Heard in the Cheap Seats

My brother and I often disagree when it comes to assessing trades, free agent signings and the changes of our great city’s professional sports franchises.  If you witnessed our virtual brawl over the Brian Dawkins departure you know exactly what I am talking about.  

The Philadelphia Phillies trade for Cliff Lee was no different.  Anthony and I come at this deal from different sides of the coin.  We figured since we argue over email we may as well post that for all to see.  We will continue to do these segments from time to time as we inevitably disagree on the topic of the day.

The following is our actual email exchange on the topic.  Weigh in and tell us what you think.  Are we both wrong?  Was this the wrong move or did the Phillies shrewdly pick up the right pitcher?

From: Anthony
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 8:37 PM
To: Chris Iafolla
Subject: Re: Point, CounterPoint

Before I begin my points, I want to be clear to you, Chris, and to everyone else out there that I am not saying that the Philles made a “bad” trade!  So where should I begin my ass kicking in this debate?  I I believe the Phillies settled for the lesser of 2 pitchers in this trade.  They had the pieces to acquire Halladay, but were too stubborn to let go of certain players.  For a team that has won 2 World Series in over 100 years, I think we should all realize, this type of era doesn”t come around often.  I am going to withhold the rest of my ammo until you come back with your predictable response!

From: Chris Iafolla
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2009 8:42 AM
To: Anthony
Subject: Re: Point, CounterPoint

I like you how blunt any possible debate by saying it is not a “bad trade” just that they settled for the lesser of two players.  I don’t disagree that Roy Halladay is a better pitcher—I said as much when I posted about the Cliff Lee trade on Wednesday.  But that is not the issue at hand here.  The question for me is not who the better player is, but what was the better trade?  You say that the Phillies “settled” for the lesser player but I don’t think that is the case at all.  They wanted desperately to land Halladay and offered a very attractive package to get a deal done.  But to give up your entire stable of blue-chip prospects for one player is foolhardy.  They didn’t settle for the lesser player, they made a calculated decision to get a top-of-the-rotation starter without decimating their farm system.  

From: Anthony
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 9:44 AM
To: Chris Iafolla
Subject: Re: Point, CounterPoint

Don”t try and completely twist my words buddy.  Let me put it this way so there is no confusion: I don;t think they made the better trade.  The whole argument that I have heard from you and everyone else is that the reason the trade was so good has to do with the players they did and also didn”t give up.  Yes, they added a starter, and yes he won the cy young award last year.  But, since both trades were available, I don”t think they made the better trade here.  There are 2 reasons to have a good farm system.  One is to have replacements over the years and 2 is to be able to make trades for players like Roy Halladay.  Everyone uses cliche phrases like “mortgage the future” because they heard Buster Olney say it on Baseball Tonight. How can something be deemed a “better” trade when the only true evidence we have is between Halladay and Lee, and Halladay wins that battle in a landslide ( some people argue this, but I will get to that later). You say it is foolhardy to make that trade?  I say it’’s foolhardy to expect Halladay without giving up a top pitching prospect!  Prospects have no guarantee whatsoever, not even close to one, which is why I wanted to make the Halladay trade in the first place.  The fact that they made a trade and gave up prospects shows they knew they had a desperate need.  I have heard a car analogy used by a lot of people.  Well, let me say this to you and everyone:  If you have the ability to comfortably afford both, there is a difference between a Bentley and a Cadillac, so why settle for the Cadillac?  I have many more bullets but I want to see what other point you have other than they didn”t trade Drabek, Brown, or Happ.

From: Chris Iafolla
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 12:08 p.m.
To: Anthony
Subject: Re: Point, CounterPoint

You cheated, we agreed to a 150 word count on responses and you doubled it.  Does your argument need that much explaining that you can’t squeeze it into 150 words?  To level the playing field, I will stick to this new standard you have created.  

Yes, the argument is that they didn’t have to include players like Drabek, Taylor, Brown or Happ.  But it is not only about the type of players those prospects might become, but also about the cost control they provide.  Even the Phillies ownership was not comfortable with the Halladay trade—and it wasn’t because of talent.  The holes trading those prospects away creates would necessitate the signing of major-league free agents to fill out a roster.  They simply would not have the money to do that.  So yes, letting those prospects walk out the door is a risk in terms of talent, but also in terms of budget.  You can’t dismiss that risk.

Second, you mentioned that the Phillies have won two World Series titles in the last 100 years, so why not go whole hog now to win as many as possible while they have a young, strong nucleus.  But let me ask you this: how did they win last year’s World Series title?  Was it with a nucleus of players they acquired from outside the organization or by building from inside the organization?  I think the answer is obvious.  You win by drafting well and cultivating young talent. 

Finally, I think evaluating the trade on just the ability of Halladay and Lee (as you suggest) is oversimplifying the trade.  It’s not that simple. You made a car analogy that compared a Bentley to a Cadillac.  First of all, the disparity between Halladay and Lee is not that great.  Second of all, you conveniently left off price.  In my mind, a more apt analogy would be this.  Do you want to pay $500,000 for a Bentley or $50,000 for a Cadillac and we will throw a Honda Accord in on the side (Ben Francisco).  I will take the two cars (both of which serve a valuable purpose) at a fraction of the cost.

From: Anthony
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 12:51 PM
To: Chris Iafolla
Subject: Re: Point, CounterPoint

Yes, I cheated and then you went way overboard!  I don”t know where to begin.  Your rebuttal to my car analogy makes no sense.  My point was that they went for the cheaper deal and the lesser “car”, so thank you for making my point for me.  No, the two don”t cost the same, nor should they!  I agree that you build with the farm system, but that team was made up of a mixture, as all good teams are. Take a look at the rosters for the World Series Champs over the last 20 years. 

Also, What holes would be created?!  The players aren”t even on the damn roster. If you have a chance to win now you do it!  So, you have to give up a few prospects, if you believe in your scouting I would say you should be able to replenish.  When I was living in Cali, I witnessed the Angels develop the best farm system in baseball.  Still haven”t won since ”02, and because those prospects didn”t pan out the way they were supposed to, they have been bringing in guys like Abreu, Hunter, and Teixiera.  The team that is assembled will mostly be together for another 2 seasons, this chance doesn”t come around very often as Philly fans should know.  If you are OK with an Eagles Philosophy then more power to you.  The Phillies will be “competitive” by not going for the big deal.  To build a championship team, there has to be risk involved.  I am sick of people talking about the budget.  This is the World Champion Phillies who are filling the Bank to the tune of 101%, and if they continue to win, they will have plenty of money.  We aren”t living in Kansas City.

I guess I will just end with this: I think the Phils are lucky they can spin this by saying Lee won the Cy Young award last season.  If that weren”t the case I would be even more disappointed, because, like I said, they played it safe, and for no other reason than lack of guts and a plain stubbornness.  Kinda like the years when Reid insisted the Birds didn”t need a wide receiver.  I argue that there is a much greater disparity between Halladay and Lee.  I won”t go through every stat, I will allow people to look it up themselves.  But, here are a few reasons I feel they made the wrong trade: The Phils are very left handed heavy in the roatation.  Hopefully Pedro come in and helps with that.  That I can live with though.  Before last season, Lee had one other very good year…That’’s it!  Halladay has done it his whole career.  Lee surrenders more hits than innings pitched, Halladay does not.  Lee is a fly ball pitcher, and I don;t like that in Philly, and he has benefited from one of the most pitcher friendly parks in baseball.  Halladay induces more grounders than flyballs, which is better suited for the Bank.  Lee has a 30 point higher batting average against, and the list goes on and on.  All of this came with Halladay pitching in the best division in baseball.  So, please don”t use an award as grounds to say the race is close between these two.  Barry Zito won the Cy Young too!  You know what other award Lee won last season?  The Comeback Player of the Year.  Why?  Because he was awful in 2007 and was booed off the field and sent to the minor leagues.  You won”t see that on Roy Halladay’’s resume.

The bottom line, to me, is that the Phillies made the best trade they were “willing” to make, and I don”t agree with the reasoning.  The bar has been set at a World Championship, so if they don”t win and Lee isn”t dominant, then I will say they made the wrong trade.  There is no guarantees in baseball, but if they don”t win, we won”t get to see if Halladay would have made the difference.  If they do win it all and Lee is a catalyst, I will admit I was wrong.  Hey, at least there are those prospects to look forward to in 2012, when the window may no longer be there!  I feel so grateful for that.  Now, I”m done.  It was fun kicking your ass little brother.  That’’s how you debate!!!!

From: Chris Iafolla
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 1:41 PM
To: Anthony
Subject: Re: Point, CounterPoint

 Um, use your wordcount function; if you take out the sentence where I pointed out you cheated, my section is shorter than yours. 

But I digress.  I did take a look at the roster of the last 20 years worth of championship teams and in every single instance they are built almost entirely from the farm system with a player or two as a key contributor from outside the organization.  That’s why a four for one deal of ALL (literally all) of your most coveted prospects does not make sense.  Don’t you think it is telling that no team was willing to come even remotely close to the price the Blue Jays asked?  The Phillies were not the only team that balked at the price—every team has so far.  And if a deal does get done for the Blue Jays in the next two hours you can bet it won’t be anywhere near what they requested of the Phillies.  The worst thing any GM can do is bid against themselves and that is exactly would Ruben Amaro Jr. would have been doing if he made that deal.  

The car analogy makes complete sense.  Your argument said if you have a Bentley and a Cadillac in front of you—which one would you choose assuming you can comfortably afford it?  The problem is; they can’t.  Obviously, if somebody said to me you can have either of these cars I would take the Bentley.  Until they asked for money I can’t afford to pay.  So yes, they did take the lesser car but at a more palpable price.  It was the right deal.

As for your questions on what holes would be created—the ones that those players will presumably fill on the roster.  Two SPs and two OFs do not come cheap.  That was directly from Phillies ownership that they did not feel they could afford to fill a roster if they had to look outside the organization for help.  No, they are not the Royals but they do have a budget.  You can’t just dismiss that aspect of baseball as much as we would all like to do that.  It is a business and if they can’t afford to pay their players they will suffer in the long run.  That’s a fact.

Of course Halladay is the better pitcher, but the discrepancy is not as large as the picture you paint.  You cherry picked some nice stats that support your argument so I will do the same that close the gap.  First of all, Lee was a better pitcher than Hallday last season, which you can’t dispute.  This season, since April 16^th after his rough start he has a 2.66 ERA.  He leads the major leagues in quality starts and is on pace to pitch 240 innings this season.  Cliff Lee is no slouch and is immediately the best pitcher on the Phillies roster.  

The bottom line is this: did the Phillies make a trade that greatly improves their roster? Yes.  If you can do that AND not give up a bevy of coveted prospects then why not make the deal?

The speculation can now end: according to Ken Rosenthal, the Philadelphia Phillies have struck a deal with the Cleveland Indians that sends last year’s Cy Young Award winner, Cliff Lee, to Philadelphia in exchange for Jason Knapp, Carlos Carasco, Jason Donald and Lou Marson.  The Phillies also land OF Ben Francisco as part of the deal to serve as their much-needed right handed bat off the bench.

For weeks, the city of Philadelphia has been fixated on the prospect of adding Roy Halladay to the rotation.  As talks with the Blue Jays progressed, and eventually broke down, it was apparent the price would be too steep.  The Blue Jays essentially asked for every blue-chip prospect the Phillies had in their system.  Needless to say, the front-office brass in Philly balked at that sum.

When that notion became clear, the Phillies moved swiftly and set their sights on Cliff Lee.  Lee is the reigning American League Cy Young winner and gives the Phillies a legitimate top-of-the rotation ace to carry into the postseason.

Don’t be fooled by Lee’s mediocre 7-9 record.  He is having a solid season with a 3.14 ERA in the daunting American League.  His record is a product of playing on a bad team, not an indicator of his performance.  While Halladay is the better pitcher of the two, Lee holds a distinct advantage in one key area—cost.  Lee’s contract is prorated at $6million for 2009 with a $9 millionon club option for 2010.  That is a much more palpable number than the money it would have required to employ Mr. Halladay.  

The addition of Lee gives the Phillies a left-heavy rotation with Hamels, Moyer, Happ and Lee.  Assuming the Phillies add Pedro to the mix and the effectiveness of Blanton in recent weeks, it seems either Moyer or Happ is heading to the bullpen.  Of course, Happ has been the better pitcher this season but Charlie Manuel is always loyal to his players to a fault.  Will that loyalty keep Moyer in the rotation?

The impact on the rotation aside, as a Phillies fan, I think you have to be satisfied with this deal.  They managed to land an ace while still keeping every blue-chip prospect mentioned in the proposed Halladay deals.  By completing this deal, the Phillies improved their chances of competing for a World Series this year and in 2010 without compromising the future of this club.

I wish my first post back was about a different topic, but I wanted to make sure that I at least said a few words on this site about the sad news today.  Jim Johnson, Philadelphia Eagles defensive coordinator for over a decade, passed away today. He was diagnosed with melanoma originally in 2001 and then again in January and had been undergoing treatment.  My thoughts and prayers are with Johnson’s entire family in this difficult time. 

I don’t know Jim Johnson personally, but my family has come in contact with him recently during his battle with melanoma.  I have vaguely mentioned this before, but our (Chris and myself) immediate family is currently dealing with a fight against melanoma just as the Johnson family had been.  It is one of the reasons I have not posted anything this month.  It is a terrible disease, and that is an understatement.  I pray that someday we can reach a point where we no longer have to lose anyone to cancer.  I myself have begun to develop ideas and look into ways that I can contribute to this fight.  It is interesting that the word “fight” or “battle” is often associated with cancer.  I always hear the phrase “lost their battle” when referring to someone who has passed away from the disease.  I personally do not believe in that phrase.  There has never been one person diagnosed with cancer that has ever lost.  They may no longer be with us, but they haven’t lost.  They have shown me and millions of others what true courage is. 

Jim Johnson did this as well.  He was genuine and kind to my family when they came in contact with him.  He obviously left his mark on the city of Philadelphia in football, but he had a family that knew him as a husband, a father, and a grandfather.  That is the most important mark any of us can make.  Once again, my thoughts and prayers are with the Johnson family.

I have not written anything for this blog in over 3 weeks.  When I started doing this with my brother, my goal was to write posts about Philly sports that spark discussion or invoke thoughts.  I am very opinionated when it comes to sports and most things in general, and I have always tried to make my opinions very clear.  When I started doing this, I wanted to be able to fill this site with tons of different content, and I believe my brother and I have done that.  We will continue to do that, and we have some bigger and better ideas and plans for this website.

Unfortunately, recently I haven’t produced much of anything.  I will try in the future not to lapse as much as I have done this month.  There has been a lot going on in Philly sports, and I plan to throw my two cents in on some of the main issues in the coming days.  It has been an exhausting month and continues to be, but I think my head is back to a place where I can focus on writing for this website.  I hope everyone out there continues to read and comment with their own opinions.  Thanks for your past readership and thank you in advance for following this site.

The Philadelphia Phillies will look to continue their recent 8-game winning streak in a three-game series against the Chicago Cubs.  The Cub themselves come in winners of four straight, though all four of those games came against the lowly Nationals.

It is not hard to see why Philadelphia is winning of late.  The Phillies recent surge has come on the back of solid starting pitching and the resurgence of Jimmy Rollins.  Rollins is hitting .397 (23 for 58) with eight doubles, a homer, eight RBI, five stolen bases and 10 walks over his last 14 games.  To me, the most impressive number in that bunch is the 10 walks.  Rollins has seemingly discovered a more patient approach at the plate that allows the run producers behind him to do their jobs.  When Rollins gets on base, this team is tough to beat.

But despite the solid string of play I suspect this will be a tough series.  In looking at the pitching matchups, the Phillies have the bad luck of facing all of the Cubs top three starters.   Tonight, Ted Lilly will face Rodrigo Lopez.  Each starter is coming off an injury, albeit, Lopez’s was of the more serious variety.  Tomorrow, Joe Blanton will square off against Rich Harden and Jamie Moyer will have Carlos Zambrano to deal with in the finale.  In each matchup, the Cubs hold the upper hand on paper.  And while winning four games against Washington is nothing to brag about, it sometimes can serve as a springboard to more consistent play that the Cubs are looking for.

Make no mistake: this is a talented Cubs team that just may be finding its groove.  If the Phillies take this series lately, they could come out on the losing end.

Have you heard, Brian Dawkins is no longer wearing Philadelphia Eagle green?  Instead, Dawkins chose the greener (7 million times over) pastures of Denver.  That leaves a gaping hole at safety for an Eagles defense that relied on Dawkins not only for his big-play ability, but also his leadership and on-field coaching.   

With training camp right around the corner, the speculation has started as to who will ultimately be asked to take on the unenviable task of filling the shoes of a legend.  Ultimately, the competition will come down to free-agent acquisition Sean Jones and second-year man Quintin Demps.

But for starters, let’s get one thing straight—neither of these players will replace Brian Dawkins.  Dawk was a hall-of-fame caliber player that captured the hearts of the entire city of Philadelphia.  To place the weight of those expectations on either Demps or Jones would be unfair and unreasonable.  What the Eagles need is a versatile safety that is capable in both pass coverage and run support and has the knack for the big play.

When evaluating Demps, many jump to his poor performance in the NFC Championship game last season as proof he is not ready.  He was the scapegoat on a trick play that resulted in a long touchdown pass and also committed an inexcusable roughing the passer penalty.  But I don’t necessarily subscribe to that theory.  While Demps could have made a better play on the ball on the trick play, he was the only Eagle even remotely in the play.  I have watched the video a number of times (embedded below) and have come to conclude that Demps did a decent job of staying home.  If you watch, he is running stride for stride with Fitzgerald and did not bite on the play fake.  His problem came when Warner under threw the ball forcing Fitzgerald to change directions.  Demps got turned around on the play and lost his footing.  The end result had Demps on his stomach watching Fitzgerald waltz into the end zone.  But Quintin Demps was the only player on the defense that stayed even remotely close to home.  And for those people that argue we will never know what the scheme called for on that play, I can assure you Jim Johnson did not isolate Demps in single coverage on Fitzgerald. 

I don’t analyze that play as a means to defend Quintin Demps.  He was beat on that play without a doubt.  The point is: let’s not use one play as a microcosm for his overall quality of play and as a means for deciding this position battle. 

Demps is a solid player with well above average speed and coverage skills.  At 5’11” and 206 pounds, he is on the smaller side for the position but is a willing tackler.  Sean Jones of course holds a huge size advantage at 6’1” and 220 pounds.  He also has more experience, starting three years with the Cleveland Browns and has shown he has the ability to intercept passes.  The knock on Jones though is as a pass defender.  While he will make the occasional big play, he is also susceptible to getting beat—particularly on deep routes.  

It will be one of many interesting training camp battles.  Who is your money on?

Training camp is still a few weeks away but that doesn’t stop the bookies in Vegas from projecting the win totals of the upcoming NFL season.  This year, Vegas has the Philadelphia Eagles at 9.5 wins—behind only the Patriots, Steelers, Colts and Giants and tied with the Chargers. 

A couple of interesting takeways from the early projections:

1.)   That’s right, the Giants, a team the Eagles beat twice last season, are ranked higher than the Eagles despite losing Plaxico Burress.  Apparently, the experts in Vegas know something that we don’t and think highly of the Giants offseason moves—or lack thereof.

2.) Overall, Vegas believes that the NFC East will be a dogfight this year.  After the Giants at 10 wins and the Eagles at 9.5, the Cowboys are sitting at 9 and the Redskins at 8 wins.  If those projections turn out to be accurate then the division would end up without sporting a losing record.  

3.) If these projections turn out to be accurate, we are in for quite a bit of mediocrity next year.  After the group at the top, there is a slew of teams bunched in the 7 and 8 win range and few more below that threshold.  Some people call it parity, I call it mediocrity.

So it may only be July, but it is never too early to place your bets.  What do you think: over or under for the Eagels on 9.5 wins?

The Philadelphia Phillies ignored my memo yesterday and chose not to heed my advice.  The Phillies have signed three-time Cy Young award winner Pedro Martinez to a 1-year, $1 million contract that could escalate to $1.8 million with incentives. 

In perhaps a harbinger of things to come, the Phillies promptly placed Pedro on the 15-day DL with a mild shoulder strain.  The move to the DL is probably less about an actual injury than it is getting him some work before he joins the big-league club. 

The Phillies are hoping that Pedro is one piece of the puzzle when it comes to curing their starting pitching woes.  The 37-year old pitcher has struggled to regain any semblance of his heyday after a couple of seasons riddled with injuries and poor performance.

If Pedro can give the Phillies six innings every fifth night than this move will be deemed a success.  I’m just not sure he is capable of that at this stage in his career.  I hope I am wrong. 

Even before Brett Myers went down with what looks to be a season-ending injury it was apparent the Phillies would need to find help for the starting rotation.  And while front-end help is certainly the biggest priority (READ: Roy Halladay), depth is a need as well.  The Philadelphia Phillies must find a capable starter to hold down the fifth spot of the rotation.

Every starter they have tried in that spot has either failed or fallen victim to the injury bug.  In order to make a run to the playoffs, the Phillies will need to shore up the rotation from top to bottom.  Clearly, this is the driving force behind the Phillies kicking the tires of what remains of Pedro Martinez.  But Pedro is not a part of the solution for the Phillies starting rotation.  Repeat after me Philadelphia: “say no to Pedro.”

The common argument to justify signing the once-great veteran is that it’s a classic low-risk high-reward proposition.  I think that is faulty logic.  On the contrary; there is plenty of risk and the reward is not that high.  How high can the reward possibly be?  At his best, Pedro is a guy that can give you five solid innings—maybe six on an efficient night.  That’s it.  That is his upside.

Here is the risk: even if he reaches that upside, he is still placing undue strain on your bullpen every fifth night.  This is a bullpen that has pitched too many innings through the first half of the year and is in desperate need of some help from the starting rotation.  So even at his best, Pedro still taxes the bullpen.  In his poorest outings, Pedro will put the team in a precarious position by both coughing over the lead and taxing the bullpen.  So I don’t buy the low risk argument.  The risk is immediate damage in the standings and collateral damage as the season progresses and Pedro continues to stretch the resources of the bullpen thin. 

There is no disputing that the Phillies need depth across the rotation.  But to think Martinez adds to that depth is suspect.  In his last season, Pedro 5-6 record and a 5.61 ERA—not the type of numbers the Phillies need.  This is not the 2000 version of Pedro Martinez.  It is past his prime version that won’t help the Phillies repeat as World Champs.  So one more time with me Philadelphia: “say not to Pedro.”

While most old adages are overused, there is one that applies to the baseball season—“it is a marathon, not a sprint.”  But now that we are halfway home, it s time to take stock of what has transpired thus far and what the rest of the season may bring.

Here is what we know: the Philadelphia Phillies sit at 44-38 and are two games clear of the Florida Marlins in the NL East.  The offseason acquisition of Raul Ibanez has proved to be a shrewd move by rookie GM Reuben Amaro Jr.  His early season surge has catapaulted the Phillies to its status as an offensive juggernaut.  Think that “juggernaut” is too strong of a term for this team given its recent struggles and the much-maligned Jimmy Rollins?  It isn’t.  This team is on pace to score 59 more runs and hit  28 more dingers than last year’s group and nobody would question the offensive prowess of the World Champs.  Imagine how lethal this offense will be once Rollins gets rolling.    The putrid performance of Rollins has been offset by strong seasons from Chase Utley, Ryan Howard, Ibanez, Jasyon Werth, Shane Victorino and a bouneback season from Pedro Feliz.

With so much going right at the plate and a two-game lead in the NL East, it is reasonable for Phillies fans to feel good about their chances of getting into the postseason for a third straight time.  But that would be a false sense of security.

The reality is that this team is venturing into dangerous territory.  Cole Hamels has not pitched like the ace they need him to be, Jamie Moyer is finally starting to show his age, Brad Lidge has fallen back to earth and Brett Myers is likely out for the year. What that leaves is a mediocre starting rotation and an overtaxed bullpen.   I don’t care what kind of thunder you have in the middle of your lineup, if you can’t pitch, you can’t win. 

So where does that leaves this Phillies team as the second-half of the year gets underway?

In my opinion, the Phillies are teetering on the edge of trouble.   For starters, Raul Ibanez cannot be expected top continue his early season surge.  Without his early season production, the Phillies would have been in a perilous position.  With a drop off inevitable, Jimmy Rollins MUST start playing better baseball.  He has started to show signs lately that he is turning the corner but we need to see this on a prolonged basis before his  slump can be put in the rearview mirror.  But the offense is not the major concern. 

If the Phillies do not land a frontline starting pitcher, they will not repeat as World Series champs.  In fact, if they don’t get a starting pitcher, I would venture to say they won’t get out of the wild card round of the playoffs and will struggle to win their division.

The struggles of the starting rotation have put undue stress on the bullpen.  As the innings continue to pile for this bullpen unit, their effectiveness will decline.  Starting pitching is a definitive need for this team and if the Phils do not land one they will be hard-pressed to make the playoffs let alone defend their crown.

Yesterday’s development that Roy Halladay is on the market is welcome news for this team.  He is exactly the type of pitcher the Phillies need to land.  There are few pitchers in the league that can eat innings like Halladay.  With him at the top of the rotation, the bullpen can take the first seven innings off on nights that he starts.   But he won’t come cheap.  Amaro needs to find a way to get this deal done.  This is a team that is built to win and holding on to top prospects for the future when a player the caliber of Halladay is available is pure foolishness. 

The first half of the season provided a barometer of where the Phillies stand.  In first place, it is certainly not time to panic.  But a healthy dose of reality says that this team is not nearly as good as last year’s unit.  First place should not serve as comfort to a team with higher aspirations than a division crown.