Trade Market - CC Sabathia and the A's
As many of you know, the Brewers just dealt AN-Want-To-Trade-For-Favorite Matt LaPorta, Zach Jackson, Rob Bryson, and maybe Taylor Green for Indians Pitcher, Bay Area native, and 2007 Cy Young winner CC Sabathia.
UPDATING: Sabathia dealt to Brewers
by John Perrotto
The Indians have agreed to send left-hander and reigning AL Cy Young winner C.C. Sabathia to the Brewers for a four-player package that is highlighted by Double-A first baseman/outfielder Matt LaPorta. Also headed to the Indians are two minor league pitchers, left-hander Zach Jackson and right-hander Rob Bryson, and a player to be named, likely to be minor league third baseman Taylor Green. The deal is expected to be announced Monday.
Sabathia, 27, is 6-8 with a 3.83 ERA this season in 18 starts and is eligible for free agency after this season. He is expected to make his Brewers’ debut Tuesday night by starting against the Rockies at Miller Park.
LaPorta, 23, is hitting .288 with 20 home runs and 66 RBI in 84 games with Double-A Huntsville in the Southern League to go with a .402 OBP and .576 SLG.
Jackson, 25, has been converted from a starter to a reliever this season and was 0-0 with a 4.91 ERA in two games with the Brewers and is 1-5 with a 7.85 ERA in 22 games (and six starts) for Triple-A Nashville, where he has averaged 5.3 strikeouts and 2.9 walks per nine innings while posting a 1.73 WHIP.
Bryson, 20, is 3-2 with a 4.25 ERA in 22 games, five stars, with Low-A West Virginia, striking out 11.9 and walking 3.3 per nine innings with a 1.15 WHIP.
Green is playing at High-A Brevard County, and the Indians want to see if he can make the transition from third base to second before agreeing to take him as the player to be named. The 21-year-old left-handed hitter is batting .298 with 10 homers and 54 RBI in 80 games with a .382 OBP and .448 SLG.
Baseballprospectus.com
Thats the Brewers #1 prospect, and three who didn't make BA's BrewCrew top 10.
And we all remember the pitching deals that went down this winter. Dan Haren, Erik Bedard and Johan Santana were all dealt to different places, with Dan Haren being thus far the best of the three in both performane for Haren and the package recieved for him.
So what then could the A's get if they decided to deal away their pitching depth right now and deal Joe Blanton (after a few good stars), Rich Harden and Justin Duscherer? We would be throwing in the towel for 2008, but the potential haul of prospects would be enormous, and with our offense the way it is right now, we might simply be fooling ourselves into contention.
I think we could get a better package for any of those three than the Indians got for Sabathia, but not quite as good as what we got for Haren. Then again, should we concentrate the prospects acquired into three awsome prospects or six good ones like the Haren deal?
<!-- <h3><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=930" rel="bookmark">UPDATING: Sabathia dealt to Brewers</a></h3> <p> <p>Posted by John Perrotto @ July 6, 2008, 07:14 PM-->
0 recs |
88 comments
Comments
I think you might be overestimating our trade leverage
When you say that our pitchers will have more trade value than Sabathia, or approach the value we got in the Haren trade.
Blanton’s trade value is going to be nowhere near Sabathia’s, because although Blanton has more years of control, he is not as good as Sabathia. Sabathia elevates Milwaukee from a wild card contender to an NL World Series favorite. Blanton would certainly help a number of teams get to the playoffs, but no team is going to get stars in its eyes at the thought of Blanton as a playoff starter.
Duke has been amazing this year, but I think most teams are going to be skeptical of his ability to perform this year as his innings pile up, and he doesn’t have the type of “stuff” that is going to make GMs dream of Duke starting Game 7 of the World Series. I think the A’s should keep Duke, find a way to limit his innings as the year goes on, and sign him to a contract to let him be the anchor of the rotation for the next few years.
Harden is the wild card. His “dead arm” scares the hell of out me, and I would think it would scare the hell out of GMs from other teams. With Sabathia gone, however, Harden is the one pitcher available who can significantly elevate a team’s chances to win a World Series. All it takes is one team to fall in love with him to make a “Beane Fuckin’ A” trade, but I think that at the end of the day Harden either stays with the A’s or brings back a package just shy of what Sabathia brought.
Given the realities of the trade value of our starters (or Street), and the situations of other teams, it’s hard to see how we could ever hope to get anything close to a Haren type of deal from any team. Haren is a better pitcher than Blanton, has a far better health record than Harden, and has been healthier and had a longer track record as a successful starter than Duke. Haren also had three years of cheap control for Arizona. Combined with that, Arizona had depth in their minor league system and the willingness to trade that depth for a chance to compete in the next few years. I don’t know of another team that is in that position right now for the A’s to trade with.
This post is getting long, so I will start another one with teams I see as potential trade partners, and what we might expect to get as well as obstacles to a deal with those teams.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 5:24 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
With all due respect
how do you figure Sabathia “elevates Milwaukee from a wild card contender to an NL World Series favorite”? By all means, it certainly helps them out in their hopes to run down St. Louis, but they won’t catch Chicago … I bet they don’t even make the playoffs.
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
by Vacafan on
Jul 7, 2008 7:16 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Fair question
And here is my answer. At the moment, the Brewers have the second best record in the National League although their run differential does not support that record. Assuming that the Brewers are able to catch the Cubs or maintain their wild card spot, their playoff rotation would be Sabathia, Sheets, Parra, and Gallardo (he should be back and have a fresh arm for the playoffs). That is a fantastic playoff rotation, and would in my mind make the Brewers a formidable opponent for any NL team in the playoffs.
The Brewers may not make the playoffs, but getting Sabathia certainly helps the cause. Once they get to the playoffs, the season starts over and that rotation and lineup would make them the most complete playoff team in the NL in my opinion.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 7:31 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What'll be funny is when he re-signs with Cleveland next season
The Brewers won’t catch the Cubs, may even miss the playoffs, and will get to watch LaPorta and CC with the tribe.
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 7:34 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
None of that is out of the question
Of course, if the Brewers make the playoffs as a wild card and go on to play in the World Series or win a world championship, I would imagine they wouldn’t really care. If they miss the playoffs and lose Sabathia and Sheets, they have four draft picks to rebuild with and many young players to trade to build a rotation around Gallardo and Parra. Having the talent they have on hand is what gives the Brewers the opportunity to take the risk they are taking. We’ll just have to see how it works out for them.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 7:46 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
This is fantastically unlikely
There’s virtually no chance Cleveland finds the money to outbid the Yankees, not to mention everyone else who needs an ace starter.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 7:57 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think Cleveland would still get a hometown discount
But this is pure speculation on my part. I’d just love to see it happen and I think “fantastically unlikely” is an overstatement.
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 9:22 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Oakland is more likely to get a hometown discount than Cleveland
...not very likely, though.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 9:30 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
As the trade rumors popped up
There was always a quote from one of his “friends” about how much he liked Cle, didn’t like NY, etc. Obviously those are about 0.001% more likely to be true than if the reporter made them up, but he did win the Cy (and almost get carried to the WS) there. I bet he’d seriously consider going back if the money was close, but since I don’t follow the Indians I have no idea if they’d be serious bidders.
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 9:35 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And if CC signs with the Cubs,
the Brewers get draft picks.
So the issue isn’t half a season of CC vs Laporta and filler. It’s half a season of CC + draft picks vs LaPorta and filler.
Also, fact is, the Brewers already have Prince, Ryan Braun, Corey Hart in the corners. Not only that, aside from LaPorta, they also have Mat Gamel.
Gamel’s line this year, in AA: .381 .443 .637 1.080.
LaPorta’s line, also in AA: 291 .404 .584 .988
Gamel career: 316 .385 .509 .894
LaPorta career: 294 .395 .616 1.011
Gamel is about half a year younger than LaPorta.
The Brewers have a surplus of corner sluggers. They can’t play all of them. They’re better off trying to use them, instead of hoarding them.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 7:37 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I mean if CC signs with the Indians, or another team
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 7:38 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Disagree
They were already catching and caught St Louis. One can argue they are just as talented now and maybe even more so than the Cubs with Sabathia. Time will tell. The Brewers should of made the playoffs without Sabathia, with him if they don’t, I will be shocked.
Gas to Chicago- $23.87 A's/White Sox Tix- $28 Watching the A's whipping the Sox in July 05'- Priceless
by WiscoFan on
Jul 7, 2008 10:25 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
We'll see
They caught StL with Pujols on the DL after all. He makes much more of an impact on a team’s performance than CC.
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 10:25 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
True
But I still think STL is getting by with smoke and mirrors…..some guys are simply overacheiving and I believe they will fall back somewhat. Schumacher, Ludwick for example. JMHO.
Gas to Chicago- $23.87 A's/White Sox Tix- $28 Watching the A's whipping the Sox in July 05'- Priceless
by WiscoFan on
Jul 7, 2008 10:27 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Potential trade partners
Rays
Players to target – Brignac, Jennings, Hellickson
Rays’ needs and reason for trading – The Rays have the best record in baseball, but could benefit greatly from the addition of Harden, who could team up with Kazmir, Shields, and Garza to form a devastating playoff rotation. The Rays could also be interested in Street as a closer with Percival out.
Obstacles to trade – The Rays have an incredibly deep farm system, but they also are notoriously difficult to trade with and have shown a great reluctance in the past to part with their prospects. The deep farm system also gives the Rays the opportunity to improve from within by calling up a guy like Price this season. If I were the Rays GM I would be intrigued by the idea of Harden, but I think I would stick with what I have for this year and preserve my options in later years.
Yankees
Players to target – Hughes, Jackson, Horne Tabata
Yankees’ needs and reason for trading – The Yankees need at least one starter, are always in “win now” mode, and have a new owner in Hank Steinbrenner who is every bit as insane as George was in his early days.
Obstacles to trade – One bad week may take the Yankees out of the playoff race, taking them out as a buyer. The Yankees are perceived as a team that needs pitching to go with their offense, but the Yankees’ offense has gaping holes as well. The Yankees may actually be more interested in a bat than a pitcher at this point. Cashman has been very protective of his prospects, and as long as Hank does not overrule him, I would think that the Yankees are not going to give away their prospects this season.
Cubs
Players to target – Rich Hill, Pie, Vitters
Cubs’ needs and reason for trading – The Cubs have been mentioned in trade rumors for almost every starting pitcher, and are now likely to be more motivated after Milwaukee acquired Sabathia.
Obstacles to trading – Hendry is a borderline moron, and it is always difficult to trade with morons. It is also questionable whether Beane would be interested in the Cubs’ prospects. Hill strikes me as a typical Beane pickup in that he has more talent than the Cubs acknowledge, but I’m not too sure Beane would like Pie or Vitters.
Dodgers
Players to target – Kemp, LaRoche, DeJesus, Hu, Meloan
Dodgers’ need and reason to trade – The Dodgers were part of the Sabathia sweepstakes, and are thus apparently on the prowl for a starter. The Dodgers have the depth to trade if they desire to, and seem to be down on Kemp, Laroche, and Hu.
Obstacles to trade – For all the talk of Coletti’s willingness to trade his prospects, he really hasn’t done so at this point. Given that the Dodgers allowed Sabathia to go to Milwaukee, it is questionable that they really were that motivated given that Milwaukee only gave up one real prospect in the deal. Beane may not like Hu, and may have soured on DeJesus.
Any other potential trade partners you guys see out there? I could see many teams being interested in a minor deal for a guy like Embree, but it’s hard to see any other markets for the types of deals it would take for the A’s to trade Blanton, Harden, Duke, or Street. I predict a relatively uneventful trade deadline for the A’s unless some team decides to take the risk of acquiring Harden.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 6:15 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
re
Could see the Red Sox being interested in Rich Harden. Outside shot, but they are very good as opposed to dominant in the rotation, and a healthy Harden…it would be tough for any team to beat. And, if they choose, they do have movable pieces; that rotation is young.
The obvious pieces the A’s would want are Buchholz (good luck), Masterson, and Bowden (less). Lowrie on the offensive side, and they have a few interesting guys beyond him (Anderson, Reddick, Kalish).
The obstacles are that the Red Sox (under Theo) do not spend their prospects, they don’t have great need, and Beane can probably extract more from a less savvy GM (well maybe, the best GMs do understand giving up value to get it.) The good news is that the Rays are surging, and it has to concern the Sox some.
by 31Boots on
Jul 7, 2008 7:35 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
A Cubs trade rumor not involving Murton to Oakland?
Weird.
by mikev on
Jul 7, 2008 7:42 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
oh, duh
I was just thinking about this, don’t know why I forgot. The other team that might have a big interest in Harden, or maybe even Duke, is the Cardinals. Harden is a big step up from what they’ve got. Cards also have an interesting trading chip in Colby Rasmus. He’s struggling this year and they have John Jay right behind him in AA, as well as a full outfield in the bigs. He could definitely go. They have a good pitching prospect, Jaime Garcia, a very good catching prospect Bryan Anderson, and some others the A’s might like. I don’t think any deal happens without Rasmus, but with him, there is enough left for the A’s to make it happen.
by 31Boots on
Jul 7, 2008 7:51 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
True, and now that Jocketty's out as their GM, this might actually happen
I think I’d trade Harden straight up for Rasmus at this point. Critique me if you will, but that’s my gut reaction.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 8:05 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I thought about adding St. Louis to my list
The reason I didn’t list them is because the only one I think the A’s would really want in their system is Rasmus, and I think he is largely untouchable. I would do Harden for Rasmus if St. Louis would.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 8:07 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I wouldn't mind
if the A’s were able to pull John Jay away from the Cardinals.
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 9:32 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He did good work in the Federalist papers
but isn’t he a little old for a prospect at this point?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 9:33 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You are correct that he is a little old.
23 years old at AA. I’m probably a little partial having watched him play for the University of Miami while Ryan Braun was there. They were both very exciting players to watch. That being said, I’m not sure he is the type of player that would be approaching the top of the A’s wish list. He does play centerfield and has a little bit of pop in his bat. And of course he bats lefty. I’m honestly kind of surprised that he is still in AA. Taking his age and production into consideration, the Cards should give him a shot at AAA.
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 9:48 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Hey, I figured out how to post images

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 9:57 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I very much doubt the Cardinals would trade Rasmus for Harden.
Or even Harden plus Street or Duchscherer.
by WaddellCanseco on
Jul 7, 2008 11:57 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Uh
There is no prospect in baseball (apart from ones on obviously hopeless teams that have no chance of competing in the next 2 years, eg Madison Bumgarner) who could not be had for two of those guys.
That would be completely ridiculous.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 12:07 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So I guess the question is:
Will Jon Jay be the next Madison B, or the next J Hamilton?
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on
Jul 7, 2008 2:18 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah i guess i should have picked up on it right away.
Problem is, i was under the impression that this was a sports blog. Silly me.
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 12:21 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You underestimate my erudition
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 12:31 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That's not the case.
I believe that you are an intelligent guy, and i can respect that. That’s great that you have been able to get an education. My problem with you is that there is a time and place for attempting to show it off. Believe it or not, it is something that can be achieved without constantly trying to belittle other people in the process. It seems as though you try to provoke people into arguments. Why is that? Are you trying to be the cool controversial lawyer type? I’m not a difficult person to get along with, yet you always seem to have some smartass response to everything i post. Seriously, the crude humor act or whatever it is you have going on was actually somewhat funny for awhile, but it’s beginning to get old. In other words, i’m all for having an intelligent conversation with you or anyone else on here; but if your idea of an intelligent conversation is basically you talking down to me or calling me sexist, then I would appreciate it if you would keep your comments to yourself. Geez, if i want to argue i can just go home.
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 12:49 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah, I'm belittling you
by making a joke about one of the Founding Fathers.
[rolls eyes]
Other people appear to have gotten the joke. If you didn’t, well… tough luck.
Being able to make historical wisecracks is one of the few tangible benefits of being a history buff. Damned if I’m going to give it up.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 1:06 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
See you are not understanding my point.
Maybe this isn’t the best place for this conversation since I’m really not upset about anything in this post. My previous response came about because you have done nothing but act like a jerk since i started posting on here. It’s more or less a culmination of all the smartass comments that you’ve made since i started posting here. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out your type. You’ve done the same thing to numerous people on here. Realistically, you are probably the one poster on here who’s departure would almost assuredly result in greater participation from the ‘lurkers’. Nobody wants to be attacked for voicing their opinion, yet it is something that you continually do and continually seem to get a way with. You expect everyone else to take your opinion as gospel, and if they don’t, they are open to attacks or belittling comments. Like i said before, you are obviously an intelligent guy and know what you are talking about most of the time. My problem with you is your delivery. You seem to be seriously lacking in your people skills.
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 1:24 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
1 recs
This has been done to death on other threads
so I’m just going to take issue with one part of this:
You expect everyone else to take your opinion as gospel, and if they don’t, they are open to attacks or belittling comments.
I generally back my positions with evidence. If someone offers countervailing evidence, I’m perfectly willing to be swayed. I don’t expect everyone else to agree with me on face—that’s why I present the evidence in the first place.
If I think someone’s talking through their hat or has no basis for their statements, I’m going to call them on it. If saying “hey, your argument doesn’t hold water” is an “attack”, then I plead guilty.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 1:43 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Alright PT.
I think we’re just beating a dead horse at this point. I have no problem being cordial and respectful to you. I do, however, expect the same respect in return. Is that not fair?
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sure
If you have a complaint about a post, you’re welcome to make it and I’ll listen.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 2:21 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Perhaps if you would just use the tone of
“Hey, your argument doesn’t hold water,” PT, you wouldn’t step on so many toes. It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it.
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 7, 2008 2:23 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
that's what i was getting at.
Maybe it’s a matter of just not being able to hear PT’s tone when he says things. I guess it could be viewed as if you are texting or emailing back and forth. Comments can be taken out of context way too easily.
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 2:29 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes and no - true, tone is lost
online. But there are still ways of putting things that are going to be perceived, by 99.9% of the population, as more or less respectful.
For example, I hate “trade talk” because no matter what anyone suggests, someone invariably goes, “Oh my God, we/they would NEVER make that trade!” – except they feel the need to say it in a way that’s more like, “You’re a moron if you think that’s a fair trade!” or “GM XX would have to be on drugs to make that deal!”
If someone, in earnest, suggests Foulke for Pujols, just say, “Not a good enough deal for the Cardinals.” Holding court on the user’s ability to figure out fair deals is not necessary or useful.
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 7, 2008 4:06 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs

... arousing men to burst the chains under which monkeyish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves ... @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Jul 7, 2008 5:43 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I thought the original wisecrack was great.
The post that should have invited second thoughts and use of the cancel button was “Hey, I figured out how to post images ”. Skip that post and I think this whole exchange is avoided.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on
Jul 7, 2008 2:20 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Founding fathers?
“THINGS MY FATHER FOUND AND BEAT ME WITH!!!”
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 7, 2008 2:23 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
this exchange really had nothing to
do with the either of those posts.
"So there I am, getting it on with this perfect female body, but with the head of Abraham Lincoln. With the hat and the beard, everything." -Tony (Dazed and Confused)
by OrlandoAsFan on
Jul 7, 2008 2:26 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Err, you want an "intelligent"
conversation, and then you complain that someone is “showing off” his education?
So who determines what is “intelligent” and what is “showing off”?
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 7:29 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Jocketty's absence makes trading for Rasmus
more likely? Jocketty has a history of trading for vets. The guy who won the power struggle with Jocketty, Luhnow, comes from player development and has gone on the record several times stating his belief in developing home grown prospects.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 1:22 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I just think it's more likely because he isn't personally burned by the Mulder deal
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 8, 2008 7:53 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Rich Hill has Steve Blass disease
Last time I checked he was giving up 5 runs in 1/3 of an inning with 5 walks—in rookie ball. He’s not hurt either, at least not that anyone can tell.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 8:02 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I know
I don’t consider Rich Hill any kind of centerpiece of a deal involving Harden, he’s just a guy that I would like to pursue as an add-on player or as a possible waiver pickup/cash trade if the Cubs decide to punt. Hill has talent, and a change of scenery could do him good, especially if he came to the A’s, who tend to bring out the best in struggling pitchers from other organizations.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 8:10 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Cubs interested in Harden spposedly
per MLBtraderumors.com
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/07/cubs-pursuing-h.html
Let's have our Piazza and eat the Cust too - SPWC
by closetasfan on
Jul 7, 2008 7:06 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
If I'm moving Harden to the Cubs
I’m going to have a hard time finding the right prospects. Fontenot and Cedeno may be capable, but they aren’t exciting players. Vitters is pretty exciting, but the minor league success is iffy and he’s a long ways away. Otherwise, who do they really even have?
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 7:43 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I have that same problem
Other than Rich Hill, who isn’t exactly a need for the A’s, I see no one in their system that excites me.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 7:47 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Rotoworld has picked up on the Cubs rumor as well.
Maybe Beane will convince them to take Blanton for Murton and Vitters
by mikev on
Jul 7, 2008 8:41 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
If the A's DO trade Harden/Duke/Blanton.
Don’t you think we should target hitting prospects?
We look like we have some depth when it comes to pitching…
Also, don’t rule out the possibility of a three-way. The Cubs might not have the prospects we want, another team might.
"That Crosby kid, as well as that Chavez guy, suck." - my Grandfather
Currently Listening: Kanye West - Graduation; In Flames - A Sense of Purpose.
by Morgasm on
Jul 7, 2008 7:51 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
That's kind of the problem
Milwaukee was the one team that had a significant surplus of minor league hitters, and they have done their deal. The lack of available young impact hitters is one of the reasons I think the A’s will fail to make a major trade at the deadline. I will never bet against Beane, however, so it would not surprise me if I’m wrong.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 8:13 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
We'll See
Now that CC’s gone, Harden is the only stud pitcher reasonably available. We don’t need to move him.
Those two facts make for an excellent bargaining position as teams start getting desperate. I don’t think another OMFG deal (like Haren) is out of the question. Assuming, of course, that which shall not be mentioned doesn’t happen.
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 9:28 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Here's the thing
It always easy to say a deal is possible, but until I see someone identify a team that has the depth to do the deal, identify the players that would be dealt, and explain why the team would actually pay that amount for Harden, I’m not going to believe it. Anything is possible, but not everything is likely. What team has the resources and willingness to give up a OMFG Haren like deal for Harden?
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 9:36 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Teams in Contention that could use another starter
Team Name (Worst qualified starter’s ERA) (BA’s 2008 Farm System Ranking)
Tampa (4.31, but only 4 qualified) (1)
Boston (3.75, but only 3 qualified) (2)
NYY (4.22, only 3 qd) (5)CHW
Min (5.18, only 2 qd) (18)
Det (5.19, only 3 qd) (29)
Philly (5.84, 5 qd) (22)
Florida (6.24, only 4 qd) (14)
NYM (4.62, only 4 qd) (17)
CHC (4.78, only 4 qd) (20)
STL (4.15, only 3 qd) (13)
AZ (5.15, only 3 qd) (15)
LAD (4.02, only 3 qd) (6)
Basically, the White Sox are the only team in contention (and not in the AL West) with 5 solid starters. If your argument is that none of these teams (including several of the best farm systems in baseball) has what it takes to trade for Harden, then hopefully you’ve learned something from my post. If your argument is that it’s stupid to discuss our (strong) trading position with the only season-affecting SP available without providing specific trades, then I think you’re crazy (and I’m too lazy to figure out which prospects from any system would be “fair”).
How about this, I’ll believe no deal is possible if you give me a good reason why none of these franchises would be interested in trading for Harden. Until then it’s always easy to say a deal isn’t possible, but until I see someone identify the reason I’ll consider the possibility of making a move from a position of strength
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 10:24 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I figured you'd be all critic no contribution
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 10:46 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm done with you until you answer the question I posed
What team? What prospects? Why do they do it? You’re just talking out of your ass until you do that, so there is no reason for me to take you seriously.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 10:52 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
What Team? Any of those 12
Why Trade? To improve their chances of making the playoffs (and succeeding once there). Harden is the only pitcher available that would have a start in a 5 game series for most of the teams listed.
What Prospects? Several of those teams have great farm systems and would be able to work something out with Beane. I’m not going to build 12 trades for you.
Explain to me why none of these teams are possibilities or take your “easy to say” criticism somewhere else.
My point, which remains, is that
Harden is the only stud pitcher reasonably available. We don’t need to move him. Those two facts make for an excellent bargaining position.
If you think I’m wrong you’re going to have to put at least a couple seconds of thought into providing a reason.
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 11:07 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Here you go
Every year there are teams that are competitive and there are players on every team in baseball that would make those teams better. Blanton is better than the #5 pitcher on basically every team in baseball. Does that mean that he will be traded? No. Harden is an incredibly talented pitcher that would make every contender better if healhy? Does that mean he will be traded? No.
I have stated that I do not think that Harden will be traded by July 31st because I can’t think of a specific team with specific prospects and the specific motivation to make a deal happen. You insist that the deal will be made, but as of yet have not proposed a single specific trade that the A’s and the other team would actually agree to.
Proposing the idea of trading someone is easy. Coming up with an actual trade is hard to do. Until you do that, I remain unconvinced.
Once again I ask. What specific team? What specific players? Why do the A’s and that team agree to that deal?
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 11:19 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I never said he WILL be traded
I said we’re in a strong position. The difference between Harden and Blanton is that Harden gets one start (or two starts) in a 5 game series, Blanton doesn’t.
There certainly is interest around the league in Harden (the Cubs, specifically, seem very interested) so I don’t know what idea I’m proposing (other than that if we do trade harden we’ll need a good reason to do it).
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 11:43 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree with you that we are in a strong position
That is part of the reason why I think he won’t be traded. Beane needs sufficient motivation to trade him, and I have yet to see any specific proposal that appears to make sense for the A’s and another team.
If the Cubs are willing to part with Vitters, and Beane and his brain trust like Vitters, a deal begins to take shape. Whether the Cubs are willing to include whatever other prospects Beane would demand to pull the trigger would then be the key to the deal. I think Harden could be traded, it’s just that I have a hard time seeing the right fit at this point.
by BlameChannel53 on
Jul 7, 2008 12:40 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I really think the Cardinals are a good fit
They have a lot of guys that fit the “A’s style”: patient hitters and pitchers with good control and groundball tendencies. And they need an upgrade in order to stay in play in the NL playoff hunt.
They’re pretty set at catcher, so I think they could part with Bryan Anderson as the primary piece in the trade. Jess Todd looks good at AA Memphis, and Jaime Garcia has been good too. Jon Jay has been discussed above—he’s put up solid numbers even if his “toolsiness” isn’t off the charts. Or if you don’t like him, check out Jarrett Hoffpauir’s K/BB ratio.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 12:57 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Annals of unintentional self-parody
Set up:
I’m too lazy to figure out which prospects from any system would be "fair"
Punch line:
“If you think I’m wrong you’re going to have to put at least a couple seconds of thought into providing a reason.”
by 74mk on
Jul 7, 2008 11:54 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
+1
BlameChannel’s posted tons of intelligent, insightful commentary here for a long time and I wish he’d be given the benefit of the doubt in an analysis/trade discussion, even if somebody thinks he takes a shortcut in his response. He’s probably put hours of thought into what he’s writing.
He’s one of many good AN commenters who don’t post often enough, IMO. And I’d hate to think that long-time ANers are being driven away as the dialogue gets more personal and negative.
I don’t mean for that comment to put anyone down. I mean it as a compliment to those reclusive ANers from the glory days of ‘07 that I wish would contribute more often. :)
"The painting was a gift, Todd. I'm taking it with me." -Wedding Crashers
by notsellingjeans on
Jul 7, 2008 8:40 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Of course pretty much EVERY team
could use another starter. That’s freaking true in MLB every freaking year.
The question, is, do these teams have the prospects / players that would help the As? Secondly, are these teams biggest needs, another starter?
I’ll take 3 teams from your prospective list.
LAD: Their ERA+ is 119. Their OPS+ is 87. Yes, even with Brad Penny’s struggles, with injuries, they have the best team ERA+ in the NL. Meanwhile, their offense SUCKS. All the vets have gone cliffdiving, all the highly touted youngsters have not fulfilled expectations. Could they use a starter. Of course. Should they try to improve their pitching?
Mets: Have you looked at the guys they’re running out there, in corner OF? Guys like Marlon Anderson, Brady Clark, Damion Easley. They could use a starter. They could also use just a league average corner OF or 1b. Pretty much all their offense is coming from the defensive “skill” positions: ss, cf, 3b.
Tigers: Take a freaking look at their farmsystem. It’s empty. There’s really nothing there that is all that useful to the A’s.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 1:39 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Wow
That’s why I noted farm system ranks. TB/BOS/NYY/LAD have top-10 farm systems. It’s entirely possible that they don’t want to trade for him. But they have the prospects.
That’s freaking true in MLB every freaking year.
This was MY point exactly. I was saying there is demand for Harden. There is. I was saying we’re in a good bargaining position because he’s the best and we don’t have to trade him. That’s true.
I get attacked for not pulling out a balanced deal from each of 12 organizations, but if you’re arguing that there is no possible deal anywhere I’d like to see some evidence. Certainly the Cubs disagree (although I don’t love their prospects). If you think anything in the second paragraph is wrong, fine, go after me. Please, however, don’t be condescending by adopting my argument.
by nevermoor on
Jul 8, 2008 8:50 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Well, it's 4 more starts until the trade deadline...
According to my patented Harden Injury Calculator, that puts the odds of him surviving unhurt at about 65%.
Woot.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 7, 2008 9:36 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
'only stud pitcher reasonably available'
I’m still not convinced that Felix Hernandez isn’t available. I really don’t think he’ll sign an extension. He’ll still be a good deal at arby prices, but I wonder if he’ll be enough of a good deal to warrant keeping a guy who doesn’t really want to stay. Especially since the M’s look likely to be “rebuilding” for another year or two, and might get good again just in time for Felix to become a free agent. Of course the Mariners front office loves him — who wouldn’t? — but at some point I think they say, “hmm, maybe we’re better off trading him.” I think the right offer could pry him loose.
Bedard is definitely available. Not sure if he counts as a “stud pitcher”, but he’s worth having. He got overhyped in Seattle, so he’s being called a “disappointment” here, but that’s only because he was trumpeted like he’d be the second coming of Cy Young. He’s pitched well, and it’s not his fault the team can’t hit.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on
Jul 7, 2008 2:34 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think Bedard's value is down,
because he has some physical ailments (hip – he’s been scratched from Wednesday’s start and has been scratched before this year), and there are questions about his attitude (doesn’t like the pressure of a #1, takes himself out of games early, etc.). No question about his stuff, though.
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 7, 2008 4:08 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Err,
Bedard may, or may not, have pitched well. But he IS a disappointment. And NOT because of “hype”. His K rate is down.His walk rate is up. His ERA+ of 107 is good, but way down from that of the previous 2 years. He’s not durable.
As for Felix, if the Mariners trade him, they’re IDIOTS. A team with a $100M+ payroll shouldn’t be trading a pitcher like Felix, just because he’s now under control for 3 years.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 1:47 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
ESPN the reliable is listing.....
Colorado as our best trade partner with BB looking out their outfielders Willy Taveras and
Matt Holliday. Now usually ESPN the mag is full of poop, but what kind of package would we have to lay down to add a young potent bat such as Holliday? Would anything we do be worth a 1.5 year rental? Could we/ would we want to sign our first huge contract with this guy? I know we are rebuilding, but this still makes me a little gitty…..maybe I am grasping for straws, but if their selling on the cheap could we capitalize?
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about trainers." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on
Jul 7, 2008 8:16 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Willy Taveras sucks.
1.5 (possible, maybe if he’s healthy) years of Harden for 1.5 years of Holliday
But still, Holliday scares the shit out of me. I don’t care what anybody says, he’s got a 1.000 OPS at home and a .790 OPS on the road.
by mikev on
Jul 7, 2008 8:24 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
His numbers may be inflated in the NL also, but he would certainly be an improvement IMO
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about trainers." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on
Jul 7, 2008 8:27 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
His numbers would suffer hitting in Oakland.
An .800 OPS at the Coliseum isn’t an out of the question estimate for what he’d do.
I’m just not in favor of trading a Cy Young caliber pitcher for a guy who’s going to be pretty good, but not great.
by mikev on
Jul 7, 2008 8:31 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't love Holliday either
The deal doesn’t make sense unless we’re willing commit to re-signing him, but I’d be very worried about getting a hugely overpaid .790 OPS guy. After all, our first big money commitment (Chavez) hasn’t gone so well either
by nevermoor on
Jul 7, 2008 9:31 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He's not a 790 OPS guy in a neutral park.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 1:52 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Since you know how to look at Holliday's
road OPS, try looking at his year by year road OPS:
2004: 240 .287 .367 .654
2005: 256 .313 .416 .729
2006: 280 .333 .485 .819
2007: 301 .374 .485 .860
2008: 309 .401 .472 .873
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 1:50 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Holliday vs. Bay
This is certainly a fair point, and is encouraging for Holliday’s next contract. I was certainly being over dramatic in criticizing Holliday’s talent. I would still, however, prefer Bay (cost of trade being equal). Both are signed through 2009.
Holliday (28) Costs 13.5M next year and Bay (29) Costs 7.5 next year. The real difference, though, is that Bay plays in a pitcher’s stadium and Holliday plays in Coors.
Park Effects from 2007:
Coors: HR = 1.218, Hit = 1.120, 2B = 1.256.
PNC: HR = 0.779, Hit = 0.995, 2B = 1.079.
Coliseum: HR = 0.786, Hit = 0.865, 2B = 0.786
In other words, Bay would be expected to add a HR or two, while his hits and doubles drop a fair amount. Holliday, however, would have dramatic dropoffs in all three categories. They’d both still be good/great, but I think Holliday would have a harder time adjusting to the dramatic difference.
Additionally, Bay walks a lot more (56 to 38) so he’d be better able to produce with our stadium’s drop off in hitting.
by nevermoor on
Jul 8, 2008 9:08 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
If anyone could scoff at the altitude, it's Harden
He doesn’t throw breaking pitches anyway.
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 7, 2008 1:27 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Why would the Rockies want any A's player rather than prospects for Holliday
How is Taveras better than Rajai?
by WaddellCanseco on
Jul 7, 2008 12:01 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I guess it depends
Do they want just a salary dump, or are they getting an early start on rebuilding would be the million dollar question. If Harden is the piece, the move wouldn’t make sense unless they felt a pitcher could return more prospects from another team next year then they would get for say Holliday now. I would guess prospect pitcher and MLB placemarker if they were to go with us.
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about trainers." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on
Jul 7, 2008 2:10 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
















