Originally Posted by cws05champ
No question...hated it then, still hate it now.
OK, the trade didn't work out. Not all of them do. It's not worst trade of the past couple of years, as that prize goes to the second Nick Swisher deal (the one with the Yanks).
Some people, like Phil Rogers in this article
, will just not let the Hudson/Jackson trade go and continue to berate KW for making the trade. As a Sox fan, I find Rogers' incessent complaining about this deal fairly annoying, particularly in light of the lack of complaining about the Cubs' seven player swap with Tampa Bay to get Matt Garza.
Garza'a numbers this year? 4-6 with a 4.07 ERA with 9.4 K's and 3.4 BB's per 9 innings. Jackson's numbers? 5-6 with a 4.24 ERA with 7.8 K's and 3 BB's per 9 innings. Garza and Jackson are both 27.
Garza and Jackson are similar pitchers and have pitched roughly the same this year. The Cubs didn't give up two prospects for Garza,; they gave up four
(pitcher Chris Archer, shortstop Hak-Ju Lee, catcher Robinson Chinnos and and outfielder Brandon Guyer) plus major league outfielder Sam Fuld. The Cubs gave up a lot of talent all across the diamond to get Garza. Funny, the silence from Rogers on the Garza deal is deafening.
And unlike the Cubs (who really have no choice but to hold onto Garza), the Sox can move Jackson at the trading deadline when John Danks is ready to come off the DL. And given the lack of starting pitching available at the trade deadline, the Sox should be able to obtain a pretty good value for Jackson.
One more thing -- if people are not going to stop complaining about the Hudson deal, shouldn't people be at least as vocal praising KW for signing Phil Humber when Oakland released him? And remember, if the Sox didn't trade for Jackson (and still had Hudson), then the Sox might have brought in a another veteran starter in the offseason (someone like say, Jon Garland) as insurance for Peavy, as they would not have necessarily wanted to rely on a young starter such as Hudson. And who knows, in that scenario, maybe they wouldn't have signed Humber at all, as Hudson would have filled the position of 6th starter/long man in the bullpen. That was Humber's role in the beginning of this year but given the opportunity to start, Humber blossomed.