beck72 Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 If the sox acquired him I could see moving him in another deal. Not much time before the deadline, though. Yet he'd likely be a good addition to the bullpen. Then in the offseason, the sox could move Javy or Jose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 12:35 PM) This is kind of puzzling. Why would the Nats trade away a pitcher that is 23. Anyone want to tell me something about this guy. Ie, is he for real and are we talking about a nice long-term acquisition or are we talking about a guy thats been pitching way over his head, despite being young. You have to like the fact that he has fewer hits than innings pitched, but he has thrown a decent number of walks and doesn't get a ton of k's. Is this guy going to get lit up in his transition from the NL to AL. Also, we have to be talking about a package which involves both Fields & Poreda correct (why would the Nats trade a 23 year old without getting significant pieces in return). Hell looking at his minor league numbers, the guy just shot through the system. 2006 was his first full season and he was nothing short of mediocre, than 07 he goes from High A to the Majors. 08 he spent the entire time with the Nats. That's like asking why would the Nats trading Jon Rauch when he was their closer and under their control til what 09 or 2010? You know how much Jim Bowden loves his toolsy outfielders and position prospects. I don't know how Fields would be a fit for them considering they have Zimmerman at 3B already (unless Fields moved to 1B/OF). Otherwise my guess would be Broadway + McCullough + Shelby maybe, the Nats are just really going after loading up their system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 on SI.com now: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writ...ml?eref=writers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 12:00 PM) I would assume Clayton Richard would have to be traded to the Nationals as part of this deal. They would clearly want an ML ready pitcher. BUt like mentioned before, why would the Nationals trade a 23-year-old lefty, who is dealing this year? Probably because Clayton has better stuff. I'd back away from this deal if they want Richard, but Broadway would be on the table, and McCulloch should always be on the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 is maccullough going to make the majors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 01:04 PM) is maccullough going to make the majors? Not with us. He'd make it for the Nats someday in their ballpark though I'd imagine. Also Lannan has some weird numbers this season; Home - 2-5, 42IP, 16K's, 18BB's, 4.71 ERA, 1.40WHIP. Away - 4-5, 77IP, 50K's, 22BB's, 2.57 ERA, 1.23WHIP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 I love Richard, but based on the stats why wouldn't you give him up to get this 23 year old lefty (again this is purely stat base as I can't give much of an assessment on Lannan). On a side-note, wouldn't you think the Nats would have interest in Brian Anderson (toolsy outfielder, could be a high upside acquisition). And I'm not implying Anderson as the main piece, rather one of the potential pieces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 01:03 PM) Probably because Clayton has better stuff. I'd back away from this deal if they want Richard, but Broadway would be on the table, and McCulloch should always be on the table. Have you actually seen Lannan? Because I just can't full believe that Richard has better stuff than him, not when Lannan has an ERA in the low 3's. Even in a pitcher's park and in the NL, that's still a damn good ERA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 trade deadline 3 p.m. eastern? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 10:08 AM) trade deadline 3 p.m. eastern? 4 Eastern Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 One thing I will say though, the Sox have hit on Danks and Floyd, 2 young pitchers who they've traded for over the past couple of years. I'll give KW and the scouting staff the benefit of the doubt here if they do indeed go for Lannan (who I had heard nothing about prior to 10 mins ago). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friend of Nordhagen Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 01:08 PM) Have you actually seen Lannan? Because I just can't full believe that Richard has better stuff than him, not when Lannan has an ERA in the low 3's. Even in a pitcher's park and in the NL, that's still a damn good ERA. And if the numbers earlier in this thread are right, his numbers are actually way better AWAY from that ballpark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 the fact that we haven't had Levine talk about this makes feel like it will get done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Lannan makes sense. He could fill in for Jose until he's back. If Jose is healthy and throwing well, Lannan can go to the bullpen. A LHP who can eat 2 innings at a time, and be on the roster in case a SP goes down/ or is sucking, would kill 2 birds with one stone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 12:08 PM) Have you actually seen Lannan? Because I just can't full believe that Richard has better stuff than him, not when Lannan has an ERA in the low 3's. Even in a pitcher's park and in the NL, that's still a damn good ERA. http://washington.nationals.mlb.com/media/...3&c_id=was# I like Richard's arm better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Is there anyone listening to score that can confirm that Rogers is saying it's Joel Hanrahan now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 01:08 PM) Have you actually seen Lannan? Because I just can't full believe that Richard has better stuff than him, not when Lannan has an ERA in the low 3's. Even in a pitcher's park and in the NL, that's still a damn good ERA. "Stuff" does not make a pitcher. Take MLB results over stuff. Although, Lannan did his work in the NL so I'm not sure how that would equate to the AL. The deal would depend on the other pieces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bschmaranz Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 12:12 PM) Is there anyone listening to score that can confirm that Rogers is saying it's Joel Hanrahan now? I was just in the car and heard that. Everything is speculation. They said the Sox were talking to Washington and that's all they could confirm. Everything outside that is speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 06:12 PM) Is there anyone listening to score that can confirm that Rogers is saying it's Joel Hanrahan now? That would make more sense. He's a big power pitcher with some good stuff out of the pen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 12:12 PM) Is there anyone listening to score that can confirm that Rogers is saying it's Joel Hanrahan now? Ooooh, I could get behind that move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Lannan has a 4.48 FIP this season FWIW. Seems like he's had excellent defense behind him that has saved a few runs to say the least. Does have a 56% GB ratio though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 31, 2008 -> 01:15 PM) That would make more sense. He's a big power pitcher with some good stuff out of the pen. Has some control issues though apparently. Weird that Bowden would trade 2 closers in a row though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Apparently (taken WSI) Rogers said that the talks have cooled for Lannan and now Hanrahan is more of a possibility. I'm sorry, I don't trust Rogers' source, I don't know his reputation, but I have never heard him give good inside scoop ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Hanrahan made his pro debut with Great Falls in 2000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/players/Joel_Hanrahan/ Sounds like he's closer to being what Masset was supposed to be than Masset himself was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.