Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Rickey Henderson Coming Back to A's? Bar-right-arrows



Trade Analysis / Pitching Mechanics of Sean Gallagher

Sean Gallagher - Traded to the Athletics
Sean Gallagher - The Biggest Return Piece in the Rich Harden Deal

When I solicited your views for the Rich Harden trade, the responses were varied amongst both Cubs and A’s fans. Make no bones about it - the A’s dealt a high-risk but high-impact player in Rich Harden and received a group of mediocre to above-average talent blocked at most positions in the Cubs’ system. However, is this such a bad thing? Remember that Harden hasn’t thrown 200 innings in his professional career ever, and the last two years he has lost significant time to injury. As a result, Rich Harden is no longer throwing a breaking ball, instead becoming a two-pitch (fastball/changeup) pitcher. How he gets it done with just two pitches as a starter is beyond me, but it is a testament to his amazing ability.

Let’s take a look at the pros and cons of the package, and as a bonus, we’ll take a look at Sean Gallagher’s pitching mechanics - pulled straight from his recent start for Oakland, where he led the A’s to victory over division rival Los Angeles of Anaheim, striking out seven in his debut…

Star-divide

 

 

 

 

Dave Cameron of Fangraphs wrote an excellent piece about exchanging Rich Harden for Sean Gallagher here. In it, he makes some solid points about the durability of Gallagher vs. Harden and what would happen should Harden go down. Comparing Harden + his replacement to Sean Gallagher looks something like this:

That brings the combined totals for Harden + Harden Replacements to 180 innings with a 4.25 FIP, compared to the 180 innings we were projecting from Gallagher at a 5.00 FIP. That’s a difference of three-fourths of a run per nine innings, which while significant, adds up to a grand total of about 15 runs over the course of an entire season.

Fifteen runs, or roughly 1.5 wins - that’s the entirety of downgrading from Rich Harden to Sean Gallagher, based on the assumptions I made above. If you don’t like the numbers I used, feel free to plug in your own, but unless you’re very bullish on Harden’s health, you’re going to come to the conclusion that the swap will cost the A’s at most two or three wins between now and the end of 2009, when Harden’s contract expires.

For giving up those two to three wins in the next year and a half, the A’s receive club control over Gallagher from 2010 to 2013 (his ‘08-’09 years are already counted above), control over Murton from 2008 to 2011, control over Patterson from 2008 to 2014, a potentially useful prospect in Josh Donaldson, and they save approximately $8 million in salary.

If you assume that Cameron’s numbers are right (and I do), the A’s trade two to three wins for a ton of cost-saving prospects and league-ready players in addition to dumping $8mm in salary. This is a great trade by any measure! However, the problem lies in the fact that Rich Harden’s star power far outweighs what the A’s will get in Murton/Gallagher/Patterson/Donaldson, and that’s what’s blinding people. For those of you who have read Moneyball (and I hope that’s all of you), it is important to remember what Beane said about trading for and replacing players:

It’s not important to recreate the individual. It’s important to recreate the aggregate.

Beane said that regarding the loss of Jason Giambi, another high-profile player with stellar on-base and slugging percentages that couldn’t be replaced by any one single player. However, by choosing the undervalued parts that Beane could control, he was able to compete without one of the best players in the American League by adding Scott Hatteberg and Jeremy Giambi. Rich Harden is impossible to replace - but the package the A’s received in return does a good job of recreating the aggregate while saving the club money and giving them control over more pre-arbitration players who are league-ready.

 

A Closer Look at the Return

We’ll focus on two major players in the return - OF Matt Murton and RHP Sean Gallagher. Matt Murton is something of a pariah in Chicago, never getting playing time in the crowded outfield despite excellent on-base percentages in addition to a little pop from time to time. Though Murton has a line drive stroke and hasn’t shown the propensity to hit 25+ HR per year, he is a finished product that adds quite a bit of value to Oakland. His career batting line in the MLB is .294/.362/.448 and the average left fielder’s batting line is .264/.344/.441. All signs point to Matt Murton being a perfectly league-average (or slightly better) left fielder, both offense and defense considered. When you can get this production for close to the league minimum, you should be pretty damn happy.

Additionally, Matt Murton has never played full-time since 2005, and he is probably quite happy to be in a situation where his talents are appreciated. He will get a chance to play full-time in Oakland’s sparse outfield, probably joining the ranks of Carlos Gonzalez and Travis Buck in the long-run, while the other reserves scramble for playing time (Denorfia, Sweeney, Brown, etc).

RHP Sean Gallagher is the real return piece that people want to look at, especially after his great debut in Oakland last night. Gallagher combines a 93-96 mph four-seam fastball with a two-seam sinker, a straight change, devastating 12-6 curveball, and a newly added slider. Here’s what his Pitch f/x player card looks like, courtesy of Josh Kalk of The Hardball Times:

Type Movement in x (in.) Movement in z (in.) Initial Speed (MPH) Number Thrown Percent Versus RHB Percent Versus LHB Percent
Fastball -5.82 8.83 93.63 535 64.93 231 60.95 304 68.31
Curve 7.99 -5.8 75.33 86 10.44 35 9.23 51 11.46
Slider 3.96 0.57 83.75 159 19.3 111 29.29 48 10.79
Change -7.58 8.53 82.81 44 5.34 2 0.53 42 9.44

As you can see, Gallagher works like most RHP - primarily fastball/change to LH batters and fastball/slider to RH batters. He throws his curveball to both batters with some regularity, though, which is a testament to his confidence in the pitch in addition to the quality of the late break. I like his approach, as he throws a significant percentage of fastballs to both hitters and trusts his best pitches, rather than dabbling in a lot of off-speed work.

In 2008, Sean Gallagher spent 29 innings in AAA, striking out 30 batters, walking only 9 and giving up 2 home runs. His career in the minors has been a major success - he has struck out just over a batter per inning (482 K in 480 IP) and has shown major durability despite large jumps in innings pitched (Gallagher threw 151 innings at age 19 and 164 innings at age 20 - both high totals for such a young pitcher).

Complaints about Gallagher tend to focus on the same things - his mild velocity (prior to his jump in fastball velocity in 2006) and his bad body (6′2″ 220 lbs). Sounds a lot like Dana Eveland, doesn’t it? Though Gallagher has a reputation for running out of steam late in the season, there is the fact that he is just 22 years old and the Cubs have imposed a large amount of innings on his young arm - something they are unfortunately known for doing despite history indicating that it might not be such a great idea. For my money’s worth, I see a pitcher with an above-average fastball and curve who has been durable and strikes out a ton of batters with a mild control problem (though it is trending down, a very good sign).

Gallagher’s Mechanics

Thanks to reader xv84, I’ve figured out how to synchronize and combine two pitches from the same pitcher. I won’t waste any time showing you it, because it’s positively awesome:

Sean Gallagher's Fastball/Curve Combination

This is a sequence of Sean Gallagher vs. Chone Figgins in the first inning of the A’s / Angels game yesterday. Gallagher ran a fastball in on Figgins at 95 mph on an 0-1 count, speeding his hands up, then threw a nasty looping curveball on the outside corner of the plate nearly 20 mph slower, sitting him down. Poor Figgins never had a chance.

However, there are a few things I don’t like in Gallagher’s delivery. The first is the timing of his pitching arm at footstrike. Compare James Shields to Sean Gallagher in these two images - right when both pitchers start to turn their shoulders:

As you can see, Gallagher’s arm is not vertical when the shoulders turn. However, neither is it below the horizontal plane of his acromial line, so it’s not terrible. However, this will increase the distance that the forearm lays back in external rotation and will increase the load on his ulnar collateral ligament (UCL).

Tempo-wise, Gallagher is a lightning-fast 16 frames from maximal leg lift into footplant, which is excellent. Nothing to change here! Furthermore, Gallagher features the late stepover into footplant that I like, as it aids in fast rotation of the hips ahead of the shoulders:

Gallagher significantly “scap” loads his arm behind his back, but keeps the elbow at or below the level of the shoulders. He has a great high glove finish at the shoulder in the deceleration phase:

He does feature a bit of pitching arm recoil, but his arm does a pretty good job of uniformly decelerating across his body, so I think it’s fine for the most part.

Overall, though I don’t like his timing at footstrike/shoulder turn, Gallagher has otherwise pretty solid mechanics. I’d rate them at a tick above average, or Good.

In conclusion, I think the A’s got a good deal. That’s not to say that the Cubs got a poor return, since Patterson is blocked by Theriot/Fontenot/Derosa, Donaldson is blocked by Soto, Murton is hated by the organization, and Gallagher is nothing more than a fourth/fifth starter to the Cubs, depending on Rich Hill’s ability to throw strikes. Both teams did well here, and I just don’t understand the people that say that Oakland got ripped off here.

For more in-depth analysis of pitching mechanics, check out Driveline Mechanics.

12 recs | Comment 58 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

is 220 lbs what he weighs now or is that before he lost weight?

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Jul 12, 2008 8:24 AM PDT   0 recs

Weight.

http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An unconventional look at baseball video analysis.

by Driveline Mechanics on Jul 12, 2008 8:27 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Weight. (Real post)

That’s his listed weight on Baseball Prospectus. Not sure what it is now.

BTW, Tyson Ross put on the disabled list. Reasons unknown; can’t find any more information on it. Sad, but I predicted it.

http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An unconventional look at baseball video analysis.

by Driveline Mechanics on Jul 12, 2008 8:28 AM PDT   0 recs

Shoulder strain

Apparently he had one in the college season, too, so he may have reaggravated old damage.

They’ve got to clean him up if he’s going to be an effective pitcher.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 12, 2008 10:03 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

great job

Gallagher’s tempo is exciting, though I think he sometimes over rotates when he’s pumped up. I’d guess that’s where most of his control issues come from.

And Murton… boy. I don’t want to be overly pessimistic so quickly, but he’d be lucky to hit even 20 home runs with his swing. He should be spun for someone with upside, ala Ryan Church.

by rebus on Jul 12, 2008 8:33 AM PDT   0 recs

The Thing is...

Gallagher will look a lot better because of the Coliseum

but Murton and Patterson (should he come up) will look worse. I hesitate to predict that Murton will be league average in Oakland.

That’s not an especially harsh prediction though. I think Murton is probably a league average skills hitter, but to be average in Oakland, you have to be well above average (haha, I loved writing that)

by ohmangoAs on Jul 12, 2008 12:00 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Interesting note about Gallagher and Wrigley:

Gallagher has given up 6 HRs this season, all on the road. 0 HRs in 30 IP at Wrigley – just kind of interesting.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 12:20 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I just heard a comment

(maybe on the broadcast last night, I’ve already forgotten) that the wind tends to blow in at Wrigley during April and May, and blow out later in the summer when the weather warms up. Gallagher’s last start in Wrigley was June 1 – his five since then were all on the road. I also thought (as nsj noted in his wrapup) that he benefited from the wind on a few hard hit balls last night. I wouldn’t be surprised if he ends up being a bit homer prone during away/day games.

"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.

by andeux on Jul 12, 2008 1:20 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He does appear to have the tendency to hang a few breaking pitches

I expect to see a few of those get hit out. That’s why I’m most interested in the BBs – if they’re low, he’ll be in great shape, if not…not so great shape.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 1:47 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

That's true.

But Murton actually surprised me by how bad his process looked. Long swing, hands flying out. Maybe he can compensate by hitting for a high average.

by rebus on Jul 12, 2008 12:24 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Seems like an .800 OPS on the road

bodes awfully well, especially for a guy who is in his prime years (26) and not declining physically. I wonder how he has managed the .800 OPS if his process looks poor – he is certainly not a power hitter so he must be spraying doubles consistently line to line and alley to alley.

From the numbers, it looks to me as if he is a Kendallesque (better years) singles hitter punching balls hard line to line against RHP, who hits with more XBH power against LHP. Basically, his BA and OBP are solid against all pitchers but his slugging percentage is a lot higher against LHP.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 1:09 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

yeah

I’m just bummed that there’s little to no upside. I see him hitting .275/.340/.410. He could be a little better, but I feel an optimistic projection is league average. That’s probably okay if he plays a really, really good left field (seems like it), but we all know the A’s need power hitting coming from some position players.

by rebus on Jul 12, 2008 2:04 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He doesn't play reallly really good LF...

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 12, 2008 2:10 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

as far as I know (secondary internet sources)

Murton was fifth on James’ Plus/Minus list for 2005-07, with a +21 and he was rated significantly above average by BP in FRAA. Maybe that was just due to an unusually good year in 2006?

by rebus on Jul 12, 2008 2:39 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Hmmm,

I had the wrong impression. He arm scohttp://www.athleticsnation.com/2008/7/12/570188/trade-analysis-pitching-me#res poorly, but he does indeed seem to be a plus LFer.

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 12, 2008 2:45 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

maybe he just looks bad out there sometimes?

Cubs fans seemed pretty down on his D.

by rebus on Jul 12, 2008 2:53 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

oops,

here’s the link.

by rebus on Jul 12, 2008 2:53 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He doesn't have one - he's excellent against LHP

but he’s not at ALL bad against RHP. Basically still a high average and high OBP with less power.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 9:11 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Thank you for compiling all of this information.

Great turnaround time also. After watching the game last night I e-mailed a friend of mine who is a very big Cubs fan and told him that I was surprised that the Cubs would trade a young arm like Gallagher. We both agreed that the A’s got value for Harden, the Cubs needing to win now the A’s long term. We also agreed that the trade is great for the career of Gallagher because the Cubs would have ruined this kid like every other pitching prospect they’ve had over the last couple of decades.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Jul 12, 2008 8:39 AM PDT   0 recs

Awesome writeup.

These are fantastic.

(Also, I saw your posting looking for a new writer. I wish I knew enough about it to help, because it’s really interesting stuff.)

by mikev on Jul 12, 2008 10:01 AM PDT   0 recs

This is fantastic.

I’m still not completely on board with the trade, but Gallagher looked extremely impressive last night.

My confusion lies here (and forgive my ignorance): Many critics of the trade said that Gallagher is 22, but has grown completely into the pitcher he’s going to be in the future, and doesn’t have much upside—which is why many project him as a back of the rotation starter.

Where does this line of thinking come from? I’m genuinely curious, because I had never heard that argument before this trade.

by Keys Myaths on Jul 12, 2008 10:37 AM PDT   0 recs

Mostly his physique, I think

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 12, 2008 11:02 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Upside.

Though Gallagher is just 22 years old, scouts say he has little upside since he is a finished product. What they mean is that his body is done growing for the most part, and that his pitches do not have future potential. It would be something else if he threw 100 mph but walked a bunch of guys, or needed to add movement. That’s upside. Gallagher already throws what is perceived to be his genetic maximum velocity, and his pitches are already just good enough.

That being said, I think he has plenty of room to improve. His minor league numbers are very impressive.

http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An unconventional look at baseball video analysis.

by Driveline Mechanics on Jul 12, 2008 11:04 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He could still add some command, though

He admits he needs to refine wasting his breaking pitches after getting ahead on the count, and he walked around 3 per 9 IP in the minors.

Also, he could always learn to cut his fastball.

I think a lot of this is a matter of perspective. Last year, he would have been hands down our most exciting upper-minor league pitcher—now, since we’re all excited about Gio and Cahill and Simmons and Anderson and Inoa and, oh, whatsisname, the guy who had to go back to the Mexican League, not to mention the improvement of Italiano and Lansford and Mazzaro, and young major leaguers like Smith and Eveland…well, in that context, it’s easy for people to feel “meh” about a guy like Gallagher despite his genuine talent.

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Jul 12, 2008 12:10 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Leon

whatsisname

by mikev on Jul 12, 2008 12:21 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Arnold Leon,

but his pals call him Leon Arnold – at least his friend Jairo Garcia, who is two years younger, does.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 1:09 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Thanks

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Jul 12, 2008 6:26 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

+1!

I watched the game that Sean Gallagher pitched this past Friday a couple of times and I have to say he impressed the hell out of me. I’m no stats geek or video guru but I know what my eyes tell me:

The kid has big league stuff and great composure on the mound. His off speed stuff was especially impressive and he was plus on his fastball in the strike zone.

Thanks for posting the videos, though…......-M-Rod

by mrod on Jul 14, 2008 10:57 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

What I saw last night looked like #2 starter stuff to me

Especially when you offset the “hanging breaking ball” problem with the “22 years old and gets to work with the A’s coaching staff” factor. Lots to like here.

Thanks again, DM, for the great writeup – they are always appreciated.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 11:22 AM PDT   0 recs

Excellent analysis

Fantastic info. I agree with Nico, definitely a number two IMO, after reading the “expert opinion”, and knowing how well the A’s work with pitchers. No mention of Gaudin in the “trade analysis”, but I would like to point out, Gaudin gave up a HR to the first batter he faced as a Cub pitcher.

"I never predict anything, and I never will." Paul Gascoigne, English footballer

by One won lost won on Jul 12, 2008 11:40 AM PDT   0 recs

i agree as well

This kid could def be a number 2 starter imo. The A’s staff always does a great job with young pitchers and seeing that this kid is only 22 years old I think the A’s will continue working with him and develop him a bit. He seems to have good control and sure knows how to throw a fastball. I think there is alot more upside to this kid than most of us thought at first. Great to see him do so well in his first start. Let us hope the next one is just as well!

I loved this writeup. It was so in depth and just amazing.

by ilovegregsmith on Jul 12, 2008 11:54 AM PDT   0 recs

Nice thing, the biggest reason he may not be

a #2 on the A’s is that the A’s have enough other good pitching here and on the way. Hard to know where Gallagher would fit in the 2009 or 2010 rotation of Duchscherer, Smith, Eveland, G. Gonzalez, Simmons, and Cahill (Blanton? Never heard of him, sorry.) Best case realistic scenario is that Gallagher is soon our #3 starter, acknowledged as “a #2 on most teams.”

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 12:17 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Who's gonna make it?

I’m curious how likely our pitchers are to make it. Obviously, this isn’t something we can know, but it is fun to think/idly speculate about.

My Guess:
Pitchers, in order of Likelihood of being in the 2010 rotation,
Duke
Blanton
Simmons
Anderson
Cahill
Gio
Mazzaro
Leon
Rodriguez
FDLS
Ross
Inoa

Others want to chime in?

by ohmangoAs on Jul 12, 2008 2:24 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I think Blanton's gone by 2010

Basically whenever there’s a taker. Also, I’d put Gio ahead of Anderson due to Anderson’s age and the fact that Gio is already at AAA and starting to put it together. Maybe switch Gio and Anderson straight up and it’s right on.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 2:26 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Smith? Eveland?

Gio
Simmons
Anderson
Cahill
Smith
Gallagher
Eveland

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Jul 12, 2008 3:39 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

wtf, that is the worst list ever

apparently “likelihood of being in 2010 rotation” means “let me list a bunch of a’s pitchers”...
duke, who the a’s have for only one more year as of now, is at the very top, whereas smith, eveland and gallagher don’t even make the list?

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Jul 12, 2008 5:59 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Not including Gallagher

That is a mistake. I goofed.

However, I’m not optimistic about Eveland and Smith. Especially not Eveland. I’d defend putting them in among the Mazzaro/Leon group.

Duke, I suspect, will be extended. He’s just too undervalued by other clubs is my guess.

Also, your response is a non-response. Ranking prospects by likelihood of success (as opposed to upside) is a legitimate exercise. For example, although Cahill has been awesome, we all put him behind Anderson. That’s something to discuss/think about.

The inclusion of Blanton is another one…I think we’re not going to get a reasonable offer. If you disagree, say so.

Listing A’s pitchers would be the goal, since we’re discussing A’s pitchers. It seems like non-a’s pitchers are not likely to foreseeably be in the a’s 2010 rotation. thanks for suggesting that listing a’s pitchers was a bad idea…

by ohmangoAs on Jul 13, 2008 2:57 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Absolutely, positively no way

Inoa is in the rotation in 2010. They got him for less money than was offered by other teams, in large part because they sold him on being an organization that takes care of its young pitchers. That does not mean putting an 18/19 year old through a major league season in the starting rotation. There would be no point.

Blanton will almost certainly be someone else’s #4 starter by then.

Duke is 75% gone, by trade or free agency.

Gio will get a chance next year, and almost certainly another in 2010, barring some catastrophe.

Smith and Eveland also have jobs to lose here in Oakland. I’d say at least one of them will be in the rotation at the start of the year in 2010.

Put that together:
(Duke/Blanton)
Gallagher
Gio
Smith/Eveland
Simmons
Anderson
Cahill
Mazzaro
... probably not any of these other guys

This is in the order of likelihood of being in the rotation at the start of that year, not necessarily the order they will be run out there. For example, Blanton is the 4th or 5th best starter on the team right now, but if he’s here next year, would be a lock to have a job, hence at or near the top of the list.

I would bet on Gallagher, Gio and Smith or Eveland, with Simmons close behind that group. Assuming Duke and Big Joe are gone, the fifth spot is up for grabs between the lesser of Smith/Eveland, plus Anderson, Cahill and Mazzaro.

I probably spend too much time thinking about this.

by Mark Borgschulte on Jul 13, 2008 8:55 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

well,

12th on the list is not that high (and since I forgot Gallagher it’s really 13th).

I’m not sure Inoa being up is so infinitely unreasonable. Of course we wouldn’t expect or even necessarily want him to move that fast. But what if he were to be absolutely all world and fly through the minors?

I put him behind ross, which tells you I think 2010 is extremely unlikely for Inoa

by ohmangoAs on Jul 15, 2008 12:44 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

What happened to Gallagher's 90-94 mph fastball?

I saw a lot of 95-97 mph! Are we using a different speed gun?

by calas on Jul 12, 2008 12:28 PM PDT   0 recs

Velocity.

Gallagher increased his velocity over the past year or two after people told him he needed to get in shape.

http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An unconventional look at baseball video analysis.

by Driveline Mechanics on Jul 12, 2008 12:33 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm calling juiced gun

Fangraphs says his average velocity is 92 something, not 95.

Garland’s pitches looked substantially faster than they should have, too.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 12, 2008 12:35 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd say his true fastball is 92ish,

that he was amped last night and was actually throwing 93-94 MPH, and that the radar gun spotted him yet another 1-2 MPH just for kicks. That sound about right?

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 12, 2008 1:11 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

gameday had him at 94-96 the first few innings,

and 92-93 in the later innings. I’d say the tv gun was about 1 mph high. But guys who average 92.3 as he does on fangraphs throw plenty of 95-96 which is what we tend to remember.

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 12, 2008 1:41 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

somehow i feel this trade is reminiscent

of the mulder/haren-calero-barton trade…we trade a good established pitcher for one with good minor league numbers and a few other prospects…i know that we gave up gaudin too, which kind of lessens us “winning” this trade…but i think its about equal

We've never been in that position. We wouldn't know how to operate, I mean, do we get him a corsage?-Billy Beane on signing a high profile FA

by DyeLongJustice on Jul 12, 2008 1:15 PM PDT   0 recs

Barton was a top tier prospect...

the A’s received nothing close to his quality of prospect in this deal. This deal, on paper looks more like the Hudson deal without the injury concerns of Meyer.

Cruz = Murton
Thomas = Patterson
Meyer = Patterson

Catching prospect is a slight bonus for including Gaudin. I’m not saying that the A’s got ripped off like the other deal but the make-up is similar.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Jul 12, 2008 3:36 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

wait

were there any injury concerns about meyer when the A’s traded for him?
I just remember him being one of the braves best pitching prospects that never managed to recover after getting injured in spring training of 05.

by totoum on Jul 12, 2008 4:37 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

there were no injury concerns regarding meyer when the a's traded for him

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Jul 12, 2008 6:03 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Gaudin

seemed to be complaining a bit too much and under-performing in the bullpen. The A’s tend to ship this sort of player out. I wish he’d gotten a chance to start again, after his incredible first half last year, but his ERA out of the bullpen did not seem to indicate he had that next gear in him. Whether this was mental or physical, either way, he made the perfect complement to Harden.

by Mark Borgschulte on Jul 13, 2008 8:33 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Bingo.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 13, 2008 8:42 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

so

All I can say is if Smith is gone by 2010..so am I. Jk I’ll still love them but I really really want Smith to stick around awhile lol

by ilovegregsmith on Jul 14, 2008 5:50 PM PDT   0 recs

I don't think Smith will be "gone"

As a back-of-the-rotation depth guy and swingman, he’s excellent. Competitive teams need guys like that—your Julian Tavarez, Braden Looper types. And if you have a deep rotation, you can make hay trading the back end guys to desperate contenders.

If he’s bypassed by better options for the core of the A’s rotation, that’s a good thing for the team. If he’s your #3 starter, as he arguably is for the current A’s, you’re probably not going to the postseason.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 14, 2008 8:45 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

hope you are right

I sure hope so!I’d love to see him stick around awhile. I was actually raised a Yankees fan (forgive me everyone) but when I was maybe 14 (so about 8 yrs ago) I started watching the A’s and I fell inlove with the team riiiiiight away.
I always get “attatched” to players and when they get traded I get bummed out but usually I end up falling in love with whom ever they traded for lol Smith became my favorite from his first start though. No matter what…their pitching ALWAYS amazes me.

by ilovegregsmith on Jul 14, 2008 9:03 PM PDT   0 recs

Wow DM, this is awesome stuff. What would it take to talk you into looking at some other Cubs pitchers? ; )

"It’s like they have 40,000 players on one team. Forty thousand people want to be in the dugout slapping fives. ‘Passionate’ is an understatement. Fans like that are special." -- Giants LHP Alex Hinshaw on Wrigley Field

by northsider on Jul 15, 2008 12:04 AM PDT   0 recs

Trade Update

OK, but can you now begin to understand why people think the A’s got ripped off?

by solotar on Aug 4, 2008 4:42 PM PDT   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms