Oakland A's Breaking News: Trevor Cahill Traded to Arizona Diamondbacks
Amid all the hoopla regarding the Oakland Athletics’ shopping around pitchers Gio Gonzalez and Andrew Bailey, one might wonder if starting pitcher Trevor Cahill had lost his cachet as a valuable commodity.
After all, Cahill was himself an All-Star, who finished in the top 10 in the Cy Young Award voting a mere two seasons ago. Certainly he had just as much value as his two teammates who were being dangled to nearly every other team on the market for a quality starter.
But the reason Cahill may not have received as much fanfare might be in small part to his difficult 2011 campaign. Last year saw Cahill struggle to the tune of a 12-14 record with a 4.16 ERA. In nearly every important statistical category, Cahill worsened from his dominant 2010 season.
Yet on Friday afternoon, the A’s managed to find a suitor for Cahill, trading the 23-year-old to the Arizona Diamondbacks, according to the CSN BayArea. Oakland will receive two right-handed pitchers, Jarrod Parker and Ryan Cook, as well as outfielder Collin Cowgill. Arizona also gets left-handed reliever Craig Breslow in the deal.
It’s no secret that the Athletics are in the midst of an aggressive roster upheaval, the likes of which could result in nearly every single player on this year’s squad being different that last season’s Opening Day team. Even the highly touted ace of the staff, Cahill, was not untouchable.
Consequently, the A’s are intent on unloading their young talent to acquire even younger—and cheaper—talent. The Oakland A’s will likely field a junior varsity team of unproven prospects and minor leaguers next season. And their bounty of Parker, Cowgill and Cook is an example.
The move to trade Cahill is not surprising to A’s fans. They have been forewarned that a revamping was about to ensue. So despite a plethora of options regarding Gonzalez and Bailey spreading through the rumor mill, Cahill’s departure is not a shocking one.
He’s just the first domino.
This is only the beginning.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?