November 2, 201213 yr I don't understand this. Why would the Cubs want to add payroll, and get older at the same time? They aren't competing while Haren is under contract (2013). If they just wanted to dump Marmol, they should have cut payroll too. UNLESS this is all just to move Haren elsewhere either this offseason or in July. He has tons of success in the NL, so maybe they want to boost his stock, and trade him midseason?
November 2, 201213 yr I look at this the complete opposite away, this trade makes 0 sense for LAA imo
November 3, 201213 yr QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 2, 2012 -> 07:57 PM) I look at this the complete opposite away, this trade makes 0 sense for LAA imo Actually, now that I think about it, I forgot the Angels had an OPTION for Haren at $15M, but a buyout at like....$3M? So really, they just added $6M in payroll, and got a terrible reliever (unless someone can control his walk issue).
November 3, 201213 yr I don't even know what to think of this trade. It's one team's garbage for another team's garbage...except one team's garbage has a guaranteed contract.
November 3, 201213 yr QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 2, 2012 -> 09:27 PM) #Cubs source says Marmol-for-Haren trade "not happening" Indeed. http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8584934/...deal-called-off
November 3, 201213 yr It's the Dempster trade fiasco all over again. Good work Theo. Angels bought out Haren, he is now a free agent.
November 4, 201213 yr QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 3, 2012 -> 11:31 AM) It's the Dempster trade fiasco all over again. Good work Theo. Angels bought out Haren, he is now a free agent. I don't know why you'd ever trade with the Cubs now. That's two botched deals in the past 4 months.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.