• Roy Halladay Would Welcome Trade To Yankees

    Posted by on November 28th, 2009 · Comments (19)

    Via Anthony McCarron

    THREE DAYS after the Daily News wrote that the Red Sox were “putting on a full-court press” to trade for Roy Halladay, a report out of Canada says the Toronto ace has told the Blue Jays he would waive his no-trade clause for a deal – to the Yankees.

    A story on Canada’s Slam Sports Web site Friday quoted an unnamed major league executive as saying, “I don’t know when he is going and I don’t know where he’s going. But I do know that Halladay has told the Jays he’ll approve a trade to the Yankees.” The story was written by Bob Elliott of the Toronto Sun, a nominee this year for election to the writer’s wing of the Baseball Hall of Fame.

    A baseball source said all was quiet when asked Friday if a Halladay-to-the Yankees trade was imminent.

    Halladay, 32, has used his full no-trade power in the past – last season he said he would not approve deals to either Minnesota or Texas, but that roadblock appears to be out of the way for a potential Yankee trade.

    I’m sure the staff at the Yankees Clubhouse store would welcome back that “Black Friday” rush of shoppers, before X-mas, looking to add that “Roy Halladay Yankees Jersey” to their under-the-tree collection for this year…should the Yankees be able to pull off this deal, quickly.

    But, what number would Halladay wear in New York? #32 is retired. Swisher has #33. And, Burnett has #34. Would Roy want #31? That’s his, if he wants it. Or, would he go for #35? Or, maybe he would want #22? Perhaps the bigger question is whether #62 or #65 would be available if the Yankees do trade for him?

    Comments on Roy Halladay Would Welcome Trade To Yankees

    1. Corey
      November 28th, 2009 | 10:06 am

      Perhaps the bigger question is whether #62 or #65 would be available if the Yankees do trade for him?
      ===========
      preferably #65 IMO

    2. YankCrank
      November 28th, 2009 | 11:15 am

      The Yankees didn’t sell the farm and pay double for a younger Santana, they will not be selling the farm and paying double for Halladay either.

    3. Corey
      November 28th, 2009 | 11:32 am

      YankCrank wrote:

      The Yankees didn’t sell the farm and pay double for a younger Santana, they will not be selling the farm and paying double for Halladay either.

      I’d be fine with that too. We DO have a world series winning ball club, after all.

    4. YankCrank
      November 28th, 2009 | 11:51 am

      Corey wrote:

      YankCrank wrote:

      The Yankees didn’t sell the farm and pay double for a younger Santana, they will not be selling the farm and paying double for Halladay either.

      I’d be fine with that too. We DO have a world series winning ball club, after all.

      Personally, I see no point in trading our best young players for one year of Halladay then handing out another $20 million contract to a 33-year-old pitcher when other arms just cost money next year.

      That tactic clearly worked from 08-09. We kept our young players and still landed the big arm for just money…both contributing to a WS win. Why would we make change our strategy when it clearly worked?

    5. Corey
      November 28th, 2009 | 11:52 am

      YankCrank wrote:

      Why would we make change our strategy when it clearly worked?

      Desperation from losing the World Series? Oh…wait a minute…

    6. YankCrank
      November 28th, 2009 | 12:12 pm

      Corey wrote:

      Desperation from losing the World Series? Oh…wait a minute…

      Haha yes, that’s it…

    7. YankCrank
      November 28th, 2009 | 12:18 pm

      Just a question here Steve. Are you on the side of – if the package is right – the Yankees should definitely trade for Roy Halladay?

    8. November 28th, 2009 | 12:21 pm

      YankCrank wrote:

      Why would we make change our strategy when it clearly worked?

      Dude, you do realize that the Yankees won 7 more games than they should have last season – with a luck factor coming into play…and the Rays and O’s should be better next season ,,,,Boston too. And, of course, in the post-season, the schedule worked perfect for the Yankees. You cannot count on all those things working in the Yankees favor again in 2010. Thus, the need to reload.

    9. November 28th, 2009 | 12:23 pm

      YankCrank wrote:

      Just a question here Steve. Are you on the side of – if the package is right – the Yankees should definitely trade for Roy Halladay?

      See me previous comment. ;-)

    10. Corey
      November 28th, 2009 | 12:27 pm

      @ Steve Lombardi:
      Don’t discount the work of Wang, Veras, Ramirez, Clagatt early in the year.

    11. YankCrank
      November 28th, 2009 | 12:30 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      See me previous comment.

      You do realize that we’ll be swapping essentially “free” players (Joba, Hughes, Montero, etc.) for a man that will be costing us $20 million+ a year, right?

      For someone who slams Cashman for his payroll number and how the Yankees can’t develop players and win at a premium, advocating this trade doesn’t fall in line with what you’ve been preaching this last week.

      So are you on the side of win at all costs, or win “the right way,” which is a payroll close to everyone else? I’m confused.

    12. Corey
      November 28th, 2009 | 12:48 pm

      YankCrank wrote:

      So are you on the side of win at all costs, or win “the right way,” which is a payroll close to everyone else? I’m confused.

      Good point.

    13. November 28th, 2009 | 12:53 pm

      @ Corey:
      @ YankCrank:

      I’ve said all along, many times, if you’re paying attention to all what is written and not just what you want to remember, that I’m no fan of buying a ring, BUT, if the choice is to buy a ring or lose without buying, give me buying.

      Cashman has proven (see 2004-2008) that he is not capable of building a ring-team thru smart trades and the farm system. So, the only way to win, with Cashman, is to buy and spend. Thus, if this is the hell that we’re forced to live in, we might as well win while we’re at it, no?

    14. Corey
      November 28th, 2009 | 1:10 pm

      All I hope is that before, if, they do decide to pull the trigger on a Doc deal, that they first check with the Marlins to see what Johnson would cost and do the prospect math to see which deal is better.

    15. YankCrank
      November 28th, 2009 | 1:24 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      I’ve said all along, many times, if you’re paying attention to all what is written and not just what you want to remember, that I’m no fan of buying a ring, BUT, if the choice is to buy a ring or lose without buying, give me buying.

      So you feel it’s perfectly fine to regularly discredit a man for buying when, as you said yourself, you prefer buying over the alternative?

    16. YankCrank
      November 28th, 2009 | 1:25 pm

      Corey wrote:

      All I hope is that before, if, they do decide to pull the trigger on a Doc deal, that they first check with the Marlins to see what Johnson would cost and do the prospect math to see which deal is better.

      Agree 100%. I’ll gladly send Montero and Joba or Hughes over to FL for JJ in a second.

    17. Pat F
      November 28th, 2009 | 1:28 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ Corey:
      @ YankCrank:

      Cashman has proven (see 2004-2008) that he is not capable of building a ring-team thru smart trades and the farm system. So, the only way to win, with Cashman, is to buy and spend. Thus, if this is the hell that we’re forced to live in, we might as well win while we’re at it, no?

      it’s important for everyone here to remember that rodriguez(trade), cano (develop), hughes(develop), chamberlain(develop), cabrera(develop), gardner(develop), robertson(develop), coke(develop), molina(trade), marte(trade), swisher(trade), aceves(develop), etc. did nothing to help this ring-team either during the regular season or the playoffs. never mind jeter, posada, rivera, or pettitte either. it was all cc, burnett, teixeira, and damon. what’s more, it’s also important to remember that this was the first team in the history of baseball, past yankees teams included, to win with the help of big money free agents. even going back to the dawn of free agency, reggie jackson did not help the 77 or 78 teams win their rings, and it has been that way ever since. the yankees and their general manager have entered unchartered territory by adding free agents that helped take an already good team to the next level. excuse me i meant take the whole team on their back and win it all because the yankees had nothing in place to win pre-2009 with their team that was almost entirely traded for or developed from within.

    18. GDH
      November 28th, 2009 | 2:52 pm

      Corey wrote:

      All I hope is that before, if, they do decide to pull the trigger on a Doc deal, that they first check with the Marlins to see what Johnson would cost and do the prospect math to see which deal is better.

      From your lips to God’s ears. The guy’s a beast, and he’s young and has serious talent. If we’re going to part with good young players, ideally we should get a good young player in return, otherwise patch up and wait for next year’s FA market. Unless we steal him (unlikely) I’m not convinced Halladay is a good trade for us.

    19. Raf
      November 28th, 2009 | 5:14 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      Cashman has proven (see 2004-2008) that he is not capable of building a ring-team thru smart trades and the farm system.

      June 20, 2000: Traded Jim Leyritz to the Los Angeles Dodgers. Received Jose Vizcaino and cash.

      June 29, 2000: Traded Zach Day, Ricky Ledee and Jake Westbrook to the Cleveland Indians. Received David Justice.

      July 21, 2000: Traded Ben Ford and Oswaldo Mairena to the Chicago Cubs. Received Glenallen Hill.

      Do the Knoblauch and Clemens trades count? Bringing Orlando Hernandez along count?

      Cashman was there before 2004, ya know ;)

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.