Within a span of 48 hours both the Cubs, with the acquisition of Rich Harden, and the Brew Crew, with the acquisition of CC Sabathia, have gotten serious.
I like the Brew Crew's move best. Almost no one deals better than CC Sabathia when he's on his game. Trust me -- I've watched him dominate the White Sox for years (and he does have the hardware - a Cy Young Award - to prove it). Think Johan Santana, but with more velocity. Sabathia has not pitched up to his own standards this year (a contract year), which partly explains why the pre-season World Series contender Indians have not lived up to expectations. The Brewers assumed some risk in this situation, because who knows if he will return to form or not. Despite this, however, I like the acquisition because he has proven he can deal, and lefties who dominate night after night are tough to find.
The Cubs' move reeks of desperation. I'm sure all of Cubdom is currently rejoicing the latest chapter in this magical Cubbie season, but the deal seemed to happen too fast. Did the Cubs give up to much?
Think of it like this: Harden is damaged goods (ALWAYS be wary of a pitcher that spends a lot of time on the disabled list). Athletics general manager Billy Beane's reputation is that of a shrewd evaluator of talent, and this should tell us two things:
1) Beane's not keen on Harden's future
2) the Cubs have prospects he covets
That Beane pulled the trigger on the trade so quickly tells me the Cubs may have put way too much on the table considering Harden and his damaged goods status.
(If you doubt Beane's ability to spot treasure in another man's trash, refer to the careers of former White Sox stars Keith Foulke and Frank Thomas.)
Now the Cubs will wait and see if Beane stuck them with a lemon, or if Beane underestimated Harden's remaining useful life as a pitcher.
I give the edge to the Brew Crew. Maybe I have a skewed perspective because of my anti-Cubs bias, but I will always take a Cy Young Award winning left hander over a starting pitcher who has thrown 277 innings in the last four years.
Or, if Sabathia and Harden handle the AL to NL transition the way Johan Santana handled it, they'll both suck.
All I can say is good riddance to the both of ya! And don't come back to the AL again!
One other thought ...
I'm wondering out loud why the Red Sox and Cubs don't play the All-Star game. MLB could market the game as the preview of the Greatest World Series to Ever be Played and sell loads of merchandise to commemorate the historic occasion.
2 comments:
It's not as if it's a secret who the Cubs gave up. They sent Matt Murton, Eric Patterson, Sean Gallagher, and a AA catcher who is hitting .216. Gallagher is an OK middle-to-end-of-the-rotation guy or bullpen righty. So is Chad Gaudin. So essentially, the trade comes down to Harden for Murton/Patterson/Donaldson. Of the guys the Cubs gave up, I think Murton has the most potential. He definitely fits the Beane-coveted stereotype: not very athletic, but gets on base, and is young enough that he could develop power. But with Soriano and Fukudome locked in at the corner OF positions, Murton has more value to the Cubs as trade fodder than as a player. Patterson hasn't looked all that great at the MLB level. The catcher could be just dandy, but Geo Soto seems to have the Cubs' catching position locked down for a while. In any event, it's odd to make a post about how the move reeks of desperation without even mentioning any of the guys the Cubs sent to Oakland.
So, it seems to me that the trade was a good value for the Cubs. Obviously, Harden's injury history was taken into account. If you look at Harden's career stats, he would be considered one of the best pitchers in baseball if it weren't for his injury history. If Harden were putting up his career numbers and had started 30+ games a year for the last four years, the Cubs never would have gotten him for what they gave up. They didn't give up nearly what Milwaukee had to give up for CC.
I'm sure Beane likes some things about the players he got. That's how trades work. But your observation about the "speed" of thr trade is based on a false premise. All indications are that the two teams had been talking for some time.
John ... my false premise was based on a Buster Olney report that was published on ESPN.com.
Even if the trade weren't rushed, I still stand by the spirit of the post, which was to wonder if the Cubs took on too much risk with Harden given his injury history. Those players could not have landed CC Sabathia, but could they have landed a pitcher who may not have the stuff that Harden has (which, btw, he does have nasty stuff) but could add more value to a long pennant chase because of increased reliability and durability? I don't know for sure, but I can't help but wonder.
Post a Comment