Open Thread
by Tyler Bleszinski on Dec 8, 2004 9:39 AM PST
in News
Email
PrintThe Winter meetings are close, and the Hudson rumors are picking up steam (registration required). On one hand, I really wouldn't mind seeing Hudson in an Orioles (or Jays or Rays) uniform because it would take a few wins from the Yankees and Red Sox. Although the Yankees are doing that on their own.
For his part, Billy is doing nothing to squash them, which is smartly putting him in the driver's seat.
Oh, and here's something I can't believe they aren't giving away.
Discuss.
115 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
LOL
by Tyler Bleszinski on Dec 8, 2004 9:53 AM PST up reply actions
P.S. They were charging
by Tyler Bleszinski on Dec 8, 2004 9:57 AM PST up reply actions
Here's a picture
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1021041yankee1.html
by davebenfremont on Dec 8, 2004 10:09 AM PST up reply actions
1986 Sox
by juan on Dec 8, 2004 2:20 PM PST up reply actions
As for the Baltimore rumors...
That doesn't seem like enough to me
Who knows what it will evolve into?
by Tyler Bleszinski on Dec 8, 2004 10:08 AM PST up reply actions
oh man....
still say billy will be looking for mlb ready blue chippers and cash.
looking for a multi-team trade here probably consummated in jan/feb.
JRBH
[new] So Long Oakland As a Major League Organization
Tim Hudson represents the last thread of the A's being taken seriously as a competitive organization. His departure, following those of Giambi and Tejada, will be a huge billboard on the major league superhighway: don't bother with Oakland. The team isn't serious.
I know that's how I'm going to take it. Hudson's departure will mean I'm going to cut back quite a bit on both attendance and TV viewing.
by jrbh
by Misfit on Dec 8, 2004 10:15 AM PST reply actions
ugh.
now, if you said SCHOTT wasn't serious, that'd be another matter entirely... ;)
by rickeytime on Dec 8, 2004 5:04 PM PST up reply actions
What about Mora
Hudson and Durazo for Mora and Bedard. Sure Mora can play 2nd. He also is signed cheap 4 mill for the next 2 years.
Boo Hoo
Beane just got Kendall. He's going to have a fine roster in place when spring training opens, he always does.
How can you say, don't take Oakland seriously as a competitive organization. Billy is making big trades a couple of times a year to keep the team competitive.
Hopefully you will jump off the Oakland bandwagon, and go somewhere else to post your drivel.
As far as the rumors I have heard for Huddy, I wouldn't take any of them so far.
by Misfit on Dec 8, 2004 10:24 AM PST reply actions
I agree
by OaktownTribesman on Dec 8, 2004 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
What you're saying
Please. That's always been one of the most integral elements of my baseball experience.
Those humans make up our team, we cheer and hope for them for years, and then we're just supposed to shut up and act like loyal dogs when are favorite players vanish?
Take...off. Jesus Christ, I just got called a terrible A's fan for mounring the possible loss of Huddy. You can keep your fucking team and that mindset, thank you very much, I want nothing to do with it.
On the other hand
It'd be totally different if the A's were our neighborhood beer league team and we could genuinely call the players our friends. However, these guys are professionals and celebrities. Quite frankly I'm not much into the whole celebrity cult mindset that's so prevalent in society today. People are getting way too attached to images, not human beings they actually know personally.
I'm much more attached to people I actually interact with. That means my fellow A's fans here on the board, at the ballpark, or on the streets. And for that reason I say the name on the front is much more important. Rooting for a given team is all about a connection with the community of fans that's been built up over many more years than the time any single player has been on the team. That to me is a whole lot more important.
I just don't see how you can have a stronger connection to the a professional ballplayer than to your fellow fans with whom you've cried, laughed, and celebrated together.
by OaktownTribesman on Dec 8, 2004 3:45 PM PST up reply actions
Excellent post Oaktown
Why do I go to A's games? Simple, I want to have fun.
That fun comes from:
A) Watching good baseball at a low price.
B) Seeing the home team win or just nott seeing Mecir, thank God there was not arbitration with him.
last but definitely not least
C) My friends and fellow fans. There not a better feeling than high-fiving some stranger after a kickass play. Or playing catch in the parking lot after downing a few brews. Or waiting in line for a bobblehead at 10 in the morning. Or going to SBC to see a good NL matchup and silently laughing at all of the stupid, stupid Giants fans.
Let's face it, we do root for the laundry more than anything else. Remember David Justice? When he was with the Yankees I used to heckle the shit out of that guy, calling him a wife beater or doing chants of "Hallie Berry." And when he came to Oakland we were all like "Go Justice! We need that veteran guy in the clubhouse!"
I'd like it for Huddy to stay too, but if he goes, it's not going to be a damper on my biggest reason for being an A's fan; fellowship with my fellow fans.
by secret ASian man on Dec 8, 2004 4:21 PM PST up reply actions
Huddy Rulz
You read way too much into what I was saying. I wasn't saying cut off all emotions to these players, I said, don't get to attached in this day and age, because players are not on just one team for their career's anymore. That is fact.
You took my statement and turned it into, "we're supposed to be robots, and show no emotion." No, just don't be suprised if your favorite player gets moved because no one is off limits these days.
What's wrong with you people, so sensative.
by Misfit on Dec 9, 2004 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
Sorry I was harsh
Misfit
Does every member of AN have to show a certain amount of optimism to prove that he/she is a "good fan" or worthy of posting here?
I realize you're responding to jrbh. And you make a couple good points. The personal attacks, though, are ridiculous.
Community guidelines
He took a post from another thread and moved it here in order to launch a personal attack on a longtime Athletics Nation contributor.
What's more, this is not the first time. Misfit has attacked jrbh on several previous occasions. Everyone is allowed to disagree, of course. The point of this board is to share opinions and ideas. But repeated personal attacks should be out of bounds.
bear88...
Here:
jrbh: Stop using politics in baseball posts. Please. This is a BASEBALL site.
Misfit: Please, if you don't like jrbh's posts, just ignore them. It's obvious that most everything he says bothers you...so ignore his posts.
I love the discourse on this site and I love this community and remarkably these problems have been few and far between. Please just stop. Both of you.
I don't want to ban anyone.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Dec 9, 2004 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
listen bud, here's the facts
2003- 50,260,834 mil
2002- 40,004,167 mil
2001- 33,810,750 mil
2000- 32,121,833 mil
i don't know about you, but i see some commitment here. do you know what the a's drew last yr.? 2.2 fuckin mil!!! for a very comp. team that fuckin' terrible.
don't blame ownership...look in the mirror oakland!
I don't think you can blame the people here
It's not just stadium attendance
by AlamedaAphid on Dec 8, 2004 12:51 PM PST up reply actions
The problem is
by OaktownTribesman on Dec 8, 2004 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
wrong wrong wrong
but really this is beside the main point. if a team can only draw about 2 mil per season then you are going to be left with a 55-60 mil budget.
as we have learned-and will continue to learn- that doesn't keep players like hudson and others (past and future). that's life as an a's fan. no sense whining or threatening not to go to games or watch them on the boob tube. that's childish.
shit, i'm gratiful they signed chavez.
Unfortunately
I work at a company in Napa where there are more than 100 employees--and there are five A's fans. Five. Two are season ticket holders and the other 3 go to 10+ games a year.
When I lived in NY I worked in a compnay about the same size and EVERYONE in the company was either a Yankees or Mets fan and probably 80% went to games, whether the team was competitive or not. Different locale, different sports culture.
by Napasteve on Dec 8, 2004 1:23 PM PST up reply actions
i know what you're say man...
then when it's time for signing guys it's
"no-can-do".
i'm not blaming the loyal fans-you guys put out every chance you can. it's just really frustrating.
Partly the fault of the huge-ass Coliseum
But I love the Coliseum, with its cracked concrete and trough urinals- the current ideal ballpark seems to be a mix between theme park and shopping mall.
Ballpark
by EgolikeRickey on Dec 8, 2004 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
Take heart
by kkdaz on Dec 8, 2004 3:09 PM PST up reply actions
How true....
Part of it, I think, will always be that there are more options because the weather is better. But if you saw the SI article about the Red Sox being named "Sportsmen of the Year", Mike Barnicle (the Boston Globe columnist) made a real interesting comment about the Northeast having more stable demographics than the rest of the country. His quote was, "People don't move from New England. They stay here. And others come to college here and get infected with Red Sox fever."
There's something to be said for that...for sticking it out, suffering through years of bad teams and not fleeing to the Sun Belt when you get sick of shoveling snow. When you live in a city where so many people are from somewhere else, the rooting interest simply doesn't run as deep.
The Diamondbacks are a great example; they won the World Series three years ago but it may as well have been 300 years ago. They lost 111 games last season and there wasn't anything cute or "lovable-loser" about them. They were just a crappy, hopelessly overmatched team that nobody gave a damn about...not to mention a cautionary tale about what happens when a team spends waaaay beyond its budget. At some point the bill comes due, and the fall is long and hard.
by bakedzito on Dec 8, 2004 7:43 PM PST up reply actions
Sports Cultures
Look at Nebraska for instance. Despite the football team being awful this year, the fan base is excellent, partly because of past success, and partly because of a lack of other options. The closest national pro teams are states away in either Minnesota, Illinois, or Colorado.
We here in the Bay are spoiled, we have 6 pro teams in the 4 major sports, all of which have had at least some success in the recent years (except the Warriors, worthless).
We live in one of the most beautiful, if not the most beautiful, areas in our country, with excellent weather a majority of the year and there are so many other things within a reasonable distance of the Bay Area that we can enjoy as well as pro sports.
As for the A's themselves, the Net was a beautiful stadium prior to the addition of Mount Davis. Granted, I like the practical guarantee that I can get a seat at any game as a result of it, but there isn't anything compelling about the stadium itself to go see a game. The A's are the compelling reason, but in cities such as Boston, New York and Chicago, the stadium can draw based on its own reputation regardless of what teams are playing and whether or not they are any good.
by jumperjh on Dec 9, 2004 7:26 AM PST up reply actions
huh?
Well, that first clause is just flat out wrong. Take a look at the results of the latest census. Or better yet, hit up a bay area "Boston Bar" or go to a Yankee or Sox game at the Net. People move away from the East Coast in droves.
payroll numbers
by vk on Dec 8, 2004 5:23 PM PST up reply actions
I think he meant it had the best shot
Eye of the Tiger!
by A s Eh on Dec 8, 2004 7:00 PM PST up reply actions
huddy trade
by thanatos on Dec 8, 2004 11:13 AM PST reply actions
The rumors are so hot now....
And has anyone read Marty Lurie's blog today?
http://www.loveofthegameproductions.com/modules.php?name=News&file=categories&op=newindex&am p;catid=5
Does he really think that Giambi could come back to the A's? I think the feelings are so intense now that many seasoned A's fans would boycott opening night if that happened.
If Billy has the balls to bring back Jason, he can certainly find a way to bring back Rickey Henderson even if it's for one frigging game.
by Rob @ Athletics Nation on Dec 8, 2004 12:19 PM PST reply actions
Rickey back for one game.
And I don't know if you guys are old enough to remember it, but I watched the team(s) I loved from the 70's get dismantled, but I never blamed the players, just like I don't blame Giambi now. I was an A's fan when they sucked in the late 70's, and I'll still be a fan as long as they're here.
If he goes to the O's...
I'm not real happy I'm writing this, but just being honest.
Good radio interview with Mychael Urban
leiber just signed
Ha HA
by nothinlikethetown on Dec 8, 2004 1:31 PM PST reply actions
plus....
"We Can't Afford (Hudson)"
The A's finances are (deliberately) rather mysterious. We think we know what the player budget for this year is -- $63M is the number being tossed around in the press -- but we don't know what that number reflects. We don't know how much money the A's take in or spend, what the long term financial situation is and goals are, what the tax situation of the team is, how much money Schott and Hoffman take out, want to take out in the future, or how any of that is affected by their thoughts about what they're going to do when they finally sell the team.
What we do know is that the A's continue to spend less than most teams.
We know that we are leaving a period in which the A's had the most fertile farm system in baseball -- maybe one of the most fertile of all-time -- and have not one single playoff series victory to show for it.
We know that all the talk about how much the budget has increased in the last few years isn't so much a commitment to spending what it takes as it is a reflection of the decision to start over after McGwire with a team of low-salary kids.
We know that a series of veteran players -- Tejada, Giambi, Foulke and Damon, to name four -- have left Oakland partly because they didn't think much of the ability or desire (you make the call) of A's management to field a winning team.
We also know -- and I don't think this is a point over which serious people will argue -- that major league owners in general have an almost preturnaturally bad record for telling the truth about the finances of their ballclubs. Schott and Hoffman strike me as unlikely to be exceptions to this rule.
So, given all that, forgive me if I don't have any idea whether we can afford Hudson or not. Neither does anyone else here, or in the press. Shoot, maybe even Hudson doesn't know. Maybe even Beane doesn't know. There's a thought.
What I do have an idea about is this: I've been an A's fan since I was nine years old. I'll remain an A's fan as long as they're in Oakland.
Nevertheless, I'm in a state of disbelief -- I mean that word literally -- about the efforts of the current management to field a competitive team. I don't trust them, I don't trust their public statements about what can and can not be done, and I no longer have any confidence in A's management, and that includes Billy Beane.
I guess I think about Beane the way I think about Colin Powell: bright guy, solid, good people, a man I want on my side when the chips are down, but he's devoting the signature years of his life to people who are destructive, selfish and foolish.
I also think we're all a victim of a weird, pro sports version of Stockholm Syndrome: we've been told so many times by Schott and Hoffman, who hold something hostage that's dear to all of us, that this is the way the world works that we've not only come to believe it, we like it and identify with it.
Well, I don't like it.
Very eloquent
Kindly put
You made me examine why I'm an A's fan and it goes deep with a whole lot of "David" (Thats the A's) verses "Goliath" (That seems to be EVERYONE ELSE that competes with the A's)
This "David vs Goliath" thing carries over to other aspects of my life's interests, I root for the underdog on nearly everything and revel in it when the underdogs succeed!
The A's and I seem to match up quite well in this respect, and I, in case no one noticed, am in awe in how they improve constantly with sheer will and efficient application of modest resources. The "deals & strategies" applied liberally by BB & Co to stay at or near the top are fascinating.
Speaking of deals, I was "enjoying" the media rumors of all the teams talking to BB and considered Huddies potential new teams without regard to who we recieve in return for him, I hope someone overpays but BB will handle that if this "trade" actually happens.
-Huddy to O's makes sense because Huddy would pitch vs divisions foes Boston & Yankees and that improves the A's Wild card chances since the O's play each 18-19 games verses each erstwhile A's "wild card" opponent. Additionally O's "PAY" market value for almost everything. If they really want Huddy they will explore the various options (IE: multi-team trades) with BB to satisfy BB's wants list. The reunion of Miggy and Huddy is somehow appropriate as well. If all else is equal, I like the O's for Huddy and he can continue cutting down the goliaths for the O's & the A's.
-Huddy to Phillies makes sense because Phillies also PAY and have every left hander we could ever covet and dream about. Also sends Huddy to NL.
-Huddy to Braves makes sense because he turns their weakness (starters)into a strength. Braves a little more tight fisted with "1st-2nd year talent & top prospects" so BB might get more value elsewhere. Also a NL team. (Braves also play Giants 18-19 times, See Dodgers below)
-Huddy to Dodgers makes sense because DePo is running DodgerLand and knows how Huddy could help win the division over Braves and Giants. Also, I don't know if Beane/Schott believe in taking schotts, but if they do, they are probably remembering the Giants "Territory" defense of Santa Clara County (San Jose)
-Huddy to Cubs makes sense because they are serious about contending and NL. (And isn't Sosa off the books? If so, ... they have lots 'o green and money makes the *** go 'round!)
-Huddy to Cardinals makes sense because LaRussa would help find a way. They are A's jr. and in the NL.
=================
-So! Does BB locate Huddy where he can give our Wild card competition some needed lumps?
-Does BB send him to NL to get him out of the AL?,
-Does BB simply go maximum return?
-Does BB take names, numbers, and offers, and still take a run at the trophy with his 4 Stud Starters?
...until the All Star Break inventory?
All of the above makes sense as far as BB & the A's and what is best for the franchise.
TYPICAL BB.
All of this increases BB's trading reach/pals and as more teams discover trades are good for building a better team, BB phone # will gravitate to the top of MLBs speed dialers.
And if the season starts with Huddy on the A's, watch those speed dialers get busier & busier as the A S break gets closer & closer.
Unless things get crazy at the W-Meetings and someone gives BB it all.
Typical Beane
You know, because of free agency, the A's team personality isn't it's players as much as it's BB. I find it good that he has a lot of "David" in him.
by A s Eh on Dec 8, 2004 8:40 PM PST up reply actions
Reality of Baseball
I think you have missed a very important point about baseball: it's not a level playing field out there. Money is driving the game and not everyone has the money. In fact, only a few have the money and they are buying the championships. Oh, sure, once in awhile a team like the Marlins slip in (because they got hot at playoff time) but it is the New Yorks and the Bostons that are constant winners because they can outbid other teams for the talent. While other professional sports have a salary cap requiring skill and srewdness to win, the Yankees buy the best players.
I think the A's have done a remarkable job of being competitive in a market shared by two teams. We can critize the owners all we want because they want a return on their investment but remember they were the only ones who stepped up the plate to buy the A's and keep them in Oakland.
Because some teams are able to inflate salaries, teams like the A's , Royals, and even Atlanta cannot afford to sign their star players. You can't blame the players for wanting to maximize their salaries. If Hudson plays out his contract who's to say the Yankees won't pay more than $15 million per year for his services? Can the A's afford to match that and still put a competitive team on the field? Hell, no. What good is it to have one or two superstars and only win 60-70 games? We had superstar Mark MacGuire and finished last..The A's attendance dropped.
For a small market team, to be competitive, get a team of the best young players you can find at a reasonable cost. And if they can make the playoffs, hope they get hot.
Better yet, demand that baseball get a salary cap. If you are a hockey fan you will notice that they are not playing hockey this year because the owners want a salary cap to save the game. When will baseball realize this?
by jarforcefatherofforce on Dec 8, 2004 7:48 PM PST up reply actions
When Selig tells George he's retiring
by A s Eh on Dec 8, 2004 8:44 PM PST up reply actions
cap
Besides the big market teams like the current systema and the majority of other teams are at least competitive in their division. A salary cap is not going to happen. Best case the salary tax remains and the penalties increase.
The Beane Doctrine
Where the analogy does hold up better is in your central point, which is the context of the situation. Yes, Beane is working for some mendacious, underhanded movers and shakers.
But (and this actually works to reinforce your analogy but not necessarily your argument), tell me what baseball team owners aren't mendacious and underhanded. MLB has always been a cabal of secretive, anticompetitive plutocrats, and I can't see how it won't continue to be so as long as they still have their antitrust exemption. And whatever our common opinion of S&H is, they are clearly nowhere near the worst sports franchise owners in the Bay Area. (No, they're not the best, either; my vote would go to Magowan's coven.)
Yes, S&H are looking to maximize their investment above -- and at the expense of -- all else. But isn't that pretty much a good abstraction of the way Beane approaches building a roster and farm system? I think part of the reason Beane sticks around is that he has kindred spirits in S&H.
Now, certainly, you can argue that this in the long run is detrimental to the ballclub.
But I for one still have faith in Beane -- and, just to set things straight, it's a reality-based, empirical faith.
Oh, and I also have to argue that Tejada, Giambi, Foulke, and Damon all left nearly exclusively because of the money. Yes, one can counter that the A's not offering them enough to stay was a sign of non-competitive intent, but I think that, ultimately, the non-retention of all but Foulke were excellent strategic personnel moves.
S&H
by elephant man on Dec 9, 2004 5:26 PM PST up reply actions
A's
But it still does not change the fact if management gives Beane a 63 million dollar budget and Beane extrapolates that it will increase by 5 million or so a year, (which seems about average) I just do not see us affording 2 of the big 3, 1 tops and then expensive part of that contract would have to start in 2007 when the 6 or so million the other 2 are making is off the books.
Because lets face it Harden, Crosby and even swisher's increases in salary (I would assume Beane will try and lock them up through their Arbitration years like the big 3) will eat up most of the budget increases.
No I think that Schoot and co. agenda is to keep claiming poverty, until baseball figures out away to get them a new stadium, in a nice suburbian setting, make a killing on the increased revenue. Then sell the team for a huge profit.
Masochism
But from Don Mincher to Catfish and Vida to Campy to Don Baylor to Shooty and Rickey to the Hittin' Rage to Bruce Bochte to Walter Haas, to the Bash Bros., to Stew to Terry "The All-Stud" Steinbach, to Mike Bordick to Omar Oliveras to Giambi and Tejada to Ramon and the Big Three, to Kotsay, I've been an A's fan as long as I can remember. Literally.
The fact that the A's are owned at the moment by some selfish, greedy pigfuckers who've wasted one of the biggest opportunities in baseball history because they have the vision of a mushroom doesn't change the fact that the A's are my guys, that they're East Bay the way I'm East Bay and that they're part of the fabric of my life. I'll wait Schott and Hoffman out, and then, if the A's survive in Oakland, we'll try all over again.
That's what being a fan is about, for me at least. I don't leave the United States because a war criminal is president, and I don't leave the Oakland A's because Schott and Hoffman are there. You stick with what's in your heart.
The owners
Everyone, though, wants to make excuses for the owners. They point to the rising payroll (true, but it's from an absurdly low level and undoubtedly still allows them to make a profit) and the stadium and the Raiders and the screwed-up baseball system. There is some merit in all of this.
But it's important to point out the obvious. The owners blew an opportunity they likely will not get again: to win a World Series, maybe more than one. They did it by being cheap. Do you remember the section in Moneyball going over the elaborate calculations Beane had to make to clear enough payroll space to pay Rincon for less than half a season. It's a great read, but also reveals how cheap the owners are. They've saved pennies here and there but missed the bigger picture - not just glory, but also the clout they would acquire for bringing a World Series to Oakland again. They would have had a better chance to get a stadium, in Oakland or San Jose, with a pennant-winning ballclub. And if that didn't work, they would have a more valuable asset to sell.
Winning it all isn't everything
by jarforcefatherofforce on Dec 9, 2004 12:04 AM PST up reply actions
The dreaded 1997 Marlins analogy
My problem with the A's ownership is that they haven't grasped how lucky they were. Their GM and scouting staff drafted Giambi, Tejada, Chavez, Hudson, Mulder, and Zito - cornerstones of a dynasty, the sort of coup that doesn't come along every day. The general manager is, it is safe to say, intelligent and resourceful. Did the owners, realizing how lucky they were to have such cheap talent, go for a World Series? No. Since 2001, the A's have been in a slow but steady decline even as their payroll has increased.
I'm all for having a contending team. I grew up in Cleveland when the Indians were horrible, and have gone through lean years with the A's. I just don't agree with the all or nothing choice you propose, spend like mad for one shot at glory, or muddle along as a second-tier contender.
With their cheap young talent, the A's had several shots at glory without blowing the budget. I fear they - and we - won't get the same opporuntity again in a long time.
The biggest reason
The frequent stupid mistakes by our players in the post-season didn't help change their perception at all. We have been good enough to win it all these past 5 years, but it's the little things (not the lack of an extra 10 million dollars) that have kept a trophy away from Oakland. And do you think the owners were eager to extend the contract of a guy who booted countless routine grounders and committed crucial baserunning blunders in the postseason?
by OaktownTribesman on Dec 9, 2004 6:59 AM PST up reply actions
East Bay
I'm glad you saw my post in the light it was intended. Later.
A lousy baseball tradition
The A's had two winning runs, the first driven by Finley drafts and the reserve clause, the second during the Haas era - a combination of generous owners and smart management.
But all that was the exception. Most of baseball, especially American League baseball, is a story of the Yankees and their rotating group of challengers. During the late 1920s, the A's were that challenger - but Connie Mack ran out of money and sold off his players.
Baseball's current system stinks, and the A's situation is perfect example of why. The team had a tremendous run of draft picks, a collection of talent that should have won a pennant or two by now. But it hasn't. And now, with Hudson's apparently imminent departure, it looks like it won't.
This isn't just a case of bad breaks or postseason underperformance, although that was a big factor. The main reason is that the team cannot afford to keep its stars, or even important members of its supporting cast. We're accustomed to players leaving, and justify this by rooting for the underdog and lauding Billy Beane. That's great, and sometimes it's fun. But it won't be fun in 2007 or 2008, when we're out of contention by June or even before the season starts. That's the life of a "small-market" team, and it's our future.
And no, I don't like it.
Contention
The winter meetings start tomorrow. Let the trading begin!
by jarforcefatherofforce on Dec 8, 2004 11:54 PM PST reply actions
umm define 'contention'
by ucla kid on Dec 9, 2004 12:02 AM PST up reply actions
Counter-counter
contention
you guys didn't give me
by ucla kid on Dec 9, 2004 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
A's
No the west is winnable, I think what Beane is looking to accomplish is to improve tne team slightly this year, but also try to make it so that there is also little if any rebuilding after 2006.
I agree
Pitching
Also if you get draft picks for Hudson then I think you have a hard time convincing Mulder to stay at a discount and that the team can win.
by ogallalabob on Dec 10, 2004 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
I believe some good prospects
I still think that if the A's are serious about contending in 2005 they cannot afford to weaken their starting rotation. Of course, if they are willing to step back then my arguments have to be revised. But I'm taking Beane at his word.
I was only referring to starting pitching
that's where they will save money. Not with starting pitching, which is the most precious and least plentiful resource. they need to keep the good ones.
Contention
It wasn't so much the players the A's lost that prevented them from winning. It was the Angels becoming the Yankees of the West. Yes, if we kept Miggy and gave hi the contract Baltimore gave him, we would have won a few more games but where would we be in '05? We wouldn't even be speculating about Hudson because the $6 million we will pay him next year is too much.
by jarforcefatherofforce on Dec 9, 2004 12:14 AM PST reply actions
Contending...
But trading Hudson will not make the team better. It will not improve the A's chances of winning a pennant unless Hudson's body breaks down after the trade.
Beane is apparently planning to trade Hudson, one of the league's best pitchers, for one reason: money. That doesn't mean he is making a mistake. He has his marching orders regarding the team's payroll, and must do his annual juggling act while thinking of the future.
At this stage, the A's don't have the personnel to be a great team. The losses are adding up. Tejada won the RBI title in 2004. Foulke and Damon played key roles in helping the Red Sox win a pennant.
Could they get lucky, and catch lightning in a bottle in the postseason? Sure, if they get there. But they must win the AL West to do that, and this is no easy feat.
I'm less certain than you are that the A's will continue to be a contender if the Big Three leave. Beane's good, but he's not going to be able to spin straw into gold. My biggest gripe, though, is that the owners squandered an opportunity for greatness because they were too concerned about turning a profit every year.
Maybe not this year.
I remember this question being asked somewhere before the start of last season:
What team would you rather be a fan of, a team that competes year-in and year-out, but doesn't win the big one, or a team that is usually somewhere between mediocre and bad, but catches lightning in a bottle and wins the WS one year (Oakland and Anaheim were the two teams being compared).
The way the team is run is designed to make the competitive every year. In '04, Tejada & Chavez would have been better than Chavez and Crosby. In '05 though (and '06 and '07, etc) which would you rather have, Chavez and Crosby or Tejada and Teahen?
How many teams have been in contention in the last week of the season each of the last five years?
New York, Atlanta. Maybe Boston or Houston, not sure of them though.
Five teams.
Five teams, only two of which have one a World Series in that team frame.
What the hell are you people complaining about?
I think all of you should be forced to be Cubs fans for a year, just so you can understand what real futility is all about.
Then you should be forced to be National fans for a year, just so you can REALLY understand what it's like to root for a team with no hope of a bright future.
some of us
by ucla kid on Dec 9, 2004 11:36 AM PST up reply actions
and yes
by ucla kid on Dec 9, 2004 11:40 AM PST up reply actions
In order
Ariel Prieto is languishing in the minors, and apparently still having injury problems. The best info I could find on him shows that he pitched 22 innings for the Toledo Mud Hens (Detroit's AAA club), getting a 1-1 record in 4 games with a 3.68 ERA and a 1.14 WHIP.
Mike Bordick retired after the 2003 season.
Jason McDonald, Rafael Bournigal, Dan Magadan and Berroa are all no longer playing.
Rickey still manages to find work, though not in any league anyone keeps stats for.
I'm assuming you know how things are going for Jason Giambi.
YAH, RIGHT
If any of that B.S. were true, where than do all the obnoxious Red Sucks fans come from at every A's / Red Sucks home game???? Shurely they're not fly'n in from Beantown. My guess...transplants...like Stankee fans in the bay area. Leave the east coast to move here than piss and moan how lousy it is here....LOL
by asfanfordays on Dec 9, 2004 5:58 AM PST reply actions
Actually
by OaktownTribesman on Dec 9, 2004 7:05 AM PST up reply actions
trend in a new direction
Beanes is looking for bullpin help. Major contributions by Garcia, Street, and one other addition will improved the A's greatly without one of the big three.
by jarforcefatherofforce on Dec 9, 2004 8:54 AM PST reply actions
that's because
the a's are unusual in that they can potentially field 4 excellent starters in 2005 for a reasonable cost. should they trade away their #1 starter they are left with 3 excellent starters -- which is not s unique. In order to contend they would have to add more than one big bat -- and I doubt that they can afford that.
Hudson's injuries
This reminds me of something I read recently...
I throw in the occasional political aside, blez, but none of my posts are about politics. And one of them, ever, are personally directed towards anyone here.
The notion that I'm fighting with "misfit", who seems to have some sort of personal vendetta -- I still think he's an internet stalker who somehow knows me and has developed some weird sort of fixation -- is ludicrous. I post, he responds with an ad hominum personal attack, and I don't respond. That's the way it's gone ever since he showed up on this site.
If you feel like banning me is the way to handle this, blez, let me know, and I'll gladly leave.
Jeff...
It opens a can of worms.
If the personal comments come once more, then I'm going to ban people. I don't want it to come to that because we're all A's fans. We may have a different way of approaching our fanaticism (some optimistic, some pessimistic), but we're free to follow the green and gold as we see fit. Say ideas don't work, say trade proposals are unrealistic, but leave the personal crap out of it.
And that's all I'm going to say about it. If you personally attack each other, banning will happen without warning.
Back to baseball.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Dec 9, 2004 11:33 AM PST up reply actions
Colin Powell
(Some of the other asides I used are, of course, directly political. I'm just asking about the Powell thing.)
Colin and 3/4 of the cake
by Reg on Dec 9, 2004 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
Devil's Advocate
And the 3/4 of the cake bit was even more allusive. The only reason that's pushing your buttons, Reg, is b/c you're one of the few people who recognize the specific discussion to which jrbh was alluding.
I'm not trying to talk politics with this post, just gettin' my homie jrbh's back.
You're not trying to
Speaking of cryptic stories, JRBH's whiney post reminds me of that crappy Family Circus cartoon where a broken vase appears, mom asks who broke it, and they all say "Not Me!" Sure enough, there's a ghost behind them with the words Not Me on him. Terrible.
About those Yankee shirts............
...which I would have bought in a heartbeat.
by Rob @ Athletics Nation on Dec 9, 2004 12:35 PM PST reply actions
We made it past the ALDS shirts
by secret ASian man on Dec 9, 2004 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
You make it
by GreenNGoldGirl on Dec 9, 2004 4:36 PM PST up reply actions
it...
by GreenNGoldGirl on Dec 9, 2004 4:39 PM PST up reply actions
Hudson
by Utah on Dec 9, 2004 12:53 PM PST reply actions
Soriano
by nothinlikethetown on Dec 9, 2004 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
Oh my
Soriano is (1) not patient at the plate; (2) one of the worst defensive second basemen in baseball; (3) selfish (refuses to change positions); and (4) overrated. I'm not sure you could find someone who Beane is less likely to be interested in than Soriano.
Furthermore
Dye signs with the White Sox
This article kind of annoyed me as it goes on and on about how Dye kept his word. Honestly, if Dye was really that great of a guy, he would have played for the league minimum for the A's next season, or offered to give back some of his money, for giving them nothing of value for his recent contract. Now that would be something to write about, not making a big deal about someone keeping their word. Or at least he could have told the A's he wouldn't accept salary arbitration if they offered it, so they could get some draft picks for him.
he was type C
by ucla kid on Dec 10, 2004 12:33 AM PST up reply actions
The Marlins...
Of course, it's not exactly like our situation. In the AP story relating these events, the writer said that the Marlins were willing to put up $172M for their share of a new stadium... $72M more than Schott and Hoffman say they can afford. Is there any possibility at all that the Marlins have more money than the A's?
If you ask
The Cleveland Ballpark and Downtown
http://www.nj.com/business/ledger/index.ssf?/base/business-8/110222773550270.xml
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
