Just give me back my pieces
Just give them back to me please
Just give me back my pieces
And let me hold my broken parts

Brynes doesn't care, he has a contract until 2015

"His first stint in the big leagues was dominant"

If by first stint, you mean one really good start against Toronto...

If by first stint, you mean one really good start against Toronto...

and by dominant you mean a 4.3 BB/9 coupled with a 7.1 K/9.

Byrnes is obviously correct that a lot of trade prognostication goes wrong. But the excerpt implies it's "real baseball people" criticizing it and we know that the saber folks are criticizing it. I don't think you'll find many trades/signings that both groups criticize that turned out well.

Except when both groups don't have legitimate criticisms. I'm having a hard time seeing this trade as anything but a win for the Diamondbacks. Much of the criticism I've seen revolves around three main themes, Scherzer is the better pitcher, Scherzer's control years are hugely valuable, Kennedy is a back of the rotation starter, and I don't think any are true. It seems as most commentators are thinking about the Scherzer & Jacksons of a year ago, not todays edition. The real truth is...

1) Jackson is more valuable than Scherzer
This year Jackson pitched far more innings, with a better ERA, against much tougher lineups. Over the last two years Jackson has been more durable, and his ERA+ is only slightly lower than Scherzer's, and that is more than offset by the much tougher lineups Jackson faced.

Analysts are mislead by Scherzer's much higher raw K rate and FIPs. First they also ignore strength of competition, Jackson is likely to have a K rate above 7 per 9 when the opposing lineup contains a pitcher instead of a DH, and Scherzer is likely to be down in the 8 per 9 range when he has to face the DH instead of a pitcher. And Scherzer's FIPs is likely to increase in the AL, and Jacksons to decrease in the NL because of strength of competition. And much Jackson's FIPs was accumulated in the AL East, in fact of his 110 career starts 49 were against the Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, and Indians, in aggregate way above average offenses. Jackson faced the 9th and 3rd toughest lineups of AL pitchers the last two years, this year Scherzer faced one of the weakest lineups of any NL pitcher.

But where Jackson really adds value is in innings pitched. Scherzer is going to have to improve mightily to remain a starter. In the NL he tires the 5th inning and struggles to get in the 6th almost every start. Now facing a DH instead of a pitcher means he's going to throw even more pitches and struggle earlier. He seems likely to throw fewer innings in the AL, while the opposite is true for Jackson. In fact, I predict the Tigers wil be forced to move him to the pen next year, he just won't be able to get through lineups twice in the AL very often.

The difference in value between the pitchers isn't just the difference between a 4.5 and a 3.7 FIPs, it's the difference between Max + 40 innings of your lesser relievers and Jackson. And you have to factor in the extra stress Max puts on the bullpen and whether that forces the team to invest more into it.

2) Jackson has the better trends
Max's strikeout rate, ERA, FIP, etc all got worse this year. Jackson has improved his walk rate tremendously over the last 4 years, and his FIP/ERA has improved over the last 3 years.

3) Scherzer's control years aren't as valuable as people think
First, Max has a large injury risk. His mechanics are bad (inverted W combined with a nasty neck snap) and he has already had episodes of tendinitus and dead arm. He's gone through a substantial increase in innings pitched over the last few years. But secondly, he's not so cheap, he's already making $1.5M per year on the MLB deal he signed as a first round draft pick.

So the value of his three extra control years is heavily dependent upon whether he can stay a starter, whether he can stay healthy, and then has to be discounted for the time cost of being two to five years away.

4) Ian Kennedy is more valuable than Daniel Schlereth
Who cares if Ian only turns out to be a 4th or 5th starter, that's still more valuable than almost any reliever. HIs career MLB FIP is 4.99, which would be a significant upgrade over the Diamondback's motley collection of 2009 5th starters. Ian has much more immediate value for the DBacks than Schlereth.

And Ian's still only 25, and his minor league track record is so stellar it can't be argued he doesn't have a higher upside, the main criticism is that he got lit up for a handful of MLB starts when he was 23 years old. I'd say that is a pretty limited sample size, his 6.0 ERA in 59 MLB innings should be counterbalanced by his 2.0 ERA over 120 AAA innings. He was still as dominant in the higher levels of the minor leagues as the lower.

And Ian's extra value as a starter over his control years helps make up for fewer control years of Jackson.