but there's literally zero reason to expect Lester to outpitch Haren over the next three years.

Go look at their numbers. They have virtually the same K/9 IP and Haren gives up half as many walks. He's also got the built-in advantage of being a righthander.

Kershaw is probably the best pitching prospect in the game, but Buchholz would get support from some as #2.  Just in the past week I have seen glowing reports from guys like Jim Callis, Kevin Goldstein, and Keith Law.  He has a very good fastball and two well above average secondary pitches. He's a pretty fantastic prospect.

Boston is not scared to trade prospects, as the Beckett deal showed.  However, at the time of the Beckett trade their rotation was a mess.  Their rotation is now the best in baseball as it stands.  No need to trade young players to address what is already an overwhelming strength.

and Mets thought we were asking for too much. (Not that I was there or anything)

Haren makes that a doable trade and Maine isn't an unknown anymore. Hell Haren for Maine is almost a straight up, then we get two more players in the deal.

There's no way the Mets would give up all three of those guys for Blanton. Minaya would have to have a simultaneous stroke, heart attack and brain injury before he would agree to that deal.

LAD is really the only fit, and being an Cali boy he probably wouldn't mind being moved there.  But even still, if you look at what they are willing to give up for Cabrera, if BB were to wait (which I expect him to do) we could get that plus.  Young pitching should trump all.  As someone said before me on this thread, we can't replace Danny.  It makes more sense to remain competitive, give Danny a track record then if we still feel the need to rebuild, ponder moving him.  The same goes for Blanton, Harden, and even Gaudin.  

a Harden trade, if another team offers a blue-chipper for him, the A's need to pull the trigger even if they aren't going for the "rebuild plan". For one thing, I'm convinced he has undiagnosed structural damage in his shoulder a la Jason Schmidt; for another, he's approaching free agency and his trade value is only going to go down from here.

I think I've made it quite clear how much I dislike the idea of moving Haren this offseason.  But my justification goes slightly beyond his ace status.  I do agree that an ace is hard to find.  Apparently now the Os don't want to trade, or at least approach a long term extension, because of their belief in the importance of an ace.  I tend to agree, but my reluctance in trading him is because he is also our staff leader.  Someone the younger guys on the staff, in varying degrees, look up to, mold themselves after, and ask questions to.  If we do move Haren, who fills that role?  Who can the younger guys go to?  Not to mention I think moving Danny would destroy any winning clubhouse atmosphere.  

Or even worse, let's pretend we trade Danny mideason 2008 for stud prospect XYZ, who ends up being another Rich Harden and always is injured.  Now we've given up the rarest of commodities a cheap, durable, never injured workhorse of an ace who also had the dual role of staff leader.  It is just way too much to give up.  (Rebuilding or not).  I still argue we should center our future team around Danny, not send him off.  

From ESPN: Link

In case the link doesn't work, here is the text:

Also, a player with five years of service time who is traded in the middle of a multi-year contract may demand another trade prior to the start of the season following the one in which he was traded.

As for winning him in free agency, I think we could find the money and the desire is obviously there on Danny's part.