Haren vs. Mulder so far....

More

Haren: 73.1 IP, 55 SO, 27 BB, 7 HR
Mulder: 77.2 IP, 46 SO, 22 BB, 7 HR

Funny, they don't look much like twins.

Yes, so far the Mulder deal looks like an absolute steal for us even before considering Calero and Barton: we got a pitcher who's just as good as Mulder, but three years younger and $6M cheaper.

But you still have to wait a couple years before delivering the final verdict on the trades.

by matthias on Jun 6, 2005 7:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yup

And Haren has had a fabulous last three starts and will only get better, Mulder has been beaten up and is looking worse!

California here I come, right back where I started from, Californiaaaaa, Californiaaaaa, here I coooooome (June 24th). (OC, i was inspired)

by ohad on Jun 6, 2005 7:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

DH here

And consider that Haren has to pitch to a DH, Mulder not.
I've always loved this deal.

by Ktulu on Jun 6, 2005 7:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

True, but...

> the NL has more absolute bandboxes, and 2 of them are in Muldur's division (Houston and Wrigley when the wind blows out)

> OAK's a better park for a pitcher than STL

When I play fantasy ball, I tend to prefer AL starters, simply to avoid those road starts in Colorado. It's even worse than Texas.

My guess is that for Ks, it's easier to be in the NL, but for ERA, it's a wash.

"Yucky Head Bad Guy!" - my 5-year-old daughter to Manny Ramirez. She got ice cream immediately afterward.

by DMtShooter on Jun 6, 2005 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

After the initial shock of the trade

since, like everyone else I wasn't expecting it especially right after the Hudson trade, I came to see that the Mulder trade was very good for the A's. I'm happy with Haren, really like Calero (provided he can avoid injury), and am excited about Barton's potential.

While I was no fan of trading Huddy (and thought when the A's traded for Kendall and his contract instead of unloading the 2 lefty pitchers in some other way, that it meant they wouldn't attempt to sign Huddy), what's done is done. let's just hope Meyer gets healthy and shows major league abilities, Cruz gets straightened up enough to contribute to the pen and/or be a good trade chip, and that Thomas gets a chance to get his offense back together in AAA so he can be a good 4th outfielder or be a good trade chip.

by OaklandSi on Jun 6, 2005 7:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank goodness it's panning out

When I got the news about the Mulder trade while driving on 80 that Saturday night, I almost wanted to skid into the bay. But as much as I loved Mulder -- and I loved Mulder very, very much -- I'm over that trade.

Haren has swept me off my feet with last Tuesday's start and yesterday's performance. My loyalties have realigned themselves and all is right in that part of my world.

For the Huddy trades though I'm still waiting for redemption. Every time I see Charles Thomas I think that we traded 1/3 of Huddy for him. What would it take for me to get over the loss of Huddy...?

I have faith.

by BillybUcko on Jun 6, 2005 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

3 for 1

i think we nailed the mulder trade. haren's coming around, and will probably be worth mulder by himself (even if he's not quite as good, he's MUCH cheaper - and i think he'll be as good, if not better). on top of it, we got calero, who's a great set-up man when healthy, and the prospect barton, who may be great. the hudson trade...well, don't know about that. we have to wait until meyer gets healthy, because he's the guy the trade was made for. but, yeah, i think long-term, we totally nailed the mulder trade.

by guy incognito on Jun 6, 2005 7:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think you're all forgetting...

the most important stat: wins. Mulder has seven, while Haren only has three. Therefore, Mulder has been more than twice as good as Haren this year.

There's no better statistical measurement of a pitcher's importance to his team than wins -- John Kruk told me so. ;)

by Vic on Jun 6, 2005 8:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

i agree

too bad we didn't trade for sidney ponson and jarrod washburn...

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 8:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

haha...

does anyone on AN like watching baseball tonight anymore? bringing in a moron like kruk is slowly killing that show.

by guy incognito on Jun 6, 2005 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bleh

baseball tonight SUCKS. when the A's were in the middle of their horrible losing streak, they kept saying how the A's were the worst team in the league. but now that they are doing well, i don't hear any mention of the A's.

by gotgreen on Jun 6, 2005 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

it used to a "smarter" show with just HR, Gammons and Stark. Kruk just thinks laughing all the time is good television. Yes, it was cute the first 2 times but now it is just old and annoying. And when he does speak it is just blah, blah, blah, and the most obvious of statements. Like, "The Yankees need starting pitching. If the Yankees don't get better starting pitching they're going to have a hard time winning the WS." Yeah, thanks Kruk, you frickin' idiot!

"Don't you play the flute, Huddy?"

by capper3 on Jun 6, 2005 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's a pity

BT used to be one of the best shows on television and the last couple of years it's been horrendous. I guess that's what happens when you start getting your staff from Best Damn Sports Show...

Jonathon

"This is supposed to be a happy occasion! Lets's not bicker and argue about who killed who.... "

by JLeverenz on Jun 6, 2005 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ask Joe Morgan too

Therefore, Haren actually sucks and we got fleeced.

independencefieldsac.org
Please help disabled kids in Sacramento play baseball by helping the Rivercats build a specially equipped field for them.

by kaweahkaweah on Jun 6, 2005 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No we're not forgetting that

and I also think the Mulder trade was good for St. Louis.

Let's not forget that St. Louis has a much more powerful offense than Oakland, plus Mulder gets to pitch to the pitcher instead of a dh.

I would expect Mulder, as a young veteran, to be more effective than Haren, a rookie in his first season of being a regular in a starting rotation. But none of this negates that this was a good trade for the A's

by OaklandSi on Jun 6, 2005 8:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

dude he was kidding...

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was a little too quick

with my reply. I responded before reading the entire post -- my bad.

Anyway it gave me the opportunity to say that the Mulder trade was also good for St.Louis. I have no problem with trades that are good for all the teams involved (actually they're the best trades since they don't discourage future trades).

And just for the record: I used to love watching Mulder pitch.

by OaklandSi on Jun 6, 2005 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We must have some die-hard A's fans

on this site because the bandwagon fans are staying away in droves as evident by the 12,000 or so who showed up for a Fri night game.

I'm glad everyone here understands A's Economics 101 and recognize the trades were made for the sake of the team's future.

"You are Marine kids and can chew nails while other kids are sucking cotton candy!"...The Great Santini to his children.

by sf drift king on Jun 6, 2005 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wins

mulder has more win because the card's offense has been way better than the A's offense. haren had a couple of bad starts but so did mulder. it sucks how pitchers are judged by how many wins they have when it's really not their fault sometimes.

by gotgreen on Jun 6, 2005 8:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

A minor point, but there is an optimization

aspect to the trade. I think Mulder will turn out to be a significantly better hitter than Haren, as he gets more AB's--he's already hitting .100 better than Haren did. That of course means almost zip to the A's, but can be the difference in a ball game or two in the NL.

But unquestionable this looks now as though it might turn out to be an incredible deal for us. I get to charged up thinking about Duke and Calero as set up, and Street as closer!!

by alamedaman on Jun 6, 2005 8:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Also remember on average

NL ERA's should be .3 -.5 lowere because they face the pitchers.

by novaoakland on Jun 6, 2005 8:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I loved the Mulder trade,

and wasn't wild about the Huddy trade, at the time, and obviously what's happened so far has only solidified each view. Remember: Beane actually went after Marcus Giles (and may have gone after Davies, we don't know), and eventually decided the trade was worth making for Meyer/Cruz/CT.

My rationalization to myself is that Beane had to make the Huddy trade, as is, to make the Mulder deal, so he decided it was worth it in the balance. As a 2 for 6 deal, I think the A's come out well--and that's how I choose to think of it.

Nico

by Nico on Jun 6, 2005 8:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

we'll see about the hudson part

once meyer is healthy and is or isn't the same pitcher he was in 2004.

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Either way keep in mind

Hudson was gone in 2006 no matter what and I just do not see having hudson makes this team good enough to be winning the division.

If the A's finish within 6 games of the Division title I will regret the Hudson trade.

by novaoakland on Jun 6, 2005 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree

people who question the hudson trade seem to ignore all the evidence from urban's book that hudson never wanted to stay in oakland.

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

although Urban remarked in an interview

that Huddy really, really wanted to stay in Oakland.

Stating that I wanted to see Beane at least attempt to sign Huddy -- and that the Kendall trade among other things indicated that the A's would not attempt to free enough $$ to at least attempt to sign Huddy -- doesn't mean I thought Huddy wanted to stay. At the time I didn't know. But it seemed from Huddy's statements at the time that he wanted the A's to at least try.

by OaklandSi on Jun 6, 2005 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Huddy is where he wants to be

The SOuth. ATL got the hometown discount we would never have seen.

by novaoakland on Jun 6, 2005 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe only Huddy and his wife

really know what he wanted at the time. But I wouldn't doubt that now they're happy with how it turned out.

by OaklandSi on Jun 6, 2005 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope we get CT down to Sac so he

can get some consistent AB's, and then bring him back and see what he can do in the Big's. He's just so far off his last year numbers, when he was playing regularly.

and he can't start for the A's now--swish, kotsay, kielty need to be in there, and probably Burns follows.

by alamedaman on Jun 6, 2005 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

Maybe we can send Charles Thomas back to ATL. They need a corner outfielder.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Jun 6, 2005 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

VORP and SNVA

Comparing Mulder vs Haren stat lines is eerie, as matthias and oakfanindc have pointed out. But check this out:

(as of 06/06/05)

Mulder: 14.1 VORP, .033 SNVA/game, .503 expected win%
Haren: 1.7 VORP, -.039 SNVA/game, .432 expected win%

That's just plain weird. Given that the components that make up their pitching performances (K/9, BB/9, etc.) are more or less the same, what could account for this difference?

Maybe it's this:

Mulder: 0.6 HR/9
Haren: 0.8 HR/9

Other than that, I'm stumped.

Fearing Mecir since 2000.

by salb918 on Jun 6, 2005 8:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

how can there be that much difference in VORP?

this includes both their last starts?

if it's the home runs, that is ridiculous. we're not talking about joe blanton here, both haren and mulder have 7hr, but mulder has pitched 4 more innings.

perhaps VORP is more flawed than we think...

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's the problem with these VORP like stats!

Value over replacement Player?!?!?!

Is this the Jamesian calculation of heart?!?! (JK) ;)

by saint on Jun 6, 2005 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What is the problem?

Please tell me. What specifically is the problem "with these VORP like stats"?

Do you know? Do you even know how it's calculated?

Yeah, didn't think so.

I don't mind criticism, because I'm a big critic of pretty much everything, but ignorant blathering just makes you look stupid to the people who know better.

by Inquisitor on Jun 6, 2005 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yikes man

take it down a notch

I'm the guy with the Carney Lansford jersey

by gojohn10 on Jun 6, 2005 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

VORP has Win's and Loses in it.

I think!!!!

by novaoakland on Jun 6, 2005 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nope.

Fearing Mecir since 2000.

by salb918 on Jun 6, 2005 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

only two other things i can think of

haren has given up more unearned runs (including five just in the boston game), and i'm assuming he's allowed more stolen bases than mulder since the angels stole five in one game.

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Unearned runs

I think that's it. I agree with that, too, since most "unearned" runs are actually the pitcher's fault.

Fearing Mecir since 2000.

by salb918 on Jun 6, 2005 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where'd you get those numbers?

From BP:
Mulder 10.1
Haren 4.3

It looks like the bulk of the difference is the fact that Danny Boy has allowed 9 unearned runs this year while Mulder has only allowed 3. Park adjustments may be part of it too.

The next time I slap a guy's ass, can we all just assume it's because I wish I was a baseball player?

by devo on Jun 6, 2005 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

makes more sense than a 10X difference

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's weird.

I got the numbers from the same place you did, apparently...I checked the site again and your numbers are correct! Maybe they weren't updated from this weekend's starts?

In any case, it makes a lot more sense, and Haren's unearned runs probably account for the difference (as they should).

Fearing Mecir since 2000.

by salb918 on Jun 6, 2005 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

VORP

Well, doesn't this stat say that Haren is better than Mulder (the pitcher he replaced)? That seems like a good thing!

And, doesn't this stat say that Mulder is better than the guy he replaced (Woody Williams, or something like that...)?

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Jun 6, 2005 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no

you're using a different definition of "replacement."

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not at all

A "replacement" level player is one who is freely available on the waiver wire...guys like Etherton, Harikkala, etc. I think in reality, it is defined as 70% of the league average.

Fearing Mecir since 2000.

by salb918 on Jun 6, 2005 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

I wasn't sure. I was trying to use common sense in determining what the STAT actually means.

Just another STAT I'll need to ignore...just like pitchers W's and L's.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Jun 6, 2005 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

uhh... no, again

VORP is actually useful, unlike W-L.

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK, Stathead

...Now go on to explain why Mulder's VORP is better than Haren's VORP.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Jun 6, 2005 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The main reason

May 9, 2005
Boston, MA

After allowing one run in the first, which scored on a double play, Danny Haren pitched excellent second and third innings.

Entering the bottom of the fourth, with the A's up 2-1, thanks to a Bobby Kielty double, Danny Haren's fortunes were soon to change. Ortiz led off with a single and as a result of his ghastly gait found himself at third after two more singles. Bill Bueller proceeded to hit a grounder to Scott Hatteberg, which he threw to the backstop - allowing two runs to score and leaving runners on the corners. At this point, Haren had allowed 3 runs with only the one the first earned.

Haren settled down briefly and struck out the next two batters. Johnny Damon, stepping up at the top of the order brought everything crumbling down around Haren. Damon drew a walk, which loaded the bases. One run scored on the ensuing wild pitch and the remaining two were plated by a Trot Nixon double, which sent Haren to the shower. The inning ended with a score of 6-2.

Haren's line for the day was 3 2/3 ip, 5 h, 4 bb, 2 so, 6 r, 1 er - for an era of 2.45.

VORP is based on runs allowed, not earned runs allowed. As was the case in this instance, many unearned runs can partially or fully be blamed on the pitcher. Unfortunately, VORP is not defense neutral, which is, I agree, a flaw, so a pitcher with a poor defense will suffer (and Mulder plays in front of one of the best defenses around).

The next time I slap a guy's ass, can we all just assume it's because I wish I was a baseball player?

by devo on Jun 6, 2005 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

good example and well put devo

The "Free Matt Watson from Sacramento-Redux" Committee is back in business...taking new memberships...crap!!!

by bigelephant on Jun 6, 2005 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh, are you using "stathead"

as a derogatory term here on AN?

i see devo has already taken care of this...

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess...

I guess it's derogatory if you don't think you're a stathead.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Jun 7, 2005 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Besides...

VORP had the A's winning about 95-100 games this year. I just don't see how that's a stat that can be taken seriously in all cases. I'll need more proof before I can give VORP more credence.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Jun 7, 2005 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That was the original formula

it's changed now to:

80% of the average offensive rate (85% is used for catchers, 75% is used for 1B/DH) for position players
1.37 * League RA - 0.66 for starting pitchers
1.70 * League RA - 2.27 for relief pitchers

The next time I slap a guy's ass, can we all just assume it's because I wish I was a baseball player?

by devo on Jun 6, 2005 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Very useful

Thanks for the info. And as for that stathead lable people are putting on you...I say, WEAR IT! and WEAR IT! with pride!

Fearing Mecir since 2000.

by salb918 on Jun 6, 2005 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I do

I just wish I had taken my stats class in college a little more seriously ...

The next time I slap a guy's ass, can we all just assume it's because I wish I was a baseball player?

by devo on Jun 6, 2005 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

To me the whole Hudson

deal is contingent on whether or not Meyer comes back healthy and the player he was before the injury. If he does, then I'd make the deal every time, even if Cruz and CT don't do much. Meyer can be a devastating lefty in the majors. I'm holding out judging that deal for a while. And I do agree that the Mulder deal looks good right now, but a few weeks ago, it looked horrible with Haren getting pounded, Mulder doing well and Calero injured.

I guess my point is that it's great to get excited, but temper it because it's a long season and Haren will have his ups and downs.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Jun 6, 2005 8:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

cruz

let's also remember that cruz is a pretty decent pitcher. something is a bit off, i don't know if it's physical or mental, but we can all see that he has the ability.

CT needs to be in AAA.

by xbhaskarx on Jun 6, 2005 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

that CT needs to be down in AAA. But no doubt in my mind that the Hudson deal doesn't happen without Meyer included in it, so I think judgment on that deal needs to be reserved until we see what the kid can do when healthy.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Jun 6, 2005 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

CT

I think CT will be pretty valuable this time of year (Interleague). He's going to be needed as a defensive replacement (Byrnes) and as a pinch runner.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Jun 6, 2005 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll agree it hinges on Meyer...

So far teh Mulder trade looks far superior, but Haren was closer to ML ready than Meyer was. And now Meyer's injured. So we have to wait for him to get back in teh swing of things.

If Meyer comes in and is as good as advertised, the trade will be worth it on finances alone. And if Cruz comes around and Thomas, and they realize their potential, it could be awesome. It will just take a little longer for this trade to pan out.

A's fan for life!!!

by ZeroIndulgence on Jun 6, 2005 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

St. Louis did the right thing

I agree that STL did the right thing for them. They want to win the World Series this year. Proven dependable starters are priceless commodities for teams that aspire to championships, and while no pitcher (or player) is a 100% guaranteed success, Mulder is about as close to a sure thing as you can get.

Haren as a starter on the other hand was a gamble, one that made sense for the A's in a rebuilding year.

by matthias on Jun 6, 2005 9:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

So did Detroit...

when they traded some schmucky prospect named John Smoltz for proven vet Doyle Alexander back in the '80s. Alexander won something like 15 games and contended for the Cy Young. What did Smoltz ever do for Atlanta?

"Yucky Head Bad Guy!" - my 5-year-old daughter to Manny Ramirez. She got ice cream immediately afterward.

by DMtShooter on Jun 6, 2005 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i understand the importance of

holding judgement on these trades. nevertheless i always considered the mulder trade a fleece job by beane BUT as for the huddy deal i think beane was taken to town by a better GM. i didn't like the OAK/ATL trade when it went down and unfortunately i'm looking to be right. chucky t will always be AT BEST a 4th OF, cruz was (incredibly) dressed up by that "freak rockin' man" wizard PC in ATL and meyer will ultimately be added to one of the many over-hypered ATL pitching prospects. the huddy deal stinks. beane should've over paid and kept hudson...bottomline folks

The "Free Matt Watson from Sacramento-Redux" Committee is back in business...taking new memberships...crap!!!

by bigelephant on Jun 6, 2005 10:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Does anyone know when Meyer will pitch again?

Or at least a guess?

by Sharon on Jun 6, 2005 10:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

all i know is...

...he is rehabbing a "tired or strained left shoulder" and i suspect staying away from those rubber hoses.

The "Free Matt Watson from Sacramento-Redux" Committee is back in business...taking new memberships...crap!!!

by bigelephant on Jun 6, 2005 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Last I read there was

"no timetable" for Meyer and that he was shut down "indefinitely".

not good

by OaklandSi on Jun 6, 2005 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with BigElephant

Unless Meyer turns around next year and becomes a stud, the Huddy trade will be one-sided for Atlanta. On KNBR the other day, BB said that it is not fair to evaluate the trade so early, and it was long term for the A's. That's a cop out, in 2-3 years, the trade will be mostly forgotten. I will say that the A's did not receive proper value for Hudson, now or in the future. I understand that his market value was down because of impending free agency, but he was a perennial Cy Young candidate and has one of the best all-time winning percentages. That being said, the Mulder trade was good, in that we got Haren, who's showing to be an equitable pitcher to Mulder plus being cheaper and 3 years younger, plus Calero and Barton. Also, on the highlights yesterday, Mulder's fastball was at 89 mph and getting ripped. He hasn't been the same since he broke the hip, his stuff before the injury was a lot nastier.

by Reggie on Jun 6, 2005 11:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think it is juice:

Seriously. He got tagged in the beginning of the season. Suddenly regained his fastball. Now he's lost it again.

Like Arsenio Hall used to say, this is a "Thing that makes you say Hmmmm?"

by saint on Jun 6, 2005 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Meyer

was and still is a top 20 Pithcing prospect.

That is about all you are going to get for a 1 year rental with an injury history, who was just plain bad last part of 2004!!!!!!!!!

by novaoakland on Jun 6, 2005 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mark Who?

"There's one word that describes baseball -- 'You never know.'" - Joquin Andujar

by McFood on Jun 6, 2005 11:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

At the time...

I was a fan of the Mulder trade and not of the Hudson.

OK, I know what you are thinking, "sure ZI, you can say that now that the trades are looking how they are." But, you know what, I really did.

I have loved Haren since I saw him in St.Louis, and Calero was good too. I hadn't heard about BArton, but if he is even 2/3 the player he was "projected" to be, then he'll be a good one.

The Hudson trade I thought we got swindled at the time for one main reason...BB didn't get the pitcher he wanted. He had to settle for Meyer. BB usually goes for players for a reason. I don't remember who we wanted, but we didn't get them and Beane settled for what we got instead. Now, if Meyer goes crazy and is awesome, and if Thomas becomes a productive outfielder, and if Cruz stops being crazy and pitches like he should, it will be a good enough trade...but thats a lot of ifs.

But yeah, back to topic, the Mulder trade is looking pretty good right now!

A's fan for life!!!

by ZeroIndulgence on Jun 6, 2005 11:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Did BB want Davies instead of Meyer?

I remember reading that the Braves said "no deal' until BB stopped insisting that Giles be included.

by OaklandSi on Jun 6, 2005 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've been hearing this a lot lately

but can anyone actually produce a link that says Beane wanted Davies, not Meyer? Every single propsect rating had Meyer higher.

The next time I slap a guy's ass, can we all just assume it's because I wish I was a baseball player?

by devo on Jun 6, 2005 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

beane wanted giles

and there was NO WAY bobby cox was going to let that happen (in ATL the manager DOES have some say-imagine that!) the impression was that beane "settled for" meyer at the last minute of the winter minutes and there was never any talk about some other minor league pitcher from ATL. this "impression" (settling for, i mean) is probably false but huddy for meyer, chucky t and cruz is a nightmare.

The "Free Matt Watson from Sacramento-Redux" Committee is back in business...taking new memberships...crap!!!

by bigelephant on Jun 6, 2005 12:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I do recall that Cappellan was coming here:

Then he was gone to Milwaukee.

I also do remember some Kyle Davies talk, but that he wasn't available.

by saint on Jun 6, 2005 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i remember cappellan

but he was trade to the brewers prior to the a's/atl trade (i think) but i don't remember the davies talk-must have missed it. anyway, moot point either way.

i see atl is looking for bullpen/OF help: i wonder...would billy go back down south for round two????

The "Free Matt Watson from Sacramento-Redux" Committee is back in business...taking new memberships...crap!!!

by bigelephant on Jun 6, 2005 12:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

give them back Cruz and CT

Something made them sucessful in ATL. Not sure what but give it a shot. Sure we would not want much in return.

by novaoakland on Jun 6, 2005 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

exactly, a few bats and a bag of balls

would do nicely i think.

The "Free Matt Watson from Sacramento-Redux" Committee is back in business...taking new memberships...crap!!!

by bigelephant on Jun 6, 2005 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

can the balls be autogrpahed

Like by Huddy and Smoltz. Then we sell those to raise money to keep our players around.

by novaoakland on Jun 6, 2005 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Critics of the Hudson trade forget

that the A's are saving substantially in salary, both this season and even more so in future seasons.

I agree with Blez that when it comes to personnel, this trade is impossible to evaluate until we can really see what the highly regarded Meyer can do--and that could take at least two more seasons.

But the A's did save a bundle by unloading Huddy and you must also factor in what players the A's might thereby add to their payroll in the next two years to fairly evaluate the trade with Atlanta...

by reztips on Jun 6, 2005 1:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Beane got little of use for Hudson and Mulder?

It's funny to see this diary and read the Mercury today. Tim Kawakami writes a confused and uneducated, Joe Morgan-esk appraisal of the A's future. After praising the young players, he concludes with this paragraph.

"A little bit late for 2005, but if things go as planned, this could be a very nice, and very long, lead-in to 2006 and beyond. They could build momentum. They could entertain their fans. They could help make people forget that Billy Beane got little of use for Hudson and Mulder."

Little for Mulder? It seems many would argue just the opposite.

"It makes you not want to play, when you know you are going to get beat." -Twins manager Ron Gardenhire

by Parklife on Jun 6, 2005 2:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Hahaha, wait a while men

Initially, when Mulder was cold and Haren was blistering, we were crowing about how'd gotten the better end of the deal. Then Mulder got hot and Haren went frigid and we were complaining about how we'd gotten screwed. Now we're talking that pitcher-to-pitcher we probably made out a little better. You need more than a few mores, more than one season to judge these kind of things. I mean, Kielty-for-Lilly ain't looking so bad at the moment.

by dchu on Jun 6, 2005 2:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Here's my opnion

Get this: I thought Mulder was getting unrealiable, he wasn't lights out like he was before. Too many injuries and the same with Hudson, although he wasn't bad as Mulder, though he did fade late in the season. Haren is ok he'll win more than 10 in 2006, I was hoping for Cruz to be a good bullpen man, although he hasn't panned out yet.

You may have the greatest bunch of individual stars in the world, but if they don't play together, the club wont be worth a dime.-Babe Ruth

by doublehustle22 on Jun 6, 2005 2:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Is there a benefit...

if two SPs are equal, in taking the lefty?

I think if you asked sabermetric types, you'd get no, and if you asked trad baseball types, you'd get yes.

"Yucky Head Bad Guy!" - my 5-year-old daughter to Manny Ramirez. She got ice cream immediately afterward.

by DMtShooter on Jun 6, 2005 3:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Presumably

if you're only taking a basic analysis (such as this) and you conclude that the two players are equal, you can assume that the benefits of handedness were included, if not identified in the data.

Of course, if you did a more thorough study that accounted for virtually all variables (including handedness) and still concluded they were equal, then you might get more stat heads on board with your lefty bias.

The next time I slap a guy's ass, can we all just assume it's because I wish I was a baseball player?

by devo on Jun 6, 2005 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I suspect you'd get more in trade...

for the LH, since they're just more rare.

And there does seem to be a prejudice in play from most real teams to try to get a lefty in the rotation.

Now, if BB could log on and clear this for us (what, like he doesn't have 5 dummy AN accounts set up? you ever see him and one of "us" in the same place at the same time?)...

"Yucky Head Bad Guy!" - my 5-year-old daughter to Manny Ramirez. She got ice cream immediately afterward.

by DMtShooter on Jun 6, 2005 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We all like the Mulder trade ...

This seems pretty obvious. Danny Haren is a young stud, and Mulder looks shaky. Plus, Calero and Barton show promise. It saves us a ton of money now, etc. But I agree with OaklandSi that this is what the Cards needed, too. Mulder is better for them than Haren. They are trying to win the WS now, and money is essentially not a concern. Stats aside, Haren wouldn't necessarily have brought as many wins as Mulder. He wouldn't have thrown a 10 inning complete game shutout (on the back of an 8 inning gem when they had no bullpen to use). Mulder can hit, and I fully expect him to be a major part of their run toward another WS.

The Hudson deal is another story. Why did we need to send him to Atlanta? Arizona wasn't looking for a hometown discount when they signed Russ Ortiz. If we couldn't get any good value for Hudson, how much of a gamble is it to retain him in his contract year? Someone would have given plenty for one of the top ten pitchers in baseball for the stretch run. He would have been happy going to a contender in July. Did BB think he was all of a sudden washed up? I don't think it's too early to second guess this trade. Meyer is hurt, but no one in that trade is all that young. They shouyld be producing, period. It will be a small miracle at this point if we ever see anything that approaches the value that we should have received for Hudson.

by iceplant on Jun 6, 2005 4:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Two good trades

I'm going to go on record right now as saying I have always thought, and still think, that both trades were good moves (in spite of my initial freakouts). The Mulder trade is defended above; Haren is going to be a star, Calero is lights out when he's healthy, and plus we get Barton.

The Hudson trade is obviously less straightforward BUT remember the position we were in! Beane had much less leverage with the Hudson trade since it was his contract year and everyone on the planet knew that we could not afford to keep him beyond that.

Every year of the last 5 has been a rebuilding year; we've always lost someone big and had to recover. Had we kept Hudson, and let him go as a free agent at the end of this season, we'd have been more competitive this year, but next year would be a rebuilding year too. With these trades, we took a bigger hit this year, but next year, our core that is established this year will still be around. That kind of continuity is huge when trying to compete. Of course that logic doesn't scale if we truly got nothing but absolute garbage in return, but I don't believe we did.

I agree that CT needs to go to Sac and get some ABs and some time actually playing the OF. Cruz will be fine; right now he's still suffering the after-effects of being left in too long and busting his confidence about 1.5 weeks ago (as we'd predicted). Meyer is still an unknown -- but an unknown with a good track record at a pretty high level, and he's ours. I'd take that over a compensation draft pick and another painful off season any day.

by oblique on Jun 7, 2005 8:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think this is his problem! (Cruz)

From the Farhan Zaidi Interview

"Hopefully once we get on a hot streak, my biggest thrill will be something that takes place on the field, but so far I'd say it was winning the arbitration case. That was really the first thing I worked on after starting with the A's so to win the case was very validating. It was a good first thing to work on because preparing a presentation was something I was familiar with from my management consulting days (I worked at the Boston Consulting Group from 1998-2000). It was a pretty intense process, and David Forst (the Assistant GM) and I had to work pretty diligently to build our case up, piece by piece. I think we ultimately won because we established precedent was on our side. That was the big surprise to me about the arbitration process -- it's all about establishing precedent. The weight given to precedent is pretty pervasive throughout the industry -- from draft bonuses to arbitration cases to free agent signings -- much more than I anticipated."

Man, two highly educated management figures proving for hours that he really wasn't that good. All over 250K!!! That still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Realizing the kind of emotion that rules Cruz's life this was a bad call.

This, in my opinion is the worst 250K not spent.

by saint on Jun 7, 2005 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs