• Heyman: A’s Willing To Deal Haren

    Posted by on November 30th, 2007 · Comments (7)

    From Jon Heyman:

    The A’s have contacted at least the Mets, Yankees and Red Sox — three teams that also have showed interest in Santana — about [Dan] Haren, who was 15-9 with a 3.07 ERA in 2007.

    Oakland is believed to have its sights on one or more of the Yankees’ three top young pitchers — Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy.

    Well, it won’t be Joba. And, I doubt that the A’s would take Kennedy, one-up, for Haren.

    If you’re the A’s, do you take Phil Hughes, one-up, for Haren? If you’re the Yankees, do you trade Hughes, one-up, for Haren? I think the answer to both could be “Maybe yes.”

    Comments on Heyman: A’s Willing To Deal Haren

    1. Pete
      November 30th, 2007 | 1:51 pm

      Kennedy and a couple of prospects for Haren, perhaps?

    2. baileywalk
      November 30th, 2007 | 2:10 pm

      According to the article, the A’s want an outfielder from the the Sox and the Mets. So wouldn’t they want an outfielder in this deal too? I would assume if the Haren trade went down, it would have to be Kennedy, Melky, and maybe Tabata or Austin Jackson.

      The funny thing about a Hughes/Haren trade is that I think Hughes IS Haren. I think Haren is a good comp for who Phil will be. Haren pounds the strikezone with his four-seamer, which he has great control of. His splitter is comparable to Phil’s curveball. I think Phil might have a better third and fourth pitch, but they do remind me of each other in the way they use their fastballs.

      If the A’s would be willing to take Kennedy, Melky, a high-level prospect and a lower-level prospect for Haren, I would do it in a second and forget all about Santana. Because if you could do that, even if Pettitte retired, the rotation would still be amazingly young and cheap: Haren, Wang, Hughes, Chamberlain, Moose. (Yeah, Moose isn’t cheap or young, but four out of five ain’t bad.)

    3. baileywalk
      November 30th, 2007 | 2:24 pm

      By the way, at the end of the article it says “The Yankees appear willing to form a package for Santana that includes Kennedy and young center fielder Melky Cabrera, but they’ve been resistant to date to substitute Hughes for Cabrera. While the Yankees have made Chamberlain untouchable, the Twins may be holding out at least for Hughes, the second-rated young Yankees pitcher.”

      One, it’s good to know the Yankees don’t want to part with Hughes. Bravo. But I wonder if it’s simply a typo when he writes “substitute Hughes for *Cabrera*.” If it’s not a mistake, that means the Twins want Kennedy AND Hughes. I wouldn’t make that deal, because with Pettitte potentially retiring, the rotation is very thin.

    4. butchie22
      November 30th, 2007 | 6:00 pm

      If the Yanks can get Haren for Hughes,so be it.He is cheap , he is good , and let the moneyball Sox pay 25 million for a 6 plus ERA at Fenway pitcher(and lefthanders who are unusually weak at Fenway) who is not dominant in the postseason.Let them sew that up and see Theo and Lucchino cringe and let financial restraint out the window.I can’t wait for Lucchino and Theo to get him.Everybody claims that they have every World Series sewn up for the next 5 years.I dunno not with Toronto’s 1-12 featuring the one two punch of Doc and Burnett.And if the Yankees can get back Pettite or land Haren,nothing is assured for the Red Sox.

    5. Ference
      November 30th, 2007 | 6:11 pm

      If there is a way to get Haren, Bedard or Santana with only having to give up Kennedy, Melky and prospects you have to do it no questions asked. The fact is IPK and Melky arent untouchable by any means. It would be a monumental upset to acquire any of the three I mentioned above for Kennedy and Melky, you know, sort of like being able to get Pedro for Pavano and Armas or Schilling for Fossum and Lyon. Hopefully, for once, we will get handed a stud starter who will lead us to a championship.

    6. Rich
      November 30th, 2007 | 7:23 pm

      I wouldn’t trade Hughes for Santana or Haren even up, but according to Olney, Hank may be about to blink.

    7. baileywalk
      November 30th, 2007 | 8:10 pm

      Trading Hughes for Haren is pointless. You’d be giving up what you’re getting back, only the thing you’d be getting back was older and more expensive. You only go after Haren if you can get him without giving up Hughes. If Kennedy/Melky/Tabata/someone else gets you Haren, it would be a good move. But not for Hughes.

      As this Santana trade goes on, I think it’s pretty inevitable that Hughes will be traded for him. When the Twins put the gun to the Yankees’ head and say “Hughes or no deal,” they will blink. There’s little doubt. It’s a mistake not because Santana won’t be great (at least for two more years, anyway) but because they have to sign him to a SIX-YEAR extension. That seems insane. It would be easier if he was a free agent and it was just money. But in this deal you’re giving up the best or second-best pitching prospect you have.

      You can’t argue with acquiring the best pitcher in baseball, but giving up Hughes feels like a mistake. I fully expect it to happen, though.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.