"The Phillies refuse to accept that they might not get exactly what they want." ~ Ken Rosenthal
I completely understand his point of view. Rosenthal reminded us of manager Ryne Sandberg commenting negatively on last year's clubhouse environment, and wrote that the "environment will not improve this season, given the uncertainty surrounding so many prominent veterans."
I don't have any problem with most of the basics in the piece. Yes, the Phillies need to deal as many of the aging, high-salaried veterans as possible. Yes, players like Howard and Papelbon are not likely to yield much, and will require eating big chunks of salary.
Yes, those deals should happen anyway, for the sake of changing that environment. But I do have a problem with a couple of directions that the Rosenthal article seems to take.
On the one hand, he writes: "The Phillies refuse to accept that they might not get exactly what they want."
On the other hand, two paragraphs later he begins: "No one is suggesting that the Phillies make a poor trade."
Though he mentions names of prospects in other organizations, nowhere in the article do I see specific trade suggestions.
What package does Rosenthal himself think would be acceptable for Cole Hamels, either from the Padres or the Red Sox, the two teams he highlights in discussing the ace lefty?
He quotes the old "sources" as saying that the Phillies "are adamant about getting one blue-chip prospect in any trade for Hamels" - and hangs that idea out as if it's outrageous.
For a pitcher of Hamels age, experience, proven health and results, and cost certainty, they had best get at least one such prospect in a deal.