Lets hope Halladay is a playoff stud like Lee

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

How the heck are they not better than last year?? Polanco is a upgrade over Feliz and Halladay is a slight upgrade over Lee

Also we need to sign Chan Ho Park and Durbin.. big time.

The bolded isnt necessarily true.

Why would you feel the need to sign Park and Durbin? They are easily replacable.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The bolded isnt necessarily true.

Why would you feel the need to sign Park and Durbin? They are easily replacable.

Polanco is a gold glover who is a better offensive player than feliz.

Halladay is Halladay, though Lee is great too.

Park and Durbin were our two best bullpen guys last year IMO.. especially Park. If we replace them with guys just as good that is okay, though I really want them both signed.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Polanco is a gold glover who is a better offensive player than feliz.

Halladay is Halladay, though Lee is great too.

Park and Durbin were our two best bullpen guys last year IMO.. especially Park. If we replace them with guys just as good that is okay, though I really want them both signed.

Polonco was a gold glove 2nd baseman. And honestly a gold glove is hardly an accurate measure of a players defensive worth versus others at his position. Polanco also is a singles hitter with no power at a power position. Feliz is far from Arod but his defense at third was as good as anyone in the NL and he did have some power. It not only is a lateral move but Polanco is going to be 34, he isnt getting better.

Park and Durbin are barely replacement level guys. They were the 11th and 15th best pitchers on the staff last year using VORP as a measure. They could get younger, cheaper guys to do just as well as those 2.

[Cannon Shell]

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/200...illies_18.html

[SCUDSBROTHER]

I Don't get it. If they had paid Lee the 9 mil, then they had Hamels, Lee, and Halliday possible for the World Series. They were competitive for it all in 2009 with just Lee pitching well. Chances are 2 out of those 3 above starters would be pitching well in the 2010 World Series. That's all they needed. All I can think of is they were concerned about the chemistry going bad (too much expected from them etc.)

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

I Don't get it. If they had paid Lee the 9 mil, then they had Hamels, Lee, and Halliday possible for the World Series. They were competitive for it all in 2009 with just Lee pitching well. Chances are 2 out of those 3 above starters would be pitching well in the 2010 World Series. That's all they needed. All I can think of is they were concerned about the chemistry going bad (too much expected from them etc.)

The only logical explanation seems to be they are just cheap

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The only logical explanation seems to be they are just cheap

seattle got lee ?

they might be tough next year?

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The only logical explanation seems to be they are just cheap

In the end, they gave up a ton of prospects to get Lee and a ton of prospects to get Halladay. As an Indian fan, I think they gave up very minimal amounts to get Lee, but what do I know. I think it's still simply a case of trying to get some of those prospects back. That's it. Cheapness is certainly also involved, they're simply gambling Halladay is enough this year to get them back to the World Series. The postseason is a crap shoot anyway. They had zero chance to sign Lee. Evidently Lee wants Sabathia money. I'm not sure who will give him that. Lee was the big winner. He has a much better chance to put up good numbers with Seattle as his home park rather than Philly despite the presence of a DH. I can honestly see both sides to should the Phillies have traded Lee argument. Sometimes being cheap can work.