That’s a Load of Beane
by Ken Arneson
2008-07-11 7:22

I’ve poured through all the analysis I could find about the Harden deals, and I still don’t like it emotionally. But there’s a major point that I haven’t seen being made on the rational side of the ledger, so I’ll make it here. I’ll begin with a quote from the San Jose Mercury News:

Asked if dealing Harden might lead to more trades involving players such as Joe Blanton or Huston Street, Beane responded: " ‘No’ is probably the quickest answer." But he added: "I think you have to look at (possible deals) independently."

That’s a load of bull. Beane may make his deals one at a time, but that doesn’t mean he looks at his deals in isolation. He looks at them as to how it affects the team as a whole, and what kind of flexibility it gives him in the future. Which brings us to the missing point: the A’s are saving quite a bit of money in this trade over the next year and a half:

2008 (remaining)
Harden: $2.25 million
Gaudin: $0.87 million
Total: $3.00 million

2009 (estimated)
Harden: $7.00 million
Gaudin: $2.50 million
Total: $9.50 million

Combined: $12.50 million

Gallagher and Murton and Patterson will make about $1 million or so between them, which makes about $11 million or so that can be spent on something besides an extremely injury-prone starter and a mop-up man in the pen. Perhaps $4 million of it has already been spent on Michael Inoa–a younger, hopefully healther Rich Harden for the future. And perhaps the rest of that money can be spent on extending Mark Ellis or Justin Duchscherer. Perhaps you and I wouldn’t trade Harden and Gaudin for Gallagher, Patterson, Murton and Donaldson. But if you think of the deal as including Inoa plus an extra year or two of Mark Ellis, the trade looks a lot better, doesn’t it?

If you figure the A’s are unlikely to make the playoffs in 2008, and you want to load up for 2009, who would you rather have: Harden and Gaudin, or Gallagher and Ellis?

Comments: 3
1.   dianagramr
2008-07-11 09:20

1.  Yes, the Harden deal may irk some folks who think the A's were still in it for '08. But a closer look at their record gives one pause.

Going into today's action they are 50-42. However, they have already played 52 home games, and their last three before the break will also be at home (with the Angels). That will leave them just 26 home games (versus 39 road games) after the break.

They are 30-22 (.577) at home and 20-20 (.500) on the road. Let's project that out the rest of the way.

Home = 81*.577 = 46.7 (47) wins
Road = 81*.500 = 40.5 (41) wins

So, would 88 wins nail down the Wild Card? Would it catch the Angels?

Maybe Beane thought not?

2.   Tom Meagher
2008-07-11 12:15

2.  1 Perhaps it should be noted that 2/3 of Harden's 2008 innings were at home, as well. (And he did give up one more run on the road than at home.)

3.   For The Turnstiles
2008-07-11 12:53

3.  While I'm always in favor of Beane spending whatever budget the owners grant him as wisely as possible, I'm having a hard time getting excited about cost savings as the upside to a trade that, at least in the short term, seems to weaken the team. Major league payroll was already down about $25 million compared to last year, which suggests that there was already ample money in the budget to sign Inoa, and maybe keep Ellis around.

My first thought about what this trade would mean for Ellis was, in fact, exactly the opposite of yours: it seems likely to me that Eric Patterson will be the starting shortstop for the 2009 A's. I sure hope that I'm wrong and you're right on that point.

Comments on this post are closed.
This is Ken Arneson's blog about baseball, brains, art, science, technology, philosophy, poetry, politics and whatever else Ken Arneson feels like writing about
Original Sites
Recent Posts
Contact Ken
Twitter

LinkedIn

Email: Replace the first of the two dots in this web site's domain name with an @.
Google Search
Web
Toaster
Ken Arneson
Archives
2021
01   

2020
10   09   08   07   06   05   
04   

2019
11   

2017
08   07   

2016
06   01   

2015
12   11   03   02   

2014
12   11   10   09   08   04   
03   01   

2013
12   10   08   07   06   05   
04   01   

2012
12   11   10   09   04   

2011
12   11   10   09   08   07   
04   02   01   

2010
10   09   06   01   

2009
12   02   01   

2008
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2007
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2006
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2005
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2004
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2003
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2002
12   10   09   08   07   05   
04   03   02   01   

1995
05   04   02