Scott (Ontario)
It seems like Kelly is a potential hold up in Halladay going to the Red Sox. Why would either side balk at a 20 year old in A ball with only 2 pitches. He plays so much SS we don't even know if he can endure 100 innings let alone 200. With Halladay you are getting an annual 220 inning guy

Jim Callis
Kelly is a three-pitch guy with tremendous feel for his age, so don't undersell him. But you are correct in saying that he's as unproven as Halladay is proven. I think the issue for any club is do you give up a lot of talented young players whom you can cost control for several years AND have to pay Halladay a ton of money in an extension to hold onto him. I don't think the Jays will get as much back for him as you might suspect. They should do better than the Twins did for Santana, but not a ton better.

Kevin (NYC)
Hi Jim- Love the chats. You stated that the Jays shouldn't do much better on a Roy trade than the Twins did with Johan. Unless I'm mistaken, the Twins received a plus defender in Gomez who had "upside" and a bunch of, at best, lower end rotation guys. I know Gomez is still young, but he still can't hit. Why would you expect the Jays to do only marginally better moving Roy? I know the $ for an extension limits the trade partners, but Roy is, well, Roy. Thx!

Jim Callis
Santana was, well, Santana. Halladay is a year from free agency, just like Santana, and he's not going to re-sign with his current club, just like Santana. As good as Halladay is, the Jays don't have a lot of leverage. There aren't many clubs who can afford Halladay and will be willing to give up a huge haul of prospects for him.