Much ado has been made about the Halladay + Lee combo in Philly.  This, IMO, misses the point.  The REAL interest is not in looking at the top 2 ... or perhaps even the top 3.  The shock comes in looking at the top 4.  And considering this is the "Fillies", I'm thinking the Four Horsemen is a likely appelation:  In order of (current) reputation - followed by three true outcome rates (career) - (then best of last two seasons)

Player --- (HR/9; BB/9; K/9 career) - (HR/9; BB/9; K/9) - WAR (full season recent)

1. Halladay - (0.8; 1.9; 6.7) -- (0.9; 1.1; 7.9) -- 6.9 - Conquest
2. C. Lee --- (1.0; 2.2; 6.9) -- (0.7; 0.8; 7.8) -- 4.3 - Famine
3. Oswalt --- (0.8; 2.1; 7.4) -- (0.8; 2.3; 8.2) -- 3.7 - Death
4. Hamels -- (1.2; 2.4; 8.5) -- (1.1; 2.6; 9.1) -- 4.7 - War

The first eye-opener in this is that the LOWEST K-rates are those of Halladay and Lee.  The next is that Hamels may actually be the actual #2 (already), and he's the only guy that may not have peaked.  But, Hamels is the only guy without any 20-win seasons on his resume. 

The top three guys understand how to avoid gophers.  Hamels hasn't figured that out yet.  If he does - he becomes the ace. 

In truth, I'm thinking Oswalt may well be actual scariest guy on the staff.  I'm thinking his 7-1 record (and 1.74 ERA with Philly in 2010) has gotten lost in the Lee furor.  Lee went 7-4 (3.39) in his Philly partial.  And Halladay and Lee both had the "never been seen" edge in meeting the NL for the first time.

If people are placing bets on "best" Philly pitcher for 2011 ... I'd probably take the odds that are offered and place my chips on Oswalt.  (Not wild about the Braves reclaiming division dominance this year, either).