Trading Hanrahan, Sooner Rather Than Later

by CW on May 31, 2011 5:49 PM EDT

Joe Posnanski had a nice little post this morning on Joakim Soria's very bad 2011. For those of you not following the situation, Soria blew yet another save yesterday afternoon, leading Ned Yost to insert Aaron Crow into the closer role. Last year the Royals were turning down Jesus Montero for Soria, and now the Yankees would laugh if Dayton Moore called up and made that same offer.

Soria isn't the same as Hanrahan - his fastball isn't anywhere near what The Hammer can deploy - but he does illustrate that relief pitchers, even seemingly all-world closers, aren't sure things to stay dominant. I don't have any idea what the Pirates could get for 2.5 years worth of Hanrahan on the open market (although I certainly had a great time researching the Rangers farm system with everyone earlier in the month), but I'd like to find out at the trade deadline. We don't have to trade him any sooner than that - and if the Pirates go on some miracle run through their brutal post-All Star break schedule, you could maybe convince me otherwise - but unless the return is clearly paltry, it would be wise to move Hanrahan before he joins this rather depressing paragraph:

Mark Davis won a Cy Young in 1989, he was all but unpitchable one year later. Bobby Thigpen saved 57 games in 1990, he was was minus-1 Wins Above Replacement for the rest of his career. Bryan Harvey ... Chad Cordero ... J.J. Putz ... Robb Nen ... Michael Jackson ... Derrick Turnbow ... Jeff Russell ... B.J. Ryan ... you can name two dozen others ... they had dominant seasons as closers, some of them had multiple dominant seasons, but then it ended, maybe because of injury, maybe because the league figured them out, or maybe because closers, like running backs and boy bands, live thrilling but short lives.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I whole heartedly agree with this.

I’m hoping Huntington can make a huge move at the deadline.

Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?

http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained

by Kosstic518 on May 31, 2011 5:59 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

I would like to see Meek for a little longer before I would think about moving Hanrahan

by pantherboy on May 31, 2011 6:35 PM EDT reply actions

i wouldn't mind seeing veras getting a save chance or two

by theatrain on Jun 1, 2011 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions

Agreed. Meek pitched excellently last season down the stretch before he wore out due to overwork, and was never quite healthy this year till recently. If Meek can recapture that success then I wouldn’t mind a Hanrahan trade. However, that’s entirely dependent on the return, because to justify trading a guy who looks like he could well be a top-5 reliever we would need an irrefuseable offer.

by Akshay R on Jun 1, 2011 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions

I like the Notion of this

But whose to say that The Hammer doesn’t have the same issues that Meeker is having next year and he never fully recovers? Also whose to say meek will ever get back to dominate, he pitching well lately but its a small sample. I think it would be best to move Hanrahan as soon as possible

by samvescovi on Jun 1, 2011 7:52 AM EDT up reply actions

I can accept that, I guess it just depends on how much importance you place on having a strong closer. Personally I feel like everyone thinks closers are easily replaceable, which often they are; but then once your closer hits a massive slump(e.g. Capps from 2 years ago, Soria now) you find yourself scrambling for an adequate replacement.
In that sense I think it’s an excellent luxury to have 2 top-notch relievers with Meek and Hanrahan. However, as I said it’s just a luxury, so given the right offer anyone on the team besides McCutchen and NW, and perhaps Morton now, should be available.

by Akshay R on Jun 1, 2011 8:53 AM EDT up reply actions

Why?

Why does a team that’s probably not going to make the playoffs need a closer? If we’re conceivably in the race by the deadline I say we hold Hanrahan unless we get a hell of an offer, but if not, what’s a few blown saves in a lost season?

www.stealingfirstbase.com

by Stealing First Base on Jun 1, 2011 4:03 AM EDT up reply actions

a few blown saves, means a few more loses, a few more loses that occur because of blown saves are very morale deflating, not what a young team needs.

We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!

by C Shint on Jun 1, 2011 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions

A few more losses means a higher draft pick.

Thus, better players in the farm system. Thus, a better future.

www.stealingfirstbase.com

by Stealing First Base on Jun 1, 2011 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions

meh

I’d be fine with moving Hanrahan at the deadline, but only if a team will pay an “elite closer” premium for him. The reason closers are volatile is just a sample-size issue: if you only pitch 4 innings a week, you’re prone to bad months sometimes. That could happen to Hanrahan, but stuff-wise, he’s an elite reliever: plus fastball, plus-plus slider, and he’s added above-average control/command to his game this season. I’m not worried about him, performance-wise, so I’d only trade him if I got an offer I couldn’t refuse.

by epoc on May 31, 2011 6:37 PM EDT reply actions

Are you figuring ages

into these guys who fell off the cliff?

Free your ass and your mind will follow.

by cocktailsfor2 on May 31, 2011 6:43 PM EDT reply actions

No, and that's a great point

So Hanrahan is 29.

Soria is 27 (and he could be fine by the All-Star break, this is a really small sample size)
Mark Davis: 29
Bobby Thigpen: 28
Harvey: 31
Cordero: 26
J.J. Putz: 32

And I have to run, but I’ll get the rest of those ages together later.

http://www.rakesofmallow.com

by CW on May 31, 2011 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions

I think these ages actually support your argument.

But the only age that matters to me is how old Hanrahan will be by the time the Pirates are competitive. I want to move him based on that fact alone to the highest acceptable bidder. I’d hold another season if people tried to lowball.

Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?

http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained

by Kosstic518 on May 31, 2011 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions

I think you hold him for another season regardless. Unless NH is absolutely blown out of the water by what a team offers for Hanrahan you keep him.

Best case scenario, you trade him next year for something just as good as you would get this year if not better.

Worst case scenario, he falls off and your stuck with a RP that can gas it up there for another, in which time you can hope he re-establish his trade value, and then once agian, you attempt to trade him…

We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!

by C Shint on May 31, 2011 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions

I wouldn’t be opposed to trading him this year (unless the oft chance they are still in the hunt). I don’t know that he is part of the future and I don’t think his trade value will be any higher than it is now. Of course injuries to other closers could play a role in the asking price.

I’m not saying give him away by any means. But if you get an offer with solid major league ready prospects, then I wouldn’t hesitate to make the trade.

by StripesForLife on May 31, 2011 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions

The problem with trading Hanrahan

or any of our guys at this point is who do we get in return that is a definite upgrade on what we’ve got, either at the major or upper minor league level? Will trading Hanrahan get us a power hitting 1B or RF? Will it get us a hot shot shortstop prospect?

If the answer is that he will only get us more of what we already have, then the answer is no, don’t trade him.

I don’t expect Hanrahan is going to fall off a cliff like some of those others. There are other examples, like Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman who do it for much longer.

by MarkInDallas on Jun 1, 2011 12:30 AM EDT reply actions

I think a nice MLB-ready RF

and maybe a shortstop prospect in single-A might be perfect for him. I don’t expect that but I would certainly enjoy it.

by samvescovi on Jun 1, 2011 7:55 AM EDT up reply actions

If we could get Profar and an interesting pitcher (but not elite or even good prospect)

I’d pull the trigger. Profar supposedly will stick at short, and his performance at A for his age and position is awesome. Plate discipline and power.

Everything that guy just said is bullshit . . .thank you

by Scranton on Jun 1, 2011 8:24 AM EDT reply actions

I doubt that the Rangers would trade...

…Profar and an interesting pitcher for Hanrahan. They may have already thought twice about trading Profar of Perez for Hanrahan. If the Rangers were desperate, they might over pay for Hanrahan. But not otherwise.

s.zielinski

by steve_z on Jun 1, 2011 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions

try to remember that Meek's velocity is down from last season

hes rarely reaching mid 90’s now. but he, and especially Veras, could hold down the closer role if Hanny is dealt.

by white angus on Jun 1, 2011 11:54 AM EDT reply actions

yeah this

i need to see meek back up around 96 before he closes regularly

by theatrain on Jun 2, 2011 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110124&content_id=16493480&c_id=mlb

If we don’t get one of these in return for Hanrahan than there’s no need to bother right now.

by BadAndy on Jun 1, 2011 1:04 PM EDT reply actions

but if you were to get a player with numbers such as Matt Curry, lets say at AA ball, does it help you pull the trigger?

im not saying Curry, but someone with a similar pattern. and Curry isnt on anyones top 50, top 100, or even top 200.

by white angus on Jun 1, 2011 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions

if we got

let’s say, a Paul Goldschmidt, I’d pull the trigger. (Not that I know his offensive context, but if its close to this after accounting for park and league, I’d do the trade in a heartbeat)

by BurgherKing on Jun 1, 2011 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions

where would PG rank in the Pirates top 20, BK??? whats his ceiling, in your opinion.

by white angus on Jun 1, 2011 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions

I haven't any

I have never seen Goldschmidt play— heck, I never heard of him before this season, but he’s age appropriate (slllightly on the higher side, but its OK if he mashes like this)—his past K/BB rates are a concern, but that’s where you need to put scouts out there and trust them to decide if his numbers so far this year are for real… frankly, I threw the name out there, so there’s more figuring to be done on this.

by BurgherKing on Jun 1, 2011 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions

dang, Goldschmidt is a horse

i would say that his homers were inflated in 2010 in the CAL league, but hes tearing up the Southern league this year, and thats not a hitters league at all.

lots of K’s though, but the power is impressive. brad eldred anyone?

by white angus on Jun 2, 2011 6:54 AM EDT up reply actions

the K rate this year

is perfectly acceptable, esp combined with the bb rate. That’s why you gotta figure out if this is for real or not, based on scouts

by BurgherKing on Jun 2, 2011 9:36 AM EDT up reply actions

Irony

How fantastic would the irony be if Pittsburgh acquired Tanner Scheppers from the Rangers for Hanrahan?

I don’t think Hammer alone could fetch any of these guys, especially considering that about a third of these guys are in the majors or rumored to be up any day now.

by SuperBaes on Jun 3, 2011 1:25 AM EDT up reply actions

What other teams would be possible trade partners for Hanrahan?

Anyone know off hand? Was kind of running thru the list of contenders quickly…I could see St. Louis or Cincinnati getting involved…maybe Tampa, cause call me crazy, but I have doubts about the idea of Kyle Farnsworth lasting the entire season as a lights-out closer. Would something like Hanny for Alonso as a starting point with the Reds work?

by NastyNate82 on Jun 1, 2011 11:07 PM EDT reply actions