MLB, Cliff Lee

Cliff Lee seems disappointed about the trade to the Mariners

12/18/09 in MLB   |   Pat   |   5234 respect

After the Cliff Lee trade, the popular assumption was that the Phillies felt that Cliff Lee was unwilling to sign an extension with the Phillies, and that's why they essentially traded away an ace for another ace. But after Lee's recent comments, it looks like Phillies GM Ruben Amaro might have just wanted Roy Halladay THAT badly.

Amaro publicly said that the issue was their ability to sign Lee to an extension, but that seems unlikely at this point. Here was Amaro's quote:
"I would have loved to have kept both guys on the club. It was a matter of, we felt more comfortable with the deal we could do with Roy than the one we could do with Cliff. I hope Cliff Lee pitches tremendously well. We would have loved to have kept him, but it didn't look like we were going to move toward that goal."

That doesn't really match up with what Lee is saying:
"At first I didn't believe it, because I thought that we were working out an extension with the Phillies, and I thought that I was going to spend the rest of my career there. This goes to show this is a business, and you never know what's going to happen until you have a full no-trade clause."

Clearly, there was a disconnect somewhere, perhaps with Lee's agent, because the rumors are that Lee was willing to accept a deal for less than market value, since he wanted to stay in Philly.

It looks like the Phillies had a chance to have both Lee AND Halladay in 2010, and Amaro passed it up, and instead gave up Lee AND prospects to get Halladay.

Amaro has done a pretty damn good job so far, so I wouldn't want to question his methods, but it's hard to wrap my head around this one. Perhaps we'll learn more in the coming weeks and months.
Notify me by email about comments that follow mine. Preview