The Rich Harden/Tim Hudson Trade Thread

[Andrew Cashner]

On one of the ESPN chats Rob Neyer said it would take one A- prospect and a couple lesser ones to land Rich Harden. But, said that the A's probably won't trade him because they will still be in the race.

[Mizzou]

I know he's great when healthy, but so is/was Mark Prior. I really can't get behind this trade, just because he's such a huge health risk.

[USSoccer]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

[rawaction]

I had something interesting pointed out to me today about Billy Beane's history.

 

Oakland has had a lot of talent over the years. But Beane doesn't typically trade his talent away during the season. Sure, a lot has to do with the fact his team has been competing at the deadline for the most part, but still interesting to point out.

 

Giambi, Tejada, Dye, Zito, and Damon were all allowed to leave as free agents, without even being offered a serious contract.

 

Mulder, Hudson, Haren, Swisher, and Ted Lilly were all traded in the offseason.

 

Beane doesn't have much of a history of being a seller at the deadline. In 01, he traded for Dye. 02, he traded for Lilly . In 03, he traded for Jose Guillen. 2004 was Dotel. Granted the A's either were in the playoffs or were within 3 games of the playoffs in all of those years. But last year, all the A's "sold" was Jason Kendall and Milton Bradley, who was in the minors at the time.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Harden carries huge risks. I'd do it only because I'm only hoping he's healthy through the post season. Anything after that we got out of him would be gravy.

[Guest]

Hrm, I didn't know that Harden had complained about dead arm each of the last two times out. That's not a good sign.

[USSoccer]

I suppose the nice thing about our system being kind of crappy is that we're not likely to really miss anything we deal for Harden if he gets hurt.

[rawaction]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

[USSoccer]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

 

What would you offer?

[CuseCubFan69]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

 

What would you offer?

 

What would you do about the lack of a backup SS if you traded Cedeno?

[UMFan83]

I enjoyed reading the comments on this blog to find out what A's fans think Harden should command. Of course every teams fans overvalue their players, but its fun to read.

 

The first comment suggested the Cubs should trade Vitters, Murton and Samardjia...............for Blanton

 

http://www.athleticsnation.com/2008/7/7/566267/cubs-want-some-harden

[rawaction]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

 

What would you offer?

 

Probably the 2nd deal. I'd try to keep Hill out of it and give up Gallagher, Marshall or Veal instead.

[CubColtPacer]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

 

What would you offer?

 

My offer would probably be closer to the second, although I think the 2nd deal is too much talent to give up.

 

You just implied that Pie, Atkins, and Veal=Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin when the 2nd deal has probably close to double the value of the first deal. They aren't comparable at all.

[SABR Gamer]

No to Burnett, Hudson or Harden, period.

I don't know about you guys, but a rotation of:

 

Zambrano

Harden/Hudson

Lilly

Dempster

Hill

 

makes me feel all warm and fuzzy, that's an amazing rotation.

 

Make up your mind.

 

It was bad punctuation. I believe it was intended to be like this:

 

No to Burnett. Hudson or Harden, period.

 

Yeah, Banedon has it right. I just screwed up and put a comma where I should have put a period. My bad.

[Little Slide Rooter]

No to Burnett, Hudson or Harden, period.

I don't know about you guys, but a rotation of:

 

Zambrano

Harden/Hudson

Lilly

Dempster

Hill

 

makes me feel all warm and fuzzy, that's an amazing rotation.

 

Make up your mind.

 

It was bad punctuation. I believe it was intended to be like this:

 

No to Burnett. Hudson or Harden, period.

 

Yeah, Banedon has it right. I just screwed up and put a comma where I should have put a period. My bad.

 

Still if we cant get Harden or Hudson, Id accept Burnett. Wolf or Maddux, not so much. We have to understand that other teams will be charging just as hard for these guys if and when they become available. I know Hendry usually gets his guy, but there are a lot of contenders who would like to get their hands on another quality starter.

[USSoccer]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

 

What would you offer?

 

My offer would probably be closer to the second, although I think the 2nd deal is too much talent to give up.

 

You just implied that Pie, Atkins, and Veal=Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin when the 2nd deal has probably close to double the value of the first deal. They aren't comparable at all.

 

This is just my opinion, but I figure Beane is going to want either Pie or Hill. He's probably going to want at least one, and possibly 2 pitchers in the deal.

 

Do I think Atkins/Veal=Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin? Kinda. Apart from the centerpiece players (Pie/Hill), I'm not all that concerned about giving any of the other guys up. Colvin at best is Mark Kotsay. Ceda is a good prospect, but didn't we just draft a college reliever? Wouldn't that make Ceda somewhat expendable? Cedeno is filler. Veal and Atkins are P prospects. I don't sweat giving up either, because half our rotation is signed fairly long term and the other half is Gallagher and Marshall.

 

As far as what to do about a backup SS without Cedeno, those guys are easily found prior to the waiver deadline.

[jersey cubs fan]

Ceda is a good prospect, but didn't we just draft a college reliever? Wouldn't that make Ceda somewhat expendable? Cedeno is filler. Veal and Atkins are P prospects. I don't sweat giving up either, because half our rotation is signed fairly long term and the other half is Gallagher and Marshall.

 

The fact that they drafted a college reliever, who they may or may not turn back into a starter, should have absolutely no effect whatsoever on their willingness to trade Ceda, or any other prospect. He hasn't thrown a professional pitch yet. And even if he makes it, there's still a need for at least 6 relievers at once, more likely 7, and then a handful of others each season. And again, not sweating giving guys up because we have others around doesn't mean you should just keep adding those names to offers.

[USSoccer]

Ceda is a good prospect, but didn't we just draft a college reliever? Wouldn't that make Ceda somewhat expendable? Cedeno is filler. Veal and Atkins are P prospects. I don't sweat giving up either, because half our rotation is signed fairly long term and the other half is Gallagher and Marshall.

 

The fact that they drafted a college reliever, who they may or may not turn back into a starter, should have absolutely no effect whatsoever on their willingness to trade Ceda, or any other prospect. He hasn't thrown a professional pitch yet. And even if he makes it, there's still a need for at least 6 relievers at once, more likely 7, and then a handful of others each season. And again, not sweating giving guys up because we have others around doesn't mean you should just keep adding those names to offers.

 

My point was not so much to say that Ceda is expendable because of Cashner, but that relievers shouldn't block you from a deal that makes you better. I'm not trying to pull a Truffle/Weiters thing here.

 

Would you really hesitate on getting Harden over Jose Ceda? Do any of those names strike you as untouchable?

[jersey cubs fan]

Ceda is a good prospect, but didn't we just draft a college reliever? Wouldn't that make Ceda somewhat expendable? Cedeno is filler. Veal and Atkins are P prospects. I don't sweat giving up either, because half our rotation is signed fairly long term and the other half is Gallagher and Marshall.

 

The fact that they drafted a college reliever, who they may or may not turn back into a starter, should have absolutely no effect whatsoever on their willingness to trade Ceda, or any other prospect. He hasn't thrown a professional pitch yet. And even if he makes it, there's still a need for at least 6 relievers at once, more likely 7, and then a handful of others each season. And again, not sweating giving guys up because we have others around doesn't mean you should just keep adding those names to offers.

 

My point was not so much to say that Ceda is expendable because of Cashner, but that relievers shouldn't block you from a deal that makes you better. I'm not trying to pull a Truffle/Weiters thing here.

 

Would you really hesitate on getting Harden over Jose Ceda? Do any of those names strike you as untouchable?

 

no name is untouchable. But the fact that they are touchable doesn't mean all of them can or should be included.

[rawaction]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

 

What would you offer?

 

My offer would probably be closer to the second, although I think the 2nd deal is too much talent to give up.

 

You just implied that Pie, Atkins, and Veal=Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin when the 2nd deal has probably close to double the value of the first deal. They aren't comparable at all.

 

This is just my opinion, but I figure Beane is going to want either Pie or Hill. He's probably going to want at least one, and possibly 2 pitchers in the deal.

 

Do I think Atkins/Veal=Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin? Kinda. Apart from the centerpiece players (Pie/Hill), I'm not all that concerned about giving any of the other guys up. Colvin at best is Mark Kotsay. Ceda is a good prospect, but didn't we just draft a college reliever? Wouldn't that make Ceda somewhat expendable? Cedeno is filler. Veal and Atkins are P prospects. I don't sweat giving up either, because half our rotation is signed fairly long term and the other half is Gallagher and Marshall.

 

As far as what to do about a backup SS without Cedeno, those guys are easily found prior to the waiver deadline.

 

 

Atkins is at best a C+ prospect. He's clearly the least talented of the guys you listed. Hill > Pie, because he is a pitcher and has had much more major league success. Ceda is probably a slightly better prospect than Veal, even as a reliever. Colvin is a better prospect than both. Ranking those names 1-7, I'd go Hill, Pie, Colvin, Ceda, Cedeno, Veal, Atkins, with the large gaps between Hill and Pie, then Veal and Atkins.

[rocket]

I think if Beane is willing to trade Harden now in the middle of a pennant race that his team's a part of, I'd be very wary of the deal. It probably means that Beane knows Harden's arm is about to fall off again and he wants to get something for him now.

[CubColtPacer]

I kind of think Pie, Atkins and Veal gets it done. So would Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin.

 

Maybe add Cedeno. I think that's a fair deal, really.

 

One of those is a really cheap deal. One is fairly expensive.

 

What would you offer?

 

My offer would probably be closer to the second, although I think the 2nd deal is too much talent to give up.

 

You just implied that Pie, Atkins, and Veal=Hill, Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin when the 2nd deal has probably close to double the value of the first deal. They aren't comparable at all.

 

This is just my opinion, but I figure Beane is going to want either Pie or Hill. He's probably going to want at least one, and possibly 2 pitchers in the deal.

 

Do I think Atkins/Veal=Ceda, Cedeno and Colvin? Kinda. Apart from the centerpiece players (Pie/Hill), I'm not all that concerned about giving any of the other guys up. Colvin at best is Mark Kotsay. Ceda is a good prospect, but didn't we just draft a college reliever? Wouldn't that make Ceda somewhat expendable? Cedeno is filler. Veal and Atkins are P prospects. I don't sweat giving up either, because half our rotation is signed fairly long term and the other half is Gallagher and Marshall.

 

As far as what to do about a backup SS without Cedeno, those guys are easily found prior to the waiver deadline.

 

I can understand what you mean about how it would have a similar impact on the Cubs. I'm looking at their potential value to the A's:

 

 

I just look at the deal this way:

 

Pie>Colvin (Somewhat similar type players, Pie is further along and has more history of success).

Cedeno>Atkins (Cedeno has a use on a major league team, and has a small chance of starter upside. Atkins is basically a non-prospect that could turn into a #4-#5 in a couple years if a major league team gives him enough of a chance).

Ceda=Veal. They are both pitching prospects who have question marks. Veal has more upside being a starter, but has less of a chance making it with his control. Ceda could be a dominant closer, but also has control issues. These two have been ranked right next to each other in most prospect rankings, and I don't think their performance so far this season has changed that.

 

So the deal is pretty comparable if you look 3 for 3. Deal 1 is probably slightly preferred by the A's because teams tend to like deals with better centerpieces and worse supporting pieces rather than the other way around.

 

But when you add Hill in to deal 2, that changes everything. As the centerpiece of deal 2, that makes deal 2 quite a bit better than deal 1 could ever be.

 

I agree with Rawaction. If they could substitute Marshall for Hill, then I'd do the deal. If they want Pie instead of Colvin, I'd then exchange Cedeno for Murton and make the deal Marshall, Pie, Ceda, Murton.

[Banedon]

Oakland is only 5 or 6 games behind LA... Are we sure they'll be selling?

[USSoccer]

Oakland is only 5 or 6 games behind LA... Are we sure they'll be selling?

 

If I were them, and could get a good deal for Rich Harden, I would be. As Vance said, Beane goes all in or all out. If that 5-6 becomes 8 prior to 7/31, he'll sell if we offer a good deal.

[jersey cubs fan]

Oakland is only 5 or 6 games behind LA... Are we sure they'll be selling?

 

If I were them, and could get a good deal for Rich Harden, I would be. As Vance said, Beane goes all in or all out. If that 5-6 becomes 8 prior to 7/31, he'll sell if we offer a good deal.

 

Yeah, if you were Beane, but Beane is Beane, and Beane never sells. Perhaps he's looking at the pythag and thinking his team should be in first. Odds are it's going to take a huge offer to entice him to make a move.