A Roy Halladay Post With Zero Puns About His Name

Posted in MLB, Philadelphia Phillies on 12/21/2009 06:20 am by Brian Berg

Replacing Cliff Lee with Roy Halladay may make the Phillies only marginally better for 2010, but it makes them significantly better for the three years following.

Roy Halladay talks about joining the Phillies, while Ruben Amaro Jr. looks on (Clem Murray/Staff Photographer, Philly.com)

Roy Halladay talks about joining the Phillies, while Ruben Amaro Jr. looks on...happy after finally catching his own personal unicorn (Clem Murray/Staff Photographer, Philly.com)

The Phillies finally got their man.  Prior to last season’s trading deadline, the Phillies were considered the front runners in acquiring Roy Halladay from the Toronto Blue Jays.  However, the asking price was too much GM Ruben Amaro Jr.  So as a consolation prize, he practically stole Cliff Lee from the Cleveland Indians.

We were told that Lee was every bit the ace pitcher that Halladay was.  And from the moment he arrived, he proved that assertion - most notably with a 4-0 playoff record record in leading the Phils to their second consecutive National League Pennant.  While we were skeptical of Lee at first - he didn’t have quite the track record of Halladay - we came to worship him.  And now he is gone.

In sending a package of prospects that seems to be only slightly less than what the Blue Jays were asking for last July, the Phillies brought Halladay into the fold.  But why do it if Lee proved to be just as capable as Halladay - particularly in the clutch (where Halladay is unproven).  And when you think about it, why not keep both?  With a rotation as good as anyone has had since the Braves of the 1990’s, another trip to the World Series would seem about as inevitable as something can be in baseball.  The answer is two-fold; neither of which has to do with the Phillies being cheap.

Many criticized the trade of Lee as the Phillies being more concerned about their payroll than winning another World Series.  And it certainly seemed that way on the surface, since the Lee trade to Seattle was technically separate from the Halladay trade from Toronto.  The first reason the Phils chose to put their legacy on the arm of Halladay instead of Lee did actually have to do with money.  Just not in 2010.  All indications were that Cliff Lee intended to test the free agent market following the expiration of his contract after this season.  Lee is old enough to want to make this his last long term contract.  And he is young enough that there will be teams willing to give it to him.  Halladay on the other hand wanted to win a World Series so bad, he was willing forgo free agency and take a below-market contract extension with a true contender.

All of that means the Phillies were able to get Roy Halladay for $20 million/year through the 2013 season - a bargain when shopping for major league aces.  Whereas Lee will probably sign for at least that much, and probably 2-3 years longer once he hits the free agent market next season.  The Phillies were clearly worried that Lee would walk after this season, and they knew they could sign Halladay to an extension.  It made sense on the field, and in the pocket book.

However, maybe the bigger reason for not keeping Lee was not financial at all.  Considering the three prospects they gave up to obtain Halladay, combined with the four they gave up to get Lee last summer, the Phillies were losing seven of their best prospects.  And as Amaro put it, “That’s no way to do business in baseball.”  And he’s right.  It’s tough to understand the true value of prospects when you’re staring at a possible rotation that’s headed by two Cy-Young Award winners, but the Phillies needed to restock the farm system with talent if they wanted to remain competitive in the future.  So they traded Lee to Seattle for three prospects.

If the trade of Lee was done simply because the Phils did not want to pay for both him and Halladay, the Phillies would’ve been much more likely to trade someone like Joe Blanton - who makes about only $2 million less this coming season.  However, Blanton would not command near the level of prospects that Lee did.  Obviously these trades had to do with money AND prospects, but I think money was much less of a factor than many fans are arguing (probably the same fans who criticized the Phillies for getting Lee instead of Halladay at the trade deadline).  And it is completely unfair to criticize this team - a team that has won two straight N.L. championships and one World Series in the last two seasons, and a team that just added a pitcher of Roy Halladay’s skill level for four more seasons - for caring more about their payroll than another World Series.

New Coach. Painfully Similar Result

Posted in NHL, Philadelphia Flyers on 12/07/2009 04:24 am by Brian Berg

Facing a growing distance between themselves and the contenders in the Eastern Conference standings, the Flyers made a change at head coach, replacing John Stevens with Peter Laviolette.  Unfortunately for the new coach, the Flyers lost his debut 8-2.

Peter Laviolette does his best tomato impression during his 8-2 debut loss (Photo by Len Redkoles/NHLI via Getty Images)

Peter Laviolette does his best tomato impression during his 8-2 debut loss (Photo by Len Redkoles/NHLI via Getty Images)

A couple weeks ago I wrote about how it might be time for the Flyers to start thinking about a different direction when it comes to the head coach.  Well, apparently the Flyers were already thinking that.  Late last week, the Flyers’ continued struggles cost John Stevens his job.  Soon after his dismissal, his replacement was named: Peter Laviolette, former coach of the 2006 Stanley Cup Champion Carolina Hurricanes.

Laviolette promises to bring a stricter mentality to the team, as well as a more open, attacking style.  In his past, he has not tolerated mistakes by players, and he would hold them accountable by taking away their ice time.  That is something this Flyers team sorely needs - they lead the league in penalty minutes, and that’s without the large number of fighting majors they usually earn.

The Flyers’ first test under Laviolette was against the Washington Capitals on Saturday, with one small caveat:  The Caps were without two time MVP (and widely considered the best player in the World), Alexander Ovechkin.  So, any success the Flyers might have would have to be marked with an asterisk.  That, of course, is assuming they had any success…at all.  Losing 8-2 generally means that not much went right for you.

For about three quarters of the first period, the Flyers were playing fairly well.  After falling behind 1-0 early, they took over control of the game, and eventually tied it up.  Then it happened.  In an 8-2 game, there is rarely a single moment that you can point to and say, “that’s when the game changed.”  Saturday had one of those rare moments.  Daniel Carcillo and Matt Bradley got into an altercation…sort of.  It was mostly Carcillo that got into the altercation.  At least that’s the way the referees saw it.  They handed the Flyers’ forward a five minute major for fighting, a two minute minor for instigating, a two minute minor for cross-checking, a ten minute misconduct, and, finally, a game misconduct penalty.  All Bradley received was getting helped off the ice, after being dropped by one of Carcillo’s punches.

Add all of that up - grab your calculator - and you get a nine minute power play for the Capitals.  Nine minutes - the first five of which were the major (which means the Caps would be allowed to score as many times as they could)!  Simply put, the Captials took advantage, scoring three times.  By the time the smoke cleared, the Flyers were down 4-1, and were clearly emotionally drained.

Now, as monumental as that series of events was, it was not what was most troubling about the game.  What was most troubling was the attitude the Flyers played with.  It was the same seemingly emotionless attitude that led John Stevens to get fired.  Even after an unprecedented penalty (at least in my viewing experience), the Flyers were only down 4-1 with more than half the game left.  They have come back from worse.  Instead of playing with the intensity that you’d imagine a team with a new coach would play with, they were flat.  And they went on to allow four more goals that can’t be blamed on anyone but themselves.

So here we are.  They Flyers (as of this writing) have lost seven of their last eight, have fallen to 12th place, and now they have a new coach and new system to learn.  Their goaltending has been subpar, and their special teams have been anything but special.  But…wait for it…it’s still early.  Yes, they are two spots removed from the bottom of the conference standings, but they are also “just” 14 points away from the first place Penguins with over 50 games to play.  And they still have four games in hand on the Penguins.  And if their position seems insurmountable to you, just look at those cross state rivals.  Last year - and much later in the season - they were in tenth place in the conference.  After a coaching change, they went on to finish the regular season in fourth place and eventually won the Stanley Cup.  Am I predicting a Stanley Cup for the Flyers?  No.  It’s just that I don’t expect this slump to last.  This is a good roster, and I think the new coach will turn them around before it’s too late.

Time For Flyers to Consider a New Coach

Posted in NHL, Philadelphia Flyers on 11/30/2009 12:43 am by Brian Berg

The Flyers have fluctuated between being a good, average, and bad team the last two-plus seasons.  The weaknesses in the roster have been addressed - successfully in my opinion - but the team still seems to be missing something that the great teams in the league have.  It is time to consider the possibility that coach, John Stevens, is not the right man for the job.

John Stevens seat isn't hot yet, but it might get warm real quick if the Flyers don't make a Cup run. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar)

John Stevens' seat isn't hot yet, but it might get warm real quick if the Flyers don't make a Cup run. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar)

First, I’d like to apologize for my absence the last month and a half.  Somehow I’ve managed to go through back to back Phillies World Series runs with next to no writing.

Ok, back to the Flyers.  As of this writing, the Flyers’ record stands at 13-10-1; good enough for 3rd place in the Atlantic Division.  As you can see, not bad, but not good either.  And when you consider they have the defending Stanley Cup Champion Pittsburgh Penguins (the team that has eliminated them from the playoffs the last two seasons) in front of them in their division, the Flyers have definitely not been good enough.

Ever since GM Paul Holmgren remade the team in 2007, following their worst season in franchise history, the Flyers have had a young and talented roster.  Over the course of the following two seasons, more talent has been added, and the young leaders of the team have gained valuable experience.  The Flyers have a balanced scoring attack, with three lines capable of carrying a team, and with the addition of Chris Pronger this past offseason, they have a talented blue line with a mean streak.

It’s been argued on this site that all this team needed, following their latest exit from the postseason, was an atitude adjustment.  Too many times last season, and the season before, the team seemed unable, or unwilling, to play a full 60 minutes with intensity.  They allowed themselves to fall into holes, both over the course of the season as well as within a game.  And while they were able to crawl out of those holes from time to time, it was ultimately the reason their season was over after just six postseason games.

Coming into this year, Captain Mike Richards had another year of experience under his belt.  And with the addition of Pronger, this year’s team looked like it would have the right attitude to play hard each and every game.  And the season started good for the Flyers.  But since their quick start, the Flyers have struggled with the same problems that have plagued them the last two years.  They come out slow and fall behind; they take undisciplined penalties; the fail to hold leads; etc.

I look at the roster, and I see a group of guys who are as good, top to bottom, as any team in the league.  And for stretches during games, they show that.  But they lack the consistency to be considered a true Stanley Cup contender.  The roster has been addressed and the only possible explanation  left is coaching.  Maybe John Stevens isn’t motivating his players.  Or maybe his system does not suit the talents of his players.  Either way, it’s becoming clearer that he is not the right coach for this team.

I say this team because I really like Stevens as a coach.  He’s still young as far as coaches go (You have to remember that this is Stevens’ first NHL coaching job), and I think he has the potential to be a great coach.  But this team has the roster to win now.  It’s core is entering its prime, and so is the core of their Eastern Conference rivals.

Maybe I’m wrong, and what we’re seeing is a team that is still jelling.  And come playoff time, maybe they will be playing up to their capacity, and make a real run at the cup.  Maybe this is the normal Flyers trend of a so-so beginning of the year.  But if that’s the case, what’s stopping them from having their “normal” early exit from the playoffs.

The point of all of this is that it never really crossed my mind that the problem all along may be the coach.  Or maybe it never crossed my mind because I didn’t want it to - just like I never wanted to admit Richards needed help leading this team.  But now it’s time to allow that thought to enter my mind.  It’s time to consider a change.  And it’s not like the Flyers organization has been afraid to change coaches in the past.  This is Stevens’ third full season as Flyers’ coach, and three years seems to be the average shelf life of a Philadelphia Flyers coach.

Older Entries