I don't know how to edit it myself so I'm telling you publicly...In the linescore above (which is cool, by the way), the hits are backwards - the A's had 9 hits, the Red Sox 5.

Harden is enough to put the A's in contention for as long as he's healthy, and isn't worth enough in trade because no one knows how he'll hold up.

Plus, as is the A's have a solid rotation with Harden, Blanton, Duke, Gaudin, and Eveland/DiNardo, Gio Gonzalez is ready to excel in 2009, De Los Santos, Simmons, Cahill, Anderson, Leon et al have you stocked for 2010-11. Unless Harden brings you a kick-ass CFer or SS for the next 6 years, how is it worth it to give up contention in one season for more prospects?

I'm telling you, this team can hang in there in the AL West for as long as Harden takes the mound. CarGon is on his way to bolster a team that is already better than the pundits think.

But I'm the weirdo who thinks Duke will win 15 games this season.

The A's have said that, despite CarGo's injury, if he performs well in the three exebition games, the A's might carry him as their Centerfielder.

Considering Denorfia and Sweeney are not doing so hot, it might just happen.

The A's could platoon Sweeney and Brown, or they could throw Jack Cust in Left Field and have Mike Sweeney DH. I think having Cargo in there would fill a big hole. But despite his heroics (and blunder), I am not really high on Emil Brown as our everyday Left Fielder and #5 hitter.

I'd prefer the A's go with a lineup of;

RF Buck
2B Ellis
1B Barton
DH Sweeney
LF Cust
3B Hanahan
CF Gonzalez
SS Crosby
C1 Suzuki

someone is willing to give up absolute top tier talent for Harden (someone like David Price or Jay Bruce). Eventually there is a significant level of diminishing marginal return to good but not great prospects -- we have a VERY deep farm system as it is. It lacks the high end talent of a couple of teams but it's as deep as anybody's.

If Harden makes it through the entire season healthy, I'd think long and hard about moving him in the offseason, though.

Is this not a better offensive team than we had last year? I don't think it's any bit of a stretch for Barton, Suzuki, Brown, or whoever is in the outfield to outperform Kendall, Kotsay, Johnson, or Swisher. On top of that, if Crosby gets any worse than he was last year, he shouldn't be in the big leagues, he has nowhere but up to go. Same with Chavez. With that said, that team was pretty competitive given the ridiculous amount of injuries. I don't see why this team cannot compete with any other team in the west. Especially with a healthy Harden and Blanton.

I'm not sure how much longer we have Harden signed for, but if it's going to be 2 or 3 years down the road, then why not keep him? That way we will have him when the new guys are really coming into their own. It's a sure thing that Harden can dominate, if he is traded away for more prospects, it's a possibility that the guys in return could never work out (Dan Meyer comes to mind). The starters we have and guys we have seen during spring training aren't going anywhere for a while, unless they all flop, I mean we already essentially have a set future starting 9 in Suzuki, Barton, Ellis/Murphy, Crosby, Hannahan, Buck, and Gonzalez/Denorfia; minus a sure CF. So what is there to gain by trading Harden or Blanton?

Honestly, I love Blanton and Street both, but like so many people have said before, you just don't give up on a talent like Harden, especially if the return package for him is not overwhelming.

I think that Beane could extract a pretty good package for Blanton from a team in need of a starter at the deadline, or for Street if/when a contender loses a closer.

Both Blanton and Street are above-average for their positions and are under club control for the same amount of time, but they won't ever contend for the Cy Young and won't single-handedly turn a rebuilding season into a competitive one (like Harden can).

Healthy Harden + Gio + Cargon + Joey Devine + Greg Smith in 2009 would make for an awfully competitive team, top to bottom, regardless of whether one or both of Street/Blanton are traded sometime this calendar year.

They should go for it. I was glad when they kept Zito a few years back and we made it to the ALCS. The fans deserve to have the A's admin. try to bring a WS to Oakland when it's within reach.

First, Beane's job is to bring the A's a championship. He only traded Haren and Swisher this year because he felt they were too far away and he was setting himself up to win a championship later. If the A's are in first place or otherwise playoff bound, it goes against what he's there to do to hurt the team's chances.

Second, even if the A's are struggling in the middle of the season, there's no need to trade either guy. You can, I suppose, if the deal is right. But there's no reason to shop two guys who are under your control. I think most of us here believe the A's can be serious contenders as soon as next year. Wouldn't we like to have Blanton and Harden a part of that? So unless a team is desperate and offering the farm for one of them, why move them in July when you can re-assess in December and vote yay or nay on a serious run in 2009?

A farm system is great. I support the Haren and Swisher deals. But the major league team is always more important. You don't sacrifice a World Series to have the #1 minor league system in the universe.

If Street and Harden pitch at an elite level all season...a bigtime team that is worried about making the playoffs(the team may start with a Y) will give plenty to sign these two guys.

if you don't have a realistic chance to do so in any given year you work to improve your team to be able to contend in the future. But any year that you have a chance to go for it you should.

That said, I don't think it's realistic to expect the A's to contend on the hypothetical situation of their being 100% healthy while the Angels and Seattle are not. If all three teams are mostly healthy the A's are likely to end up finishing third this season, just based on talent and experience alone.

I'm just as guilty as everyone around here of letting Rich Harden make me hope, nay dream of a 30-start season after seeing him pitch once-- and after we spent all offseason steadfastly promising to avoid doing just that, no less-- but I can't let it cloud my better judgment. Is Harden a game-changer? Yes. But he only changes-- if the A's are lucky-- about 10 games a year. I wouldn't even ask for something close to what the A's got for Haren; I'd be satisfied with a Swisher-esque package centered around a slam-dunk shortstop.

If Billy can sell high on Harden, he's gotta.

I haven't thought that in the past, but he just looked different out there today, in my opinion. Very smooth and fluid. Effortless, really. I think the adjustments he's made are going to be the difference. Put me in the optimist corner.

He made an excellent point about building your team around an ace. Harden is young, relatively cheap, and extremely talented. He's a top 3 pitcher in the majors when he's healthy so if he can prove himself to be healthy then you build your future around him not by trading him away. Imagine a rotation next year of Harden and Gio at the top with Blanton, Gaudin, and Eveland/Simmons/Duchscherer filling out the rest.

Harden is a talent that only comes around once every decade or more and trading him away when he has a realistic shot at leading this team for years to come is not a good business decision.

So many things have to go just right for the A's to be in contention come July.

1) The Angels have to fall apart. Escobar going down is astep in that direction but Vlad is healthy and Lackey is due back in May. Lackey, Weaver and Garland are a very strong starting 3. Kendrick is going to hit, Hunter will too and if Kotchman can even duplicate his 2007 season the Angels should have a solid enough line-up.

2) The A's offense is going to be led by Jack Cust, Mike Sweeney, Travis Buck and Daric Barton. That's a potential one-year wonder, a guy who's spent more time on the DL than Rich Harden, a 2nd year player who missed half of his 1st season and a rookie.

3) Hell... #1 and #2 are enough to make it long odds already.

Even if Harden can magically hold it together this year does anyone think he can do it two years in a row? More importantly, is Rich Harden (even if he manages to stay healthy the next two years) the kind of guy you want to see the A's invest in long term? We still don't know what the exact problem is and he is pitching through discomfort in his right arm.

And if Harden is not someone you want the A's to commit 4 years/$48 million to (or more) then would you rather collect a couple draft picks or trade him for 3-4 prospects? 'Cause there's no guarantee that Harden is actually going to hold up for the next two years.

Billy Beane did not sit down in his office and say to himself "Hey, I've got a better chance of winning the AL West in 2008 if I trade Haren and Swisher." Didn't happen. If Harden can somehow go from junk bond to blue chip status in the next couple months then Beane is a fool if he turns down a deal that offers full value. If Harden can make his price jump it will be a lucky break for Oakland.

Luck doesn't last.

Neither will Harden.

I think the only concievable way you dish either one of the two if were in the hunt for a playoff spot is if a team is willing to overpay by incredible amounts. Not just prospects, but prospects and a young player who is in the bigs and very promising. However i doubt that will happen just cuz the other team will be trying to get him to increase their playoff push, and getting rid of a solid young contributor might be too high a price. but it is beane were talking abotu here so it is always a possibility, even when it seems unlikely.

I'm from Canada, and on the sports center they were saying how the A's took the second game, but of course the last line they left off on was, " The red sox split the series by winning 5-1" But in canada we get such limited coverage, all winning teams in america are the only ones that get any attention whatsoever. Except on sirius hardcore sports, they know their stuff. Big small teams don't matter.

Our sports center guy after the first game also called our closer "Hudson Street". Its very irritating but their the media. Their not credible or professional in a wide scope.

Harden has never stayed healthy and most likely never will. Chavy has not been healthy for 4 seasons or so and almost the same with crosby. If no one gets injured on a lot of teams then those teams would also have chances to compete. I know it is hard to watch Hardens filthy stuff and wonder what would happen if he stays healthy. If you do that he will only dissapoint you when he is injured in a month or so

I hope that for at least a single game in the 2008 season the A's have a seemingly fully healthy squad. I certainly don't expect it, but it would really make my day to see Chavez at the hot corner during a Harden start.

I would love to see a healthy Chavy along with a healthy Crosby and Harden. Even with all of them healthy the A's have a lot of filler players out there right now, like Hannahan, Denorfia (or whatever his name is) and Brown, and That is just not good enough to be a competitive team.

I think Billy will keep them, because I think he wants to win a championship. Playoffs? Been there, done that, went home early. To win the championship, you need an ace (Harden) and a very dependable #2/3 (Blanton plus someone, order TBD.) You need some pop in the lineup also, and there's a good chance that we've got that in the system now. You're more likely to have Harden healthy than to have ANY prospect, no matter how dazzling, develop into another Beckett. And that's from someone (me) who loves what Billy has done and doesn't think Harden will be healthy.

the a's have a chance this year, nearly sweeping the red so in japan is something that could show hope for the future.

"red sox" not "red so"