The Doc trade

[gmwannabe]

Not sure if this was ever discussed before ( and sorry to rehash if it was) but i saw at the Phillies official website the article of how the Halladay trade was consumed. Interesting article. still sore that they traded Lee so quickly after the trade was announced. Replenish the farm system with what they got! a dark moment in phils history, i think. What would have 2010 been with both Halladay and Lee at the top of the rotation, with a revitalized 26 yr. old cole hamels? we'll never know.
gm

[Philsmania]

Yes, nearly a year to the day later, they decided the COULD afford both Halladay and Lee. Panic move engineered by the financial department.

[allentown]

I don't know what you mean by 'financial department', but something of this magnitude (coupled with demanding a quick Lee trade, in which RAJ was only allowed to negotiate with one team) says to me that this action was dictated by the owners, who refused to allow a few-$million over-budget for even a single year, a year in which we would have had a great shot at another WC. The limited exploration of potential Lee trade partners struck me at the time as a PR move to strike a deal before fans had a chance to dream of a Halladay-Lee-Hamels top of the rotation.

It also struck me at the time that the owners brought on GMs like Wade and RAJ, who lacked stature and experience, and then didn't listen to them, even when they had excellent recommendations. The advantage of Gillick and the recent GMs is that the owners trust their experience and are more willing to listen to them and open their wallets. The Phillies at times seem to view GMs as the Eagles view LB: not terribly important and a place to save $. Longer ago, they even allowed Giles to be GM. That ownership group, at least on a familial basis, has commonalities with today's ownership group.

[California_Dreamin]

Sorry to toss a wet balloon on this theory that they would have been better in 2010 with Lee but I say balderdash to that. Yes, the optics were and still are bad, but if they had kept Lee its highly doubtful they would have brought on Oswalt, who merely went 8-1 during a closing Phillie stretch of 49-19that catapulted the Phils into the catbird's seat of the '10 playoffs. Oh, and Oswalt beat the Giants in the NLCS in Game 2 and would likely have won Game 6 if not for that strange concoction of events in the 2nd inning when Utley got hit by a pitch with the Phillies leading 2-0 and then tossing the ball to the Giants hurler, which enraged the Giants and in their words led to their comeback in that game.

Actually that series was lost in Game 1 when Halladay didn't have his usual stuff, surrendered two home runs to Cody Freakin Ross and lost 4-3. Honestly, the Giants admitted that until winning that game they really didn't think they had a chance against that Phillie team.

And in the year that DOES still bug me, 2011, it was the aforementioned Lee who was given a 4-0 lead in Game 2 of that series and proceeded to blow the lead...and the series. Halladay had won game 1 annd Hamels won game 3 so if Lee does what he had done in 2009 [dominate] the Phils sweep the Cards, Howard doesn't tear his Achillies, Halladay doesn't have to pitch game 5 and with a bad back, likely hurt his arm, and the Phils probably beat the Rangers and win the WS.

If ifs and buts were candies and nuts we'd all have a great Christmas [hope we all do!] and there were plenty of both during that ill fated 2010-11 period. But I do not believe trading Lee, other than the optics of it, had anything to do with losing both of those playoff series...and the ultimate end of that dynastic 5 year run.

[phillychuck]

I thought Morey had traded Rivers. Made me very happy...