Beltran

Chris_Sanders

Not Always The Best Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,382
Reaction score
32,065
Location
Scottsdale, Az
And yes, they have similar impacts on the field... but one makes more than 10 times what the other does, and we're a team on a budget... and we flushed a sorely needed reliever along with Parker. It was an abysmal move.

I have already conceded that the money difference is large but I don't believe it is the impact you feel it is.

More to the point, as bad as Cahill has been here, I am not sure Parker would have been worse. Oakland's park is definitely the better place to pitch. Cahill's best season was there.

Ultimately they are both just kind of "bleh", which was my original point about trading prospects.

The only thing that makes this a "bad" move in my book is Cook (well and I have to watch Cahill every season).
 

ASUCHRIS

ONE HEART BEAT!!!
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Posts
16,672
Reaction score
15,023
Yet, they are almost the same player with virtually the same impact on their teams.

Repeating this ad nauseum won't make it true. Further, ignoring the cost difference between the players and Cook, who is an all star reliever is the kind of cognitive dissonance that can get you a job in KT's front office.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,292
Reaction score
8,324
Location
Scottsdale
I dunno, its pretty bad. As I said in my last post, I think its much more likely that Parker improves than Cahill. Cahill had a career year in 2010 and the A's jumped the gun giving him an extension. Outside of that career year in 2010 you're looking at a dude with an ERA in the low 4s, high 3s and a 1.4 whip. And the long term impact of his contract if he does not turn his career around will be brutal. 12 million for a #3/#4 pitcher is waaaay too much for this franchise.


You're neglecting his first year with the Dbacks in 2012... And as bad as he was last year, he still had an ERA under 4.
As for the money... I think when you're approaching $8 million and above for a starter, it's right to expect more from that starter than what we saw from Cahill last season. Would his 2012 season sit better with his $7.7 million salary? I think so...
 

Chris_Sanders

Not Always The Best Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,382
Reaction score
32,065
Location
Scottsdale, Az
Repeating this ad nauseum won't make it true.

Right, that .02 ERA and .19 WHIP are game changers. How could I be so blind. Especially pitching in that hitters paradise in Oakland. Oh wait....

That $5 million difference would have been...hmm...

Cook for sure would be the same reliever in Arizona...like when he had the ERA of 7 pitching here. Hmm....
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
20,382
Reaction score
11,478
Right, that .02 ERA and .19 WHIP are game changers. How could I be so blind. Especially pitching in that hitters paradise in Oakland. Oh wait....

That $5 million difference would have been...hmm...

Cook for sure would be the same reliever in Arizona...like when he had the ERA of 7 pitching here. Hmm....

Cook pitched all of 7.2 innings as a Dback, I hardly think that was enough to say he say he couldnt have hacked it in Az. Cook basically had one really bad outing (giving up 3 runs in 0 innings in his debut), and after that was perfectly fine, and then became a stud in Oakland.

And its more than just a 5 mil difference. Its 28 million over the span of the contracts... for an inferior player. You could sell me on the ball park being the a huge factor if not for Parker having a significantly better whip. I hardly think the ball park is forcing Cahill to walk batters at a higher rate than Parker.
 
Last edited:

BC867

Long time Phoenician!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
17,827
Reaction score
1,709
Location
NE Phoenix
I think when you're approaching $8 million and above for a starter, it's right to expect more from that starter than what we saw from Cahill last season.
Trevor Cahill has baby fat and a double chin. He doesn't even look like an athlete. :)
 

Attachments

  • Cahill.jpeg
    Cahill.jpeg
    4.1 KB · Views: 40

Chris_Sanders

Not Always The Best Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,382
Reaction score
32,065
Location
Scottsdale, Az
Well Cook is fairly indefensible. Was really bad to include him in the trade and a classic toss in that bites you in the ass.

The salaries I think they would have just spent that on a different #3 pitcher. Right or wrong, they didn't feel Parker was that guy.

I am fairly sure they don't think Skaggs is that guy either.
 

Chris_Sanders

Not Always The Best Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,382
Reaction score
32,065
Location
Scottsdale, Az
Trevor Cahill has baby fat and a double chin. He doesn't even look like an athlete. :)

He is the Pillsbury Blowboy but I am harder on him than his numbers probably dictate.
 
Top