Happy trails, Doc...

Lee has five post-season starts, four wins, an ERA of 1.56 and a WHIP of .818.

I think he has proven that he can beat the better teams in the league.

 

Chad Ogea proved he could beat the better teams in the league, too, in the 1997 playoffs, when he went 2-2 with a 2.32 ERA in five appearances (four starts) for the Indians.

 

Where does Chad keep his Cy Young?

 

Given the choice between ...

Cliff Lee at what all accounts indicate he was going to ask for and Roy Halladay at 4 years/$69M, I'll take Halladay every single time.

Having said that, it still pisses me off to no end that they didn't just keep Lee for this year.

 

Point being that one excellent postseason does not guarantee future success against elite teams.

 

They could have won 110 in the NL with those two starting with Happ, Cole and a fifth.

 

I know. I just don't see how you ship out a guy who you almost rode to anther WS Title.

Halladay could do just as well, but damn, having both of them would have been nice.

 

The thing that bugs me more than anything else is that the Phillies have won a grand total of 2 World Series in 126 years and yet they're perfectly content to just be really good and hope to win another one. You'd think a team with that many failures would be willing to be bold and say "fuck it, we're winning this year. And we're gonna go all scorched-earth on your asses on the way."

 

mb, I totally sympathize, but there's only one franchise in baseball that thinks that way. It doesn't win every year, either.
If there's only room in the budget for one $20 million per year pitcher right now, on balance, I give Halladay a slight edge. Of course, having both would be excellent. But perhaps Hamels '08 will return and Hamels '09 vanish.

 

But that's the kicker. They're only paying Halladay (with the $6M that Toronto kicked in) $9M. And Lee's deal for this year is only $9M. Those are two ridiculously good deals. Borderline criminal.

I totally get that they couldn't keep them both in 2011. And I'm fine with that. I just want, for once, Philadelphia to be the baseball team that busts out the heavy artillery and goes on an asskicking spree. Throw Lee-Halladay-Hamels-whoever-whoever and deal with 2011 in 2011.

 

See, the Phillies aren't just playing for 2010, though. They're in a position to compete for a championship for the next three or four years, at least. They're not an aging team with one or two good years left in them that needs to win now or have the window slam shut. They're a team with a bunch of all-stars in their prime, some of whose contracts will be expiring in the next couple years.

Unless they could have traded for Halladay without either a) giving up every top prospect in the system; or b) giving up Lee and making it the three-team dance it became; then this was a good move.
They also get bonus points for not giving up Happ, who seems like he's on the verge of big things. If he develops into a solid No. 3 starter, a rotation of Halladay-Hamels-Happ for the next three years is pretty potent.
The Phils are still the best team in the NL heading into 2010 -- and probably 2011 and 2012, too. They'll be in a position to win a couple more championships, which is all you can really ask for. Twenty years ago, even 10 years ago the Phillies would have played the Jays' role in all of this.

 

There is a team in LA who will be right with the Phils.