The Price is Right? What is Your Bid on Halladay?
Posted by trs86 on 9:39am, Tuesday November 3rd 2009
On July 20th John Heyman had the following to say about a rumored Halladay to the Mets deal:
Jays’ asking price for Halladay too steep for Mets
“Toronto’s request of the Mets for star pitcher Roy Halladay was for top outfield prospect Fernando Martinez, young pitchers Bobby Parnell and Jon Niese and shortstop prospect Ruben Tejada, sources tell SI.com.
The Mets responded with a resounding no.”
Now as most baseball fans know, it is difficult to determine how much of these types of stories are true. We know that Halladay was on the market and we know that the Jays were most likely calling teams to find out if they would be interested. We also know based on most published reports that it would take at least 4 players and at least 1 top pitcher and top hitter from the organization. Obviously I still am not sure that the rumored Mets package would have been enough and I think Omar would have been insane not to take it. However, today I ask what would you be willing to give up for Doc? Personally I think he is a better option than Lackey.
Halladay is a year older than Lackey but is that a draw back? The last 4 years Halladay has pitched 150 more innings than Lackey and has averaged over 7 1/3 innings per start compared to Lackey’s 6 2/3. During that span Halladay has produced a ridiculous 29 CG compared to Lackey’s 9. The last 2 years Halladay has had a higher K/9 and nearly twice the SO/BB ratio. Of course I am not a big fan of ERA but Halladay’s ERA was also a full run lower each of the last 2 years.
Of course what am I saying here? I am not sure anyone would debate that Lackey is better than Halladay or even in the same league. However, at what point does the extra talent required to get him even up the discussion? Halladay is owed 15.75 Million for next year and becomes a FA after that season. Of course he also has a no-trade clause and could force a contract extension before accepting a trade. However, that extension to get a contract worked out something that the Blue Jays were unwilling to discuss last summer.
If I was going to offer the Jays a package for Halladay I would start by asking if we could take a guy like Overbay to lessen prospects. Most likely that will not play into the discussion unless we would take Wells. Taking Wells would obviously reduce the prospect demand but would be taking what may be the worst contract in baseball as he is owed another 98 million over the next 5 years. So in my mind it’s back to what prospects would you be willing to give? Competition will be stiff and it could actually require more prospects now than it did during the summer as I expect more teams will be involved.
With all this in mind I start with the following:
Fmart, Holt, Parnell, Niese
This gives them 2 MLB pitchers for next year an OF if they can dump Wells somewhere some how and a pitching prospect. Most likely that would not be enough. How far are you willing to go?
Sphere: Related Content
The one problem I have with this, and it’s a major one, is that you only get one year of Halladay. I think if the Jays allowed the Mets to work on a pre-trade extension with Halladay (like the Santana deal), it would be much more worthwhile.
Otherwise it’s either:
a) Trade most of your top prospects for one year of a very good pitcher
b) Trade no prospects, just salary, for multiple years of a slightly lesser pitcher
Well technically you trade one prospect that you would draft but yeah I agree. However, you get 2 back when you offer him arbitration if you don’t work out an extension. So you lose 4 players and get 3 back in some ways. Who knows what those 3 will be though?
That’s true, I forgot about getting the 2 prospects. It’s a tough call.
Also, as I said in the article at what point does it become an advantage either way? Lets say rumors are true and it takes 5/90 for Lackey. Does that go down as a positive that you have him locked up for 5 years at 18 million per or a negative? Is having Halladay on a 1 year contract at 15.75 million a positive or a negative?
I couldn’t see the Mets getting involved in a trade like this (i.e. one that would involve a serious mortgaging on the future) without them making every effort sign the guy long term. They couldn’t (wouldn’t?) go into this unless they had reasonable assurances from Halladay that he was willing to sign with them long term and that they could get something donw.
As I mentioned I would not mind trading for Overbay. Would the Jays be interested in Murphy in the deal as well if it sent us a true 1B? Overbay had a decent year: .265 .372 .466 .838. Of course looking most just a range and not the little things Murphy has more range than Overbay and perhaps similar or more potential but is Murphy our 1B of the future and would Overbay give them a better chance of winning next year while we wait on guys like Davis or other potential star 1B through FA or trade?
probably not that far.
I still worry about Hallady on a LT extension, at huge $s. So, I would prefer to look at him as a 1 year rental that you offer arb to.
You can’t discount the opportunity cost of all those prospects either. At least lackey only cost money + a 2nd round pick!
How about this for a devil’s advocate position: If it is going to take F Mart + holt + neise + parnell/tejada (or more), could you get Prince or A Gon for that package?
so, you could get lackey + a major hitter at below-FA market price via trade OR Halladay alone, with no offensive help.
Now, I have no idea what lackey will get, so say it is the same 15.75 Halladay gets paid. If you could use the prospect lode to get A gon for 4.5 (maybe even fielder for 10), you are still only at 20-25 spent, with money for the pen and C left.
Or you could sign Bay for another 16, have less offense, and be broke.
Why would we worry more about giving Halladay a long term extension than giving Lackey 5 years? Because of the one year age difference? If Lackey is going to get the 18 Million (who knows if he will get what is rumored) how much more will Halladay get? 5/100? Is that significant compared to 5/90 because of 1 more year in age, even though Halladay has not had the injury concerns that Lackey has had?
No I don’t think you could get Fielder for that but in turn remember that you will have to pay Fielder 10.5 million for 2010 and if you want to keep him most likely give him a contract in between Holliday and Tex? Agonz I still have a hard time understanding why they would even trade him but if they do it will take a lot. That being said you get him for cheap for 2 years but then while Lackey is still signed will have to give him a Tex type contract as well. So in my mind the money is going to even out in the next 3 years regardless.
Also with Halladay if you DON’t restructure the deal and justhave him for 15.75 million then you would still have 17 million or so left to spend on the rest of the team. Obviously I don’t see the Mets going out and getting Bay or Holliday if they get Halladay or Lackey. So 17 million buys a lot of role players.
As I said at the time, if such a deal was on the table and Omar rejected it then he’s got to go. Immediately.
I’d be willing to go pretty far in a trade for Halladay, moreso if we could sign him to an extension.
I’d be willing to part with the players TRS proposes. And I’d probably be willing to substitute Davis for Martinez (with Overbay on his final year I suspect they may be more interested in Ike than F-Mart but who knows if they even like Ike), Flores for Tejada and possibly Mejia for Holt. Not sure if I woul dmake all three of those substitutions, however.
Finding a match is tough, though. I think Toronto’s young pitchers — Romero, Cecil, Mills, Marcum, etc. — all probably have equal or greater ceilings than Niese or Parnell. Not sure Niese or Parnell are that interesting for them right now.
How many of those guys are MLB ready? I have no clue. I guess you would have to look at the fact that Niese, Parnell and Murphy could all be on the MLB team now? But if you are rebuilding does that even play a roll? Another question, if you have Wells how do you rebuild? LOL. Man what a bad contract. Think about this if the Jays took Perez and Castillo for Wells in the deal then we would still be on the hook for another 62 million extra. WOW. Seriously how much would the Jays have to eat to have anyone even consider taking him?
Well, Romero gave them 29 starts and will probably receive a handful of ROY votes, Cecil started 18 games and Mills 2. All three are lefthanded. Righties: Marcum is returning from Tommy John but has already proven to be a solid pitcher (1.28 WHIP and 3.95 ERA in about 400 IP) and should start this season. Neither of Dustin McGowan (who was looking like a potential stud at various times until shoulder and knee surgery — ) and Jesse Litsch (also was very solid with 1.30 WHIP and 3.83 ERA in 300 IP) will probably not start the season but should be back some time during it.
Neise would only add to their list of injured pitchers.
Parnell would probably have some value to them as a reliever.
Thanks. What about Downs would they keep him at 4 million for 2010 if they are rebuilding? I keep looking for contracts to take to lessen the blow. Overbay, Downs and Halladay save them 27 million next year.
Wouldn’t make sense for a rebuilding team to pay $4m for a set up reliever.
The problem with that theory, though, is that Downs will have a lot of trade value in the open market and they won’t be so desperate to dump him in this scenario. Why take lesser prospects for Halladay in order to dump a guy who could fetch good value elsewhere?
Overbay probably fits better in this scenario. And, of course, Vernon Wells would too. But geez, I wouldn’t take his contract unless it came with Adam Lind’s and Travis Snider’s!
Yeah, I am still trying to wrap my mind around it.
How desperate would the Jays be to dump Wells? Would it be better to get top prospects for Halladay and just eat all of Wells or would it be better to take lesser prospects in hopes of dumping him? Hard call. I guess I would just keep Wells and try and get as much as I could from Halladay.
IF they took Perez I would be willing to maybe take Wells for 10M a year instead of 20? Assuming it drastically reduced the prospect cost. So no chance.
I’ve said a few times that the Mets will have to be creative on the trade market to really succeed this offseason.
But I just don’t see many trade chips.
If we were not so locked in with a high budget already we could go the normal route of picking up guys like Wells to get who we need but with most of our salary besides the 32 million available locked up long term it makes it difficult.
Again, if the Jays were willing to eat salary how much would they have to take to include Perez and Wells in the deal? Any thoughts?
Wells’s last three seasons: .265 .317 .426
I’d say they’d have to pick up an awful lot. And I’m not sure how he would do anything but hurt the Mets with that type of production.
Wanny I am not sure I am willing to give up your package. Davis, Flores, Mejia, and another prospect is tough for sure. Of course you are also assuming that we get a contract window.
I would rather not deal Davis or Mejia and would rather include Murphy and Holt but prospects are prospects.
My fear is that regardless if we take Lackey or trade for Halladay we are going to have to skimp on LF and or 1B. I would hope that we can keep a guy like Davis who hopefully can take one of those spots for the future.
As I said, I would not be willing to make all of those substitutions, i.e. I would have made one or two of them to result in a package like Davis, Holt, Tejada and Parnell but not David, Mejia, Flores and Parnell.
Oh I missed it. Sorry.
I guess to me the only player that I really don’t want to trade as part of a package is Davis. Granted if he is the center piece and I get to lessen the over all load then he is not untouchable for sure. I just think with his ability to play OF and 1B and potential for a power bat we need to try and keep him.
I’d prefer to keep him too. But from what I’ve read scouts are not unanimous on him, and afterall, we’re talking about Roy friggin’ Halladay.
I said this yesterday. Sign Lackey at ($16M @ 5/80 same as Burnett) and trade for Halladay with extension of ($16M in 2010 and 3/69 after - Santana money).
Santana-Halladay-Lackey-Perez-Pelf
With that rotation you can go with Pagan and Murphy. Hopefully Ollie has a resurgance in 2010 and we can trade his 1/$12M salary the following year and we’d still have Maine to replace Ollie.
I’d really be willing to give up our top 4 prospects for Halladay, if it came to that. Pitching wins in the playoffs, and there wouldn’t be a better playoff rotation in all of baseball.
Would never happen. Nice thought though. Better hope those guys can hit though because there would be no money for hitters for a while. Not to mention the Mets would have to drastically raise payroll next year that’s 39 million for those 2 and 82 million wrapped up in 4 players.
i know. I live in a fantasy world.
Castillo-Pagan-Reyes-Wright-Beltran-Frenchy-Murphy-Santos
I’d be comfortable with that lineup if we had my rotation. You got good defense, speed and linedrive hitters.
Of course salaries go up so payroll has to go up, but I tried to reduce w/ getting rid of Ollie after this year, IF he has a comeback.
Yeah, I understand but I have to wonder what happens if Pagan turns back into his normal pumpkin and Murphy is just not good? We are stuck. I love that rotation but you still have to score to win.
lol. I’m Mr North Jersey could come up with a nice Pumpkin Head image for Pagan
Re: Murphy, as long as he plays good D at 1st and is decent with the bat, I’m good. Kind of the Pedro Feliz of the Mets.
Pagan can def be a bust, but I’d imagine Reed or Sullivan could step up
Speaking of Sullivan,his yr ending stat line is one of the strangest I remember seeing.
?
Opps,sorry ’bout that!
Over 150 p.a.s,2doubles,2HRs&5triples..Don’t recall ever seeing that before.
Saw this on another site and I have to ask. Would you trade Reyes in a deal for Halladay? Their point was that the Jays need a SS and someone to see tickets with Halladay gone. Of course star for star deals do not happen but just curious.
I vote no. As you said, very unlikely it happens but…
I don’t like the idea of trading what I perceive to be a star every day player for a pitcher as he’s in there only every 5 days. It would have to be a pitcher in Johan’s league for me to want to consider that type of trade.
Would never happen. Nice thought though.
It would make sense in some ways, but home grown stars like Reyes don’t get traded.
Unless they are Halladay. LOL. But yeah for NY teams it does not happen. Most of the time the star for star trades never happen.
not unless there’s someone pretty good in the system to replace them
I rarely use the word great when discussing
an active ball player BUT this guy is great.
The price noted
by many here is very steep.
I thought I read
over the weekend that the Cubs are considering moving Bradley and taking on Wells’contract.
You guys know I have strong opinions BUT on
a Doc Hallady deal,I’m wishy-washy right now.
I love Reyes BUT
am note sure about him anymore and/or what kind of player he’ll return as.I’m not a big FMart fan and would have no problem moving him in this type of deal.I really like both Parnell and Niese and would hate to give them up but understand what it would take to get a Halladay.
So,I don’t know.
I do know however that if we were to make a huge move and get him that he MUST come with a clean bill of health and an extended contract.
If that happened
I wouldn’t crush Omar no matter who he gave up because THIS guy really
is one of the top5 Pitchers in the game and
should have 3or4 more yrs
at that level.
so ur Loco for Lackey and think Doc is Great
I fear that a Reyes for Halladay deal is like the Mets cutting off its nose to spite its face.
The Mets don’t have an excess of major league offense to deal right now. They arguably do not have enough at all.
On this point, Marty Noble (whose reports and opinions I take with a grain of salt and would cut that grain of salt in half if I could) states that the Mets will prioritize offense over pitching this offseason.
If this is true, well… I am not surprised but I am disappointed.
I don’t disagree.
I hereby grant Omar the authority to offer the Jay’s my first born.
LOL. I don’t know - can he pitch? Maybe he’ll turn out to be better Halladay.
I don’t know enough of the specifics to do this on my own but what I would want to do when considering trading for Halladay is to have a great understanding of prospect rankings and I would use the Cliff Lee - Philadelphia trade to compare/contrast my potential offer.
First I would need to know what rank the prospects in the Phils organization had. For example, did Philly send their 3rd, 6th, 8th and 13th prospects? Whatever they were I would want to know that.
Then I would want to know the rankings of the Met prospects being considered for offer. The Phillies got Lee who is far more inconsistent year-to-year than Halladay, so you would seemingly have to offer more for the more consistently good pitcher. But Philly got 1 1/2 seasons of Lee, the Mets would be getting only 1 sure season of Halladay.
Then you have to have some basis of comparison between the organizations prospects. How does, for example, the Mets #3 prospect compare to the #3 surrendered by Philly? Is our #3 worse?
It’s all a jumble and I don’t know the specific rankings but ultimately the one thing I’m getting at is I would not offer MORE to the Jays than the Phils gave up for Lee. Yes Halladay is better and more consistent but I’m getting him for less time. So I’m comfortable with offering the Jays an equivalent package that the Phils gave to the Indians, but that’s where I would draw the line.
Anyone who wants to figure out what that would be, knock yourselves out, I’m all eyes and ears.
I think you have two things. One for you and one against you. Halladay could use his no trade clause to dictate where he goes and that could play into the Mets favor if he wants to pitcher here for some reason. Against you is that now more teams will be involved with Halladay than were with Lee during the season last year.
Fair points. I guess one of the sidebars of my thought process is this: I have a ceiling for my offer. I go into this understanding I can be outbid.
I as fan/faux-GM am comfortable with someone I trust (since I can’t do it) establishing what the Met equivalent is of that Philly - Lee offer, and making that my “best offer.” Either it gets it done or I move on to plan B.
Grave:
I think we (or some of us here) discussed this comparison at the time of the deal for Lee.
Anyway, BA’s pre-season rankings of the Phillies players in the Lee trade were Carrasco (2), Marson (3), Donald (4) and Knapp (10). I think by the time the trade was made, the three top guys all had falling stock prices while Knapp’s was increasing.
The Mets BA preseason 2, 3, 4 and 10 were Flores, Niese, Holt and Kunz, respectively. This would not significantly differ from the types of proposals we discussed here earlier. But as an example of how much the preseason rankings changed during the course of the year, neither Ike Davis or Josh Thole were even included on the preseason top 10… and it is likely Davis will be a top 3 right now.
Another comparison could be to match up as follows:
*Carrasco and Niese are both close to major league ready prospects — and at the time were the teams’ top pitching prospects.
* Marson and Josh Thole are both singles hitting receivers and the top catching prospects of each team.
* Donald and Tejada are the shortstops closest to the majors, though Havens bat probably profiles closer to Donald’s as does the likelihood of his positional versatility. Plus, with a good year he could move faster than Tejada given his age. Donald and Havens have both underperformed expectations.
* Holt and Knapp are both power pitching righties, though Knapp is not the Phils second best pitching prospect according to BA’s preseason ratings.
So would an offer of Niese, Holt, Thole and Havens be more comparable to the Lee deal than a Niese, Holt, Flores and Kunz?
Either way, with the exception of Kunz, I think these deals would be of similar quality.
Wanny, thank you so much for finding and sharing the rankings.
I trust your knowledge of these topics so if you feel that either of those offers you mention close to the bottom of your comment are realistically roughly comparable to what the Phils used to net Lee then I am comfortable making either one “my” offer.
I have no love for Kunz so I guess I would start with that offer, if rejected I would then suggest the “Thole/Havens +” offer, and if that were rejected I would thank Toronto for their time and move on to other avenues.
Thanks again for the info.
I think it more likely that if the criteria was to offer something close the top 2,3,4 and 10th best prospects as the Phillies did, the Mets won’t get the advantage of a retroactive application of the rankings and would have to submit to offering the 2,3,4 and 10 of today.
I would guess the top 5 Mets prospects for 2010 will include, in some order: FMart, Davis, Mejia, Holt and Flores.
If 2-4 are Davis, Mejia and Holt, your opinion might change.
I think it is a better idea to go with my second scenario above as it more closely compares the player quality, regardless of BA’s rankings.
Why wouldn’t you consider holt or mejia? What is their best case scenario…that they can one day be considered in the same class as Roy Halliday? Mejia is currently getting lit up in the freakin Arizona fall league, wheras Halliday is currently baseballs best pitcher. Obviously he’s young and still has a ways to go, but I cannot even begin to comprehend your logic. You’re talking 2/5 of our games we are the best overall team in baseball.
No one said they wouldn’t consider Holt OR Mejia. Under the 2010 rankings you might have to include Holt AND Mejia if we were to match the same formula of the Lee deal.
I think when push comes to shove and the Blue Jays realize they already screwed the pooch by holding onto Halliday this long, they’ll probably be in a postion were they won’t be able to dictate the value they receive. I’m telling you, don’t be shocked up we have another Johan Santana on our hands. The Jays can obviosuly never afford to keep this guy, the Yankees probably won’t be involved, the Phillies have Lee, the Sox don’t need Halliday. Not too many teams can afford to take this guy, it might boil down to one or two potential trade partners. I can see maybe the Cubs or Dodgers here, but lets see what happens in the offseason.
I agree this is a possibility. And I think the same possibility exists with Lackey.
With the Yanks not likely to be involved, things change drastically.
Uh Oh. I hope I have time for what is about to happen. LOL.
We won’t be able to argue forever on this because we’ll never know what Toronto could have gotten previously (since it didn’t happen and JP Ricciardi is not likely to name names).
But I would be very very surprised if the Jays could get more now for one season of Halladay than one and a half seasons of him — and in some cases two playoff runs.
It makes no sense that teams would be willing to pay more for less.
And I don’t see any difference in the number of teams that might be willing to trade for him. Only so many can even afford his contract. (another point not worth going to far into because we’ll know who was involved before either)
Last year with Harden in the fold would the Cubs have traded for Halladay? Most likely not. Could the O’s now see more of a reason to trade for him than they would have last year? Maybe even a team like the Nationals now decide to invest more money? Perhaps Texas? I just think that now almost every team thinks there in it where in July not as many do.
Since Tom Hicks is on the verge of bankruptcy I think it is safe to rule them out. Anyway you’re also assuming that they were not interested midseason when they were very much in the race. Perhaps they were.
I don’t think Rich Harden would have an effect one way or the other on the Cubs plans re: Halladay. They have a formidable rotation even without him (and I can’t see why having him would preclude trading for Halladay) and need to upgrade their offense. Anyway, it sounds as if they are also in cost-cutting mode under new ownership.
The Orioles? Seriously? I don’t know where in peter Angelos’s recent track record there are any entries that include paying big name players and trading young players during a rebuilding mode.
And again, what suggests that if these teams were interested now, they weren’t interested 6 months ago?
Again, why pay more for less?
Point is that almost every team believes they are in it for next year where as many of those teams were out of it or already had a guy in the rotation at the time last year.
Again, I think they can get the same. Who knows?
I get your point about less time but to me that time is not as significant for a team taht was out of it last year.
There’s some validity to the point that certain teams will be more interested when they know there in it for real.
But I think the dollars, even for one year, combined with the trade return really limits the number of interested teams. Some of the teams you mentioned below don’t spend that kind of money on their entire outfield.
I understand they don’t but teams do strange things. Who would have thought the Nationals would give Dunn 12 million for this year and keep him?
Who would think the Pirates would trade for Matt Morris.
Unless Halladay uses his no trade clause then I think the Jays will actually get as much or more for Halladay now than they would have during the season. More teams involved and no comparable pitchers on the market unless you count Lackey and then after that as we know there is a dramatic decline. I see no difference in what the Mets would have to give now and what they would have had to then in terms of quality except the names may have changed.
TR…1. The Jays are trading Hallaiday, they have to, this is what baseball has become. 2. Who is going to be able to afford him? I mean how many teams can give him the money he’s going to want? Of these teams, how many will be willing to make the deal for him? And when you think about it, not many teams come to mind. Teams I can draw off the top fo ym head based on 0 research..Mets, Angels, Cubs, Dodgers. What other team can afford Halliday and would actually be willing to trade for him? Then take into account that its very likely that Harden and Lackey will go to at least one of these teams, so you can cross them off. The list is very small, and while the Mets might not be in the best position of all these teams, you’ve witnessed the drastic effect one team dropping out of the race can have. Lets just draw this imaginary scenario from my head here. Near the end of the offseason, and it emerges that the only team sinterested in Halliday are the agnels Mets and dodgers. Most likely one of these two teams will be driven away due to the Jays original asking price. So lets cross of the Dodgers. So it comes down to Mets Angels, it’s a 50/50 dependend on other circumstances. And lets say maybe Halliday wants to stay on the east coast..just saying.
Halladay.
Remember they can always try and compete this year and then trade him at the deadline for prospects or offer him arbitration and collect 2 picks so they don’t have to trade him now. Yes they would get less then for sure.
A lot of teams during an offseason come to mind. Unless Halladay forces the issue then he is on a 1 year deal for under market value. Why wouldn’t the Mets, Nationals, Cardinals, Cubs, Rockies, Dodgers, Angels, A’s, Rangers, Whitesox, Yankees, Redsox, O’s….
I can’t see many teams at 1 year 15 million that would not be interested.
However if Halladay starts using his no trade clause it all becomes a different game.
Halladay’s contract for 2010 represents more than 1/4 of the Nationals 2009 payroll, about 1/4 of the Orioles 2009 payroll, about 1/3 of the A’s 2009 payroll, about 1/6 of the Cards 2009 payroll (and that’s before re-signing DeRosa, Holliday and Pineiro — not to mention they already have two ace caliber starters and various other needs), etc.
It’s one year for 15 million for the best pitcher in the game. I am sure all kinds of teams would be interested if they thought they could compete next year.
FWIW, the Phils top prospect (as determined each year by BA) has a pretty high success rate of at least becoming a solid regular. If I had to guess, Carrasco will be the one to ruin it. Meanwhile, the Mets’ list is a bit more hit and miss.
Year Player, Position 2008
1999 Pat Burrell, 1b Phillies
2000 Pat Burrell, 1b/of Phillies
2001 Jimmy Rollins, ss Phillies
2002 Marlon Byrd, of Rangers
2003 Gavin Floyd, rhp White Sox
2004 Cole Hamels, lhp Phillies
2005 Ryan Howard, 1b Phillies
2006 Cole Hamels, lhp Phillies
2007 Carlos Carrasco, rhp Phillies
2008 Carlos Carrasco, rhp Phillies
1999 Alex Escobar, of Nationals
2000 Alex Escobar, of Nationals
2001 Alex Escobar, of Nationals
2002 Aaron Heilman, rhp Mets
2003 Jose Reyes, ss Mets
2004 Kazuo Matsui, ss Astros
2005 Lastings Milledge, of Nationals
2006 Lastings Milledge, of Nationals
2007 Mike Pelfrey, rhp Mets
2008 Fernando Martinez, of Mets
If I’m looking at this as things currently stand, then no, I don’t think the Mets would be well served to make this kind of trade. Now I realize that Halladay is as good as advertised and would definetly make the Mets better, but at what long term cost?
If we have learned anything from this past year, it’s that we have a lot of holes and with the exception of Wright and Reyes (and even they aren’t as sure things as they were two years ago)this team is going to have a lot of new faces in the next few years. It would be my hope that some of these guys on the farm could fill those roles down the road.
On the other hand, if the Mets go out and add a big piece in left field (say Holliday) or maybe a nice free agent pitcher (i.e. Lackey), then my opinion changes totally. In that scenario, I say yes, go ahead and make the trade since you are back to being a contender immediately.
In short, my opinion on the trade depends on the context and current state of the team.
Come on that’s not realistic either. So now you want the Mets to get Holliday, Lackey and Halladay and add 50 Million plus to the payroll. What are the long term cost of signing Lackey and Holliday to 5 year 80-100 million dollar contracts?
I think he said he would not be interested in Halladay unless they also got Lackey OR Holliday first.
Even still you know that is unrealistic. It appears that we will only get one major addition to the team this offseason and unless we are going to permanently raise payroll then I am ok with only one.
Do you understand how good Roy Halliday is? Look at his stats, and understand he’s putting them up in the AL East. You’re talking about a rotation featuring the games best righty and second best lefty. If the Jays seriously want to trade Halliday and are willing to let the Mets work on an extension to get the deal done, I tell the Jays they can scan our minor league roster and help themselves to any 4 names. Maybe not exactly that, but you get my point! Its Roy Halliday! He consistantly wins 16+ games playing for the Blue Jays in the toughest division in baseball. And if you can somehow sneak into the playoffs! Good luck beating Halliday and Johan at Citi Field..and if you do, well than i tip my hat and say nice try Omar I understand why you made the move anyways. There’s nothing about Halliday that would insinuate he is declining. He’s stated 30+ games the last 4 years and eats up inning.
I think most people on here agree with that however where we differ is on how much it would take and how much we would give.
If it was Fmart, Holt, Tejada and Parnell I would drive them to Cananda myself. If it’s Davis, Holt, Mejia, and Niese I am not so sure.
Halladay is a no brainer if you want to win in the next 3 years.
Halladay is a Ace. If you don’t agree then you are beyond help.
At 33 next year he is for the win now approach not the long term 5 year approach.
It will most likely take a 5 year or 4 with an option to get him to allow himself to be traded.
So even if we agree he is a win now guy you have to give him a 4 or 5 year deal to trade 4 him.
The question is if he wants a trade and sign how far are the Mets willing to go with prospects?
He will get 15Mil in 2010 so he will want more than that for sure.
I would go as far as 25mil a year for 4 for and an option 5.
If the Mets go that high with money that will of course affect how much talent they will offer also.
If it took Niese Parnell FMart and Tejada to trade for him on top of 25 mil a year I can’t fault Mets for not making trade.
That being said I would pull trigger myself Niese and Fmart are coming off surgery and Parnell has a live arm but so does Halladay and Tejada for all the buzz is still but a prospect.
Here is a question, if it was a move to the NL to a team like the Mets or Dodgers would he be more likely to accept it without the extension knowing how his stats could be incredible switching to the NL in a pitchers ballpark thus increasing even more how much money he could get?
If he wanted out of Toronto badly maybe, but I think he is content to play out his year there and go free agent plus I don’t know if he likes New York maybe he does not want any part of us.
I think as usual it comes down to money and the security of a long term deal. Think about he will be 33 next year this may be his last shot at a huge deal.
Oh I agree. But he will have to weigh out would he get more money a) forcing the trade to whatever team he wants this year b) as a FA leaving the Jays next year c)leaving say the Dodgers next year with better stats?
Yea but option A he would only consider if he wanted out of Toronto
Option B would depend on if he can get now what he is will want at the end of 2010 and where he is ok playing for said team
Option C that is a dangerous game to play and I don’t think he would say I am so much better on the Dodgers compared to Toronto. He has posted good numbers with Toronto it is not like he is a bad pitcher there.
Agreed that he is not bad, LOL. But how is it dangerous IF he was just going to wait out the season in Toronto?
The dodgers r an unknown to him. who is to say that he will excel in the NL more than he has in the AL. To assume so when trying to decide where he can post better numbers and generate a bigger payday is a dangerous game on his future.
Think about this Wanny. Example the Nationals. The Nationals to match last year’s payroll easily have 25 million to spend. They are technically only committed to about 26 million and had a 60 million dollar payroll last year.
What if they decided, lets do it this year. Lets trade for Halladay, sign O-Dog, and sign a 6 million solid pitcher.
That’s about their 25 million to payroll.
Then their rotation becomes
Halladay, Lannan, Zimmerman (injury but…), Solid #4, Livan or cast of young guys
Lineup
Morgan, Hudson, Zimmerman, Dunn, Willingham, Dukes, Guzman, Flores
If I am the Nationals I am thinking that may actually be enough to compete for a wild card spot.
You leave out one bif factor why the hell would Halladay agree to be traded to the Nationals?
LOL, most likely he would not. You missed the previous discussion. My point was that if Halladay does not use his NTC then a lot of teams would be willing to get into the race and perhaps give as much or more than the Jays would have gotten during the season last year.
lol, maybe he feels patriotic and wants to play in the capitol
According to Cot’s they are committed to $34-35 for Guzman, Zimmerman, Dunn, Strasburg, Willie Harris and Josh Willingham alone (I estimated Willingham at about $5m since he is in your lineup).
Can’t see how your scenario is accurate, much less remotely likely.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tsCEGKNVcxttZHoBc2O6q0w&output=html
Has them at 28.85 million and then of course the money given to Willingham who made 2.95 million last year. If you include Strasburg on the MLB budget then yes it would be 34-35 but they spent 60 million last year.
Well, you have to include Strasburg because he has a major league contract.
So $34 million goes to six players (one of whom may not even be on the major league roster to start the season for service time reasons). You then add 3 players for $25m and have a $60m roster of 8-9 total players.
Am I missing something or are they not going to have another 16-17 players on their team?
LOL, yup, that’s all they are going with.
MLB has to include the 4 million for Strasburg, why do the Nationals?
4 million gets you 8-9 players at league minimum.
Another intersting point, as much as I love Cot’s contracts even on their spreadsheet they don’t have 40 players contracts included. Many don’t have a value there for 2009 so assuming they did make money and the total on the spreadsheet was already over 61 million their total payroll last year may have been closer to 65 million anyway.
So your theory is that the Nats will fool themselves into thinking they can compete with a team consisting of 17 major league minimum players, which will include its entire bullpen, 2/5 of its rotation, its entire bench and 3/8 of its starting lineup?
Sure hope their 6 paid guys don’t get hurt or that Elijah Dukes doesn’t stink again…
Yup.
Did they fool themselves into thinking they could compete last year when they brought in Dunn and were into the Tex sweepstakes?
Which of their rebuilding chips did they have to trade for those guys?
Hmm a 2nd round draft pick for Tex? So you are saying the Nats don’t have trading chips to spare for Halladay? I have no idea.
Again that’s not the point, if they were interested in brining in Tex for 10 years 180 million dollars there is a chance they would be interested in trading for what may be the best pitcher in the game on a one year contract at 15.75 Million.
No. I’m saying trading for one year of Halladay is not the same as signing 8 years of Teixeira.
There’s no chance that the Nats will contend in 2010 even with Halladay. But there’s a possibility that in 3 years that the Nats could contend with Tex when their young pitchers and position players mature.
Why is Halladay being discussed going to the Nats I don’t know? It is pointless unless you think he would consider revoking his no trade clause to be traded there.
I disagree, with that lineup and say you spend that 6 million on Gonzalez and another BP guy instead. Why did they spend 20 million on Dunn?
Great. So now you have a rotation comprised 4/5 of league minimum guys, 5 of 6 relievers who are league minimum guys, an entire bench of league minimums and at least 2 guys in the lineup of league minimums (and what exactly have Dukes and Flores proven?).
Not to mention you’ve probably traded some of your better league minimum ugys just to get Halladay.
If you and Washington can be fooled into thinking that will be a competitive team, then have at it.
They signed Dunn because you have to some veteran players on your team who can perform now.
But you do realize that:
a) Dunn did not cost them any of their young prospects
b) Halladay will cost several of them
c) you have 17 players on your roster who are league minimum players — most of whch are second rate after you’ve traded your better ones away for Halladay
d) your team has just one veteran in its bullpen and none on the bench (meanwhile your remaining players are sitting on it)
e) you only have Halladay for one year and your trade value for him will be less in July than what you paid for him in December
Last points on this silly subject:
Even after signing Dunn to his large (for them) contract they only increased payroll over 2008 by $6m. So I don’t really see this concerted effort on their part to spend money and compete.
Along those same lines, I think it is pretty likely that their Tex efforts were largely a PR campaign, knowing full well that Tex was not going to sign with them.
Regardless they still have about 25 million they could spend if they wanted to. They got rid of Young, Kearns, Johnson, and possibly McDougal and Olson. That’s a lot of money.
I think you’re fogetting a key point…WHY THE BLEEP WOULD ROY HALLIDAY EVER EXCEPT A TRADE TO PLAY FOR THE NATIONALS!!!!! Why would he except a deal to a place he’s onyl going to stay for 1 season or even half a season. This is why TR he is going to a big market team like every other big player does nowadays, or at the very craziest scenario he will get a too big to decline offer from a team that will only be able to afford him, and that is not going to happen.
active topic today.
In general though, a team can only go so far with concentrating ont eh big name/huge contract guys. Eventually you become the cubs, crushed under declinging talent with unmoveable contracts.
You really do have to blend in fresh blood every year to keep the team and payroll healthy. So, if you continue to gut the farm for 1 big name guy (even a good pitcher like Hallady), then you will never have the talent to bring up, but you will have an aging, max payroll team.
at least signing expensive FAs preserves the farm (minus your lost draft pick, of course).
Is it inconceivable that Omar could go back to working on value trades? That is, get guys before they become studs, not while they are on the downhill side of their career (and I don’t care who you are, a 33 YO SP has a lot of miles on them).
The Garza for Young trade was a great example of trading strength from strength, and targetting a guy you expect to be a star, and soon. It also strengthens your team for the future too.
For Roy Boy, it is possible that they could hold out and hope a team gets dewperate at the trade deadline if the offers aren’t that good now.
And frankly, the Mets shouldn’t worry about the extension window, assuming the only way he signs one is if it is absolutely top dollar. SO, might as well wait until the end of the year, and pay top dollar then. At least that way you are covered if he breaks down, and have the option of collecting 2 draft picks.
But, with a NTC, who knows what Doc will or won’t do, or want!
finally, the Phils gave up none of their (at the time) top 3 (at least) prospects (2 OFs and Drabek) for Lee. The “star” was a damaged goods A ball thrower, and donald and marson aren’t considered to have much up side (serviceable maybe?). They gave up much less for lee than it would have taken to get doc (based on the reported rumors)
What did people think about the Braves moves last year?
They traded for Vazquez, signed Lowe and Kawakami while keeping Hudson and Jurrjens.
So, even though they had pretty good pitchers in Hudson, Jurrjens and Hanson, they went out and got themselves 3 more pitchers.
It’d be great to see Omar put his more money where his mouth is. He’s always preaching about pitching. So let’s see him go get (or at least try) the top 2 pitchers on the market, Doc and Lackey.
LOL Case I love you man but it’s just not happening. Also, I am not sure the Braves had any intentions of getting Lowe until the Smoltz thing did not work out and they did not know Jurrjens would do what he did and Hanson was not ready. Nor was Vazquez as good as he pitched last year…
Also Hudson was out until August.
Sorry but I have to laugh at how this can’t happen but that the Nationals might fool themselves into trading for Roy Halladay!
See above, did the Nationals not get into the Tex discussions last year or sign Adam Dunn for 20 million last year?
< Back to Front Page Text size – +
Nationals reportedly up the ante for Teixeira
Email|Link|Comments (69) Posted by Steve Silva, Boston.com Staff December 23, 2008 09:11 AM
Another day, another Teixeira update.
The Washington Nationals "have sweetened their proposal to Teixeira, offering him an eight-year deal worth $178-184 million" according to a report by the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network (MASN) website. MASN's Roch Kubatko has been told the Nationals are willing to go nine years and there's been talk of a 10-year offer.
Sounds like they were ready to go all in for Tex last year. I guess it would be incredibly foolish for them to do the same with Halladay this year.
Which of their rebuilding chips would they have had to trade for those guys?
Do think they were willing to sign Teixeira to a long term deal because they thought they were going to compete this season with 17 league minimum guys? Or because they hoped in 4-5 years Texiera would be part of a team with their developing young stars?
Then why not wait 4-5 years and get the next big stud and save 90 million dollars?
There are all kinds of articles out there that show the Nationals execs planned on competing LAST year and I would think with the money they have invested in Dunn would think about it again this year. Besides, how much money would bringing in Halladay and another 2 guys bring in?
Last year this team had several more vets than the 17 league minimum player team you are projecting.
And they for some reason thought Ronnie Belliard, Dmitri Young and Austin Kearns could contribute. They also had Nick Johnson, brought in a veteran for the bullpen in Joe Beimel, etc.
Again why would Halladay go to the Nationals?
LOL come on NJ stop messing up the discussion I posted this already:
LOL, most likely he would not. You missed the previous discussion. My point was that if Halladay does not use his NTC then a lot of teams would be willing to get into the race and perhaps give as much or more than the Jays would have gotten during the season last year.
so you are discussing a point that has no future just to say what if?
Ok then its your time
wait… so the point of this discussion was that so many teams, including Washington, would be involved in Halladay discussions yet you don’t even think it’s possible?
Why did I just waste my afternoon when I could have been paying attention on these conference calls?
My point never changed. My point was that a lot of teams would be interested in Halladay. However most of them would not be approved of by Halladay. As I said I think more teams will be interested in Halladay now than there were during the season last year.
trs just wanted to get his comments stats up.
Nah, I am already untouchable.
I don’t know who is worse for not doing their job, the teacher or the lawyer.
damn, can’t get one past you.
Still, I’ll be hanging out at Omar’s coffee cart to drop some fan requests.
I would think that IF Omar was given the green light to bring in 2 high dollar guys it would be Holliday AND Lackey/Halladay. That is of course if the Wilpons decide to raise budget.
To be Honest though no one can say if Doc and Lackey could happen or not. We are just guessing but Minaya may just not do anything at all or he may reload bigtime. History suggests he will make one big splash to fill a hole either in pitching or offense which one I don’t know?
If he goes the pitching route the only big splash via free agency is Lackey and via trade he has a couple of possibilities. Halladay being top of the list.
But maybe he surprises everyone and pulls out a hail mary and goes for a Doc and Lackey.
But then the Wilpons would have to agree to raise budget unless Halladay does not request a new contract and or Lackey is cheaper than the 18M per.
Man, this World Series is like Iran vs. Al Qaeda
Hey TA10. Longtime no see.
Yea…been a while. I’ve actually been working hard. Those last few months of the season were unbearable.
At least I have my Islanders!
I am going to say this again down here again….because TR you’re beginning to scare me. Even if the Nats wanted him, why on earth would Halliday ever except a trade to the Nationals. Please explain to me why you would even defend that argument? That’s utterly ridiculous. If that ever happens you can come here and I will build you a statue in front of Citi Field.
Of course it would not happen. That is the point.
You and Wanny were both discussing how not many teams would be INTERESTED. I counter by saying a lot of teams would be INTERESTED and would consider bringing in 1 year of Halladay at less than market value knowing they could get a full year of Halladay and 2 draft picks. So what will most likely determine it is just like the Johan situation, the NTC.
I think the general idea that a surprise team might believe that Halladay is THE GUY to put them over the top and surrender multiple quality prospects to obtain him despite the likelihood that he will shortly depart via free agency is a valid one. The Brewers did it for Sabathia, so the precedent is there.
But the Nats specifically as the suggestion is where you lose me.
Of the teams suggested other than the Mets (Nationals, Cardinals, Cubs, Rockies, Dodgers, Angels, A’s, Rangers, Whitesox, Yankees, Redsox, O’s), I believe the Rockies, Dodgers & Angels with the A’s a dark horse are reasonable to whittle it down to and many of the reasons why have been mentioned above.
That’s still a formidable list of teams which at least arguably have better prospects to choose from than the Mets. So that’s where Halladay’s NTC comes into play.
Sadly, I find it easy to envision him in Dodger blue. Unless he has a strong phobia of earthquakes, knowing that Ned Colletti is on record with his #1 off season priority being a “true #1 pitcher” I believe the Dodgers will be the main player to fear for the Mets with the wildcard of the team’s unsettled ownership situation perhaps being the best thing that could happen to the Mets.
No I was never serious with the idea that he would actually GO to Washington, only the idea that Washington would be interested if there was no NTC. However, there is so it will limit his teams which makes a trade to the Mets more likely than a lot of other teams for sure. I still however, do not think they have cost themselves any value by hanging on to him until now instead of trading him during the season.