Ye of Little Faith Thread

by windyfelix on Jul 8, 2008 7:55 PM PDT Comment 24 comments

I live in Chicago and believe me Cubs fans are scared to death they just got Prior-Wood III. As they should be.

Talented though he certainly is, the player Billy Beane traded has thrown an average of 70 innings a season the past 4 years, and less than 50 the past three. He was traded just as he finished two "dead arm" starts and a day after the one team in the NL with equal WS ambition as the team that picked up the 2007 AL CY winner realized that their perch was under great threat.

So beane-- rather than risk ANY more starts of a player unlikely to pitch consistently well for the rest of his year and a half under Oakland contract-- struck while the iron was as hot as it would ever get. The inclusion of Gaudin surely underscores the difficulty in getting the "impact bat" or haul of prospects back that some here believe was warrented.

Meanwhile Beane has stocked the A's incredibly deeply with arms-- arms that can be used as bait to land that impact bat-- either before this year's deadline or in the offseason. He will use the money saved from Harden to sign an infinitely more dependable pitcher in Justin Duchscherer; he will also use the surplus amount of position player talent the A's are amassing in the organization to strengthen his hand further.This is akin to 1999-- we may not have the Big Three but we have the Semi Big Eight or Nine plus, frankly, better position players up and down the lineup that can help this team longer than the 1999-2000 versions could.

Those who are forswearing this team and vowing to stop watching/going have every right to react in that manner-- but I caution you to take a deep breath and have faith in the guy who has delivered the 2nd best record in baseball over the past decade with one of the lowest third payrolls.

1 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Funny

I talked to a couple of A’s fans after the deal and I said, “I don’t know why the Cubs fans are so excited. Didn’t they have enough pain going through Wood and Prior.” Harden could very well be a hat trick of those kinds of pitchers.

I still would’ve wished the A’s could’ve gotten more, but I’m convinced Harden is hurt right now. He’s lost 4-5 MPH off his fastball the last two starts and looking infinitely more hittable than he did at the beginning of the season.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Jul 8, 2008 8:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Agree Blez

Remember Rich came out of his start before last saying ” I felt like I had a dead arm”.

by HRH on Jul 8, 2008 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I doubt that fans are going to stop going bcuz of this trade.

Not many are showing up but, the ones who do, will continue to support the team. Everyone is just pissed off right now but things will calm down eventually.

Good luck with Harden. I hope he does well.

Was Black Snake Moan a comedy or a drama?

by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 8, 2008 8:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

WAGD!!!!!!

by somebodyelse on Jul 8, 2008 8:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Better position players?

Eh?

The 1999 A’s had two young stud hitters at defense-first positions. Just because people here are pissy at Chavvy for being injured most of the last year doesn’t mean he sucked in 1999.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 8, 2008 8:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

In terms of depth, yes.

Our outfield back then was Long, Grieve, Stairs and Piatt. With no one coming up through the farm.

Giambi was a short-termer by 2000. Didn’t have Ellis until 2001.

by windyfelix on Jul 8, 2008 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another Positive - Even though I'm down on Gallagher

Gallagher might not be a pitcher with Harden’s star power. But he’s exactly what Billy Beane was looking for, said an official of one team—“a major-league-ready starter who can go straight into their rotation right now but who they get as a ‘zero-plus’ player. He can pitch for them for 2 1/2 years before he can even go to arbitration.”

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=3479086

by nevermoor on Jul 8, 2008 8:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I actually thought that column

laid it out perfectly. Better than anywhere else I’ve seen so far.

Especially this:

Asked Tuesday whether the A’s got enough for one of the most overpowering pitchers in baseball, one scout chuckled: “For a guy who might break down tomorrow? Yeah.”

by Tyler Bleszinski on Jul 8, 2008 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

It made me feel a lot better after a very morose dinner

by nevermoor on Jul 8, 2008 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But I still think it's important to remember

that the key word in that statement is “might”. I agree, it’s scary to pin all your hopes on Harden … he has certainly disappointed in the “staying healthy” department. But when the guy pitches, he is flat-out dominant. Maybe I’m a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately guy, but injuries aside, he’s been lights out this year. You’ve gotta pay me (if I’m the GM) to get “lights out this year”. Hell, if trades were based on what “might” happen, nothing would get done.

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 8, 2008 9:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Well flat out dominant...

... except the last two starts.

by nevermoor on Jul 8, 2008 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's the thing...

...you can’t put injuries aside. With his track record, that’s no less a “what if” than the rest of your point.

You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the goddamn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all. ~Earl Weaver

by UncleLeo on Jul 8, 2008 9:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

We'll see

Yesterday I wrote that I wanted some prospects with power or no deal. I guess the jig is, as the windyfelix writes, that we just couldn’t get that for Harden; the fact that we threw in Gaudin seems to underscore that point, although I have to say that I don’t really get why we let the guy who was our #4 starter coming into the year go, particularly given Eveland’s uneven performances.

So, I guess I’m back to my original stance—not convinced it’s worth it. It’s all a gamble on Harden’s arm, and I felt that Harden’s “the guy you don’t want to face in the playoffs” top game was worth rolling the dice.

Hope Billy got this one right.

by DiegoSegui on Jul 8, 2008 9:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Agree, I'd rather have traded Eveland

but I admit that’s at least 60% based on my irrational hatred of left-handed starting pitchers.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 8, 2008 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hesitate to say this now, but I actually like this deal

I realize emotions are raw, and man will I miss having Rich around, the deal looks like it makes sense considering a few of the maxims for baseball success:

1. You can never have enough young pitching. For the A’s I really the equation is as simple as quality affordable pitching=contention. I love that we are stocked in this department, and we should take every opportunity to add on to our current bounty, lest 2, 3, or 4 of our current crop pull a Dan Meyer (or Kirk Dressendorfer, or Todd VanPoppel) on us.

2. Legit catching prospects are about as rare as sunbathers in Siberia. Can’t find the link now, but a note somewhere mentioned that scouts saw Donaldson as someone who would stick at catcher defensively. If true, considering the difficulty we’ve had with our one-time bounty of catching prospects sticking at that position, I think that makes him a valuable catch.

3. Fans always overvalue their own teams players. Look, I love Rich, and I like Chad. But if I’m a GM trading for either of them I got some concerns. Everyone seems aware of the giant Rich Harden health risk, so if you turn the situation around, would you want to give up your #1 lock prospect for him? I wouldn’t. And as much as Chad has been effective, he’s basically a 2 pitch guy, which means the A’s may see him as better suited for middle relief (and Billy seems to be able to pick up effective middle relievers all the time). Then there’s the occasional control issues and 1.50+ career WHIP. I’m not saying the guy is chump change, but there are legit concerns.

4. Competition strengthens performance. I basically see Murton as another version of Travis Buck. Both these guys have reasons why they should succeed at the MLB level, but haven’t yet. The competition will make each of them better, and hopefully one of them pans out.

Lastly, there’s no maxim for this, but if Patterson sticks at 2B (ie. if his defense improves) he could also be a good pickup. Good bat and speed and most of his defensive liabilities seemed mental, so maybe he can improve with coaching. 2B will be a tough position to fill once Ellis leaves (and I’m sure he will. The market undervalues him, but not by THAT much). A career 300 hitter with speed at 2B? I’d take it.

We all wanted the lock can’t-miss hitting prospect in this deal, but the hard truth is neither Harden nor Gaudin could get that price. Billy made this deal because it was the best one out there.

I guess you could sum up my feelings by saying this is pure Merle Haggard. It’s not love, but it’s not bad.

The glare was not practiced. I would get into the game situations, and when that happens, there comes a level of concentration that most can only imagine but can never achieve. You become what you are doing, and that is what you see on my face. -Dave Stewart

by Hegenberger Road on Jul 8, 2008 9:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The thing is

that if you stock up on enough great young starting pitching than you sit in the driver’s seat when you want to go acquire that big bat. I don’t think Beane thinks that he is only a big bat away from winning this year. That’s why you make the deal and build towards something better as he started this past offseason.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Jul 8, 2008 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the Sting wouldn't be as bad ...

if Beane could have at least got a top 5 prospect from the Cubs system. Ceda or Veal, to me at least, would have been great replacements from either Murton or Patterson.

by Gaffletic on Jul 8, 2008 9:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Eh

Veal = Gallagher, at least according to BA.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 8, 2008 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gallagher was the #5 Prospect

5 sounds pretty top-5 to me.

by nevermoor on Jul 9, 2008 6:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

When he says "top 5",

what he meant was “top 4.”

What, that wasn’t obvious? :p

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 9, 2008 8:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

As usual, it really comes down to scouting

as an inexact science. Many are bummed because we settled for Gallagher and didn’t get a “top 4 prospect,” but maybe the A’s feel Gallagher will be BETTER than the 1-4 rated guys. Happens all the time that lower-rated prospects turn out to be better than higher-rated ones.

The A’s didn’t just settle for what they could get, they also targeted guys they wanted and held out. The Cubs wouldn’t include Gallagher until this week – so Billy DID hold out for, and get, what he wanted over what was originally offered. Just because some scouts rate Veal higher doesn’t mean he’ll be better. Plus, it’s politically incorrect to acquire Veal.

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 9, 2008 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs