2009 Phillies Offseason Thread

PhillyPhreak54 · December 15, 2009, 07:53:45 PM

Am I wrong for not being fired up about this?

PhillyPhreak54 · December 15, 2009, 08:14:10 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4745103&campaign=rss&source=MLBHeadlines

Lee's agent called bullshtein on him overpricing himself.

ice grillin you · December 15, 2009, 08:17:16 PM

amaro is so shady

Rome · December 15, 2009, 08:29:07 PM

He told the Cleveland GM he wouldn't offer a hometown discount and he told the Phillies he wouldn't offer a hometown discount.

But even if he didn't directly say so, there was ample opportunity for Lee to re-up longterm after he got to Philly last summer. He didn't, the opportunity to get Roy Boy for four years guaranteed came up, and that was the end of that.

I still think it's beyond retarded that the Phillies are giving up Lee over a measly nine million dollars, though. At the bare minimum they get a very reasonably priced 1A starter and then at the end of the deal they get two #1 draft picks from the team he signs with next winter. Or in essence, what they're getting now by trading him to Seattle. Only difference is they lose 15-20 wins plus whatever he would do in the playoffs.

No one can tell me that if a team is going to spend 140 million, 150 million is breaking the bank, especially when spending the extra ten million practically guarantees you another World Series run.

PhillyPhreak54 · December 15, 2009, 08:36:27 PM

I'm with you, Rome. That's why I can't get excited even though they landed Halladay. It should be Halladay, Lee, Hamels in 2010...but the misers who count the beans at CBP are full of shtein.

Let Lee pitch for them in 2010 and get the two picks after he walks.

Rome · December 15, 2009, 08:44:08 PM

You know the Phillies royally screwed this up when they have all the hacks at Philly.com defending them. Hell, even Bill Conlin hasn't blasted them to kingdom come yet. And he lives for that shtein.

PS: Andy Martino must be Amaro's bitch. Just sayin'...

LBIggle · December 15, 2009, 09:39:22 PM

whats pathetic is they'll "save" lee's portion of salary and still not address the bullpen properly.

it's obvious gillick isn't doing much advising if any at all.

Drunkmasterflex · December 15, 2009, 11:38:05 PM

Quote from: LBIggle on December 15, 2009, 09:39:22 PM
whats pathetic is they'll "save" lee's portion of salary and still not address the bullpen properly.

it's obvious gillick isn't doing much advising if any at all.

That is one thing kind of lost in all of this craziness is that they still haven't addressed the bullpen.

The BIGSTUD · December 16, 2009, 12:03:36 AM

It wasn't about money, it was about replacing Drabek and Taylor with the prospects from Seattle. Word is the Phillies scouts love these prospects almost as much as their own. They are taking a major gamble that Hamels will bounce back and be that 2nd ace that Lee would have been.

If it was about money they just would have traded Blanton for mediocre prospects and non-tendered Durbin.

MDS · December 16, 2009, 12:35:14 AM

thanks for mimicking exactly what i said you farging dolt

The BIGSTUD · December 16, 2009, 02:44:45 AM

Well it wasn't on page 36 so I didn't see it.

ice grillin you · December 16, 2009, 08:11:44 AM

phillies will act like it was the prospects but theres no one on earth other than amaro who would rate the prospects the phillies got even close to the ones they gave up...in fact drabek is a better prospect than all the mariner guys combined

the fact is toronto wouldnt have touched seattles guys with a ten foot pole where as they coveted drabek and had to have taylor even if it was to get another top prospect in wallace

otherwise just do this:

seattle gets lee

phillies get halladay

toronto gets aumont - gillies - ramirez - d arnaud

Eagles_Legendz · December 16, 2009, 08:55:40 AM

It still was about getting prospects back though. There were millions of ways they could have cleared up $ and kept Lee if it wasn't. I think while the prospects they sent to Toronto are supposed to be better than the ones coming back from Seattle, the FO didn't want to completely slaughter the farm. The fact that they could clear 9 mill was just a way to kill two birds with one stone.

ice grillin you · December 16, 2009, 09:09:56 AM

Quote from: Eagles_Legendz on December 16, 2009, 08:55:40 AM
It still was about getting prospects back though. There were millions of ways they could have cleared up $ and kept Lee if it wasn't. I think while the prospects they sent to Toronto are supposed to be better than the ones coming back from Seattle, the FO didn't want to completely slaughter the farm. The fact that they could clear 9 mill was just a way to kill two birds with one stone.

as far as the reason for not keeping lee it was 99% salary dump...its not like they said damn we traded prospects for halladay we have to get some back...because they could have let lee walk next winter and gotten two number ones for him that could have easily turned out more promising than aumont and gillies

now of course once you decide you have to trade lee you want something back for him...but they didnt trade lee to replenish the farm...they traded him because he was to expensive

my main point tho is that its ridiculous to say the phillies did this because they really like seattles prospects and think they are close to as good as the prospects they gave up

Eagles_Legendz · December 16, 2009, 09:52:57 AM

I don't agree with that.

I would have sucked it up and kept Lee for a year, but I think it was almost 100% about getting prospects back from Seattle. They were going to shed salary anyway. Moving Lee had salary implications but they figured they could move Lee for 9 million dollars and get 1 solid and 2 decent prospects back or move Blanton and get nothing back. As you said though, I would've just kept Lee and let him walk and take the 1 and 1a draft picks even if they were at the bottom of the round.