Post Your Best Halladay Deal

[daddyfivestar]

Seems the Dodgers and Angels have the 'Wish List' items:

ML Ready inexpensive good SP (LA Billingsley, ANA Santana)

Contributing ML Ready everyday Bat (LA Russell Martin catcher, ANA Brandon Wood ss-3b)

Couple of good Prospects at OF and P

[The_Producer]

Seems the Dodgers and Angels have the 'Wish List' items:

ML Ready inexpensive good SP (LA Billingsley, ANA Santana)

Contributing ML Ready everyday Bat (LA Russell Martin catcher, ANA Brandon Wood ss-3b)

Couple of good Prospects at OF and P

New to this board this is my first post. I couldn't live with either of these deals. Wood's a washout. If he was a serviceable player the Angels would have found some AB's for him by now. Martin is not really that kind of bat we should be looking to get back for a future HOF in his prime. The two pitchers are nice pieces though. My deal would be with the Yankees. The deal would have to include Hughes and Montero plus 3 more prospects. Who cares if they win the Series for the next 4 years in a row. We have no chance of winning anything for the next couple of years anyways.

[-MetA4-]

You guys are going to be so disappointed its not even funny.


@The_Hater: Boston is the LEAST likely team to overpay. Under Epstein they have become a very value-oriented team. They do not panic and they have yet to show that they will "pull all the cards" to get a player. If the price gets too high they will simply target someone else, which is what they have been doing for several years now. The supposed Yankee/Red Sox bidding wars are a pure myth.

This fanbase is somehow getting lulled back into the mood of the start of this entire Roy Halladay trade fiasco where we thought we would be able to line up all the teams and pillage whatever we wanted. I was overly optimistic and thought that would happen but it is obvious that opinions around the league have changed and we probably wont see a repeat of those trades in the past where players went for 3-4 top prospects. Hughes and Montero plus 3 other prospects? Dream on. We wont even get Hughes + Montero.

[Hoopstarr]

MetA4, deep down I know you're right. Prospect porn has become a league-wide addiction, and rightfully so considering a good prospect is under control for 6 years. You can't throw those around like you're Isiah Thomas or John Ferguson.

[Michael Bradley]

@The_Hater: Boston is the LEAST likely team to overpay. Under Epstein they have become a very value-oriented team. They do not panic and they have yet to show that they will "pull all the cards" to get a player. If the price gets too high they will simply target someone else, which is what they have been doing for several years now. The supposed Yankee/Red Sox bidding wars are a pure myth.

Value as in paying $50 million just to have the right to negotiate with Matsuzaka, then ponying up another $50 million to actually sign him? Trading Hanley Ramirez for Josh Beckett, in addition to taking back a bad (at the time) contract? Signing Julio Lugo to a huge deal? These happened the past few years. Epstein is not immune to throwing money around or getting fixated on a player to the point where he would overpay. Just because they did not trade for Santana (which is more Minnesota's fault than anyone else's) doesn't mean they wouldn't be major players in this case.

In fact, acquiring Halladay is something Epstein would definitely do. Roy is unlike every other pitcher in the sport. He puts up Cy Young level performance over 240-250 innings almost every year in the toughest division in baseball. He is VERY signable long-term (he took two discounts to stay in Toronto) and in many circles is justiably considered the best player at his position. This is not a Dice-K situation. Epstein would know exactly what he was getting and he'd be getting the best. I would bet every dollar I have that Roy would sign a reasonable extension with Boston within 48 hours of being dealt there. If the Red Sox can afford a $20 million a year player (which they probably can otherwise they wouldn't even be mentioned here), then it's a no brainer for them.

Epstein giving up a bunch of maybe's or (most likely) never-will-be's for the best pitcher in baseball is not value oriented? On what planet? I'm not saying Epstein will gut his system for Halladay, he may find the price too high, who knows what will happen, but this is not a typical situation. The Red Sox are not going to sign John Lackey and get Halladay performance. They'll be a good team even without Halladay, but they would be a much better team with him. Guys like Buchholz, Kelly, etc, are very replaceable in comparison to a 250 inning Cy Young candidate. If Buchholz becomes even 40% of the pitcher Halladay is it would be considered a miracle. Cost effective talent is at a premium nowadays, but elite talent is still elite talent.

[mini]

@The_Hater: Boston is the LEAST likely team to overpay. Under Epstein they have become a very value-oriented team. They do not panic and they have yet to show that they will "pull all the cards" to get a player. If the price gets too high they will simply target someone else, which is what they have been doing for several years now. The supposed Yankee/Red Sox bidding wars are a pure myth.

Value as in paying $50 million just to have the right to negotiate with Matsuzaka, then ponying up another $50 million to actually sign him? Trading Hanley Ramirez for Josh Beckett, in addition to taking back a bad (at the time) contract? Signing Julio Lugo to a huge deal? These happened the past few years. Epstein is not immune to throwing money around or getting fixated on a player to the point where he would overpay. Just because they did not trade for Santana (which is more Minnesota's fault than anyone else's) doesn't mean they wouldn't be major players in this case.

In fact, acquiring Halladay is something Epstein would definitely do. Roy is unlike every other pitcher in the sport. He puts up Cy Young level performance over 240-250 innings almost every year in the toughest division in baseball. He is VERY signable long-term (he took two discounts to stay in Toronto) and in many circles is justiably considered the best player at his position. This is not a Dice-K situation. Epstein would know exactly what he was getting and he'd be getting the best. I would bet every dollar I have that Roy would sign a reasonable extension with Boston within 48 hours of being dealt there. If the Red Sox can afford a $20 million a year player (which they probably can otherwise they wouldn't even be mentioned here), then it's a no brainer for them.

Epstein giving up a bunch of maybe's or (most likely) never-will-be's for the best pitcher in baseball is not value oriented? On what planet? I'm not saying Epstein will gut his system for Halladay, he may find the price too high, who knows what will happen, but this is not a typical situation. The Red Sox are not going to sign John Lackey and get Halladay performance. They'll be a good team even without Halladay, but they would be a much better team with him. Guys like Buchholz, Kelly, etc, are very replaceable in comparison to a 250 inning Cy Young candidate. If Buchholz becomes even 40% of the pitcher Halladay is it would be considered a miracle. Cost effective talent is at a premium nowadays, but elite talent is still elite talent.

Can you head the Halladay negotiations please?

[-MetA4-]

Value as in paying $50 million just to have the right to negotiate with Matsuzaka, then ponying up another $50 million to actually sign him? Trading Hanley Ramirez for Josh Beckett, in addition to taking back a bad (at the time) contract? Signing Julio Lugo to a huge deal? These happened the past few years. Epstein is not immune to throwing money around or getting fixated on a player to the point where he would overpay. Just because they did not trade for Santana (which is more Minnesota's fault than anyone else's) doesn't mean they wouldn't be major players in this case.

1) The money paid to negotiate with Matsuzaka paid itself with marketing, jersey sales, television deals, etc. in Japan.

2) Beckett was a YOUNG "future-ace". When Hanley Ramirez was traded he was a prospect who's stock was stagnating. Again, this isn't even remotely similar because Beckett was entering his prime whereas Halladay is 32 years old.

3) Free Agency and Trade Aquisitions are nowhere near similar. Bostom has money to throw around so signing free agents costs next to nothing except sometimes a draft pick. Bostom has money to risk on Lugo, they also have money to risk on Halladay, but signing Lugo doesn't cost you any current roster players (Buchholz?) or top prospects.

There are MANY people who believe that Boston was just faking interest in Santana the entire time, just to keep the Yankees from driving away with him easily. What happened? The Twins thought they could start a bidding war, the Yankees got aggitated and dropped out completely, and the Red Sox shortly followed suit. If they wanted Santana that badly then why didn't they just scoop him up after the Yankees said "forget it"?


Again, there is a huge difference between trading for a young star player that they can hold on for little cost (Beckett) and trading for an aging star player who is going to require a huge longterm extension (Halladay). I've spoken with several Red Sox fans and most of them think that if Epstein will sell the house on anyone it will be younger, cheaper options like Josh Johnson and Adrian Gonzalez.

[youngLion]

Red Sox get:
Roy Halladay
Vernon Wells

Blue Jays get:
drunk

Hey now I think we have to be very, very careful with these types of proposals. I know that in Wells the Blue Jays have a toxic asset of WHMIS proportions, but after all Halladay is just the opposite, he's a fantastic asset that on his own should offer a very useful, long-term return. Personally, I don't like it. I think the team needs to get something big back for Halladay. Hell, I don't mind if Rogers ends up paying Wells to sit on the bench in Vegas down the line; I just think it's more important for the team to get something substantive in return for their ace. If Anthopolous does decide to package them in a dump like this however, there's one absolutely crucial question he has to ask of the Red Sox: Will they provide the booze?

[Michael Bradley]

1) The money paid to negotiate with Matsuzaka paid itself with marketing, jersey sales, television deals, etc. in Japan.

2) Beckett was a YOUNG "future-ace". When Hanley Ramirez was traded he was a prospect who's stock was stagnating. Again, this isn't even remotely similar because Beckett was entering his prime whereas Halladay is 32 years old.

3) Free Agency and Trade Aquisitions are nowhere near similar. Bostom has money to throw around so signing free agents costs next to nothing except sometimes a draft pick. Bostom has money to risk on Lugo, they also have money to risk on Halladay, but signing Lugo doesn't cost you any current roster players (Buchholz?) or top prospects.

There are MANY people who believe that Boston was just faking interest in Santana the entire time, just to keep the Yankees from driving away with him easily. What happened? The Twins thought they could start a bidding war, the Yankees got aggitated and dropped out completely, and the Red Sox shortly followed suit. If they wanted Santana that badly then why didn't they just scoop him up after the Yankees said "forget it"?

Again, there is a huge difference between trading for a young star player that they can hold on for little cost (Beckett) and trading for an aging star player who is going to require a huge longterm extension (Halladay). I've spoken with several Red Sox fans and most of them think that if Epstein will sell the house on anyone it will be younger, cheaper options like Josh Johnson and Adrian Gonzalez.

I agree Beckett is a different case than Halladay (he was also an injury risk), but I think it is more about Epstein getting what he wants if he sees value in it. Ramirez, while not beating the world at age 21 in AA, was still Boston's highest upside prospect at the time. Much bigger prospect than Kelly or Buccholz, IIRC. Of course Beckett's age made it more of a worthwhile gamble for Epstein, as I doubt anyone would give up a Ramirez calibre prospect for Halladay now, but that was still a huge risk on Theo's part. I think it's entirely possible Epstein sees more value in Doc than in Santana for any number of reasons (durability, size, style, performance relative to strength of competition, etc), despite increased age. Just speculation on my part though.

How many pitchers who are considered the best (or at least top 5) in the league were traded at age 30+? Not to many, I would assume. That's why it is hard to get a read on what Halladay would be able to command. Randy Johnson at age 34 got Freddy Garcia, Carlos Guillen, and John Halama. Curt Schilling at age 33 got Omar Daal, Nelson Figueroa, Travis Lee and Vicente Padilla. Those happened a lot time ago, and the game has changed since then (especially as it relates to the economy and increasing value in cost effective talent), but as I said one thing that will never change in baseball is the need for elite talent. That's why Sabathia got a HUGE deal during the baseball recession.

Ultimately, I think you are right in that people are expecting too much for Halladay, but I think he will get more than Santana assuming AA is not Gord Ash part II. He is just too good of a pitcher and comes with too many good qualities (non-greedy, workhorse, easily signable, etc) to not trade for at least a good package of prospects. But yes, people expecting to raid another team's system is probably far fetched, which is a shame since losing Halladay will cripple this team for years to come.

[-MetA4-]

Red Sox now looking at Hanley Ramirez.

They also looked into Felix Hernandez last year.

I dont doubt they are interested in Halladay, but if they're going to sell their farm on anyone it will be for one of these younger options (given that we continue to demand a top return on Halladay).

[daddyfivestar]

Seems the Dodgers and Angels have the 'Wish List' items:

ML Ready inexpensive good SP (LA Billingsley, ANA Santana)

Contributing ML Ready everyday Bat (LA Russell Martin catcher, ANA Brandon Wood ss-3b)

Couple of good Prospects at OF and P

New to this board this is my first post. I couldn't live with either of these deals. Wood's a washout. If he was a serviceable player the Angels would have found some AB's for him by now.

Wood a washout at 24 y.o. with 1 legitimate shot at the bigs in '08 which he chundered?
Why so down on the guy? Still producing near .300, 25 hrs, 25 dbls, in 100 gms per season AAA the past few yrs, and can play both SS/3B.