Dan Haren

by marcbouch9 on Nov 10, 2007 1:50 PM EST Comment 29 comments

ESPN reported that Billy Beane may make Dan Haren available to replenish the A's farm system.

Haren is under contract through 2010 at $4M in '08, $5.5M in '09, and a club option $6.75M in '09.

The question then is what would the A's want back for him. Boston Globe has reported that the A's would require Clay Bucholz or Jon Lester from the Red Sox. Who would you be willing to part with to make this deal?

[editor's note, by jscape2000] front paged by jscape2000

He'll be 27 years old in 2008 and has pitched more than 200 innings each of the last three years, to a 1.2 WHIP. While he's among the most underrated pitchers, I'm not sure he's worth a member of the Trinity.
I'd trade Haren for Betances and cash- and that's saying quite a lot. Otherwise, Horne and Whelan, or a similar package.

I'd give as much for Haren as I would for Santana.

0 recs | Comment 29 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'd love to have him

But obviously they'd want Joba or Hughes, neither of which I would give up. If they want two of IPK, Clippard, Horne, Betances, Brackman, et al, I'd do it.

by SenorSwanky on Nov 10, 2007 2:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I like Haren, but am worried he isn't really a number 1 starter, nor a consistent big game pitcher. I would give up anyone except the top 2.

"It's great to be young and a Yankee"

by stillmonster on Nov 10, 2007 7:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Haren is great

I think Lester is mediocre, but Clay has really good stuff.
Is IPK a #1 starter? I don't mind trading a young pitcher to get a proven young pitcher. Haren was the only good player Billy got for 2/3rds of his trinity...

by John Amato on Nov 11, 2007 2:09 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Knowing Beane's tendencies

He would want Kennedy; college pitcher with low walk totals. I would think Kenney, Gardner and a 2nd tier pitcher would be a possibility. The A's could plug Kennedy and Gardner in right away and wait on, say, Horne.

Chien-Ming Wang+Phil Hughes+Ian Kennedy+Joba Chamberlain = the future

by marcbouch9 on Nov 11, 2007 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think there is any doubt

that next year the yankees would be a better team if they could turn IPK into Dan Haren. His 200+ innings of 1.2 WHIP is a heck of a lot more than is fair to expect from a rookie.

I guess it just depends on what else we would have to throw into the trade.

Eleven wins in October...

by Edwantsacracker on Nov 11, 2007 12:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The more I think about it

you're right. I'd move IPK if it meant we could hold onto the other high value pieces (Gardner, Horne, Betances, Tabata).

"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."

by jscape2000 on Nov 11, 2007 10:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They should dump Gardner now

before people realize that he sucks.

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Nov 12, 2007 7:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What about

IPK and Melky for Haren?

by docgonzo on Nov 11, 2007 1:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

You know....

Melky's name has been thrown in the hat for almost every trade that has come up. I think that our outfield would definitely become weaker defensibly with Damon returning to the everyday centerfielder responsibilities but I think it is unlikely that we will miss his 275/340/388 line.

With one less player in the mix we could pencil Jason Giambi in as the DH everyday which I think would be a great improvement to the lineup.

I love Melky I really do, but I think we need to move either him or Damon, and I don't think Damon is as movable or desirable to other teams.

Eleven wins in October...

by Edwantsacracker on Nov 11, 2007 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The trap

I think a problem that should be addressed at some point is the ease with which so many are falling into the offseason trap:

On Melky Cabrera -- For the time being, I am probably the only idiot against trading him. Offensive monster? Nope, not at all. Defensive monster? Abso-f*cking-lutely.

Why put damon back in CF where he can't play everyday unless he's miraculously healthy next year? Furthermore did anyone consider Cabrera's 16 OF Assists last season? He has range, speed, and a terrific arm in the OF -- and he's still young (and cheap)?

Defense and Pitching does more to win games in the postseason -- so here's the problem (and the trap) -- do we trade away solid defense in a premier position for a "good" starting pitcher and then, force ourselves to either trade for (or sign a FA) to play CF when most of baseball is holding the Yanks hostage for ALL THREE of their top pitching prospects?

See there's the trap -- you're trading away one player for another, but in reality, now you need TWO players.

So I have to apologize for being the moron, but I think given the current Centerfielder market it's a mistake to trade away Cabrera from a defensive perspective.

I won't argue the point at all that he's not highly beneficial at the plate -- but I'd be interested to know his value in run prevention if there's any such thing < that would sell me more on his trade-ability versus his non-tradeability.

My other problem revolves around Kennedy's location/command. If this kid is always around the plate (as suggested by low walk totals) -- I'm still at a loss to understand why we would trade that away instead of developing it when he's cheap? I don't doubt he's not a #1 starter -- but having a solid #3/#4 would be more cost-effective tradewise than dumping both pitching and defense for 1 pitcher.

Assuming the current staff (sans Pettitte)...someone correct me in terms of ranking the starters (based on futures if you will):

Hughes or Chamberlain (are either a #1?)
^^ The leftover from above
Wang
Kennedy
Mussina or other

I think Haren, at best, is a 2 or 3 starter. He's not a #1 -- so you trade away IPK and Cabrera...for a 2? Doesn't make sense to me.

Flip Haren and Santana, then perhaps the argument bears more weight, as essentially, you project him as a #1, Phil/Joba as #2 and #2a and Wang as #4 and Mussina as #5. That works, in essence because you're upgrading the rotation substantially (assuming Santana isn't another "He who must not be named" and suffers injury meltdown).

I know, I know, Melky the idiot who won't stop sliding into first...but he does more right in the field than he does wrong at the plate (imo).

Either way we come back to the issue of I don't think Damon can do CF everyday and outside of Abreu's arm...an OF of Damon and Matsui = very weak. Sucks to say it, but I think we're losing too much this season trading Cabrera. Might not be the same next season.

Anyway - I be quiet now.

by detroit yankee on Nov 11, 2007 8:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Now if we accept that WHIP

is the best way to evaluate pitchers then there were only a handful of pitchers who performed better than Haren this year.

J Santana 1.07
E Bedard 1.09
J Shields 1.11
C Sabathia 1.14
J Vazquez 1.14
A Burnett 1.19
D Haren 1.21

So for him to be a number three starter you have to have 2 other pitchers on this list on your team. I have no doubt that IPK will be a great pitcher eventually, but if we could have a pitcher like Dan Heren who both eats up innings and does it in a marvelous 1.21 WHIP fashion then I think I would pull the trigger.

I think Johnny Damon can be a fulltime centerfielder again. I think its a gamble thats worth taking. I agree with you its a defensive downgrade, but I think that just the fact that it gets giambi off the bench is a huge boost to our lineup because it means that it won't be Shelly Duncan OR Jason Giambi it will be AND!

Eleven wins in October...

by Edwantsacracker on Nov 12, 2007 12:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But WHIP is not the best way

to evaluate pitchers. WHIP is highly dependent on the defense playing behind the pitcher, as a hit only falls if the defense can't get to it. Thus pitchers who play on teams with good defenses (See Burnett, AJ) will likely get lower WHIP's by a function of more batted balls being turned into outs.

Also, WHIP can be more generous to flyball pitchers than to groundball pitchers. Evidence has shown (and you're free to look it up) that ground balls tend to land for hits more often than fly balls do, as fielders tend to have more time to get to flyballs than groundballs. Also, the batter's speed has a substantial effect on whether a groundball becomes a hit, yet almost no effect on whether a flyball lands for a hit. This is why groundball hitters (like Juan Pierre) tend to have higher batting averages than flyball hitters (like Adam Dunn). Hence, groundball pitchers like Brandon Webb lose the WHIP battle to flyball pitchers like Haren, even though the groundball pitcher is likely to be more valuable.

There is no one stat that is the best measure of pitching. We can certainly narrow down the stats to a select group that tells us the most about a pitcher, but we still have to judge pitchers based on the totality of their skills, not just one stat.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 2:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was impressed by the combination

of Haren's WHIP and SLG percentage. I take the criticism however. I would argue that of any single stat WHIP would be the best way to evaluate a pitcher.

Here are some ways to evaluate a pitcher that I think are bad. Wins, ERA, Single performances (big game pitchers), blood on socks...

I was just trying to point out that if Haren came over to the Yankees he would be the best pitcher on our staff this year. Could IPK be better than him in a couple of years, its not outside the realm of possibility, but Danny is a known quantity when we are trusting a large portion of our pitching to rookies, even rookies with high ceilings.

Eleven wins in October...

by Edwantsacracker on Nov 12, 2007 8:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

If there's one stat that should tell you the most about how good a pitcher is, it's K/BB ratio. That by far shows how dominating a pitcher is. I think any defense-dependent stat is probably not a good measure of a pitcher's value if taken alone.

I stick with 4 stats to learn the most about pitchers: IP, K/9, BB/9, and GB/FB.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 11:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Haren

is not a flyball pitcher. While he's not the GB pitcher Webb is, he was 49th in the majors for GB/FB ratio. His K/BB, K/9IP, number of quality starts, and IP/Start are unbelievably good.

Chien-Ming Wang+Phil Hughes+Ian Kennedy+Joba Chamberlain = the future

by marcbouch9 on Nov 12, 2007 10:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, he is.

Haren's GB% last year was 45.4%. Basic math would then say that more than half of Haren's batted balls against were in the air. Moreover, Haren gives up a lot of homeruns, which is not characteristic of a groundball pitcher. There are not many groundball pitchers that give up 25-30 HRs per season. Haren certainly is not the extreme flyball pitcher that Santana is, but he still makes the outfield work a lot.

Yes, Haren is quite a good pitcher, but he is still a flyball pitcher.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If you're going to use these stats try getting

it right.

Folow this link: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=5565

and you'll see many more grounders than fly balls.

I think a little research that the percentage you quoted is of at bats, not of batted balls. So, simple arityhmatic does not show more than 1/2 of batted baare in the air.

Career he has 1090 GB against 848 FB.

He's young, he's good, he'd be a good pickup.

A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. Herm Albright (1876 - 1944)

by Cbeck3 on Nov 12, 2007 3:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you!

Opposing hitters only mustered a .292OBP against him last year, which was 11th best in the majors. His BABIP was .292 as well, which shows he is not benefitting from abnormally good or bad defense.

Chien-Ming Wang+Phil Hughes+Ian Kennedy+Joba Chamberlain = the future

by marcbouch9 on Nov 12, 2007 3:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not discounting Haren

as a bad pitcher. Certainly, he's a very good #2 pitcher. But he's not a groundball pitcher.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 5:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I have different numbers.

Follow this link: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=285200

and you'll see more batted balls in the air than on the ground.

If you're blocked by the pay-wall, I'll show you what it shows: in 2007, Haren gave up 311 GB, 184 FB, 145 line-drives, and 45 pop-ups. And yes, each type of batted ball is mutually exclusive.

So, simple arithmetic shows: 311 GB/(184 FB + 145 LD + 45 PU) = .83 GB/FB ratio, or a 45.4% ground ball rate.

Next time, if you have different numbers, ask me where I got mine. Don't cavalierly assume that I'm wrong.

Again, groundball pitchers don't typically give up 25 HR's a season, especially playing in a pitchers park like the MacFee Coliseum. Don't mistake me: Haren is a fine pitcher, and he would do good things for our rotation, especially considering he's a strikeout pitcher with good control. But he's not a groundball pitcher.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 5:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

By the way,

BP counts 685 batted balls in play for Haren. MLB.com counts 683 batted balls (hits+groundouts+flyouts) for Haren. ESPN only counts 546 batted balls (301 GB + 245 FB).

Hmm, one of these things is not like the other. Sounds like ESPN.com did not do their due diligence.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 5:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ESPN

Uses STATS, INC., which is or at one point a Bill James company born out of Project Scoresheet. My faith lies with ESPN, for once, on this one.

Chien-Ming Wang+Phil Hughes+Ian Kennedy+Joba Chamberlain = the future

by marcbouch9 on Nov 12, 2007 6:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't rely on faith

I prefer to corroborate my evidence.

Look at this. Haren undoubtedly pitched 222.6 innings, which means he was on the mound for 668 outs. He had 192 Ks and caught 6 runners stealing, meaning he was present for 470 field outs. This cannot be denied, as its confirmed by each website.

ESPN (and by extension STATS Inc.) claims that Haren gave up 546 batted balls. 214 of those balls landed for hits. That means ESPN thinks that 332 of those batted balls became outs. This is a far cry from the 470 field outs that Haren must have been present for. This does not look good for ESPN's batted ball data.

BP, on the other hand, claims that Haren gave up 685 batted balls. Subtracting the 214 hits, we get 471 outs on batted balls. This is almost exactly the number of field outs that Haren must have been present for. BP is much more accurate.

I'll take BP's analysis.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 7:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ESPN's stats

are much more accurate in terms of grit/9 innings and heart per plate appearance.

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Nov 12, 2007 8:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

for making me feel more like a stat-head geek than I did before. I also check BR and MLB.com and their numbers did not match either...then I read your message again an put on a Cure album.

Chien-Ming Wang+Phil Hughes+Ian Kennedy+Joba Chamberlain = the future

by marcbouch9 on Nov 13, 2007 8:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

His ratio

was 1.23GB/1FB. That is 55%GB.

Chien-Ming Wang+Phil Hughes+Ian Kennedy+Joba Chamberlain = the future

by marcbouch9 on Nov 12, 2007 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Again, different numbers

See above.

by Willton on Nov 12, 2007 5:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Milkman

I know New Yorkers aren't much for talk that sounds sentimental plus my own aversion to too much rah rah! Having said that, I have repeatedly criticised Torre and many Yankee team members for a lack of spirit. I can't define it (would loose meaning), but I know it when I see it. Jeter's got it in abundance Abreu, unh, unh. Some play well for the money, others play better with a winning spirit. Do you come to the park to play for money, or 'cause you love the game (and get paid for doing it!) Ask Yogi about loosing that pent up spirit (on Larson's back.) Our new Joe on the block reminds me of the spirited Yankees of the 40s. The Yankees of the 90s faded into the spiritless winners of the new century the night they lost game 1 to Boston in '04. Not the fans, not you guys who post and post - but most of the team. Jeter could not hold that winning spirit all by himself; and we have seen sad post seasons ever since. Maybe Girardi can bring it back! Cabrera has enough extra to make up for two or three other players. I don't wanna see it traded 'til Joe at least has a chance to harness it for one season. I hope Cashout doesn't see this - I doubt he could even begin to understand. Hank S.? He sounds spirited! Have a good winter, guys. Ariz beckons.

New Hampshire Bob

by NH Bob on Nov 12, 2007 11:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Just Wanted to Point Out

That the Red Sox and Mets are kicking the tires on Haren. I'm not a fan of the reactionary move, but can we at least send out some feelers on this one. The thought of Beckett, Haren and Dice-K for the next 7 years is nauseating.

Chien-Ming Wang+Phil Hughes+Ian Kennedy+Joba Chamberlain = the future

by marcbouch9 on Nov 15, 2007 8:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs