Cubs Acquire Rich Harden

[joshnky]

This and the CC trade are good news for the Reds if they want to trade Arroyo. It takes two of the big names off the market while taking buyers off the market that the Reds would not have wanted to trade with. If Arroyo can string together a couple more quality starts he might be able to net a decent hall in mid to late June when teams start scrambling for pitching.

[guttle11]

Originally Posted by NC Reds

Wow. Oakland got a bag of beans. I don't get it.

Simple, Beane thinks Harden is either done as a top of the rotation guy, or his arm is about to explode like Mulder's. He can't see all that much in Murton, Gallagher, and Patterson. He's dumping before it hits the fan, in his mind.

[redsfan4445]

i look forward to the day the REDS add a big name near the deadline to help the team try for the playoffs.. sucks every year others get to do this and we Reds fans have to just sigh..!!

[OnBaseMachine]

Originally Posted by redsfan4445

i look forward to the day the REDS add a big name near the deadline to help the team try for the playoffs.. sucks every year others get to do this and we Reds fans have to just sigh..!!

Yep. It's a great feeling when your team is in the playoff hunt and makes a deal for a big name playoff to help push the team over the top. I remember getting excited in 1999 when the Reds acquired Juan Guzman from the Orioles to help bolster the rotation, which he did.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by reds44

Matt Murton is an awful defender, but he is definatley a player you knew Beane would get in return.

The fielding bible suggests Murton was one of the best defensive left fielders in the majors from '05 thru '07. PMR to runs and UZR also support the notion that he was above average as well.

The biggest issue with him defensively is a weak arm.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Well then, I take back what I said and replace it with 'Better job than I thought at first Billy Beane. Gallagher is not a bad pitcher at all.

Ya. I like what he did for the As.

[Reds Fanatic]

Originally Posted by Joseph

Will he start against us in this series?

No the Reds will miss Harden this time. Pinella says he will start in the San Francisco series this weekend.

[red-in-la]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Well then, I take back what I said and replace it with 'Better job than I thought at first Billy Beane. Gallagher is not a bad pitcher at all.

Gee Doug, seems like the target you were shooting at this last spring has moved a bit.

This is why competing NEVER means waiting. THis is not an attempt to revitalize the trade debate we wore out in March, just an I told you so.

[Spring~Fields]

Originally Posted by red-in-la

This is why competing NEVER means waiting.

What's that mean ?

[IslandRed]

Originally Posted by guttle11

Something has to be up with Harden. Beane wouldn't dump him for peanuts if there isn't something under the surface.

I guess we can debate the return, but it's not a big secret why they'd be willing to move Harden: He's about to get expensive (always a factor for the A's) and his injury history suggests he can't be counted on.

[red-in-la]

Originally Posted by Spring~Fields

What's that mean ?

We went through debate without end in March/Feb over whether the Reds should trade prospects for Eric Bedard.

The argument against was Bedard was a rental while the Reds kids would be stars for years to come. Basically, it was, no trade, wait until 2009 0r 2010 to compete.

I said without end that the rest of the division wouldn't sit still and let the Reds catch them.......fell on deaf ears. I lost.

And it isn't intended as a real I told you so, just a ribbing to Doug and a reminder that the next time, the Reds need to strike while the iron is hot......the guy ahead of them have just show how, yet again.

[OnBaseMachine]

Originally Posted by red-in-la

We went through debate without end in March/Feb over whether the Reds should trade prospects for Eric Bedard.

The argument against was Bedard was a rental while the Reds kids would be stars for years to come. Basically, it was, no trade, wait until 2009 0r 2010 to compete.

I said without end that the rest of the division wouldn't sit still and let the Reds catch them.......fell on deaf ears. I lost.

And it isn't intended as a real I told you so, just a ribbing to Doug and a reminder that the next time, the Reds need to strike while the iron is hot......the guy ahead of them have just show how, yet again.

So you still think the Reds should have traded Jay Bruce and Johnny Cueto for Erik Bedard? A two year rental who is having a solid but not great season and has been injured twice already. That trade would have set the Reds back another five years.

[Spring~Fields]

Originally Posted by red-in-la

I said without end that the rest of the division wouldn't sit still and let the Reds catch them.......fell on deaf ears. I lost.

Even though you were and are right,

Thank you.

Sometimes people forget what they already know.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by red-in-la

We went through debate without end in March/Feb over whether the Reds should trade prospects for Eric Bedard.

The argument against was Bedard was a rental while the Reds kids would be stars for years to come. Basically, it was, no trade, wait until 2009 0r 2010 to compete.

I said without end that the rest of the division wouldn't sit still and let the Reds catch them.......fell on deaf ears. I lost.

And it isn't intended as a real I told you so, just a ribbing to Doug and a reminder that the next time, the Reds need to strike while the iron is hot......the guy ahead of them have just show how, yet again.

I wasn't part of that debate, but that wasn't what it was about. I don't think anyone will argue that other competing teams are going to try hard to make some moves to go forward. So if your point was that the Brewers and Cubs would explore moves like this, then I really don't get it. The Cubs have been making these types of significant moves for quite a while.

The debate was about whether the Reds were good enough to compete if they grabbed a Bedard or a Blanton. Considering where we are right now, I'm going to say no, when considering the likes of Bruce, Cueto, Votto were the types of guys being targeted. To get Bedard, Bruce wouldn't be here. To get Blanton, Cueto wouldn't be here. Honestly, I doubt we would be any better right now (when considering the performances we have got from the young guys), which would firmly put as a non-competing team. Yet at the same time, we give away our best building blocks that have proven that they can play significant roles right now. The only big piece that is faltering right now is Bailey. The other 3 are far more valuable than the target players. And it would have taken at least 2 to make a deal. The young guys have grossly outperformed your expectations for them.

I think all hindsight has told us is that posters like Doug who thought holding on to Votto/Cueto rather than making an ill timed attempt to contend were right. We will be better in the future because of it, and sacrificed little in the now. Bedard quite simply would not have made us a legit contender. If we didn't have the likes of Votto, Cueto, and Bruce right now, there would be basically zero hope for the future.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by red-in-la

Gee Doug, seems like the target you were shooting at this last spring has moved a bit.

This is why competing NEVER means waiting. THis is not an attempt to revitalize the trade debate we wore out in March, just an I told you so.

I can honestly say I have no clue what you are talking about.