PDA

View Full Version : Are the A's giving up?


PeteWard
07-09-2008, 12:45 AM
How do you explain this trade with the Cubs? Oakland is only 3.5 back in the Wild Card and 5 back of LA.

I do not understand this.

Help me here because I must be missing something.

MrRoboto83
07-09-2008, 01:15 AM
Beane must know something about Haren's health. This brings me to think about the Billy Koch deal of old. Mark Mulder once dealt has never been the same pitcher either.

TDog
07-09-2008, 01:35 AM
Beane must know something about Haren's health. This brings me to think about the Billy Koch deal of old. Mark Mulder once dealt has never been the same pitcher either.

That's what I hear people saying. People don't always know what they are talking about, but the surprise is that the A's got so little in return.

PeteWard
07-09-2008, 02:07 AM
Beane must know something about Haren's health. This brings me to think about the Billy Koch deal of old. Mark Mulder once dealt has never been the same pitcher either.

Yes but the Cubs mngmnt can't be THAT naive, can they?

Harden pitched well just this past weekend.

thedudeabides
07-09-2008, 09:45 AM
:whiteflag:

doublem23
07-09-2008, 09:49 AM
Billy Beane throws in the towel with the best of them.

Dan Mega
07-09-2008, 09:50 AM
Billy Beane throws in the towel with the best of them.

But I thought he was the greatest GM ever?!

ilsox7
07-09-2008, 09:52 AM
Yes but the Cubs mngmnt can't be THAT naive, can they?

Harden pitched well just this past weekend.

No he didn't. His last two starts have not been very good and there are reports his velocity was down significantly and his stuff was not there.

palehozenychicty
07-09-2008, 09:53 AM
Billy Beane throws in the towel with the best of them.

Now I know why he didn't sign Prior in the offseason.....:tongue:

doublem23
07-09-2008, 10:21 AM
But I thought he was the greatest GM ever?!

He's definitely the greatest "Next Year" GM ever.

Rockabilly
07-09-2008, 10:47 AM
Since the Cubs gave a bunch of stiffs for Harden.. I wonder if Beane will take our stiffs for Huston Street

kobo
07-09-2008, 11:05 AM
How do you explain this trade with the Cubs? Oakland is only 3.5 back in the Wild Card and 5 back of LA.

I do not understand this.

Help me here because I must be missing something.
I think Beane wanted to move Harden before he breaks down again. He probably figured right now he could get the most for Harden so he made the deal. There are reports he has lost some velocity on his fastball, he was throwing 93-94 when he came off the DL and his last couple of starts it's dropped down to 91-93 (I noticed that on Sunday while at the game). I also heard on the Score this morning that he has trouble throwing his breaking ball and is basically a 2 pitch pitcher right now, fastball and change.

skottyj242
07-09-2008, 11:13 AM
Beane must know something about Haren's health. This brings me to think about the Billy Koch deal of old. Mark Mulder once dealt has never been the same pitcher either.

Why does everyone thing the Billy Koch deal was so terrible? Granted he was terrible for us for a year but what has Foulke and Mark Johnson and Joe Valentine done lately? Last I remember Neal Cotts was solid for us in 2005. Without that trade do we win the World Series?

Luke
07-09-2008, 11:19 AM
Beane must know something about Haren's health. This brings me to think about the Billy Koch deal of old. Mark Mulder once dealt has never been the same pitcher either.

I don't know the Beane knows something about his health, or just has a hunch because his velocity is down a little. Either way, you're dumb not to give the guy and MRI with arthrogram before finalizing that trade.

pierzynski07
07-09-2008, 11:20 AM
Why does everyone thing the Billy Koch deal was so terrible? Granted he was terrible for us for a year but what has Foulke and Mark Johnson and Joe Valentine done lately? Last I remember Neal Cotts was solid for us in 2005. Without that trade do we win the World Series?
So you're supporting the trade based on the results of Cotts in 05, and the status of Foulke, Johnson, and Valentine in 08? I could point out that Foulke won a World Series in 04 with Boston.

As for the topic, yes, the A's are giving up.

PatK
07-09-2008, 11:53 AM
Beane must know something about Haren's health. This brings me to think about the Billy Koch deal of old. Mark Mulder once dealt has never been the same pitcher either.

Look at any pitcher he deals- they have maybe one good year after leaving before becoming average.

skottyj242
07-09-2008, 11:56 AM
So you're supporting the trade based on the results of Cotts in 05, and the status of Foulke, Johnson, and Valentine in 08? I could point out that Foulke won a World Series in 04 with Boston.

As for the topic, yes, the A's are giving up.


No I'm basing it on the fact that Foulke wasn't with the A's a year later and Johnson and Valentine never really did much anywhere and we got a reliable relief pitcher for at least a year.

doublem23
07-09-2008, 11:56 AM
Look at any pitcher he deals- they have maybe one good year after leaving before becoming average.

Yep.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/hudsoti01.shtml

Lip Man 1
07-09-2008, 12:20 PM
Like I said in another thread I heard and read at least a month ago he was going to do this. Harden can be a free agent after the 2009 season so if you were going to move him this is the time to do it to get a maximum return.

I'm thinking his health questions are what drove down the price but Oakland probably said, 'something is better then nothing' if he breaks down again.

I think Patterson could be a good player for them and maybe Murton as well if he can ever get his swing back.

Lip

Irishsox1
07-09-2008, 12:51 PM
Trading Sean Gallagher was a dumb move. The guy is only 22, has a much better health history than Haren and has looked pretty good. I can understand the Cubs desire to get Haren, since he has playoff experience but I would not have given of Gallagher. Murton is a triple A player and at best Patterson is a utility player no big losses there.

Konerko05
07-09-2008, 12:59 PM
Trading Sean Gallagher was a dumb move. The guy is only 22, has a much better health history than Haren and has looked pretty good. I can understand the Cubs desire to get Haren, since he has playoff experience but I would not have given of Gallagher. Murton is a triple A player and at best Patterson is a utility player no big losses there.

I don't know if you are just spelling the name wrong, but it is Rich Harden, not Dan Haren.

chaerulez
07-09-2008, 01:02 PM
The A's got a deal haul for an injury prone starter. Gallagher is a major league ready start with serviceable talent so far. Murton is a good bat with a good eye, although he isn't a good defensive player but if he were an everyday player I think he could post a .290 average with a OBP around .350 with 15 to 20 HRs. That's decent. Patterson I think can turn into a borderline starter, nice utility player. Donaldson is an average catching prospect, could become a decent backup. So they have three guys that they can insert into their 25 man roster right away if they choose, I don't think the A's are giving up, they feel they have a better chance of winning with Gallagher, Murton and Patterson over just having Harden.

Konerko05
07-09-2008, 01:04 PM
I don't think the A's are giving up either. Billy Beane was going to trade Harden regardless of their record. If he waited a couple weeks and Harden gets hurt again, they are screwed. That wouldn't be too "Moneyball." Anyways, the A's acquired three Major League ready players.

DSpivack
07-09-2008, 01:04 PM
The A's got a deal haul for an injury prone starter. Gallagher is a major league ready start with serviceable talent so far. Murton is a good bat with a good eye, although he isn't a good defensive player but if he were an everyday player I think he could post a .290 average with a OBP around .350 with 15 to 20 HRs. That's decent. Patterson I think can turn into a borderline starter, nice utility player. Donaldson is an average catching prospect, could become a decent backup. So they have three guys that they can insert into their 25 man roster right away if they choose, I don't think the A's are giving up, they feel they have a better chance of winning with Gallagher, Murton and Patterson over just having Harden.

I don't think Murton and Patterson are really all that good. They could be average guys, starters perhaps, but nothing special. Gallagher could become a decent back-of-the-rotation guy, but is nothing special.

Harden is an injury-prone frontline starter, but they also traded away a very solid reliever and spot starter in Chad Gaudin.

asindc
07-09-2008, 01:09 PM
I don't think Murton and Patterson are really all that good. They could be average guys, starters perhaps, but nothing special. Gallagher could become a decent back-of-the-rotation guy, but is nothing special.

Harden is an injury-prone frontline starter, but they also traded away a very solid reliever and spot starter in Chad Gaudin.

That's what surprised me about the trade. I think the addition of Gaudin makes this a steal for the Cubs.

JB98
07-09-2008, 01:20 PM
I think Beane wanted to move Harden before he breaks down again. He probably figured right now he could get the most for Harden so he made the deal. There are reports he has lost some velocity on his fastball, he was throwing 93-94 when he came off the DL and his last couple of starts it's dropped down to 91-93 (I noticed that on Sunday while at the game). I also heard on the Score this morning that he has trouble throwing his breaking ball and is basically a 2 pitch pitcher right now, fastball and change.

I noticed this at the game Sunday as well. I commented to the guy next to me that Harden's best pitch was his breaking ball, because he couldn't throw his fastball by anybody.

I saw Harden pitch in person back in 2003 when he first came up. It's pretty clear his fastball isn't what it used to be. I can tell that without even looking at the radar gun, although the gun readings confirmed what my eyes were telling me.

doublem23
07-09-2008, 01:27 PM
I think Patterson could be a good player for them and maybe Murton as well if he can ever get his swing back.

Having watched Patterson down here in Peoria for a year, he definitely has some value. I know everyone likes to joke about him being Corey's little brother, but he's a decent player; not a perrennial All-Star but he can play in the Majors.

As for the relative value of the trades, the Indians didn't really get anyone MLB-ready for Sabathia did they? The A's got a starter in Gallagher who is going in their rotation this week and Patterson and Murton who will be in AAA, but can play in Oakland today.

:dunno:

The addition of Gaudin to this deal is what makes no real sense, but I don't neccessarily think Oakland got "completely" hosed the way some people do.

cws05champ
07-09-2008, 01:31 PM
Having watched Patterson down here in Peoria for a year, he definitely has some value. I know everyone likes to joke about him being Corey's little brother, but he's a decent player; not a perrennial All-Star but he can play in the Majors.

As for the relative value of the trades, the Indians didn't really get anyone MLB-ready for Sabathia did they? The A's got a starter in Gallagher who is going in their rotation this week and Patterson and Murton who will be in AAA, but can play in Oakland today.

:dunno:

The addition of Gaudin to this deal is what makes no real sense, but I don't neccessarily think Oakland got "completely" hosed the way some people do.
LaPorta is just about as ML ready as you can get. He should be up this Sept with the Indians.

doublem23
07-09-2008, 01:35 PM
LaPorta is just about as ML ready as you can get. He should be up this Sept with the Indians.

Oooo, a September call-up.

OK, after LaPorta the guys they got aren't really going to be in Cleveland any time soon, right?

Zisk77
07-09-2008, 01:41 PM
I think the A's made the better trade in the long run. I think Gallagher has a lot potential and could be a top to middle of the rotation starter he is only 22 with a good harm. His problem is everything he throws is hard...mostly fb/slider. He needs to develop his cahnge and cut his fb. Murton and patterson our ok players (maybe Ellis and Brown are the next to be dealt?)

Cubs Get Harden who is a frontline guy, but who is always injured with his velocity being down. Also, not that the A's treat him with kids gloves. He throws usually not much more than 5 innings and is on strict pitch counts. Its a if they want him to appera attractive but not want him to get hurt until...:rolleyes: He reminds me of Prior except he isn't a total wussy.

Harden = high risk high reward. I don't see th cubs just pitching him 5 innings. They will treat him like a horse...one that may have to be shot before the year ends.

Gaudin is the interesting part of the trade. He will help in the bp and could become a future starter.

TDog
07-09-2008, 02:24 PM
...
The addition of Gaudin to this deal is what makes no real sense, but I don't neccessarily think Oakland got "completely" hosed the way some people do.

Gaudin is the element to the deal I don't understand, but I really don't know if there is anything going on with him. It is possible that Beane wanted Gallagher more than or at least as much as Hendry wanted Harden.

It wouldn't surprise me if Gaudin proves more valuable to the Cubs than Harden. It wouldn't surprise me if people look back in a few years at the deal and say Hendry got hosed. I'm guessing that someone from the Cubs, perhaps Hendry himself, scouted both Harden and Gaudin when they pitched against the Sox last weekend. The Cubs have to know Harden's velocity is down. Maybe they used that fact as a bargaining chip.

Obviously the trade holds a lot of promise for Cubs fans, just as the Sabathia deal excited Brewers fans. But no players guarantee a team will get to the World Series, of course. A team has to win three of five and then four of seven from other good teams to get there. And once there, you have to take advantage of the opportunity. Even having better pitchers doesn't give your team guarantees because the opposing pitcher with an ERA over 4 could go out there and pitch the game of his life (in which case you whine about your incompetent offense).

The Cubs are probably a better team today than they were this weekend, but I don't know that they would be if they had traded Gallagher for Harden even up.

Hitmen77
07-09-2008, 02:30 PM
How do you explain this trade with the Cubs? Oakland is only 3.5 back in the Wild Card and 5 back of LA.

I do not understand this.

Help me here because I must be missing something.

:reinsy
If you think Oakland can make up 3.5 games in the wild card standings, you're crazy!

spawn
07-09-2008, 02:51 PM
I wonder what A's fans feel about this deal?

jabrch
07-09-2008, 03:34 PM
Oooo, a September call-up.

OK, after LaPorta the guys they got aren't really going to be in Cleveland any time soon, right?

That's being done strategicly to not start the clock to early and give him a year of meaningless (to them) service time. If they were a contender, and needed a LF, LaPorta would be called up today.

TDog
07-09-2008, 03:35 PM
I wonder what A's fans feel about this deal?

A lot of them are not at all happy. There have been rumors, of course, that they were going to deal Hardin, and getting back Gallagher in the deal wouldn't have been a big problem for them. Giving up Gaudin in addition to Hardin was the surprise.

BRDSR
07-09-2008, 04:34 PM
He's definitely the greatest "Next Year" GM ever.

No kidding. Say what you want about Billy Beane, but he knows baseball players. Give him a major market payroll to work with and he'd be winning championships left and right. I can't believe the Yankees haven't dumped Brian Cashman and offered Beane a boatload of money to be smart for them.

If Moneyball had never been written, this board wouldn't hate Billy Beane so much. He's probably one of the top 10 or 15 GMs in the history of the game.

doublem23
07-09-2008, 04:43 PM
If Moneyball had never been written, this board wouldn't hate Billy Beane so much. He's probably one of the top 10 or 15 GMs in the history of the game.

Probably not, because instead of being a famous ****ty GM, he'd be an anynomous ****ty GM.

And please, lets' keep the "Top 10" accolades on hold as long as his hands look like this:

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:xTdmMEdwBCbhUM:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Ring_finger.JPG/800px-Ring_finger.JPG

P.S., here's a picture of a "dumb" GM's hand, just to give you a frame of reference:

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:15kcbOMcCdMgOM:http://soxmachine.com/images/ring2.jpg

Notice the difference?

P.S., my claim that Beane is the best Next Year GM ever was not supposed to be a compliment.

Daver
07-09-2008, 04:46 PM
No kidding. Say what you want about Billy Beane, but he knows baseball players. Give him a major market payroll to work with and he'd be winning championships left and right. I can't believe the Yankees haven't dumped Brian Cashman and offered Beane a boatload of money to be smart for them.

If Moneyball had never been written, this board wouldn't hate Billy Beane so much. He's probably one of the top 10 or 15 GMs in the history of the game.

No he isn't.

TDog
07-09-2008, 05:18 PM
No he isn't.

Well put.

Last week, before the A's blew into Chicago, I thought they had a chance to catch the Angels, despite losing two of three in Anaheim. I didn't believe Beane had really assembled a good team. I believe the prospects playing in place of the injured players Beane had assembed for the team were skilled and hungrier.

If Harden and Gaudin are pitching in the postseason this October, the frustration over the A's and their general manager might boil over.

thedudeabides
07-09-2008, 05:36 PM
No kidding. Say what you want about Billy Beane, but he knows baseball players. Give him a major market payroll to work with and he'd be winning championships left and right. I can't believe the Yankees haven't dumped Brian Cashman and offered Beane a boatload of money to be smart for them.

If Moneyball had never been written, this board wouldn't hate Billy Beane so much. He's probably one of the top 10 or 15 GMs in the history of the game.

I believe he turned down the Red Sox job. Why would he do that? Maybe, he doesn't want the pressure? Or he doesn't have the balls. I don't know the man, but I'm just speculating. But, that was a chance to have a major payroll and "winning championships left and right."

palehozenychicty
07-09-2008, 05:40 PM
I believe he turned down the Red Sox job. Why would he do that? Maybe, he doesn't want the pressure? Or he doesn't have the balls. I don't know the man, but I'm just speculating. But, that was a chance to have a major payroll and "winning championships left and right."


He did turn it down, because he doesn't want to compete. It's been evident for a long time.

FarWestChicago
07-09-2008, 07:32 PM
I wonder what A's fans feel about this deal?Billy Beane is not worshiped by A's fans. That is left to "Sox" fans. :rolleyes: