What makes you think Rags didn't recognize the talent in Nathan? Just b/c they traded him, doesn't mean that they didn't know he was good.
And, as I've repeated here and elsewhere, the Pierzinski trade wasn't half as bad as people make it out to be:
The Pierzinski for Nathan, Bonser and Liriano moves is among the most underrated moves the Giants have ever made. Don't get me wrong, the trade favored the Twins, but not as much as advertised. Pierzinski, despite his less than impressive season and bad attitude and terrible job catching games, was a catalyst for the '04 Giants team that won 91 games and was a legit playoff contender. Sure, they ended up not making it, but he helped them win then, which was important. Compare that to who they traded. Okay, they could sure use Joe Nathan, I'll give you that. He's a plus closer (though probably a bit overrated playing half his games in the now-non-homerdome). But, after that, what did they give up. Boof Bonser, a career #4 starter at best. Eh, not much to give up for a shot at the playoffs. Liriano? Well, he did have 16 great starts in 2006. Maybe Liriano will have a miracle and prove he can get healthy and be a good or better MLB starter. But, as of now, he has a very, very serious arm injury and half a good season under his belt. So, a (then-future) near-top closer, an injured pitcher and a #4 starter for an aggressive catcher. Didn't work out, but if the '04 Giants had won two more games and made the playoffs, and maybe gone further, we might have a very different view of that trade.
|
