Edwin Jackson Traded To White Sox For Daniel Hudson and David Holmberg
by Jim McLennan on Jul 30, 2010 12:45 PM EDT
in Diamondbacks News
Email
PrintPer Jon Heyman
dbacks get daniel hudson and david holmberg for jackson
Hudson was the White Sox fifth-round pick in 2008, but burned his way up through the minor-league system pretty quickly, and made his major-league debut in September the next year. The results haven't been amazing to date - a 4.72 ERA in 34.1 innings - but he was listed the White Sox #2 prospect by both the Hardball Times and Fangraphs in the off-season, with Baseball America putting him at #3, though multiple sources had him as the Southsiders' top prospect (see later). He is currently aged 23.
David Holmberg was #8 on the Hardball Times list , but was not mentioned by Fangraphs. The left-handed pitcher was the Sox 2nd-round pick in 2009, and only turned 19 earlier this month. He is currently in rookie ball, and has a 4.46 ERA in eight starts.
More on this move after the jump
Dan Hudson is certainly the prize in the deal. The Hardball Times said of him, "He has the potential to be a No. 2 starter with his consistent low-90s fastball to go along with a strong repertoire of secondary offerings, highlighted by his potentially plus slider." However, Fangraphs warned, "He had issues with allowing too many fly balls in double-A, triple-A and the Majors (29.8 GB%)" in 2009. That has the potential for trouble, pitching at Chase, but the piece goes on to note "He may have been tired, which could have led to elevated pitches." That would make sense, as he threw 166 innings at all levels last season, a pretty hefty workload.
His major-league numbers do seem to show an issue with walks, Hudson having issued 20 of them in only 34.1 innings, between 2009 and 2010, though he also struck out 28 over that time. That may just be small sample-size as it is a change on his minor-league numbers, where he walked only 2.52 per nine innings of work - and struck out an impressive 10.6 per 9IP. There can't be many pitchers who made their A-ball and major-league debuts in the same season, but that's what Hudson did last year. He'll likely go straight into the Diamondbacks rotation, and should be there through 2015 or so.
Kirk Champion, the White Sox minor league pitching coach, really liked Hudson, saying, "If I sound excited about him, it’s because I’ve seen him step in and climb over other guys I liked all season long, in three buildings." John Sickels rated Hudson the White Sox top prospect this winter, saying " I rated him as a big sleeper pre-season and he really broke through." Baseball Prospectus concurred: "Hudson combines plus stuff with well above-average command. His 92-94 mph fastball can touch 96 and features good tailing action, and he throws strikes to both sides of the plate with it. His best secondary offering is a plus changeup that is a true swing-and-miss pitch."
There is some debate about Hudson's slider. Some like it, saying "His above average slider is his strikeout pitch and it has looked like a plus pitch at times," and Baseball America rated it the best slider in the White Sox organization. Others are less impressed: "His 3rd offering is a mediocre Slider that he succeeded by avoiding in the lower Minors, but won’t be so fortunate with the Big League club." Baseball Prospectus took the middle ground: "Hudson's slider flashed average, but it is inconsistent. He'll need to establish it more as a starter in the big leagues."
David Holmberg is, as noted, very young. He.entered the 2010 season ranked by Baseball America as the eighth-best prospect in the White Sox organization, and the Hardball Times said he "brings a great mix of pitches to the mound, including a curveball and change-up that have the makings of plus pitches. His fastball falls flat right now, but further velocity is expected as his frame fills out. He's the most intriguing pitching project in Chicago's system." The left-hander has compiled a 3-3 record and 4.02 ERA in 21 games (14 starts) during two seasons in the White Sox organization from 2009-10.
He just made the Baseball Prospectus Top 10, but they were uncertain about his fastball. They said, "He currently sits at 86-89 mph, and for every scout who sees some projection in him, there's another who think he's already maxed out. He'll need to improve his command as he moves up the ladder, and he might always be forced to pitch backwards." The piece reckons Holmberg "profiles to be a back-of-the-rotation innings-eater." John Sickels rated Holmberg their #7, but also wonders about the same thing: "Will the fastball get faster? If it does his stock could go up quickly." Nick Piecoro notes similarities between Holmberg and former AZ prospect Brett Anderson.
There. With the pesky "facts" out of the way, time for my opinion.
I like this trade - we seem to have almost got more back than in the Haren deal. I'd have been happy with a straight-up swap of Jackson for Hudson: the latter seems to be not much worse a pitcher already, and has a full five years of control, whereas Jackson will be a free agent after 2011. This definitely counts as more evidence that the team is now building for the longer-term, in 2012 and beyond, and Hudson looks to be a cornerstone of the rotation for the rebuild. With the arrival of Pat Corbin, Holmberg and - in all likelhood - Tyler Skaggs, that means that the Diamondbacks now control eleven of the top 95 players chosen in last year’s draft.
There is, however, no doubt that this was also a salary dump for the Diamondbacks. Between the departure of Jackson and Dan Haren, the team has now shed more than $21 million (Haren $12.75 million, Jackson $8.375 million) off the payroll for 2011. While some of that will go to Joe Saunders, who is arbitration-eligible, assuming we hang on to him, the moves should clear about $15m in total. It means the 2011 rotation for Arizona now potentially looks like:
- LHP Joe Saunders (age 30 in 2011)
- RHP Ian Kennedy (26)
- RHP Dan Hudson (24)
- RHP Barry Enright (25)
- RHP Rodrigo Lopez (35) or RHP Jarrod Parker (21), depending on the latter's return from surgery.
If Parker is in there, it will mean Saunders is the only one not under long-term control, and thus likely to be part of the next movement towards contention.
205 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
not a bad return
Hudson has GREAT minor league numbers, and Holmberg is very young with good numbers as well. Who’s next to go? Adam laroche?
by C. Wesley Baier on Jul 30, 2010 1:07 PM EDT reply actions
I really like this trade.
It makes the Scherzer deal that much better.
12 1/2 years of starting pitching for 4 years of a starter and 7 years of two relievers (assuming Scherzer’s mechanics make him a reliever, which I think will happen)… I’m up for it.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 30
Well
I do like E-Jack, and he has great potential in his career i beilieve, but were rebuilding..So whatever. Hopefulyl they make smart use of the $$$ next season. At least if we keep losing, tickets on Stubhub will be getting cheaper. Ha Ha.
2011 Season tickets here i come! Anyone wanna go in?
Freeze it..and make a popsicle
Great trade for the dbacks
Cut the cost of Edwin Jackson and get a replacement who is more than capable of doing the job. Hudson is very a nice get
by SeanMillerSavior on Jul 30, 2010 1:11 PM EDT reply actions
Another Hudson! Great!
This makes my Xmas gift list much easier — jerseys for Jim Hudson, Brendan Hudson….
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base. ~Dave Barry
Now
it’s officially summer.
Also, I’m glad he got traded to the Sox.
No crying in the Snakepit. That's what your apartment is for.
I'm too
busy right now to look it up, but I might later tonight:
Is Jackson the first pitcher to be traded in a season he also threw a no-hitter?
No crying in the Snakepit. That's what your apartment is for.
Still looking
But I’ve found at least three pitchers- Jim Bibby for the Rangers, Sal Maglie for the Brooklyn Dodgers, and Don Cardwell for the Cubs- who were traded and then threw no-hitters. Cardwell was traded from the Cardinals, and then pitched a no-hitter in his first start, against the Cardinals.
"It's a fez. I'm wearing a fez now. Fezes are cool."
Found another
Lefty Chambers pitched a no-hitter in May 1951 for Pittsburgh, and then went to St. Louis. He had 8 walks in his no-hitter, too.
"It's a fez. I'm wearing a fez now. Fezes are cool."
By adding Holmberg
the DBacks now have 8 of the 1st 71 picks from the 2009 draft BTW.
Gotta
collect ’em all!
No crying in the Snakepit. That's what your apartment is for.
by soco on Jul 30, 2010 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I read somewhere that when we add Skaggs...
It will be 11 of the top 95 or so… Don’t know if that was accurate though.
http://letswriteanotherstorytonight.blogspot.com/
by pepperdinedevil on Jul 30, 2010 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions
And if I read the post...
I would know that’s already been stated. My apologies.
http://letswriteanotherstorytonight.blogspot.com/
by pepperdinedevil on Jul 30, 2010 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Related note:
Tim Kurkjian says that the Nats won’t trade Dunn for EJ straight up. Not really a surprise, but just wanted to put that out there.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 30
per the espn trade tracking thingy
Stephen Drew may be the next guy to go
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
this is better than the
K-Mart White sale a few weeks back.
Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Jul 30, 2010 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure if I agree with this one
If “The Colonel” is able to replicate last night’s performance more often than not, and one of the prospects turns out to be a major leaguer…then we will have gotten the better end of the deal.
people seem
a lot more “pleased” with this move than the other one.
Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Jul 30, 2010 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah,
I was thinking that we would choose KJ over Drew…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 30
supposedly the Cards
are interested, although I don’t know what they have to offer in return, I would suspect we get Ryan and who knows what else….
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
I think we should keep both Drew and KJ
Abreyu has not been all he wa supposed to be.
BTW, this reminds me of the Padres actions last yr a bit. And look at them now..They just got Tejada too.
Freeze it..and make a popsicle
Abreyu?
That’s like one of those emo-metal bands isn’t it?
Bad doormat! No stock options!
by Clefo on Jul 30, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
what?
we’re trading for the kid from the Neverending Story?
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
You mean Falcor?
"Yeah I could have been king, but maybe I already am king. Hail to the king baby." Ash from Army of Darkness
Or
the band named after the kid from the Neverending Story.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 30
well his OBP
against left handed magic casting Warlocks make this a move worth doing imho
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
Don't know much about Hudson
But I wasn’t knocked out by the numbers for either pitcher we got -4.72 and 4.64 ERAs? Are there other numbers that make these guys look good? Otherwise, we just got younger and cheaper, not necessarily better. ’
I voted “meh” because we probably wouldn’t have kept Jackson past next year anyway. But who knows what we could have gotten for him on the market – we certainly undersold Haren (IMO).
Try these
Hudson compiled a 30-13 record and 2.90 ERA in 57 games during three seasons in the White Sox organization from 2008-10. Hudson garnered Minor League Baseball’s overall Starting Pitcher of the Year honors in 2009 after going 14-5 with a 2.32 ERA (38 ER in 147.1 IP) and 166 strikeouts over 26 starts between four teams in the White Sox farm system.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
by Jim McLennan on Jul 30, 2010 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
He has a 3.67 FIP
this year in AAA. That’s pretty good.
Also, 10.38 K/9.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 30
I like this trade a lot (for not this year)
But geez look at our rotation right now. Who’s the ace? Hell, who’s the two?
Tankapaloosa indeed. We may catch the Orioles.
then I would find a new team
Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Jul 30, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Isn't it hard to watch this team,
after the Coyotes had their best year ever and the Suns almost went to the Finals. (although i don’t care about the latter)
Nice strikeout!
Hudson's Major League FIP this year is 4.26.
Edwin Jackson’s is 4.27. And their ERA’s are both bad.
How does this make the team worse?
Applying Simpsons and Star Wars quotes to Brewers discussions since 2009.
Ken Rosenthal reports
Diamondbacks are considering sending Justin Upton for George Sherrill, and the corpses of Manny Ramirez and Garret Anderson
by SeanMillerSavior on Jul 30, 2010 1:45 PM EDT reply actions
Sherrill
IS a left-handed arm so this is believable :-)
Those corpses
Have a lot of upside.
What do you think keeps BOB-sod so green?
Nah
It’s for Sherrill and two fetuses to be named later.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
by Jim McLennan on Jul 30, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh
So that’s why Manny was taking fertility drugs…
"It's a fez. I'm wearing a fez now. Fezes are cool."
by kishi on Jul 30, 2010 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
lmfao
YOU CAN PUTITONTHEBOARD YES! mercy
by yankeepanda44 on Jul 30, 2010 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Fantasy Focus fan, eh?
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
ehh..
what?
YOU CAN PUTITONTHEBOARD YES! mercy
by yankeepanda44 on Jul 30, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
“put it on the board” is something they say on the fantasy focus when they finalize a wager.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
almost enough
but we should hold out for Vin Sculley and give them Sutton and a Team Mascot as well for a 1 year supply of Dodger Dogs
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
If we're giving them Baxter,
DO IT NOW.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 30
by Jdub220 on Jul 30, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
I don’t even care about the rest of the deal.
"It's a fez. I'm wearing a fez now. Fezes are cool."
It could get worse
The Rockies get eleventh houred in as a third team and we end up with Dinger.
dude
how did we pull off this trade?
how did we undersell completely on haren? and then somehow save money by selling edwin jackson and obtain a prospect like daniel hudson at the same time?
i love trading with the white sox
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 1:56 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
This is the guy
that gave up a potential above average first baseman for a meh reliever…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
We didn't undersell with the Haren trade
even though the baseball press corps ridiculed the deal, I think they are wrong. Saunders showed what he’s capable of last night.
No,
but in relation to what we gave up in each trade, we got a better deal in this one.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
really? looks like a better haul to me.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
KLaw says:
I’ve got Holmberg > Corbin, but Skaggs is definitely the best of the four they acquired.
At the very least, they’re equal.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
okay. either way, it’s close. I’m not going to argue too hard.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
But...but...
I NEED TO ARGUE WITH SOMEONE!
Just kiddin’…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
Actually, now that you mention it...
NO I DON’T.
/disagreeingforthesakeofdisagreeing
:P
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
i think it's hard to say
hudson is closer to the majors (in the sense that he’s already in the majors)
skaggs is much farther away which has to balance out his upside somewhat
i guess the haren deal was a “better haul” but just barely, and i definitely agree, in relation to what we gave up, the edwin jackson deal is a ton better
now it really makes me wonder why we sold low on haren
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
It makes me think that these teams are less advanced than we think.
Since EJ and Haren have somewhat similar ERAs, we get similar packages, even though their peripheral stats are way different. Maybe teams aren’t totally on board with xFIP, BABIP and stats like that yet.
Or maybe it’s that KW overpays for players, and I’m overthinking it.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
This improves the team
Well…now I like the direction this has taken.. from what I’ve read about Hudson… he’s torn up the White Sox minors…and remember… ERA’s are inflated in the AL… plus he’s still a young pitcher….and under team control until at least 2016….
Professional Lurker... if you see this, there may be a problem..
it's also funny
because most of us didn’t even think we could net a prospect as good as drew storen in this trade, and at least baseball america thought hudson was better than storen lol
i love the white sox
first we get chris young then brandon allen, and now daniel hudson.
Haiku are simple,
But they often don't make sense,
Refrigerator.
well, we did hand them quentin.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
Who cares if he was a beast for only one year? We traded him away for a tiny piece to throw Oakland’s way in the Haren deal. I was all on board that Haren deal when it happened, but I’m the first to say right now that deal was a disaster. A total disaster. We could have Upton, CarGo, and Quentin all on our team not to mention Anderson — and Eveland is a decent piece too .
And, by the way, Quentin has had one beastly year, one down year and now a good bounce back year (839 OPS). And he’s 27 years old! Sure he has injury issues, but he’s a guy you want on your club. Period.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
Chris Carter was not a throw away.
Also, even with his .839 OPS, Quentin is still below replacement level.
Tells you something about his defense…
He’s worst in the AL among OFers in WAR.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
if Chris Carter wasn’t a throw away that only emphasizes what an obscene deal the Haren deal was.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
No it doesn't.
CarGo was considered a really risky prospect then, and Anderson wasn’t as great a prospect as he became.
Hindsight is 20/20…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
like I said… I liked the trade at the time. But the whole point of hindsight is that you can look back and point to something and say “Ha! I was right” (whenever I’m feeling low, I just thik of Dan Uggla)… and other times you have to swallow your pride and say “Wrong, wrong, wrong. I was dead wrong.” There’s nothing to say about the Haren trade than that we were dead freaking wrong. DEAD WRONG.
CarGo+Anderson+Carter+cash >>>>>>>>>> Haren
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
i think you have to draw a difference between
a trade that worked out well
versus the right decision
the trade to obtain worked out poorly. however, i can see why it may have been a right decision. our trading away haren is a terrible decision. doesn’t mean it doesn’t have the small chance at working out well
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Barring a catrastrophic injury, the two to me are synonymous. Making the right decision on Wall Street doesn’t mean that MSNBC and CNN’s money people laud your move it means that in the end you make money. Likewise, making the right decision in baseball means that in the long run you come out the winner. The Cardinals choosing Albert Pujols with their thirteenth round pick in 2000 did not merely “work out well.” It was, also, the right decision.
Obviously, we can only conjecture, then, the relation in these trades between “the right decision” and it “working out well,” but hey, that’s what we do as fans. And if, in the end, Skaggs is an ace, then I will happily eat my words and bow before the all powerful DiPoto.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
the two are not synonymous
making right decisions means you make decisions that maximize the chance of your team succeeding in the long run
any particular trade that works out well is subject to random probabalistic events that decision-makers are (mostly) not in control of
right decisions are evaluated prior to the decision being made. “working out well” is an end evaluation
think of it this way. if i’m an owner and i want to hire a GM, i could care less if the trades he made happened to work out well. on the other hand, i care very much if he made the right decision at the time of the trade, because that’s more prescriptive of his future success. otherwise, i’d just make trades using a random name generator, and every so often i’ll get lucky and most of the other times i’ll be a laughingstock
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions
we’re going to have to agree to disagree. the whole point of a GM’s job is to project players and move them based on their comparable worth. if DiPoto is a genius and he really knows that the most valuable pieces he could have gotten were Skaggs et al even though there were other offers on the table that were perceived to have higher value, then he needs to pull the trigger, public reaction be damned. Being right in the end, is the only thing.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
i think we might have some confusion in our debate...
let me draw you two imaginary scenarios
GM 1 trades Dan Haren for Joe Saunders
GM 2 trades Dan Haren for Stephen Strasburg
for argument’s sake, let’s say (no freak injury) that saunders has 25% chance at generating 10 WAR, 25% chance at generating 2 WAR, and 50% chance at generating 6 WAR
strasburg has a 25% chance at generating 12 WAR, 25% chance at generating 4 WAR, and 50% chance at generating 8 WAR
i’m pretty sure no one in their right mind would suggest, a priori, that GM 1 made a better decision than GM 2
now let’s say, over the course of the trade (and just assume for arguments sake for the same price over the same time), Joe Saunders generates 8 WAR, and Stephen Strasburg generates 6 WAR
the outcomes have dictated that the Saunders trade worked out better than the Strasburg trade
however, which GM would you RATHER have running your team?
that’s my argument for why i think it’s important to evaluate what decisions are right and wrong AT THE TIME the decision (trade, FA, etc) is made
of course, regardless of the decision made, as a fan, i always hope the trade turns out well. but just because we get lucky once on a trade doesn’t mean our decision making is right, and it is right decision making that will build a winner in the long run
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It wasn't a bad trade.
Oakland got 8.8 WAR out of all the pieces related to the Haren trade so far: Anderson, CarGo, and Matt Holliday. Meanwhile, we.13.1 WAR out Haren… and a prospect compared to Anderson. Also, Anderson is the only player in the trade still with the A’s, so he’s the only one that will provide value to the A’s. Also, while Carter wasn’t a throw in, he’s still a future DH, which we don’t have in the NL.
Even disregarding that, the point of trades is to sacrifice long term value for added short term value. You shouldn’t expect Haren to match the eventual value of the prospects (which he did anyways).
The only way you can say that trade was bad was if you saw the Haren trade as a win now move, (which you should) and since we didn’t win, it was a fail.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
seriously, JDub. I can’t believe you can’t admit this was a bad trade at this point in time (and the fact that CarGo doesn’t play for Oakland is a total red herring… that was their decision, not ours).
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
It
wasn’t considered a bad trade at that point in time. It was actually considered a “quantity over quality” trade…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
sure it wasn’t considered a bad trade at the time (I was on board that it was a good trade (how many times do I need to reiterate this). But the point is that over time it will NOT be a good trade. We traded for a piece to WIN NOW. And what did we do? We LOST NOW. So whatever value we netted from the trade was totally flushed and now the players who are peaking in value are lost to us.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
I can't have this discussion with you,
because you can’t understand that you can’t look at these trades in hindsight. Josh Byrnes didn’t have a crystal ball to tell him that we wouldn’t contend…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
The whole point of a GM is to construct a team who can contend in a certain window. Byrnes has no one to blame but himself that the team didn’t contend.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
We contended in 2007,
so why would he think that we couldn’t in 2008?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
B/C our run differential was horrible in 2007. We were a lucky club. And if he really wanted to compete in 2008 he needed to dramatically improve the club.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
How better to improve the run differential,
than to get one of the best pitchers in baseball?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
How about not count on Eric Byrnes on being the cornerstone of your offense.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
He did have
two seasons in a row above 3 WAR, so why not?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
I know,
about the Pythag record and whatnot, but what did you expect JB to do after an NLCS appearance? Not try to take the team further?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
He needed to either put all of the chips in (and REALLY go for it in 2008 and beyond) or realize that 2007 was a mirage and he needed to wait out the public frenzy and put together a sustainable future for the club.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
He did put all the chips in.
What do you think the Haren trade was?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
he should have realized he didn’t have an offense. he needed some bats to go along with Haren if he wanted to compete.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
I'm pretty sure
he expected a better offense with the improvement of the RF spot (Upton), Young, Drew, and a full season of Reynolds.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
yeah
but there’s definitely a legitimate argument to be made that he overestimated our offensive abilities
especially since our defense was pretty bad i think (compared to now)
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I have to say
The reasons the team didn’t contend had nothing to do with the Haren trade. Haren was a great pitcher for us in 2008 and 2009. The reasons we didn’t contend were things like Webb getting injured, Eric Byrnes tanking it, etc.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
by Jim McLennan on Jul 30, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Byrnes: exhibit one of bad decisions. Anyone who thought Byrnes WOULDN’T tank it was smoking something.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
So you expected
EB to go from a 3.5 WAR player to getting injured and then becoming below replacement level?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
when his career war #s go like this and he was 31? absolutely:
0.2
0
1.6
3.3
0.3
0.6
0.0
-0.3
3.3
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
Actually,
it went:
3.3
.3
3.3
3.7
It isn’t fair to include 2000-03, because he was a part time player.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
the 3.7 was the year he signed the deal…
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
and the part time player should count against him b/c he played himself into that position.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
No he didn't.
They had a pretty set outfield of Terrence Long, Johnny Damon, and Jermaine Dye. Also, they were a contending team that didn’t really have time to try out players.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
I hope deep down you realize how crazy the position you’re taking here, is…. that a guy who had piddly production for most of his career shouldn’t have one of his years of piddly production count against him because he wasn’t good enough to beat out Terrence Long for a job.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
I certainly didn't think
He’d suddenly figured it out at age 32. Too much of his value was based on his speed e.g. base-running and defense and that is the first skill to go as a player ages. Paying based on a career year is never a good idea.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
by Jim McLennan on Jul 30, 2010 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah...
i think you are probably right
we probably shouldn’t have tried to contend in 2008. that may have been optimistic thinking on the FO’s part.
still, i blame the owners more than JB
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions
And if you want to consider
just Anderson and CarGo… that makes it 9.3 WAR.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
You’re not factoring in the years of production to come from those players as well as the price difference.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
i would still argue
bad outcome, not necessarily bad decision (i’d have to do more research on the stats of the trade pieces at the time…)
all you can ever ask of your FO is that they make good decisions. you shouldn’t blame them for outcomes
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s crazy talk. For years Sabean was hailed as the be-all, end-all of GMs, a brilliant young mind, blah, blah blah…. but if his decisions netted nothing (which they did) then those naysayers (like myself) are proven right, ESPN and FoxSports and every other pundit who thought the decisions were “smart” don’t mean a darned thing.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
most people who criticize Sabean now
criticize him from the standpoint of wrong decisionmaking AT THE TIME of the decision
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions
that’s what i’m saying: there was honest disagreement about his decisions at the time. some of us happened to be right (I was there in that group) and others (ESPN et al) happened to be wrong. two opinions… only time proved out who was right and who was wrong.
conversely (just to make sure i’m firmly under the bus on this one), many of us thought the Haren trade was brilliant at the time (count me in) and others disagreed. Those who disagreed (IMHO) have been proven right.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
i could be wrong about the haren trade
maybe over the long run, it is bad to take gambles like we did on the haren trade
though, by your argument, we can’t even debate about the haren trade, because we flipped that for prospects that have yet to show what they are capable of
my major point is still: do not evaluate decisions based on their outcomes. even if skaggs turns out to be a cy young winner one day, haren’s trade was the wrong DECISION. we just got lucky that we hit the jackpot, we were bailed out.
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions
couldn’t. agree. more.
but ESPN slobbered all over him in the early 2000’s.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
yes but ESPN is stupid
there are better analysts out there, whose opinions are much more qualified
sorry, my long reply post is way back up there…
in any case, i’m just saying don’t blame the FO for decisions that turned out bad, even though they had a strong likelihood of success, and do blame the FO for decisions that, even if they turn out good, were incorrect at the time of the decision-making
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Read:
Even disregarding that, the point of trades is to sacrifice long term value for added short term value. You shouldn’t expect Haren to match the eventual value of the prospects (which he did anyways).
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
But those players have years of value to come. Haren doesn’t. So, no, his long term value will not match theirs.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
Read it again.
Even disregarding that, the point of trades is to sacrifice long term value for added short term value.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
Read what I said below:
“the reason I say the trade was bad was because we got Haren to win now and were completely wrong.”
If we would have won then my point is moot: who cares about long term value when you’ve maximized a short term window. But we didn’t win. And so the trade was a bad one.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
Oh my God.
This is going in circles…
YOU CAN’T SEE INTO THE FUTURE.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
and yes, the reason I say the trade was bad was because we got Haren to win now and were completely wrong. If we would have won, then that 13.1 wAR would have meant something. At is is… it meant nothing.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
So
you expect Josh Byrnes to have the ability to see into the future? Okay then…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
What’s the point of a GM if not to construct a team to compete in a given window? It’s called projecting, not seeing into the future… and if you’re good at it then you’re a good GM and if you’re not, well, then you’re out of a job.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
Fine,
why wouldn’t he project us to be winners in 2008? We were in 2007.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
Because if he was intelligent he should have seen that the ship that floated in 2007 wasn’t a ship with plenty of holes that definitely wasn’t taking us to the promised land.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
i can sort of support this argument
however, you probably shouldn’t blame JB for this
it is more likely the fact that you HAVE to try to contend in 2008 because of how well we did in 2007 (public perception) and the owners meddled in handing eric byrnes a fatty contract
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
i apologize to everyone for bringing this subject up.
once again, my sincerest apologies…
Haiku are simple,
But they often don't make sense,
Refrigerator.
Beautiful move.
They just dealt a pricey #3/4 starter for a young, cost controlled guy who may actually be better than Jackson NOW. Plus they got another prospect.
I love this.
by CaptainCanuck on Jul 30, 2010 3:00 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Amazing!
Great trade. This is exactly the kind of trade I am hoping we replicate a few more times in the next 24 hours. A great haul for a guy who just isn’t that great.
This trading deadline has seriously been a bizarro world experience. It’s made me think that the state of finances in the game is has taken a more radical shift than we ever could have anticipated. Teams are literally mortiphied to take on any kind of money whatsoever. When we get basically the same haul for a pitcher who has been a top five pitcher over the last five years and one who has had one above average season in the past five years you know things are screwy. But even though the money for Haren seems (and I think is) reasonable, I think teams are just completely sheepish to take on any contracts whatsoever.
The strange thing is that I think this “Rays effect” (I think most teams really began radically adopting the strategy of protecting their young players after the Rays made their WS appearance two years ago) is actually making it a prime time for teams to shift their strategy back the other way.
When else could you pick up players like Oswalt and Haren for the bargain basement prices their going for? I think if you’re a really savvy club you take advantage of this market and go for it, even if your team is a fringe playoff club (e.g. the Mets, Dodgers, Tigers).
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
lol
i would almost suggest releasing joe saunders, completely tanking next year, and using it to figure out which parts of our young pitching are usable for 2012 and beyond
It’s funny, but kind of true. Saunders is only going to steal innings next year from someone. Seriously, I would have much prefered another prospect in the deal than Saunders. As JDub has said before, I really think we only took Saunders as a way to “pay” the Angels back part of Haren’s contract.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
I'm not sure
We have any more major-league ready prospects after Jarrod Parker. And besides, teams usually end up using at least eight or nine starters over the course of a season. There’ll be plenty of starts to go around, I think – but I wouldn’t be surprised if Saunders is traded again.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
by Jim McLennan on Jul 30, 2010 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah...
my expectation is that we’ll try to trade saunders next year
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions
This makes me madder about the Haren trade.
If Jackson is worth 2 fairly close prospects then Haren is worth more than Saunders, a journeyman and one high A guy and one low A guy.
No Gutierrez, Sherlock!
by Reynolds rapper on Jul 30, 2010 4:29 PM EDT reply actions
I think he meant "a future journeyman,"
but +1 to his post.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
I meant "journeyman"
in the sense of “not a prospect”, “not a real major leaguer”. I guess the better term would have been a “Gutierrez”.
No Gutierrez, Sherlock!
by Reynolds rapper on Aug 2, 2010 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Actually, it is the classic meaning of journeyman.
As a term of art in a union, a journeyman is a lesser craftsman who is not an apprentice and not a master.
No Gutierrez, Sherlock!
by Reynolds rapper on Aug 2, 2010 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions
You know, there are Angels fans that think they gave up to much.
For the record, I disagree, but I thought I would throw that out.
Nice strikeout!
So when does Hudson start?
He was the Sox probable today.
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like mouth?
The cool Snakepit.
Also
Five years down the road, barring trades, what will our rotation look like? Parker/Skaggs/Hudson/Kennedy/Corbin?
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like mouth?
The cool Snakepit.
it's true we're going to have a ton of options
essentially the best five of
parker/skaggs/hudson/kennedy/corbin/brewer/anderson/miley/enright/collmenter/taylor/smith blah blah blah
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions
To be honest this trade makes me very sad but I still love it.
Williams is desperate for Dunn and Williams thought he needed Ejack to get the deal done. So Dipoto took him to the cleaners and we got two top prospects for a guy who has an ERA over 5.
I am Angry and when BattleMoses is angry Mr. Bigglesworth is upset,and when Mr. Bigglesworth is upset people DIE!!!!!!!!!
I wouldn't quite say we took him to the cleaners
but I’m very pleased with the deal. Ejack’s not horrid, but he certainly wasn’t in our “future”, and I’ve liked Hudson since he was called up by the Sox. No idea who this Holmberg fellow is (past Jim’s writeup), but hey, it’s only icing.
Now, when do we deal Snydes/Qualls/Droo/KJ/LaRoche? :D
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like mouth?
The cool Snakepit.
and yeah
i wouldn’t say we took him to the cleaners completely
i like hudson’s stats, but scouts seem to question his stuff
by blue bulldog on Jul 30, 2010 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I say we would didnt we get two of their top 10 prospects.
I would consider that taking him to the cleaners. I mean chances are they are just gonna flip him to the Nats anyway.
I am Angry and when BattleMoses is angry Mr. Bigglesworth is upset,and when Mr. Bigglesworth is upset people DIE!!!!!!!!!
Our starting 5 the rest of the season is:
(in order)
Saunders
Kennedy
Lopez
Enright
Hudson
Will Kennedy get shut down at 150 – 175 IP? If so, look for Mulvey to get a callup.
Kennedy is already getting limited,
so yes, he will be shut down.
I think we call up someone other than Mulvey, though.
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
Possibly Benson?
He was supposed to be getting closer to returning.
Or Webb. (Hold for bitter, disappointed laughter.)
"It's a fez. I'm wearing a fez now. Fezes are cool."
/bitter, disappointed laughter
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like mouth?
The cool Snakepit.
I can't imagine a scenario
where Webb is in Sedona Red next year, unless he proves he’s fit to play and signs for a cut rate.
+1
And even if Webb came back, why would you waste a rotation spot on him? Why not test out some pitcher in the minor leagues?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
because webb at 75% is better than any minor league pitcher.
full-strength of course.
Haiku are simple,
But they often don't make sense,
Refrigerator.
It doesn't matter.
This season is lost anyways. Why not make it a tryout?
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 31
i got a fever
and the only prescription is more trades! Johnson, LaRoche, Qualls, Snyder, step right up. More trades, baby!
“Don’t get off the boat unless you’re going all the way.” — Col. Willard
Go Sedona Red
How does this move now impact your thinking....
On the Kennedy/Jackson for Mad Max and Schlereth trade this summer?
Time for another drink then?
http://www.wimbles.wordpress.com
Trades
I like it!! I hope they give Gibby some young kids to mold and will learn from. Listen & learn boys K.G has lots to give.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
