Cubs get HARDEN

[Scav]

Plus, Santo was just talking about how at Noon today it was 85 degrees and the ball was flying out, and now the wind shifted, it is coming from off the lake, and it is like 70 degrees....

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Len C. Cum

Now, (that) you will remember.

[Cannon Shell]

http://drivelinemechanics.com/2008/0...rden-part-two/

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://drivelinemechanics.com/2008/0...rden-part-two/

O.K., now I am going to again state the key point that is missing in your assessment, and in the assessment of your statboy friend who wrote the article. Your assessment is that Gallagher and the others(combined) will be better (in the future) than Harden. That may be a correct assessment, but the problem is that the A's will get rid of them before they become free agents. That's what they are doing with Harden. They still had him relatively cheap for a year and a half. That year and a half needs to be taken advantage of, but they didn't(especially for the start of 2009.). They make a trade like this by selling the fact they can keep young players until they become free agents. During that time they expect them to prosper. What your ignoring is they won't get the full "good cheap years" from guys like Gallagher. They will do with him what they did with Harden. I'm sure 4 or 5 years ago they told their fans that they were building for 2008/9. That time has come, and they have pushed that back to 2010-2012. When does it payoff with ring contenders? 2006 was a fluke. The free agents all hit huge that year. They dumped them all in 2007. They don't raise good enough hitters to contend for championships.

2) The A's hurt themselves for 2008, and 2009...........This seems to go right over the statboys heads, because they don't particularly care if the A's can contend for a ring. They don't care if that ever comes.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

O.K., now I am going to again state the key point that is missing in your assessment, and in the assessment of your statboy friend who wrote the article. Your assessment is that Gallagher and the others(combined) will be better (in the future) than Harden. That may be a correct assessment, but the problem is that the A's will get rid of them before they become free agents. That's what they are doing with Harden. They still had him relatively cheap for a year and a half. That year and a half needs to be taken advantage of, but they didn't(especially for the start of 2009.). They make a trade like this by selling the fact they can keep young players until they become free agents. During that time they expect them to prosper. What your ignoring is they won't get the full "good cheap years" from guys like Gallagher. They will do with him what they did with Harden. I'm sure 4 or 5 years ago they told their fans that they were building for 2008/9. That time has come, and they have pushed that back to 2010-2012. When does it payoff with ring contenders? 2006 was a fluke. The free agents all hit huge that year. They dumped them all in 2007. They don't raise good enough hitters to contend for championships.

2) The A's hurt themselves for 2008, and 2009...........This seems to go right over the statboys heads, because they don't particularly care if the A's can contend for a ring. They don't care if that ever comes.

I dont know why you think that they hurt themselves so badly for the next 2 years. Harden pitched in 13 games for them this year. 13. You know that they play 162 a year right? He wasnt 13-0. Gaudin was a mop up man. You know a guy who pitches when the game is already out of reach? Your irritation at the financial parts just dont make sense. Harden wasnt due that much money and there was no way they were giving him a long term contract anyway becuase of his injury history as much as the money. I think anyone who signs this guy to a long term deal is nuts.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I dont know why you think that they hurt themselves so badly for the next 2 years. Harden pitched in 13 games for them this year. 13. You know that they play 162 a year right? He wasnt 13-0.

He has started 14 times this year. His team lost 4 of those games. In those games, he gave up:

0 earned runs
1 earned run
2 earned runs
2 earned runs

He is not the reason his team lost those 4 games. He gave them chances to win. THEY TRADED AWAY THE STARTER WITH THE 2ND BEST E.R.A. IN THE MAJORS, AND YOU SAY IT DOESN'T HURT THEM IN THIS YEAR AND/OR NEXT YEAR? This is like the Andruw signing(we gunna have to agree to disagree.) This game is a war. You can't afford to just give away somebody who has dominating talent(even with a history of injuries.) He is not a journeyman pitcher.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

He has started 14 times this year. His team lost 4 of those games. In those games, he gave up:

0 earned runs
1 earned run
2 earned runs
2 earned runs

He is not the reason his team lost those 4 games. He gave them chances to win. THEY TRADED AWAY THE STARTER WITH THE 2ND BEST E.R.A. IN THE MAJORS, AND YOU SAY IT DOESN'T HURT THEM IN THIS YEAR AND/OR NEXT YEAR? This is like the Andruw signing(we gunna have to agree to disagree.) This game is a war. You can't afford to just give away somebody who has dominating talent(even with a history of injuries.) He is not a journeyman pitcher.

So the net gain over a replacemnet level pitcher who goes 7-7 is 3 games. You are going to risk getting nothing for 3 games? He is not CC Sabathia or Zambrano or Johan Santana. He is a very good pitcher when he is on. The problem is that is simply not very often. He is not a cornerstone guy or a guy you build around. He is a luxury item for a rich team like the Cubs that can take a chance on getting a 1/2 of a season from him. This isnt like trading Albert Pujols.

I like Gallagher. I think he is going to be a good pitcher. Not to mention the fact that he is 22 and durable. Murton may wind up like Eric Byrnes (before he shredded his hamstring).

Let's face it, Oakland needs to be proactive in order to not be like the other teams in another thread, KC and Pittsburgh. They need to liquidate guys like Harden who simply are too risky to pay a lot of money for.

Since 2000 Oakland has a record of 791-599 (close to 200 games above .500), they have been to the playoffs 5 times, they have finished 1st, 2nd ,1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 3rd, and are currently in 2nd in their division. In the same time frame the NY Yankees are 823-564. So they are 32 games behind the Yankees or divided over the 8 years 4 games a year behind them dispite a huge disparity payroll and revenues. The team that spend the most is 4 games better out of 162. And Beane doesnt know what he is doing or is ripping the fans off? The worst Oakland has finished is 3rd one time. Sounds like a team that isnt trying.