Grading A's notable July trades

by andyinfremont on Jun 27, 2005 10:31 PM PDT Comment 12 comments

MLB.com had a short piece today on some of the A's recent July trades:

http://athletics.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20050625&content_id=1103357&vkey=ne ws_oak&fext=.jsp&c_id=oak

Here are my quick grades on these 6 deals. Grades try to consider the short and long term impact of the trades, subsequent player performance, subsequent draft picks (if any), etc...:

---

July 3, 2001: OF Ron Gant from the Rockies for OF Robin Jennings.

Grade: B+

Gant didn't provide great production, but he did give a veteran presence that was perfect for a young club. Gant returned to the A's for a brief swan-song in 2003. Jennings moved from Colorado to Cincinnati and put up some decent numbers in 2001, but that was his last year in the majors.

---

July 25, 2001: OF Jermaine Dye from the Royals in a three-team trade for Minor Leaguers Mario Encarnacion, Jose Ortiz and Todd Belitz (to Colorado).

Grade: B+

Dye was great in the second half of 2001, but just mediocre in the 3 subsequent injury plagued years. If only he'd stayed healthy, and not eaten up so much of the A's payroll... He's giving the White Sox a bit more power in 2005, but his production is still well off his best years in KC.

Encarnacion and Belitz barely made a ripple; Ortiz had two OK years as a sub in Colorado and is no longer in the majors.

---

July 5, 2002: P Ted Lilly from the Yankees in a three-team trade for 1B Carlos Pena, P Jeremy Bonderman and P Franklyn German (to the Tigers).

Grade: C-

Lilly wasn't the difference maker that was anticipated in 2002, but he was a solid 4th starter in 2003. His numbers with Toronto were almost identical in 2004, and have fallen off sharply in 2005. Lilly was dealt for Bobby Kielty after the 2003 season, and after a horrible 2004, Kielty is having a solid year.

The A's gave up on Pena quickly, but it looks like the right move now -- his power numbers increased a bit in 2004, but his AVG has been poor, his OBP mediocre, his strikeouts sky high, and 2005 has been a disaster for him. Bonderman has improved each year, and he'd look good at the back-end of the A's rotation right now. After 3 unremarkable years, German has turned into a solid reliever in 2005.

The worst of the 6 deals; grade might slip further if Kielty leaves without compensation and Bonderman/German continue to perform.

---

July 25, 2002: Inf Ray Durham from the White Sox for P Jon Adkins.

Grade: A

Durham played very well for the A's in 2002, and by letting him go as a Free Agent, they got to draft third baseman Brian Snyder (currently injured; probably headed back to single-A when healthy) and SS Omar Quintanilla (AA). Durham's had two nice years with the Giants, but his numbers may be slipping.

Adkins was an OK reliever for the Sox in 2004, but he's currently in the minors. A classic Billy Beane trade.

---

July 30, 2002: LR Ricardo Rincon from the Indians for Inf. Marshall McDougal.

Grade: A-

Say what you will about Rincon, but he's given the A's solid relief work for 3 years, with an ERA in the 3's each season. McDougal is now with the Rangers and just got his first hit in the majors this week -- he's well regarded, but projected as just a utility guy...

[editor's note, by andyinfremont] McDougal just got sent back to Oklahoma.

---

July 30, 2003: OF Jose Guillen from the Reds for P Aaron Harang, P Joe Valentine and P Jeff Bruksch.

Grade: B

Guillen was a big plus in the second half of 2003, and playing through his hand injury was nothing short of amazing. Great production but disruptive with the Angels in 2004; looks good with the Nationals this year.

Harang has improved each year for the Reds, and, like Jeremy Bonderman, has become a solid starter who may continue to improve. Valentine hasn't shown much so far, and Bruksch hasn't made the majors.

---

That's my 2 cents. What are your grades?

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

interesting

seeing how the minor leaguers we gave up are doing now. It makes Billy look pretty good--except for Frank German, there's no one we lost in all of those trade who I didn't already know about. It's true you can't judge a trade until years down the road, so most of the trades above are now right to be judged--as pretty damn good trades.

by rubin sierra on Jun 27, 2005 10:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

bonderman will haunt...

...poor billy beano in his sleep for years to come. dumb trade made purely from ego on billy's part.

The "Free Matt Watson from Sacramento-III", "Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in"- Watson, mutterin' back to "the sac"

by bigelephant on Jun 28, 2005 5:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It wasn't ego

If it were ego, Billy Beane wouldn't have called Bonderman "the most talented player I have ever traded" in one of Blez's interviews.

by OaktownTribesman on Jun 28, 2005 6:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dye trade vs later contract

In the Dye trade, you're counting his later injury-plagued years against him. But those should be "charged" to the signing of Dye to an extension. The trade itself I'd give an A

by matthias on Jun 28, 2005 6:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

True, but...

Yep, I did downgrade the trade somewhat because Dye's performance/health dropped so much after he was re-signed. But I think that's legitimate -- had the A's not traded for Dye, K.C. would traded him elsewhere, and it's very unlikely the A's would have had a chance to sign him on the open market.

So the A's traded for him in part for the opportunity to sign him long-term, which proved to be a fairly big miscalculation.

I probably should have graded the overall transaction a B -- an A for the immediate trade, and a C for the long term implications, although perhaps even that's being too generous.

by andyinfremont on Jun 28, 2005 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

injury

You can't count that freak injury against beane. There is a difference between what happened to Dye (broken leg from a foul ball) and taking a chance on a lingering injury. You cannot control or predict random stuff like that, and so it really shouldnt matter when judging a trade.

Now if a team were to trade for Sweeny, that would be a different story, since we all know he is injury -prone

by chri5 on Jun 28, 2005 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

When to count an injury...

First, I gave the trade a B+ (perhaps leaning toward a B on further consideration), which is a very good grade.

Second, I didn't count Dye's injuries against Beane per se, I was just evaluating the overall trade -- what the A's gave up, what they got in terms of production, what they paid to keep him (which indirectly cost them other players/opportunities), etc... I agree Dye's initial injury was random (although for those of us that saw it happen, his failure to fully recover in 2002 wasn't entirely unexpected), but that doesn't earn the trade an A-grade either. Whatever the reasons, Dye didn't play as expected after 2001, and the trade should be judged accordingly.

Bottom line -- the trade would have been better if Dye had stayed healthy and produced like he did the last two months of 2001. Unfortunately, the trade led to the A's spending close to $30 million on a guy who never regained his pre-injury form.

by andyinfremont on Jun 29, 2005 12:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also include

I think one has to also include Free Agent signings in with these trades as they are "player acquistion" moves. One whopper was signing a medicore reliever (Mike ??? from the Angels) to a two year contract at about $2 million/year the day before the arbitration deadline. The player was a type A free agent which meant the A's gave up their first round draft pick. Just wait two days (the Angels were not going to offer arbitration) and he would have come for free.

A good nonsigning was not giving in to Giambi's demands and letting him go to the Yankees.

I'm also of the opinion that letting Miggy go and keeping Chavez+Crosby has been the way to go.

by skwid on Jun 28, 2005 8:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The relivers name

I just remembered the relivers name, Mike Magnante. What a stiff. And the A's signed him for two years!

by skwid on Jun 28, 2005 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Beyond the scope...

It'd be a blast to review all major transactions, but this was specifically limited to the July trades mentioned in the mlb.com article.

Still, I take issue a bit with your panning of the Mike Magnante signing. It's likely another team would have signed him if the A's had waited until after the arbitration deadline. Although Magnante was just so-so in 2001 (1-1, 4.31), he was lights out in 2002 (3-1, 2.77). 2003 was bad (0-2, 5.97), but in fairness the whole bullpen had substandard years except for Koch, Bradford and Micah Bowie (who only pitched the last 2 months).

Anyone know who the Angels drafted with the A's pick in 2000?

by andyinfremont on Jun 28, 2005 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Christopher Bootcheck, Auburn, RHP

4 games (including 1 start) in 2003, 3 games in relief in April this year, currently in the minors.

by green star oakland on Jun 28, 2005 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd say

look at "time spent with Oakland" as a factor. Durham was strictly a 2-month "rent a player" whereas Lilly made significant contributions the whole next year and especially in Sept and Oct.

Because of that, personally I'd downgrade the Durham trade and upgrade the Lilly trade from your ratings.

Nico

by Nico on Jun 28, 2005 4:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs