Can Harangutan be the answer

Fangraphs take a look at Aaron Harang who recently cleared waivers and is available if someone wants to meet the price. Would he be worth his large contact?

6 months ago meercatjohn 35 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

no

we dont need him

by matthewmafa on Aug 13, 2009 2:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I still think Stults is the answer.

Especially after September 1, when we can use all the relievers to back the rotation up that we want.

by JonWeisman on Aug 13, 2009 2:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think Harang could be useful no doubt, but it’s like trading Pierre – they’d never take on the salary to make it worth trading him (from their end) and to make it worth it for us to pick him up. For a 5 mil per year pitcher I’d take Harang, but they won’t pick up that much of his deal.

When the rosters expand, I really would like to see us try and piece together some sort of a bench. I figure we can carry one less pitcher in the postseason, so I’m hoping someone like an Abreu steps up.

by oshea2002 on Aug 13, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

its not like joe torre will ever use the young guys

he calls em up, doesnt use them, and send em back down

by matthewmafa on Aug 13, 2009 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haeger

will get 1 appearance and get sent down for Elbert in a week and a half. I bet I’m right, lol.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

joe torre does not trust young guys

and i really dislike him for that

by matthewmafa on Aug 13, 2009 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

he needs to start

The young guys that he didn’t trust last year are leading this team to the best record in the NL.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

joe torre does not trust young guys

Clayton Kershaw, Chad Billinsgley, Jonathon Broxton, James Loney, Matt Kemp and Cory Wade all wave hello.

I no longer feel that you can say the Dodger organization does not support young players. Many have gotten their shot.

by Michael White on Aug 13, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

All out of complete necessity

The only reason Torre couldn’t go against Billingsley is because he saw how Little tried that by starting Tomko/Hendrickson over him for so long and how it failed completely.

Broxton is the closer because Saito left and the only other options were Wood and Krod (or Hoffman).

There was no one else to play 1B every day, but I think Torre might have actually wanted to play Loney anyway.

Do you really want to say Kemp (and Ethier) were trusted last season? Torre tried to play Pierre and Jones as much as possible till he really couldn’t use any valid excuse to play them over Kemp and Ethier.

Wade he seemed to really like, which is why he gave him the ball so much at the beginning of the year when he was struggling badly.

No Torre doesn’t mistrust all young players, but he does a lot of stuff to avoid playing them until they force him to play them.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

these young guys are proven now

thats why he trusts them more now

by matthewmafa on Aug 13, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

But guys like Dewitt, Elbert, Mcdonald, and any other rookie is unproven, but for the most part haven’t been given the chance to prove themselves this season, though Mcdonald seems to be getting more and more chances, which is nice to see, especially with his ERA now just around 4.

On that last note, I’d love to see Mcdonald get the next start for the 5th spot in the rotation, so we can see if he can do more in the majors than just relieve right now.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

McDonald, Leach and Dewitt have been given plenty of rope. Circumstances forced them out, but can you say that either of Dewitt or Leach deserves to be with the ML club? I liked Leach, but with Sherril here and a healthy Kuo, he just doesn’t have a spot. As you say, McDonald has been given chances. He won the #5 role out of spring training and didn’t perform. Even still, Torre continues to give him chances as a reliever.

I agree Elbert can be given a shot. But last week he was simply a victim of circumstance. It was nothing personal about Elbert getting sent down. These things happen.

by Michael White on Aug 13, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hve to agree a bit

The vets do get sort of a benefit of the doubt, yes theyve earned it, but I’d really liked to have seen Tony Abreu get at least 2 or 3 spot starts when blake or the O-Dog need to rest

William Doolittle at your service, a.k.a. will do.

by Ollie on Aug 13, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haeger is out of options

He’s either here until Sept or DFA.

by silverwidow on Aug 13, 2009 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never looked up his contract, didn't know about the trade kicker

His contract calls for $12.5M next season, and if he’s traded, Harang’s $12.75M club option for 2011 with a $2M buyout becomes a $14M mutual option.

If he continues to decline, then he exercise the 2011 option and the Dodgers (or any new team) get two years of mediocre or worse for $26.5M. That sounds unappetizing.

(Fangraphs linked to Cot’s for the contract info.)

by David Young on Aug 13, 2009 2:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Phillies getting Lee was the steal of the century

or close to it. They gave up dogcrap and an injured guy for a top flight lefty. I hate that.

by silverwidow on Aug 13, 2009 3:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

What do you think

the Dodger’s equivalent to their deal would have been?

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

The Blue Jays were asking for ONE of Kershaw or Billingsley along with many other minor leaguers, and they did not ask for Kemp (they had no room for him in their crowded outfield at the time).

For Cliff Lee there was no way any team would have paid as much for him as Halladay, so obviously the demands went down from the Halladay offers. They still wanted Kershaw or Billingsley, but if that were to have happened (I’m so glad it never would have), it would have most likely taken Kershaw/Bills plus one or two other top Dodgers prospects.

The only other big possible trade was the SD one with Gonzo and Bell, and that involved Loney, Martin, and 3 or 4 other minor leaguers (i guess Mcdonald would be a major leaguer now, but idk).

I don’t mean to sound like a jerk, so I’m sorry if I do, but Kershaw, Kemp, Lindblom, Bell, and E. Martin would have been a more likely offer for Pujols and another Cardinals major leaguer than for 1 starting pitcher.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 3:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're clearly not JP Riccardi.

by Dr. Geek on Aug 13, 2009 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd have considered the San Diego Deal

I’d have given up a lot to get Adrian Gonzalez. There’s a reason Boston was willing to give up such a huge package for him.

by oshea2002 on Aug 13, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would have loved to get A Gone

But losing Martin would have severely hurt the pitching staff, plus we have no real replacement right now.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

They came out and said

they would do a deal without Kershaw or any MLB player.

The probly is that Colletti (and rightfully so) did not want to give up 6 of our top prospects for Halladay. From what I’ve seen now, they wanted even more than the 6.

You are delusional if you think anyone was seriously asking Kershaw, Kemp, Lindblom, E. Martin, and Bell.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I thought it was a funny joke.

by Dr. Geek on Aug 13, 2009 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ya i think your taking the slightly sarcastic comment a bit too far

He’s just saying teams were demanding alot form the Dodgers, and then they accept a sack of beans from Philly

William Doolittle at your service, a.k.a. will do.

by Ollie on Aug 13, 2009 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haha

Seriously, perhaps Withrow, McDonald, Hu, and Delmonico.

by silverwidow on Aug 13, 2009 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would have taken this easily

over Philly’s package.

by silverwidow on Aug 13, 2009 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would have figured something along the same lines

though not with Hu, because I doubt anyone really wants him anymore, even with his good defense.

It would have sucked giving up Withrow and Mcdonald (along with 2 lower prospects), but Cliff Lee would have been worth it.

Oh well, the pitching isn’t the problem for the Dodgers right now, it’s the hitting.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree with that

We need more production from Furcal, Loney, and Martin. Period. Furcal had a huge July, but is slumping in August. For all the talk of how on fire Martin is/was – he’s ops’ing .650 in August. He has 16 xtra base hits on the season.

by oshea2002 on Aug 13, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

Martin has been a huge dissapointment, and Furcal is along the same lines, but getting less flack for whatever reason. Then Loney, yeah, he really needs to start hitting for more power. Be that doubles or homeruns, they need to start coming soon.

With Manny and Ethier heating up, and Kemp having his break out season, we really need Furcal and Martin setting the table for them and having Loney be one of the guys to back them up.

Hudson has been very solid recently, and Blake, well, I really want him hitting 8th again, because he’s done the best in that spot.

by Ivdown on Aug 13, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No way. We do not need a fifth starter in the playoffs and that’s what Harang would be for us.

by craigbro on Aug 13, 2009 4:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I wasn’t really thinking about Harang this year but for next year, but given the trade kicker and the economic environment I’d probably pass. If will be curious what Wolf brings on the open market this year and how agents play the game. I could easily see more players taking the arbitration route given what happened this past spring with Hudson/Wolf/Manny falling into our laps.

Between Haeger and Stults I think I’d rather see Haeger get an opportunity because Haeger as the ability to pitch deeper while Stults has rarely displayed the ability to go more then five innings.

However when Sept 1st comes along and the game changes completely these short starting outing will be a moot point as long as we are not down by five runs after four innings.

by meercatjohn on Aug 13, 2009 6:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs