From Ken Rosenthal (FOX Sports):
When FOX commentator Joe Buck asked me to name the favorites for Halladay on Tuesday night’s All-Star Game broadcast, I mentioned the Phillies and Yankees as the “best guess.”
The Phillies actually are not a guess — their farm system is deep, and club officials already are brainstorming on how to make a Halladay trade happen. The Yankees seem less likely to pursue Halladay, but I’ll believe they’re out when the pitcher lands with another team. The Yankees were not publicly “in” on free agents such as Johnny Damon and Mark Teixeira until the moment they signed them.
There is also this: Halladay, unlike Johan Santana in the winter of 2007-08, does not sound intent on securing a contract extension to waive his no-trade clause. So, the Yankees would not need to trade top young players and make a $100 million-plus investment, at least not right away.
Halladay will cost less than $5 million for the rest of the season if he is traded after July 31, and the Yankees could worry about his $15.75 million salary for 2010 later.
Yes, the Yankees value Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes, one of whom would need to be included in a Halladay package. But I doubt they would miss either too badly if they went into the postseason with a rotation of Halladay, lefty CC Sabathia and righty A.J. Burnett — and had the same three together again for at least next season.
This will sound bad to many—and maybe I’ll regret this comment later—but the more I think about trading for Halladay, the better it seems. That’s not to say that I’m totally for the idea, rather, my stance on trading either Joba or Hughes is beginning to soften. Don’t get me wrong, I’d like to keep both as developing cheap internal talent has become a necessity in this game (and a necessity for the Yankees, specifically).
However, with that said, when you have a win-now team, winning now is also a necessity. A rotation that features Sabathia, Halladay and Burnett—possibly the most dominant pitching trio in recent memory—is certainly playoff-bound and WS capable. For that reason, one should think long and hard before passing on a pitcher of Halladay’s caliber, especially if you only have to commit to him for an abbreviated period of time and don’t have to pay $100 million plus in an extension for an aging player. If you’re only losing young talent then it could be worth it.
The Alibi video The Hamster Factor and Other Tales of Twelve Monkeys trailer
I’m not saying that we should trade both Joba and Hughes for Halladay. Nope, that’s not what I’m saying and it’s not what I believe. Instead, what I do believe is that anything outside of trading both of them or moving Jesus Montero should be considered an option if it betters the team.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
25 Responses to If Halladay doesn't demand an extension, is it worth it?
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
I get what you are saying, but there is one issue that I have with the idea that they are a “win now” team and that justifies moves. The Yankees are not a win now in its truest sense, because they can always afford to reload. It is not like they expect not contend in a few seasons, such that they need to capitalize now. If that were true, the Yankees would never ever be able to develop prospects, because they are always a win now team, and the more prospects you trade, the more “win now” you become. This idea that a perennial contender that has done a good job cycling through stars suddenly has this little window when we know they will throw the moon at free agents to replace guys like Jeter and Posada is a bit strange to me.
I def see that but that doesn’t mean the team can just reload with great FAs at will. The right players will have to be around at the right time and so on and so forth. Plus, teams are locking young talent in to long-term deals as well which makes things harder for the Yankees. Why not go for it now? If the Yankees trade 1 of Joba or Hughes then they still have ample dept and they already have 3 rotation spots locked up for the next few years. I think it could be worth it.
One of those guys would be alright. It is when they start to talk about 1 plus Montero that makes no sense to me. But in terms of the general logic, I think you can always say that this team should go for it now. But if they blow a huge package on Halladay, who they do not really need in my estimation, they wont have the pieces to fill holes they need to fill later (LF, C, CL).
Def agree Moshe. As long as the Yanks don’t ship out both guys or Montero I would consider it a fair deal.
Also, in my book, I only want to lose the talent for a player that I would be willing to sign to a long term deal. If I am not willing to give him a long term deal, he is not worth giving up the talent.
The Braves had Smoltz, Maddux and Glavine in their primes and produced 1 ring. The Astros had Pettite, Clemens and Oswalt and got swept in the 2005 WS. Having the “possibly the most dominant pitching trio in recent memory” will not guarantee a ring. And while Joba and Hughes probably will never on the same level as Halladay, Joba/Hughes + any prospects involved the trade for 5+ years > Halladay for 1.5 yrs IMHO.
Still prefer trying to trade for Joey Votto instead. Pass on Halladay as he is not worth the cost.
Why would the Reds give up Votto?
Because they have Alonso coming as soon as the second half of next year. The Yankees and the Reds match up well. The Reds need a CF we have Jackson. They need a young SS we have Pena. We can give up Miranda who is better then most think to fill in at first until Alonso. We can give them Cervelli who can challenge 29 year old Hanagin for the starting catcher plus a couple of pitchers like McAllister and Aceves? The Yankees can help turn the Reds into contenders as soon as next year.
If the Yankees do decide to push for Halladay, I like the deal better as a 1 1/2 year commitment than as a long-term one. I have written here before about the danger of losing roster flexibility because of commitments to aging players with enormous salaries. Unless you believe the Yankees have no payroll limit (a dubious position in this economy), the team cannot afford to take on more contracts for players in their mid-30s who are owed $20 miliion-plus per year. That is what a Halladay extension would mean.
No deal ever guarantees a playoff slot, much less a world championship. Trades are always about probabilities. Halladay makes it significantly more likely the Yankees, their rotation fragile at the moment, make the playoffs this year. So does Cliff Lee.
But for that matter, so would a reliable, back-of-rotation innings-eater (e.g., Meche, if his back is sound). The Yankees run a real risk of being overtaken by Tampa if the third, fourth, and fifth starters continue to go five or fewer innings on a regular basis. That exposes the weak underside of the bullpen and burns out the relievers.
My guess is that Cashman approaches it in the reverse order of what I’ve presented here — a Meche type first at a modest cost, a push for Lee, and waiting to see if the price comes down for Halladay.
Totally agree. This is Cash’s MO for mid season trades- solid guys to fill holes, not necessarily superstars- Justice, Nady, etc.
Montero should not be traded under any circumstances. This would be akin to trading a young Mickey Mantle because we wanted to win “now” because DiMaggio was aging.
Yea, I don’t think anyone here has advocated for that.
I have two thoughts that go through my mind every time a trade is considered.
1.
The Yankees are and always will be in win-now mode. You’ll hear the same thing when A-Rod is almost gone and when Montero is getting close to free agency. You can’t just sell the farm because Jeter is getting old.
2.
Trading high-level, cost-controlled, young players who have shown they can be successful in the major leagues for a guy that is on his way out of his prime years is a bad idea for a team that’s always in win-now mode. You make a blockbuster trade for Felix Hernandez because he’s crazy good, young, cost-controlled and hasn’t even entered his prime years. You don’t make it for Roy Halladay because he’s only (relatively) cost-controlled for 1.5 years and is at the point of his career where pitchers typically start declining.
My reason for this is that being how the Yankees are pretty much always in the race for the WS title, it makes sense for them to keep their young players so that they can not only use them for 6 or so title runs but also so they can supplement them with the CC’s, AJ’s and Tex’s of the world. They don’t need to go all out to win a world series like the Brewers did when they saw the opportunity last year because the Yankees are always in the race.
I don’t think it’s just Jeter, though. In a few years, AJ will be what, 35, CC will be 32, Posada will be gone, A-Rod will be a lesser player, Jeter will be gone, our OF picture is a mystery, it’s really hard to tell. The team doesn’t have many position prospects but what they do have is young pitching and parting with one of their better pitchers could definitely be a wise investment.
I could see Jeter playing until he is 40 if he moves to LF and his bat stays above .280, it’s not like the Yankees will force him to retire he pretty much can play until he can’t anymore. So with that said you have a 5 year window with the core older guys you have right now not counting Posada or Mo because they will both be done in 2-3 years due to age and position.
Yeah but Clemens got old too. Mussina got old and retired. Bernie and O’Neill are long gone. All of that and the Yankees are still miraculously in contention!
I really don’t know what that means to what I said… I just said I think Jeter can play longer than 2 or 3 years people seem to think he will play, if he wants to play another 5 years he would be able to retire at 40 and by then a new crop of Yankees will be playing and we will still be in contention. All I was remarking on was that Jeter can play past 2-3 more years nothing else.
Were we in contention last year with guys like Giambi, Abreu, and others? Not really. Also, the Orioles are going to be a very good team in about 2 years. The division isn’t going to get easier, which changes things.
We also lost our ace, our DH and our two young starters to the DL early and we lost our set up man to the rotation (even though I supported it then and still do)… I don’t think we do near as bad in the second half last year if Wang doesn’t go down, we may not make the playoffs but we would have been in position to make a trade to stay in contention he had 8 wins at the time he went down. However if you are saying we should trade our prospects for Halladay because the Orioles will be good one day I don’t buy what your selling. How do you stay in contention when you are in a division with a bunch of good young talent, you keep and develop your own talent… How did that Randy Johnson deal work out for us?
I never said we should trade our prospects because the Orioles will be good one day. What I said was that you’re taking for granted that the Yankees will always be in contention, when that’s not the case. The Orioles, along with the Rays and Red Sox will counter that notion entirely and will make it difficult for us to dominate the way we’ve done in years passed. We also have no position prospects outside of Montero, Jackson and Romine that could fulfill the void of lost players like Jeter and others. BUT, what we do have is pitching and while the team is truly dominant because of its fiscal clout and pitching depth, we can use at least one of our prized young pitchers to obtain a workhorse ace like Halladay.
And the Johnson comparison doesn’t work here. That deal was GREAT in hindsight and it would have been better if it weren’t for injury to Johnson in 2006 and a lack of defensive support (4.27 FIP in 2006). In 2005 he was one of the best pitchers in all of baseball (2005 = 4.6 WAR, 2006 = 3.6 WAR). Johnson pitched 200+ innings in both seasons and won 34 games while in NY. We traded a bunch of nobodies for him, nobodies who haven’t amounted to anything and the one regrettable piece, Javier Vazquez, who we had acquired via trade (he wasn’t a prospect). In fact, in hindsight, the Vazquez trade—a trade for what looked like a young ace—was the one that truly backfired (Juan Rivera and Nick Johnson were deal) although we can debate that.
You can’t say that Dioner Navarro is a no body, is he a perennial all star no but he is a pretty good defensive catchr and a switch hitter with some pop who played for the AL representatives last year. He was the biggest prospect in that trade and I wish we had him back for a while (even though we have restocked with catchers)… and Javier Vasquez leaving was the best part of that deal, the guy was nut job while in NY and fell apart mentally every single time he allowed a base runner. I also disagree that Randy did well in 2005, he was very up and down all season and from start to start you didn’t know what you had until the very end of the year when he settled down and got his ERA down… in fact he gave up a still career high 32 home runs that year and he never collected a single shut out in his entire tenor with the Yankees which is the exact reason we got him and the main argument behind getting “doc”.
I agree with Chip & Dave. I think the ‘win now’ mentality has been shown to be the wrong way to go.
I agree that with Wang the Yankees probably could have made the playoffs, but still, they wouldn’t have gotten very far. With a guy like Halladay, that can definitely happen.
As a side note, I appreciate the varying perspectives here and think you all have made very valid points. Good discussion all around.
They were going to be a quick out sure but it makes you wonder if they could have run Torre out and if they would have responded by getting CC and Burnett had Wang just struck out that day in Houston (which is ironically where I live, not that anyone cares it was just a weird perspective).