versus

(2) Long-term health of the franchise depends on attendance, attendance depends on winning (and market).  Sacrifice 4 or 5 years for one World Series, and maybe the franchise digs itself into a sinkhole that it can't get out of.

I don't know what's more important, but I think I know which side the owners would err to.

But, Oaktoon, you missed the point of my question.

The A's did have an option to keep Giambi in 2002; it just meant they would also have to keep him through 2009.

plus, i think they learned from the giambi neg process. the next year with Miggy they just came out in ST with "we aren't signing this guy at the end of his contract". i respected the a's management for that.

Given that there is no single move that guarantees a WS win, the goal has to be getting to the playoffs and being in a position to do well.

Sacrificing 5 years (04-09) for one or two (02, 03?) with a better shot is foolish. Plenty can go wrong in those one or two years that messes up your chances, and then you're still stuck with 5 years of overpaying for someone who's drying up. Any team in any playoff series, even the heaviest favorite, has a significant chance of losing.

Far better to spread your chances out over as many years as possible. The '00-'03 playoffs showed us that yes, our team in those years could have beaten any first round opponent, even if it was the top team in baseball. I'll go out on a limb here and say the 06-09 A's will fall into the same category. We could win any of those years, or we could go 0-4 again, but I'd rather have four chances at it than one that may look better.

Not only do you avoid horrible rebuilding stretches, you also give yourself a better shot at winning the World Series. Perhaps not in year A ... but if you can get into the postseason 4 years in a row, as the worst team in the playoffs, you have a better shot at winning a WS than a team that gets their once as the best team.

No matter what your priority is, building for the medium term is a much better bet.

Of course, for a team like the Giants, the opposite is true. They have 1-2 more years of Bonds after which they are going to suck, because they have no young talent. It would make all the sense in the world for a team like that, or the Mariners a couple of years ago, to go for it all right now.

Billy Beane has figured it out, that with the budget contraints of the A's, the best and simple way to get to, and to win the WS, is to get into the playoffs as often as possible.  After that it is purely a matter of statistics and luck in the oft quoted "it is crap shoot" line of BB.

So what are the steps to increase your probability of a World Series if you are running the A's?    

1.  Stay predominately a young (read "inexpensive), good and over-achieving team. [An occasional expensive player can be tolerated, but only occasionally, as in Chavy.]

2.  To be young and good, one must maximize the number of highly regarded young prospects, so that statistically you can increase your chances of finding "young and good" players who become "young and excellent" players.  No one really knows for sure which good young studs will become great, so you need to have good prospects stockpiles at each level (A, AA and AAA) and at each position.

3.  The two ways to maximize the number of highly regarded prospects is to draft wisely (and not trade draft rights), and to trade a veteran as necessary for multi highly regarded young players (as in 6 for 2 in the recent Mulder/Huddy trades).

It is very interesting to me that the A's never stop scouting a player.  Before each draft they have there list of want-a-bees, many they are able to draft, but others get away.  Those that get away are still scouted and tracked, just waiting for a chance to obtain them later in a trade, or when the other team gives up on them for under-performance, or when their team gives up on them due to injury

1.  Hudson.  C'mon, guys, he's not 40 years old!  The Braves are paying for, and IMO will get, <u>future</u> performance.  This is not a case of paying for the past performance of an old guy who has already won 250 games.  Give me a flippin' break.
2.  Winning the World Series.  Any time you have a chance to win it all, you go for it and you go all in.  You don't stick one toe in the water and hope you can get to the edge of the playoffs every year.

For instance, if we had signed Hudson to a 4-Year, 47-Million dollar deal (like the Braves), and Huddy goes down w/ a rotator-cuff injury in the 1st year of the contract, and never pitches again, are the Braves covered by their insurance policy?

I think this is something worth discussing, because this would eliminate any discussions w/ regards to Huddy's injury future.  If he has a career ending injury, insurance covers your losses, thus, what's the risk of signing Huddy besides the minor injuries (as we've seen the last 4 years, and I could live with), an overworked arm, etc...

Thoughts?