PTBNL In Scott Hairston Deal: Sean Gallagher

Well thats a bit of overpaying.

I have to say Padres got the better end of this. Gallagher alone for Hairston is an upset. He will be solid in Petco if he can cut back on the walks.

WINNA! WINNA! Padres win round one...

Gotta agree that the Pads got the better of this deal. Hairston isn't anything more then a journeyman 4th outfielder having a career year. Gallagher could be a decent back of the rotation starter for the next 10 years in that big ballpark. The other 2 players are just gravy.

I agree witht the opinions above, but also actually think it was a win-win for both teams. Obviously, the win for the padres is that they get a young pitcher who actually has some talent and an arsenal that well translate great to petco. However, with all the arms that Oakland has, I actually think it was a decent move to acquire a a productive hitter in Hairston. He is still in his prime and controllable, something Beane's lineup definately needed. In the end though, Towers did make out like a bandit for actually getting some good potetnail out of a player with a less than proven track record.

Yikes. Can't say I like this trade for the A's at all. That's quite a bit to surrender for Scott Hairston.

Gallagher should get plenty of chances to make things work in San Diego... nice move by Towers.

Maybe the case with Mark Mulder, and letting Barry Zito walk in free agency... but he traded Tim Hudson who went on to continue being productive, and also traded Haren after 2007, and he's arguably the best pitcher in the NL this season.

Win-win IMO. Even deal.

Hairston can regress quite a bit at the plate (put up 2007 numbers) and still be a decent CF when factoring in defense, and the A's have him through his prime years. Considering that Sweeney has a major hole in his game (can't hit LHP), this fills the CF hole long term. His BABIP is up this year, but that's explained by a higher LD%. Easily a 2-3 win player over a full season of play.

Considering that Gallagher is the only legit prospect the A's had to give up (and is a major injury risk), as Webb and Italiano didn't even make the A's top 30 prospects, this deal is a win for both side.

We he obviously receives a physical before the deal is complete....Something tells me that Towers is smart enough to ensure the Friars aren't getting damaged goods here.

No offense to Billy Beane, or to Scott Hairston, but big win for San Diego here. This is most likely a better feeling for their fans than being no hit by J. Sanchez, which is still mind blowing to me. lol

Padres got the better side of the trade. A's sold low on Gallagher.

"Besides, I kind of think he gets credit as a better prospect then he actually was to begin with – for all the talk, he never really produced, anywhere, in his entire career."

Agreed 100%. This is another case of the cub hype machine more than anything. Gallagher belongs in that same group of guys that includes, Cedeno,Pie,Murton,Eric Patterson etc. Nothing made me laugh(and cringe) more than hearing cub fans talk about these guys. For all the nonsense of "their top prospects, their just blocked" or "they just need a chance and they'll show how good they are", these guys have now shown what they have been all along......bad baseball players. Pie is hitting a whopping .234 with an OPS of .654. Cedeno is at .168 with an OPS of .528 and Murton and Patterson are still in AAA. I'd say the Harden deal has turned into a complete wash, with both teams winding up with crap on their hands.

@rollingduece

"I'd say the Harden deal has turned into a complete wash, with both teams winding up with crap on their hands."

The A's traded Harden and Gaudin for what ended up being Hairston, Donaldson (he's actually good), Patterson and Corey Wimberly. Id say it was a win move by Oakland.

1) SuzysMan-

Agreed on Harden, although you can't look at '06-'07 since he pitched so few innings in both those years. But then Beane could definitely see the velo drop over the years.

2) "The A's traded Harden and Gaudin for what ended up being Hairston, Donaldson (he's actually good), Patterson and Corey Wimberly. Id say it was a win move by Oakland."

And Patterson belongs in MLB over the O-Fail/Crosby tandem. Truth.

I've always contended that Sean Gallagher was an overhyped prospect. He has solid stuff and has performed well at several levels at good age/level ratios, but part of the deal is evaluating what kind of player he will eventually be. His frame and delivery made him seem like a slight risk for health issues as the innings mounted up. It didn't help that the Cubs jumped the gun on his innings totals to 150 when he was SOOOO young, and, they had no problem keeping at those totals if not even increase them. If you saw him pitch at 19, it was pretty odd to see a frame like that with so many innings. This is what rushing prospects can do.

Nicely done by KT. I hated to lose Hairston because of his clutch hits, but this is a solid haul. Knowing the Padres' ability to mine for pitching talent, it wouldn't surprise me if at least a couple guys emerge as major leaguers from this deal. Webb is already getting serious work out of the Padres pen, and it's time likes this I am not regretting the fact that Petco is as big as the grand canyon. Imagine what Gallagher could do there if he is heathly...solid trade.

IMO gallagher is gaudin part II and i liked gaudin.

Gallagher is not what he was a yr ago, he lost a spot in spring. Beane chewed him out and pulled him aside then but it didnt work. He had a shoulder injury early on and struggled w/ 90-92 mph velocity. Over that time, anderson/cahill/braden/outman/mazzaro passed him up.

i think gallagher can be a solid #3 but his couple injuries, lower velocity, he has an issue w/ control especially the breaking ball which he has issues throwing strikes with.
I see eveland/simmons/gio/gallagher all w/ issues. Outman/Braden proved me wrong and pitched well.
They gave up a potential #3 + 2 filler relievers for 2+ seasons controlled hairston (who replaces holliday
eventually)

obviously if they couldnt have given up gallagher i'd prefer that, but towers said beane had to beat a deal for hairston which was almost done.

A's still have solid pitching depth than most, now get some hitters!!

IMO gallagher is gaudin part II and i liked gaudin.

Gallagher is not what he was a yr ago, he lost a spot in spring. Beane chewed him out and pulled him aside then but it didnt work. He had a shoulder injury early on and struggled w/ 90-92 mph velocity. Over that time, anderson/cahill/braden/outman/mazzaro passed him up.

i think gallagher can be a solid #3 but his couple injuries, lower velocity, he has an issue w/ control especially the breaking ball which he has issues throwing strikes with.
I see eveland/simmons/gio/gallagher all w/ issues. Outman/Braden proved me wrong and pitched well.
They gave up a potential #3 + 2 filler relievers for 2+ seasons controlled hairston (who replaces holliday
eventually)

obviously if they couldnt have given up gallagher i'd prefer that, but towers said beane had to beat a deal for hairston which was almost done.

A's still have solid pitching depth than most, now get some hitters!!

"Beane knew. The other teams probably did a better job of scouting and crunching numbers on him, leading them to stay away. I am not sure scouting or numbers are in the Hendry vocabulary though. Just glad he didn’t overpay!

Hendry knew, too. He knew exactly what he was getting in Harden. Just like Beane knew what he was getting in Gallagher in his work load and his track record. I don't blame Hendry one bit for that deal or for picking up his option this year. However, no matter how good or bad the Cubs do in the second half, I did not and do not want Hendry to even consider Harden as a possibility of coming back beyond '09. Harden will be gone after this year.

they knew what they were getting in gallagher. a guy who was 22/23 made the majors very quickly. not a ton of upside, but a good bet to be a healthy, mid rotation work horse starter. he was the #81 prospect in baseball 2 yrs ago. Unfortunately, he got injured, whats new lol. Got passed up by others and that hurt his chance. Bottom line, he was better than a eveland/simmons, but wasnt in the cahill/anderson territory.

"Hendry knew, too. He knew exactly what he was getting in Harden. Just like Beane knew what he was getting in Gallagher in his work load and his track record. I don't blame Hendry one bit for that deal or for picking up his option this year"

If he really knew what to expect from Harden, then I can not see them trading Marquis. Jason, for as frustrating as he was, was relied upon to eat innings. If he truly had his concerns over Harden, I cant see them then making the 5th spot a question mark as well.

"If Hendry even considers re-signing Harden, then yeah, bad news. "

I would give him a 1 year incentive based deal. Again, it can't hurt, and if they think Samardijija's future is in the rotation, a 1 yr deal can bridge the gap between the current rotation and the Cashner/Jackson/Samardijija future. And the Cubs have Heilman and Marshall if Harden gets hurt/falters.

Oh, no, wont say the Harden trade was one we shouldn’t have done, and I do think his option almost had to be picked up. But I can not imagine Hendry actually knew what he was holding – it just doesn’t fit his track record. He probably called Beane, gave an initial offer he figured he would have to improve on and ended up shocked he took it. But you don’t remove Marquis knowing what we do about Harden (compounded by the inning increase Dempster went through I might add).

FYI - Marquis had 167 IP last year, with the missing innings generally coming from the fact they found a way to skip him in the rotation once each month (really, he had 5 starts each month, where normally 6 would be expected). Otherwise, he was 191-207 each of the 4 years prior.

And yes, very tired of Hendry, (calling for him to turn in his resignation any chance I get!) but not to the point I wont give him credit where it is deserved. That said, I still don’t believe he knew Harden was showing these trends prior to the trade. He may have known he was an injury risk, but I seriously don’t think he knew what the situation was since his production seemed to be so strong. And just to clarify, I call for him to quit because of the horrendous contracts he has hand tied the club with while providing next to nothing in the way of minor league depth. He really is trying to run the team like the early 90s Yankees, and it has gotten rather destructive. Next year, just 10 players will make 117 million because of his commitments, and I believe 7 will make 96 (or something like that) in 2011.

I don’t hold him accountable for the team doing under performing now though, other then my believe that Milton Bradley’s mental issues is having a negative effect on others in the club (much like we saw with Barrett). I hate all of his offseason moves (seriously, was there a good one?), and think that hurt the team, but we are still much better then we are playing.

Could somebody please enlighten me as to were they are getting this info about his injured shoulder!! I can tell you "that there is nothing wrong with his shoulder". His last two starts in AAA was mid-90's before going on DL with knee issue and is rehabbing.

Fair deal all around, hope it works out for both teams. I know there is alot of hype around Beane because of Moneyball, but I feel he makes fair trades in general. Towers is a GM I see as always on the win side of the equation.

"Could somebody please enlighten me as to were they are getting this info about his injured shoulder!! I can tell you "that there is nothing wrong with his shoulder". His last two starts in AAA was mid-90's before going on DL with knee issue and is rehabbing."

Most are referring to Gallagher missing 19 games in late 2008 with shoulder fatigue, originally called a "right arm injury". Ending his first half-season with Oakland that way leaves a sour taste in one's mouth. And now, of course, he is dealing with rehab on the knee.

The bottom line is he's an injury-prone pitcher who didn't fit into the A's plans. There are at least ten arms in the A's system I'd rather have than Gallagher, so getting rid of him and two players below their top-30 is a genius move.

Does it really matter who the "winner" is?

As a Padre I'm glad we're adding some potential pitching talent to our roster.

This type of trade makes sense. But only if they dont go half way and only do a few minature trades like this.

They need to trade at least one, maybe two of AGon, Peavy, and Bell this offseason and get some prospects to remake this team.