If Beane makes a few more trades, and in those trades he actually gets some major league-ready talent back, then this will look like a pretty good deal. Then the A's would have some young, possibly good-in-the-future players on the major league level, AND have a well-stocked system again.

That's kind of a big "if", though.

Of the Danny Haren trade is Connor Robertson. Not that I wanted to keep him per say, I just think its a missed chance to dumb Bobby Crosby. I was really hoping that if Beane did trade Haren, that Crosby would be in the deal. Dammit!! I think Billy dropped the ball, when you look at that aspect of the trade.

for the organization, the one that Beane did not do when he traded Mulder and Hudson. He told us that was a reload, and that the 2005 A's would be the weakest team  for the next few years.

Considering how far from ready most of the prospects are in this trade (and what I suspect is coming in other trades), the team is not likely to contend in 2008 either.

I have nothing but good things to say about Danny Haren and everything he gave to the A’s. I hope he wins the Cy Young award next season.

Thank You to Danny. He was great and I wish him well too. I wouldn't really want to see him hurt. I am glad he's in the NL and not traded to an AL team.

and it is true that we would have had trouble replacing Gaudin..especially since we are always so cheap.

another reason to not judge it now is because the a's will almost certainly make other moves:

"We need to put together a club for a long, sustained run. This trade is the first step toward that."

Billy got inside info that Selig's big response to the Mitchell report is going to be random unannounced testing for marijuana, with lifetime bans for the first offense.  So he quickly traded Haren on the eve of Danny's planned vacation trip to Amsterdam.

The D backs are starting to fill there roster up with all of my faviort Athletics...lol. I guess they were not a bad choice as a second faviort team. A few seasons ago I decided that I should have a NL team to pull for just so I pay more attention to it; and with Arizona being the home of my faviort player, The Big Unit I decided that would be my adopted NL team of choice. I still wish they would not have changed their colors to red though, to its very generic. But next season the D backs are going to have a very solid starting rotation. Very solid....

Yes, it's certainly possible that it'll turn out to be a great deal for the A's....if only a bunch of high-ceiling high-risk young players turn out. (which usually happens....right? right?)

I don't like it for 1 simply reason: when you trade a guy with nearly as much "value" as anyone else in baseball, you've got to get a similar player in return -- not Gonzalez (a top 30 prospect?) and a bunch of throw-ins. He needed to bring an impact player.

Haren has more "value" than Santana, because you get 3 years for the price of 1 of Santana. The Twins were looking at players like Philip Hughes and Ellsbury (who I don't like as much as everybody else), two guys easily more highly regarded than Gonzalez.

Billy Beane and his staff know 10x as much about scouting as I do, so maybe they know something I don't, and it'll all work out in a few years. But right now, I'm thinking about 2008, and knowing the A's won't contend, not even for a month. And because the players he's counting on are low-level longshots, it's not like I can say, "but wait until 2009/10, when [player 1, player 2, etc...] are ready. I don't even know who those players are. And like Nico said, the current young players may well be gone by then. I simply can't get behind the 2008 A's for any reason right now, and to me, that makes me really hate the trade a lot.

and actually makes fun of himself for a change...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...

But as the person who predicted boldly and correctly that the A's would win 65 games in 2005 after trading Hudson and Mark Mulder in the winter of 2004 (they did win 65, and then 23 more after that), I would hesitate to dismiss the Haren deal quite so blithely.

Have a nice vacation.

so everybody just sit tight. I agree with whoever earlier said Haren maybe hurt, too. Just don't give up on next year or the year after yet. Blanton and Street go next for MLB ready players. Hang in there, AN!

I don't really like this deal.  

However, I find myself surprised by the disgust which has been expressed here.  This is a pretty good prospect haul for any one player.

If you want to argue that it would be better to keep an A's team which should win 83 games and maybe, if everything broke right, maybe get 91 or 92 or so victories, that's fine.  I kind of feel that way myself.  I like facing spring with blind optimism.

But if you believe that a GM should recognize where a team is in the success cycle and always be looking towards building a championship caliber team, then you can only argue with this move if you feel that you know that the players we received are not going to pan out as well as the A's believe they pan out.

I love the minor leagues, I love it when the A's have good players to follow in the minor leagues. The A's got more talent in this trade than they gave up, and they gave up a lot in Haren.  

this is a move that will benefit the team when it moves from a crime-infested city which has NEVER supported the A's when rebuilding to a South Bay venue where fans will welcome what, by then, should be an exciting, solid contender.

And I give Wolff credit for permitting BB to make this bold move. 'Cause the pathetically small A's fanbase will NEVER support a team doing what it needs to do to regularly contend in the future. And Wolff et al will likely lose money in '08 and '09.

So here's looking forward to watching the evolution of a far more exciting young team. And a move from a horrific stadium and non-supportive "fans" to a wonderful future in the South Bay...

from the Chronicle blog.

and then spent the rest of the day flying home to Oakland for Christmas. Found out about it from my roommate at the airport, so I wound up missing what must have been a wild ride here.

That being said, I don't really have any thoughts that probably haven't already been stated. Just that goddamnit. That's really all I got. Goddamnit. Not in a "I'm quitting this team" kinda way or "Billy's an idiot this trade sucks" kinda way. I mean, return looks acceptable, interesting pieces and such. Should make us good in a few years, hopefully. But I liked Dan Haren. Dan Haren was signed cheap for three more years. He could have been a part of the next good A's team.

I guess I just don't understand the pressing need Billy seemed to be feeling to get rid of him. Maybe he thought he had to capitalize on a Dan Haren career year in a pitching-hungry market. I dunno. Goddamnit. Good luck in Arizona, Danny.

It's the idea that we shouldn't judge the trade now, that we should wait to see how the players we acquired developed.

Why?

Losing Haren effects the team right now, it hurts the A's, how can we not judge the deal now?

Carlos Gonzalez, the jewel of the deal, needs to get his head on straight or he will fail to live up to his potential. He's 22 so there's time but he probably needs a full season of AAA before he's ready to contribute in Oakland.

And if he does figure it out, what then? He's a right fielder for a team that just signed Nick Swisher through 2012. Do the A's bump Swisher to 1B to create a spot for Gonzalez, that would make Barton the DH. What happens to Cust? Now, if Cust flops in the next year or so that isn't an issue. Or Buck could keep getting hurt, creating an opening that way. But do we really want to think about our players failing miserably or getting hurt?

Brett Anderson turns 20 in February and with a good spring could start the year in AA. More likely he starts in High-A since he didn't exactly dominate during his time there in 2007. He's got a lot of upside (if he gets serious about his conditioning, gets in a bit better shape, he could end up as good as Mulder was) but he looks to be at least 2 years away. A lot can happen to a pitching prospect in 2 years.

Aaron Cunningham turns 22 in April. He'll start the 2008 season in AA. Scouts are mixed on his ability to play CF. If he can't play CF then his bat may not have enough power to play in a corner. At this point he projects to be a poor man Eric Byrnes. He's young enough and has the natural athleticism to be better then that but he doesn't have a projectionable frame that hints to more power in the future. If he can handle CF then he could be another Mark Kotsay type bat. (And I'm referring to when Kotsay could actually hit a bit, not the version we've seen the last two years.)

Greg Smith is a 24 year old finesse lefty. 87-88 MPH fastball, good curve, average change-up. He's struggled with mid-season promotions but has shown the ability to adjust and succeed when he repeats the league the following year. He'll return to AAA in 2008 and could be ready for a big league trial by mid-season. He'll probably look a lot like Dallas Braden did last year when he came up. In fact, I kind of like this comp. Greg Smith is another Dallas Braden.

Chirs Carter turns 21 on Dec. 18th and he had an impressive season in Low-A ball. Big power potential, a decent ability to draw walks and the corresponding K numbers to complete the pakcage. He should tear up High-A and earn a mid-season promotion to AA. After that, at least a half season of AAA in 2009. If everything goes right he could be a year and a half away, realistically we're probably looking at 2010.

The bigger problem is he's a natural DH. He committed 11 errors in 73 games at 1B and he's a long way from being adequate on defense. Sure, he's got two years to practice but even if he manages to not spike himself where do you put him in Oakland?

Gonzalez should be established in RF, Buck will be in LF, Swisher at 1B and Barton's the DH. A lot of problems go away if Swisher (doubtful) or Buck can play CF but until one of them proves capable of the job I hesitate to pencil either in to the role.

Dana Eveland is 24 and hasn't been able to stick in the bigs for the past three years. I'm pretty sure he's out of options but I'm not positive on that. He has the minor league track record and the stuff to be a 3/4 SP as soon as this season but he needs to get his butt in gear. He's another pitcher with conditioning problems, his style and stuff has often been compared to David Wells... so has his physique. I know, I know we're not selling jeans and round is a shape but every scouting report I've seen on Eveland includes a comment that he needs to lose about 20 pounds.

So what did the A's accomplish by making this trade? Did they add a SS or CF prospect to cover the glaring holes in those positions? It doesn't look like it. Did they replace the hole in the rotation they created by trading Haren? Uncertain at best, doubtful is more likely. The A's stockpiled talent at positions they already have covered for the next 5-6 years so where is the real benefit to making this trade?

The one thing the trade accomplishes is it allows Beane to target specific needs when he deals Blanton and Street. He can go after a highly rated SS and/or CF and settle for slightly less then he'd otherwise try to acquire in terms of overall package. He can turn down a 4 player offer from the Yankees if the Mets' 3 player package is more in line with team needs. This trade should boost Blanton's value on the trade market once Kuroda signs... but wouldn't Haren's value have also gone up if Beane had waited until that FA signing?

The timing of this deal strikes me as weird. For one thing, if Kuroda had signed with the Dodgers it only makes sense that Arizona would have felt more pressure to make a deal for Haren. That bit of leverage might have been enough to pry one of the Diamondbacks' untouchables off that list. Furthermore, waiting until mid-January to make a deal would have put Scherzer (AZ's 2nd best pitching prospect) in play as a PTBNL. In fact, most of the D'backs 2007 draft class would have been eligible as potential PTBNLs if the deal goes down 4 weeks from now.

This deal seems rushed and I don't understand why that is. Beane should have been in the driver's seat yet the mid-December move plays more into the Diamondbacks' hands then Oakland's. I really don't like that.

DUDES!!!  WE ARE WINNING THE WS NEXT YEAR!!  NO DOUBT!!

We just signed DiNardo and Calero back.  NEED I SAY MORE!!!  WS HERE WE COME!!

when you envy Yankee and Red Sox fans, and their ability to be good every year.    We're not going to be good again until 2010 at the earliest.  I suppose it's possible we never would have been good enough in 2008-2009 if we retained the core of the team, but I just don't believe it.

In any case, it's not a terrible deal, if not a great one, either.  I hope we see it payoff in 2010, and give Oakland a proper sendoff.

looking for "fresh perspective". If the D-Backs would have given up Gonzo and Anderson for Blanton and Street, I would rather have made this trade and built around Haren for 2009-10. I just think Haren was too good, too cheap, and under contract too long, to give up.

What do people think? Was Arizona only interested in an ace, or having dealt Valverde would a package of Blanton and Street not have looked attractive enough to deal (at least) the top two of these six prospects?

able to stay on top for most of a decade and it is what will keep them on the bottom in 07-09. You're supposed to spend money on great scouts to get young talent; you're not supposed to spend Danny Haren.

some disjointed thoughts based on many of the things that people are saying here.

A's drafting:  hasn't been bad, except for the horrible 2003 year.  Getting almost nothing (Ethier) from that very good draft class has tracked us through the system.  But it hasn't been great either.  I like what they have done the last two years, actually, I like what they tried to do in 2005 too.  

So 2001 draft was pretty good, 2002 was pretty good (considering the talent level available), 2003 was a disaster, 2004 was a deep draft for us and has had some bad luck but was good for depth of talent if light on stars, 2005, 2006, 2007 are not, except for Buck, knowable quantities yet.  Or at least, not having immediate help in the big leagues from these three draft classes yet is not unexpected or the reason why the team is now in rebuilding mode.

On Haren:  when I watched him in the second half this year, it looked to me like teams were doing everything they could to lay off his split finger.  I just had the feeling that the word had gone round that you have to just not swing at it ever. It's kind of the way that people just started taking Zito's curve sometime in 2003/2004.  

I wouldn't be surprised if he has a great year in his first go 'round the NL in 2008, only to start struggling thereafter.   Just a feeling that the A's believed that if you wanted to trade Haren, this was the year to do it.

On A's front office:  I don't believe that the grand plan has been to tank until the Fremont move.  I do take the statements at face value that Wolfeco is willing to spend money.  But the state of the team is such that they would be hoping for a super optimistic scenario to compete with the top teams in the AL for the next couple of years, especially if Guadin is shelved for half the year.  This seems to have as much to do with the Angels, Tigers, and Indians as it has to do with the A's themselves.  

On trading Blanton: It's fine if the return is good.  But I don't think we have to do it.  Having an innings eater helps keep the pen fresh.  If you catch lightning in the pen, then you can hang in there much better than the team looks on paper.  And if we are auditioning a ton of guys to find more Guadins for future value of trade value, you do want to have a good pen to help their stats out (Wins and ERA, go hard for six innings, etc...)

minorleaguebaseball.com Lisa Winston on the trade

In my opinion, the Athletics may have lost their ace, as most people expected them to, but they have made themselves much deeper and stronger. Only a handful of organizations could have afforded to give up this much for, basically, one Major League ace. Arizona is one of them.

here
http://minors.mlblogs.com/around_the...

I'm bummed that Haren's gone, worried and excited about what might happen next, and looking forward to seeing these guys pan out. hate the rebuilding, but I think it was time.

Someone above mentioned that Wolfe is open to spending money and I have already seen that.  We have opened up the Latin America and Asian markets. I think this will also help our drafts, Beane can draft better if he can spend more.  
I also view the players in this trade with a sense of "What does Beane know that we don't".  He got Gaudin and except for the fact he is hurt now, it was a good buy.  I think with the new training levels they are using our future has greater possibilities.

thinks 2012 is more realistic as far as expecting a competitive team

to physically comprise their 2008 rotation in April. Blanton - if not dealt. Harden - if healthy. Duchscherer - if healthy and not in the pen. Then there's DiNardo, Meyer, Eveland, maybe Windsor and Komine get another shot? It could get ugly really fast. Wait, it already is ugly.

while MLB.com thinks the Diamondbacks came out ahead,

some Diamondback bloggers think they gave up too much for Haren