with baseball's best lineup, the Toronto Blue Jays, enter the picture for a pitcher; the Tigers, Nationals and Padres don't disappoint and stay in the race during the summer, taking other potential pitchers off the market.

If all of that happens - which certainly isn't out of the question - there will be a lot more buyers than sellers in June and July, and the Phillies will be operating at a position of strength. They can get the premium can't-miss prospect (or two high-level prospects) this summer that they weren't able to pry away this winter.

There will be real competition for Hamels. And if you are, say, the Cubs, would you rather deal two or three prospects in June, take on the roughly $83 million Hamels will still be owed then, and increase your chances of winning in 2015 . . . or wait until the winter, spend north of $200 million on David Price, while also forfeiting your 2016 first-round pick? Or go the latter route, but spend a little less and get a productive-but-less-accomplished pitcher, like a Doug Fister?

It's another difficult question to answer, another dilemma for another team.

But from the Phillies' standpoint, maybe it's really not that tough. If they expect to trade Hamels - which they probably should do at this point, since he's arguably their only useful commodity, and thus, the best path to rebuilding somewhat quickly - they expect to receive a handsome return.

They've held that line. They should hold that line. And they've been scouting others teams' farm systems long enough that they really cannot foul it up, barring the obvious inexact science of projecting what minor leaguers will be able to do when they become major leaguers.

"[Jonathan] Papelbon or Hamels or someone like that, we're not trying to overevaluate them, but they are a vital piece for some team," Gillick said. "So, consequently, you have to get someone back in that deal that's closer to the big leagues. Because you're giving them somebody that puts them over the top right away. So you can't look [Class] A ball. You have to look Double A up, because there's more certainty when you're dealing a piece that's going to put them over the top.

"And from the other side of the ledger, they've got to think that way, too. If we get this piece - Cole Hamels, Papelbon, or some player on another club - this is going to put us over the top."

Like when Gillick himself traded away major league-ready centerfielder Michael Bourn (along with third-base prospect Michael Costanzo and veteran reliever Geoff Geary) to get Brad Lidge from Houston?

"Exactly," Gillick said. "That's a very good example, to be frank."