Should the Halos be interested in Rich Harden?

by feNOMINAL on Nov 8, 2009 10:51 AM PST Comment 69 comments

According to Pat Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune, and reported at Rotoworld, pitcher Rich Harden is not expected back with the Chicago Cubs for 2010.

A John Lackey fallback option is what I'm thinking...

Of course we know of the injury history, but Harden was stellar in '08 (25 GS, 2.07 ERA, 181K/148IP).

In 2009, the 27 year old made 27 starts with a 4.09 ERA. I understand he has never pitched 200 innings. Only once has he made 30 starts. 23 HR's in 141 innings seems like a lot--it is, but perhaps pitching in Anaheim could help.

The .234 BAA looks nice too...

Is this a hell no, or only at a certain price and length? And, what is that price and length?

This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.

1 recs | Comment 69 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Sure, why not?

He’s only a type B free agent, and he’ll be less expensive than Lackey. If he could give the team 150 innings / 25 starts, it’s a reasonable investment in the range of 3 years – $23m + incentives for innings pitched, ERA and wins.

by mustard_man on Nov 8, 2009 11:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

150 innings and 25 starts

Have we gotten so jaded and acceptant of injuries that we are happy to live with that. 150 innings? 25 starts? How about a starter who can pitch 220 innings and make all 33 starts.

Maybe I’m just old and a traditionalist in some ways, but I think Nolan Ryan has it right. Make your starters pitch 120-150 pitches a game. Don’t give me that crap about wearing them down. It builds them up.

If you can live with 8 starts from a minor leaguer and 70 innings from same source, then sign Harden.

by Baylorsgroove on Nov 9, 2009 4:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

He could give us

20 innings and 3 starts and he’d be worth it if he can outpitch the Sabathias and Beckett/Lester’s of the world when it actually matters (October).

by Los Angeles de Inglewood on Nov 9, 2009 5:24 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Give him a deal similar to Bobby Abreu from last year.

Otherwise, no way.

by ryanfea on Nov 8, 2009 11:47 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I might stomach this

Otherwise, I don’t know. It was fun to have Harden as a kind of joke on the A’s—well, there goes Harden with the injuries again—and I would hate to have that fun time on our team. But if he’s finally healthy, this could be good…so I’d agree that if you can get him for 1-year, maybe with a club option for a second or third year, at something like $5 million per with incentives, maybe you go for it.

RIP Nick Adenhart.

"When the Babe tries to call his shot, I hope Nick puts one in his ear."
--RallyMonkey5

by Clutch on Nov 8, 2009 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I concur, everyone this year wants to cash in on the proverbial "payday"

however, the economy shall continue to be a factor along with general fan discontent with the state of MLB.

Let the Halo power flow...mofo!

by HALO N BRIMSTONE on Nov 8, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I say hell no.

He’s had 2 pretty healthy seasons in a row. But with his history I’d expect the wheels to fall off the bus rather than continued health.

Happy Birthday to the ground!

by Monkeyspanked on Nov 8, 2009 12:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I fear for our pen

Between him, Kaz, and the possibility of an inconsistent Santana

by rghan on Nov 8, 2009 12:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Ah, good point

Hadn’t thought of that.

RIP Nick Adenhart.

"When the Babe tries to call his shot, I hope Nick puts one in his ear."
--RallyMonkey5

by Clutch on Nov 8, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Now this would be done with Ninja Magic and smoke and mirrors...

But what if Kaz becomes a center piece in a deal with Mike Napoli, Trevor Bell, and Mark Trumbo for Doc Halladay. That’d give Toronto a Starting Pitcher, a near MLB ready prospect in Bell, a 1B/3B project in Trumbo, and a power hitting catcher in Mike Napoli. Then we can sign Harden to a low risk contract heavy on incentives.

And for the record, I don’t want to trade Napoli away, but I know he’d have to be included to get Toronto to pay attention. They have a need at catcher and don’t they need a 1B/3B guy? I would also be willing to substitute Trevor Bell and Mark Trumbo for a lower pitching prospect and Brandon Wood.

RIP Nick Adenhart 4/9/09

I blog about the Angels at The Diamond Aces

by Jay Cal on Nov 9, 2009 9:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

More likely to want Saunders

Kazmir has a big contract, while Saunders is arb-eligible for the next three seasons.

Likewise, I think your deal is top-heavy in talent at this point. The number of teams (A) for which the addition of Halladay makes it an instant contender, (B) which are capable of absorbing a $16M salary for 2010, and © to which he’d approve a trade (which eliminates the Rangers, for example), is very thin. The Angels don’t want to be bidding against themselves.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 9, 2009 10:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What if...

We managed to keep Lackey and added Wolf?

by jessthelion on Nov 8, 2009 1:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm,,,Could be fun!

RIP Nick Adenhart.

"When the Babe tries to call his shot, I hope Nick puts one in his ear."
--RallyMonkey5

by Clutch on Nov 8, 2009 2:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Wolf is a strictly AAAA ball pitcher

Honestly I think he’d get killed if he made move to the AL

by HaloFanInDC on Nov 8, 2009 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, well then.

Maybe not.

RIP Nick Adenhart.

"When the Babe tries to call his shot, I hope Nick puts one in his ear."
--RallyMonkey5

by Clutch on Nov 8, 2009 2:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

No

We don’t need a right handed Kazmir. Harden throws way to many pitches to get K’s and is always gone by the 5th inning. I’d say only sign him if he’d be willing to play in the pen as a closer/set up

by HaloFanInDC on Nov 8, 2009 1:56 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Harden would be interesting

Ace stuff with high risk/high reward possibility with durability issues.

Pitchers get hurt, but Harden seems to get hurt for chunks of the season.

Or is Kendry perhaps the one who needs to sit?

by BBFan1 on Nov 8, 2009 2:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Yankees only willing to give Lackey 12 mil/year

According to this source.

by jessthelion on Nov 8, 2009 2:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

That is a little misleading

What they are saying is that IF No One Else pays him more than $15MM, they will try to swoop in. But they could easily wind up paying more if Andy doesn’t come back and they have lost faith in Jobba (I hope they haven’t yet because I think he sucks).

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

by Moondoggy on Nov 8, 2009 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

More on the Yankees

Here‘s some analysis on the Yankee’s rotation by a friend of mine that runs a popular Yankees blog. Hopefully he’s right and Lackey is not a priority for them right now.

by jessthelion on Nov 9, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If the goal for 2010 is to win the World Series, then

Plan A should be to resign Lackey. If the team is unsuccessful in keeping Lackey, what is a realistic plan B? The key word is “realistic”, because packing all of our bench players and undesirable contracts is not going to make Doc Halladay our opening day pitcher next April. To get Halladay will extract a cost from our Major League roster and legitimate prospects from the farm. Assuming there would be a trade, to keep Halladay longer than the 2010 season will cost Arte a significant amount of coin – Sabathia’s contract (7 years @ $161m) is probably the relevant example from the players perspective.

Harden is definitely a high risk, high reward proposition. There’s certainly not much to else choose from in this years FA starting pitching crop that will make the Angels stronger in 2010.

by mustard_man on Nov 8, 2009 3:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I think you might be able to sign Escobar to an incentive laden minor league deal...

as a 2nd fallback…

People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring. ~Rogers Hornsby

by K3YEROUT on Nov 8, 2009 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

As our closer?

I don’t think he starts again – but he might have something left in the pen.

by rghan on Nov 8, 2009 5:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

New York says they will pay 12 million...

We should match. Home town “discount.”

by waters96 on Nov 8, 2009 5:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I meant for Lackey.

I did NOT mean Escobar. He’s free to see himself to the door.

by waters96 on Nov 8, 2009 5:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

First goal playoffs, second goal WS Champs

Harden’s durability is an issue, and it is certainly unlikely he’ll put a full season together. But, I’m not sure the Angels would need a full season from him to get to the playoffs. If he were healthy come playoff time though, I’d rather have him matching up with the Yanks, Sox, etc. than anyone we have other than Lackey.

by pfpking on Nov 8, 2009 3:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Major league minimum...

I have no interest in this guy. Just a walking injury. I’d rather go with a minor leaguer.

by waters96 on Nov 8, 2009 4:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I'll happily roll Harden out there as our 5th starter...

…to limit his innings. I think it is a great idea.

People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring. ~Rogers Hornsby

by K3YEROUT on Nov 8, 2009 4:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I think I'd like it

I’d rather have Lackey by a longshot though. Harden can be had for a pretty low risk. The only thing I’d be concerned about is what rghan said…bullpen could get pretty tasked this year if you sign Harden, with Kaz typically throwing a lot of pitches early and Santana not being a sure thing…

by Spird on Nov 8, 2009 6:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I've got a crazy one for you all....

Let’s say we resigned John Lacky at 4 years/$64M. Then signed Rich Harden at 2 years/$12M+incentives. Then trade Ervin Santana, Joe Saunders, Gary Matthews Jr., Brandon Wood, Mark Trumbo, and an Anthony Ortega type for Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells. Wells has 5yr/$98M left on his horrible contract, and the real kicker doesn’t begin till 2011 at $23M. Yikes… but I believe he has some serious upside, and a change of scenery would likely do him well. Halladay speaks for himself, making $15.75M next year. I think the Jays would be thrilled with this trade, and given the extension, we would be too.

Santana has 3 years/$28M w/ a $13M for 2013. Saunders is in an arbitration year and last under contract. I see him getting Ervin Santana money this year ($6M). GMJ has 3 years/$30M left and loses his outright trade clause. He can only nix a trade to 4 teams. I don’t believe the Jays would be one of those teams. So essentially, you’re trading 10 years/$79M (Ballpark), for 6 years/$114M. If… and it is a BIG IF…. we could sign Halladay to an extension, it makes the deal well worth it. If not, the deal simply does not get done.

And I let Figgins walk, in favor of Adrian Beltre. Take the draft pick. Bring back Darren Oliver. Attempt to sign one of LHRP Joe Beimel or RHRP Rafael Betancourt. With that, I’m pretty much done with my off-season.

1. Erick Aybar SS (I expect he can grow even more this year. Pressure doesn’t seem to bother this kid… not one bit)
2. Bobby Abreu DH/RF (I expect similiar numbers as this past year)
3. Torii Hunter CF (I expect similiar numbers as this past year)
4. Kendry Morales 1st (I expect similiar numbers as this past year)
5. Juan Rivera RF/DH (I figure similiar numbers as this past year)
6. Mike Napoli C (I’m okay with Naps and Mathis splitting some time, as long as Naps DH’s a little to give the OF’s a break here and there.)
7. Vernon Wells LF (Amazing defense and speed… hopefully the bat will come with less pressure and new scenery)
8. Adrian Beltre 3rd (amazing defense and raw strength)
9. Howard Kendrick 2nd (I like him hitting lower as it gives us continuity throughout the line-up)

SP1: Roy Halladay (True #1)
SP2: John Lackey (A low end #1)
SP3: Rich Harden (A low end #1, top end #2 type stuff)
SP4: Jered Weaver (A low end #1, top end #2)
SP5: Scott Kazmir (A low end #2, top end #3)
BP1: Darren Oliver (L)
BP2: Kevin Jepsen®
BP3: Jose Arredondo® Please pull your head out…
BP4: Joe Beimel (L) or Rafael Betancourt®
Set-up: Scot Shields (Please stay healthy)
Closer: Brian Fuentes

Bench
Jeff Mathis C
Macier Izturis 2nd/SS/3rd
Matthew Brown 1st/3rd
Reggie Willits OF
Bobby Wilson C
Freedy Sandoval 3rd or Adam Kennedy 2nd

Key Departures: Ervin Santana, Joe Saunders, Vladamir Guerrero, Chone Figgins, Brandon Wood, Kelvim Escobar, and Rob Quinlan.

Key Arrivals: Roy Halladay, Rich Harden, Vernon Wells, Adrian Beltre, (One of) Joe Beimel or Rafael Betancourt, and maybe Adam Kennedy.

Side note… we would gain so much speed with Beltre and Wells, it completely offsets the loss of Figgins. Oh wait… I almost forgot about the other speed demon, Vlad. Haha.

Am I crazy or would you like me to be your GM? Haha.

by matt92130 on Nov 9, 2009 3:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Your moves both

intrigue and terrify me. Not because they are bad moves, but just a lot of change, really fast. But maybe that is what the team needs to overcome their World Series absence. But it could also affect team chemistry in a negative way. But it is interesting to say the least.

I’d prefer to bat Morales 3rd in the line up. And I wouldn’t regret losing so many young pitchers.

RIP Nick Adenhart 4/9/09

I blog about the Angels at The Diamond Aces

by Jay Cal on Nov 9, 2009 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If we took Wells' contract

They’d virtually give us Halladay, no 2/5’s of a rotation necessary. That $20-$23 mil a season is going to crush the Jays’ rebuilding efforts for a long time to come.

I still can’t help but think that this is why Halladay isn’t in another uniform already – that Riccardi was trying to save his job to the bitter end by packaging him with Wells. There was NO speculation of that elsewhere, so I’m out on a limb, but it just makes too much sense to me.

by rghan on Nov 9, 2009 5:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

So many things wrong

Hard to figure out where to begin.

First, the low-hanging fruit: GMJ has two years remaining (2010 and 2011). That is a huge difference, weighed against encumbering the team with one of the worst contracts of the last ten years, the one signed by Vernon Wells. Once GMJ’s deal is done, Wells will still be owed $63M over three more seasons.

Furthermore, if your intention is to secure Halladay, he is signed only through 2010, and could easily be gone; the obligation to Wells would put a serious crimp in Arte’s open to buy, and there is no obligation on the part of the Jays to allow negotiations for an extension as a condition to a deal. Making this trade is like agreeing to spend one night with the woman of your dreams, knowing it is a certainty you will get herpes from that experience. Halladay could easily be gone in 2011 but the team is stuck with Wells for four more years?

If the team took Wells off the Toronto books, there is no reason to also trade away Saunders and Santana. None. It would be doing that team a favor of immense proportions, not to mention killing the Angel budget for years to come.

Then, your idea of what Lackey would sign for is a lowball offer which figures to be eclipsed by whichever team signs him in real life.

The idea of taking on Beltre is simply bad on its own merits, and has been discussed as such elsewhere.

The pitching changes robs the Angel rotation of youth, stocking it instead with Lackey to age 35 and Halladay to age 33 (or longer, if he decides to stay).

If Matt Brown is on the 40 man roster by April, I’ll be astonished.

Your comment about Napoli at DH makes no sense if the result is that Rivera or Abreu has to sit.

Best to take a mulligan on the whole idea.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 9, 2009 5:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh George... We're back at this off-season and I expected nothing less....

Let us begin the counters:

1. First and foremost, you’re assumption that the Angels would make the deal without having Halladay sign long term as part of the trade… I noted that in my post, thanks for not noticing.

2. Lackey at $16M per is hardly a low ball offer. I can’t remember the last time $16M was chump change. You’re high if you don’t think a $6M raise is suffice. There are already reports surfacing of other clubs concerned about his arm and might stay away for that very reason. Plus, that is AJ Burnett type money, minus the 5th year.

3. Seeing as Vlad would not be back, Wells brings a gold glove caliber defense to our OF, and as I stated, a change of scenery would almost certainly benefit him. He feels an enormous amount of pressure having to carry the entire load in Toronto. Whereas I had him batting 7th, easing the pressure and letting him find his own groove. Plus, Gary Matthews is a must trade after his very respectful request to be traded. We should accomodate him, especially at the opportunity of picking up Halladay and my earlier conditions. Remember? The one you chose to browse right over.

Over the past three seasons (because I know that’s what you want the sampel size to be), Vernon Wells has averaged .268/.319/.433, 17HR’s, 75 RBI’s.

Over his 11 year career; He’s averaged .280/.329/.470, 29HR’s, 109 RBI’s. He’ll be 31 next season with tons of solid playing years. Hey, I’m not saying his contract is justified, it’s clearly not, bu the potential is there and you get Roy Halladay.

4. So, you want to keep Santana and Saunders because they have done so well. I like them too. Really, I do. But please tell me if you had the choice of Halladay, Santana, or Saunders on the mound in the playoffs, you wouldn’t choose one of the two latter, would you? Exactly. You say it robs the Angels of their pitching youth, Weaver is 26 years old, Kazmir is 25 years old. Lackey is 31 right now, and Halladay is 33. If we signed Harden as well, he’ll be 28 when the season begins. You need a good mix of veterans and youth. The average age of our starters would 28.6. Please tell me how that equates to old?

5. As far as the budget… you’re spot on with this one. It stretches the Angels to where we can’t go out and sign another big player for few years. My only rebuttal to this is that we’d be set for those years and wouldn’t need to go out and get some one.

6. As far as Beltre, you talk like everyone is in agreement with you. It’s humorous. Those in agreement with you, I’ll bet you no one has bothered to check his stats. You mean to tell me that 24HR’s, and 88 RBI’s a year, isn’t good enough? Those are his past three season averages with the M ‘s. I don’t know where you get your ideas that Beltre isn’t a solid 3rd baseman. Not to mention he’ll only be 31 years old when the season starts. Please don’t use Figgins as an alternative as he’s going to be 32 year old bringing his awesome .172 career BA in the post-season with him.

7. Yes, Mike Napoli can be used in the DH slot to give Abreu, Rivera, Wells days off as they shift around. God forbid an injury.

8. I have absolutely nothing to back this up but I’m assessing Matthew Brown will be a better major leaguer than Rob Quinlan. It’s not saying much, but I don’t like Rob Quinlan.

George, your analysis of my post has some major holes and some of your statements are simply opinion based without a leg to stand on. Where as your facts? Mine are there… where are yours?

If anyone needs a mulligan here, it’s you pal.

by matt92130 on Nov 9, 2009 8:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough

1) Toronto already said that it wouldn’t entertain extension discussions, since it causes the negotiations amongst clubs to grind to a halt. Whether the new GM hews to the same line will remain to be seen, but it is clearly the exception and not the rule to allow it—the trading team has zero obligation to extend that right. That’s a fact.

2) Since when has the amount of the “raise” had anything to do with free agency prices? That has meaning only in arbitration hearings. But yes, you’re correct that what you described is “AJ Burnett money”, which points out clearly that your projection is off because you’re a year short and merely matching Burnett’s deal on a per-season basis. Lackey is the only name free agent pitcher for 2010, so the dogfight to sign him is expected to include the Mets and Yankees. As I said before, $64M/4 figures to be an also-ran offer.

3) The fact GMJ asked to be traded is never a justification for making the bonehead trade play of the decade, swapping his two remaining years for five of Wells. Bad an idea as that is, it is even worse to contemplate including perfectly good, young pitchers with GMJ in the deal. Much as you apparently adore Wells, he could never, EVER live up to the deal he signed, and it would be the working definition of insanity to be paying a player $23M to bat 7th in the lineup. And i think anyone who knows the sport would stipulate as fact that it would be nuts to pay $23M to the guy in the 7 hole.

4) See above—there is no rational reason to include Saunders and/or Santana with Matthews for Wells and Halladay, mostly because there is no rational reason to obtain Wells in the first place.

5) It is more than an inability to sign a marquee free agent for the next five years, but also the fact that now-inexpensive players will be costing increasing amounts as they hit their arbitration years. The $21M average per season paid to Wells for 2012 through 2014 would cover the increases to several players by itself. That is a fact, by the way.

6) Beltre is a seriously bad idea. I can’t speak for those who are on the record as opposing such an idea, but it is awfully condescending of you to insist that nobody checked his stats. I certainly did, and saw that he is hardly deserving to be called “Sr. Octubre” himself, with his postseason OPS of .517 (that’s a fact, since I know you’re starved for them). And, no, Figgins wasn’t presented as the alternative, but thanks for setting up the strawman.

7) If Scioscia decided to carry Bobby Wilson with Mathis and Napoli, then Napoli can get plenty of DH AB—especially since Vernon Wells won’t be part of the scene.

8) Matt Brown superior to Quinlan? Maybe. I simply wonder if Brown will be kept on the 40-man roster. He was incendiary last Spring, then disappeared in SLC for the season (.245/.333/.415—that is a fact). He’s been in the Angels’ minors system since before the team signed Saunders, and the latter has been in the bigs for years—ditto Aybar, Kendrick, Mathis, Napoli and others. While the losses of Lackey and Figgins will open some slots on the 40-man, I doubt Brown will be retained when younger talent is pushing its way to the top.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 9, 2009 10:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Much ado about nothing

It’s kind of amusing to see you guys go back and forth on this…

by Spird on Nov 10, 2009 12:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

We live to entertain.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 10, 2009 12:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Which is why I chose not to respond...

We have different opinions…. and I’m cool with that. Always a pleasure though.

by matt92130 on Nov 11, 2009 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think we need a 5th starter

And at this point in his career that’s all Harden seems to be able to handle.

RIP #34

by linkbruin on Nov 8, 2009 6:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Why

Do we not need a 5th starter?

by TheAntiSox on Nov 8, 2009 6:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The in-house options are just as good

RIP #34

by linkbruin on Nov 8, 2009 8:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Meh

I don’t like the idea of SOS or Bell starting next year. Possibly Moseley if he’s back and ready.

by TheAntiSox on Nov 8, 2009 9:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Palmer is still around too

RIP #34

by linkbruin on Nov 9, 2009 3:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

True

by TheAntiSox on Nov 9, 2009 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

If the price is right, but I wouldn’t spend a mint . He is obviously injury prone, but has wicked stuff. Plus, we should have enough depth to cover a handful of starts WHEN Harden gets hurt.

1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com

by Slasher52 on Nov 8, 2009 6:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

$5-6 mil a year

Go for it, anymore then no.

by TheAntiSox on Nov 8, 2009 6:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Glass arm-

no thanks.

RIP Nick Adenhart 4/9/09

by vlad IS my man on Nov 8, 2009 9:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Might be "Jason Schmidt, Part II'

I would probably be more willing to gamble on him if we weren’t already plagued by so many sore-armed pitchers on the DL like we have been.

Now there's a hole in the sky
And if the ground's not cold
Everything is gonna burn
We'll all take turns, I'll get mine too...

This Rally Monkey's gone to Halos Heaven

by Quad Fin Rider on Nov 8, 2009 10:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

The secret

…is not to guarantee four years. That was what made the Schmidt signing so mind-bottling.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 9, 2009 7:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

There's that

and the fact that anyone watching him during his last couple of months in SFO could see that he was pitching with reduced velocity and effectiveness. He was damaged goods before they signed him.

by jjackflash on Nov 9, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If we could get this guy cheap, I would be all for it.

He is a stud when healthy, which sadly isn’t often.

I've got nothing.

by bc56274 on Nov 8, 2009 11:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I say if Cihcago is giving up on him BEWARE

They have a TON of experience and proven patience with sore armed pitchers and it’s not like they have a ton of pitching to spare

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

by Moondoggy on Nov 9, 2009 6:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

That's not really the story with the Cubs

The management of that team has saddled it with perfectly horrible contracts; there are eight players under contract for 2010 earning—by themselves—$118M. Just to refresh your memory, some of those guys are named Zambrano, Soriano, Fukodome and Bradley. The team has spent money like it was the Yankees, but played like it was the Orioles.

The Cubs, even with new ownership, may not be in a financial situation where it could extend a long-term deal to Harden if it wanted to, and still handle the expenses of the other 16 guys who would need to suit up. However, the team could offer arbitration, and the worst deal for Harden would be a one-year contract for $5.6M. I don’t think we can assume that Harden will go free agent, and I likewise don’t think we can infer that the Cubs have “given up on him”. He could well view $5.6M guaranteed as better than some other team’s incentive-laden deal which could yield him far less, even if he met all targets.

That said, I think I would first take a good, hard look at Ben Sheets, 9 months removed from his surgery, and build up an incentive-laden deal for him that could pay him $6M in 2010 and vest a year at $9M with performance, if he shows that he can return to form. If he isn’t ready to return to form, then a similar offer to Harden wouldn’t be excessive. Both men have tremendous upsides, obscured by rocky recent histories.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 9, 2009 7:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ha...I think the Orioles have a better chance of being over .500 in 2010 than the Cubbies

but I’m really high on Baltimore’s young talent. If they can ANY pitching over the winter they can be a VERY dangerous team.

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

by Moondoggy on Nov 9, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ben Sheets

This guy has yet to complete a full season. You were worried about Hardens durability. Sheets is a no risk factor. His injury is a guarentee, it just depends what part of the season it happens in.

by Baylorsgroove on Nov 9, 2009 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think Sheets will ever have the nickname "Ironman"

But I think the chance that he’ll be a more durable player after having had long-needed surgery is a decent bet, and one which can be mitigated with a carefully constructed contract.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 9, 2009 5:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Depends on his price

If he is willing to accept a 1 year deal at $5MM or so, he would flat out be a bargain. And unlike the A’s previously, we DON’T need him to be our ace.

Career ERA+ of 130. Fluky splits last year: 5.99 home ERA; 2.00 road ERA. Still young – he turns 28 later this month. Two straight years of being relatively healthy – he EQUALS John Lackey in starts the last two years, while posting better overall numbers.

I’ll take him.

"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes

by johnnyangel101 on Nov 9, 2009 7:41 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Asst. GM Ken Forsch said

The Angels don’t like taking chances on pitchers with shoulder injuries, but will take a chance on pitchers with elbow problems because elbows can be fixed and shoulders can’t (or are a lot harder).

What type of injuries has Harden had?

by WiHaloFan on Nov 10, 2009 7:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

That's fascinating

I didn’t realize the Angels front office made such a determination, but it certainly makes sense (and a former pitcher like Forsch would know a thing or two about that).

To answer the question, Harden has had both: He has shown rotator cuff problems (tears) and ulnar collateral ligament sprain (which is the area replaced in “Tommy John” surgery when it gets too bad),

Harden’s problems may simply be bad mechanics, though with as many years in the game as he’e had, he may either be uncoachable (in that regard) or his problems are less biomechanics and more simply deficiencies in his body.

What is interesting here is the problem which shut him down right before the end of the season was “arm fatigue”, not a recurrence of earlier elbow or shoulder problems. He’s just 27, so there remains the possibility he can gain additional strength and be a more durable pitcher in 2010.

He made 26 starts for the Cubs—the most for him in several seasons—and finished the season averaging 11K/9 innings. He’s no top of the rotation pitcher, but he would be an intriguing #5, where 26 starts would be more than enough.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 10, 2009 7:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I like Harden, especially if the price is right

But one thing that concerns me is his inability to pitch deep into games, and with Kazmir already showing the same trait, I’m afraid of the Angels middle relief being used too much. The Angels middle relief scares me.

by WiHaloFan on Nov 10, 2009 8:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That's a very real and legitimate fear.

On the flip side, both guys are at the age where pitchers typically start tacking on more innings. Obviously the Cubs were as cautious with Harden as possible given his injury history, but if he is truly past that, maybe he finally averages 6-7 innings a game. As for Kazmir, he realistically should be entering his prime right about now (he is even younger than Harden) so maybe he’s ready for a jump in his innings as well.

Even if this is a giant leap of faith and both guys continue to be 5-6 inning pitchers, I still feel more comfortable of having 5-6 innings every fifth day from Harden than Palmer, O’Sullivan, etc. I, for one, think our pen will be much stronger next season, anyways, if for no other reason than it HAS to after being so bad most of the year.

by dmhead on Nov 10, 2009 9:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Amen

Even if this is a giant leap of faith and both guys continue to be 5-6 inning pitchers, I still feel more comfortable of having 5-6 innings every fifth day from Harden than Palmer, O’Sullivan, etc.

Palmer was, for the great majority of his starts, the luckiest son of a bitch in baseball. He was the anti-Escobar, receiving a ridiculous amount of runs per start, despite the growing number of runs he was giving up himself. To expect the same amount of good fortune in 2010 would be a sucker bet.

Scioscia might be convinced that O’Sullivan, tasked with ironing out some flaws in his game, might be ready to take the #5, or maybe Bell. But since it isn’t MY money being spent, I would think a contract with Harden, with a decent ground floor and a tremendous financial upside if metrics for durability and success are met, would be a good investment.

Plus, if you look at his game log for 2009, it was clear he was on a pretty strict pitch count, with rarely more than 100 pitches thrown per game. The problem he had (and is shared with Kazmir) is one of efficiency, with 90-100 pitches being thrown in some games by the end of 5 complete innings. On the other hand, he was striking out a large number of the batters he faced, and that is indicative of a cat-and-mouse game with the batter, which causes a lot of pitches to be thrown.

it is clear, also, that he just ran out of gas in September, with fatigue apparently taking its toll.

Finally, of his 26 starts, 14 of them qualified as “quality starts”. It is worth noting that only rarely (4 of 26 starts) did Pinella have to go out and take the ball. Most cases, Harden’s day ended because of his pitch count, or because of the #9 spot coming up in the order in the Cubs’ half of the 6th, 7th or 8th.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 10, 2009 10:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Last Paragraph

It would be interesting to see how many times he was lifted for a pinch hitter – a dilemma AL managers don’t face.

One might hope that between the influence of a good pitching coach and a better defense behind him than he had in Chicago, Harden might be able to get more early count outs (not having to always go for the K), and pitch deeper into games. We’re really only talking about an extra 4 batters per game.

With respect to middle relief issues, the Angels’ pen presumably gets stronger next year simply from the return of one Scot Shields.

by jjackflash on Nov 11, 2009 12:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Pitching deep

In many of those games, Harden was lifted for a pinch-hitter, but it coincided with his hitting 90-100 pitches in the game.

As for the question of middle relief, it is good that you remind us that the pathway to Fuentes in 2010 should be Bulger-Jepsen-Shields. Even a Kazmir or Harden going 5+ would be OK if it was a good start otherwise.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 11, 2009 3:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Just Imagine

if the 2008 version of Jose Arredondo showed up next year.

by jjackflash on Nov 11, 2009 4:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

harden is a terrible back up to lackey, but a fantastic add to the rotation none the less. Resigning lackey is paramount, even more so that I previously thought after seeing which teams are going to make a play for him (Sea, Bos, NY). Losing lackey wouldnt hurt as badly if he didnt go to one of our rivals.

We might end up getting into a bidding war for lackey, but Lackey is really the gem of this free agent class as far as starting pitchers go. We would be foolish not to make every effort we could to bring him back.

In Kobe we trust!

by robi s on Nov 13, 2009 12:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

It would be more foolish to overpay

Every player has a ceiling. Lackey has his, and the Angels most likely have put a price on it. I expect the same as every year, the team will calculate the value of the player, make a very good offer, and waive goodbye if the player decides the money is greener elsewhere.

"He's not a Rhodes Scholar to begin with''~Theo Epstein, talking about Papelbon

by George Kaplan on Nov 13, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs