Ray Ratto has awaken me from my slumber

by secret ASian man on Dec 31, 2006 3:23 PM PST Comment 73 comments

Happy 2007 everybody! Haven't seen you guys in awhile. It's me secret asian man, remember me? I'm sorry for not being around. Starting a new job, going on an extended business trip to Minnesota (I bought game 5 ALDS tickets, but never used them) and performing in a few shows back to back kinda ruins your life. Even my offline friends have trouble remembering I exist. Trust me, it's not just the job, it's everything. When I'm rehearsing for a show I can pull 18+ hour days. Online pursuits or even offline social pursuits seen to fall by the wayside when you wake up at 6 to go to work, work a full day, then go to the City and rehearse or perform until you get home at around midnight.

You can thank Ray Ratto for bringing me back to AN. As previously stated in another diary, Ratto speculates that Joe Blanton may be sent to the Mets for Lastings Milledge.

Although I no longer have any great animosity against Ratto, sometimes this guy is so off the mark:

The A's also need a first baseman, either Nick Swisher or some sign of a rejuvenated Dan Johnson. They need an outfielder to replace Payton, they need two new starters to replace Zito and (we presume) Blanton, and when we say replace, we mean the 32 wins they will take with them, they need Rich Harden to turn up some time, they need a power-hitting designated hitter, and they need Bobby Crosby to make physical peace with the medical department.
(emphasis mine, of course)

I just hate it when people just bring in the "wins-loss" stat line. W-L is probably the most overrated stat in baseball. OK let's look at Cupcake's 2006 numbers:

GS: 31
W-L: 16-12
ERA: 4.82
ER: 104
HR: 17
BB: 58
K: 107

Ratto seems to have conveniently forgot, for the sake of fanning the flames of discontent, that Joe Blanton is a 4.82 ERA pitcher and his wins come from great run support which is an oddity for an Oakland pitcher. If anybody else on the 2006 staff had Blanton's run support they might have had a shot at 20 wins (Zito and Haren would have). Joe Blanton was one of the League's best pitchers in the second half of 2005, but before that half and since that half he has been a very mediocre pitcher.

Cupcakes for Lastings? Pull the trigger, Billy.

0 recs | Comment 73 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Blanton to the Mets

Sounds like a good trade to me If Billy decides to make it. I was hoping to get some of the Mets young pitching talent as well so make the trade more expansive, not a one for one deal.

Charlie Brown GO A'S WIN

by Charlie Brown on Dec 31, 2006 3:42 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Am I?

Am I the only person, whom at this point feels 200 innings by Blanton is more valuable then the 6 starts Harden will give us and would rather see a Harden for Milledge and Pilfrey deal then a Blanton for Milledge and Heilman deal?

by Threepwood XX on Dec 31, 2006 5:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

you're not

but many of us see an upside to Harden that is a spectacular, dominant pitcher, not merely an inning eater. It's a gamble, to be certain, whether Harden will ever attain the greatness (and ultimate "moving on" to a more monied team) that many of us hope for him, but nearly everyone acknowledges that he's "more talented" than Jelly Bean.

by Brian in 317 on Dec 31, 2006 5:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

for the record

I'm against the trade. Blanton is pretty much of an established talent, and he's still cheap. Milledge has yet to prove himself, though he's clearly real talented. I actually would've traded Zito for him last year (BB may have wanted to do this as well, but OM may have balked on that deal).

by Brian in 317 on Dec 31, 2006 5:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm with you...

I would have traded Zito for Milledge last season, too. I would have done it in a heartbeat--especially after Zito dumped his agent and hired what's-his-face. I suspect, too, that it was the Mets who balked. One thing Beane does best is know when to get rid of a guy who's going to probably become way over-priced. As far as Blanton for Lastings? I don't know--that's a tough one. Let's hope Billy knows best.

by Salvatore on Dec 31, 2006 6:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Rios is so much better than Milledge...

...Milledge appears to be a light hitting 21 year old Left Fielder, ...and part-time RF.

...Rios is 26 in Feb., has proven MLB hitting talent, is hitting his power years, and would be in CF if the J's hadn't re-signed Wells to his mega deal. His MLB service counts as 2 years leaving 4 years more of contract control.

Rios Defense
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=5880&context=fielding

Milledge Defense
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=6477&context=fielding

Rios offense
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=5880

Milledge MLB offense
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=7706&type=batting3

Milledge MiLB offense
http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/pl/451/451186NorILb06.html

by A s Eh on Dec 31, 2006 9:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I would rather have Rios as well

Only problem with Rios is that he would likely cost a lot more in terms of talent. With Milledge it appears that we would have to give up only Blanton and would get omething like Heilman or Humber to go along. To get Rios, we would be talking giving up Blanton plus a major league reliever plus a prospect and getting only Rios. Milledge is not likely to be a star in 2007 given his young age, but if we wait until he starts putting up great numbers to acquire him, he would be prohibitively expensive.

I'd like to eat my lunch, but Billy just kicked me out of my office.

by BlameChannel53 on Dec 31, 2006 10:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Rios is still much better than Milledge

Milledge is the gamble where Rios is the sure thing. The only reason for the A's to get Milledge is to flip him to the Marlins in a package for Willis.

Milledge's history is LF and moonlighting in RF, his defense stats above are not that impressive, nor his offense.

Rios is worth Blanton or Loaiza but either one offered with say Kennedy, Halsey, or Saarloos might bring back Rios & Chacin.

If another prospect is needed throw in a pitcher that is at least 5 years away from making the bigs, we have a few of those to give.

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 12:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Is Ricciardi that stupid?

Rios >> Blanton
Chacin > Kennedy, Halsey or Blanton
The addition of one of our young high school arms like Mazzaro, Lansford, or Italiano would not come close to making up that difference. Rios is a rare jewel in that he is a proven major league player who still has the potential to be a star. If Ricciardi can't get more than what you suggest for him I would hope for Toronto's sake that they just keep Rios.

I'd like to eat my lunch, but Billy just kicked me out of my office.

by BlameChannel53 on Jan 1, 2007 7:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

He gave the player next to Rios this:

Vernon Wells of
7 years/$126M (2008-14)
12/06 $25.5M signing bonus paid in 3 $8.5M installments, March 1 2008-10)

Age
29 '08: $0.5M (+$8.5)
30 '09: $1.5M (+$8.5)
31 '10: $12.5M (+$8.5)
32 '11: $23M,
33 '12: $21M,
34 '13: $21M,
35 '14: $21M

full no-trade clause, Wells may opt out of contract after 2011
award bonuses:
$0.25M for MVP, $0.2M for World Series MVP, 0.15M for LCS MVP, $0.1M for receiving most All-Star votes in league. Wells to donate $143,000 annually to Blue Jays charity.

----------------------------------------

If Rios + Chacin is a deal breaker you can look at Rios & Jannson.
Jannson should improve in MacAfee 3 ways:

McAfee Park
A's Infielders
Kendall dropping his HR count by controlling the pitch selection.

Or maybe you send Blanton & Harden? Then the scales tip to the A's and we get Rios, Chacin, and (prospects?). Harden would be a great PR piece in Canada. Might increase Season ticket sales.

----------------------------------------

BC53 - If Ricci can swing better returns from elsewhere obviously he will. The A's & J's are not in a two team vacuum. Chacin's success in '05 probably excludes him from this but Rios is being dealt entering his prime playing years and a deal that may work is worth pursuing.

Ricci is desperate for a starter(s) and that is how a team will get Rios.

The A's can add starters via trades. If we can make the J's problem go away we have Rios while he is 26 to 29 years old and in his arbitration years.

Rios as CF/RF has a "quality impact" that accomodates the defensive abilities of the group of A's youngsters that may soon populate the A's outfield. With Rios as this bridge, the A's continuing wave of outfielders: Buck, Herrera, Putnam, Robnett, Blasi, Sulentic, Mitchell, etc. could be expected to supply quality players for our OF, 3B & 1B needs into the Fremont years.

Milledge at 21 falls short of that yet removes Blanton or another 30+ games starter just as Rios would. Milledge could be a head case and worst than that he would block A's minor leaguers with LF/RF talents. I think Milledge is more about "can be" than "is". Harden and Crosby are other talented examples of "can be".

Ricci intends to move Rios for starter(s), media is on him asking when, who, where. His responses implied this process will continue into Spring Training if not beyond.

Rios is the better player for the A's outfield and will increase the standard trade value of outfielders filtered out for trades as well. Outfielders not good enough to crack the A's will be very acceptable to 20 other teams.

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 1:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You underestimate Milledge

Milledge is far better than you portray him. Look at the opinions of prospect guys like Kevin Goldstein, John Sickels and Jim Callis who all think he is a future star. There is also an interesting blog that was posted today on BP Unfiltered from Nate Silver discussing what an absolute steal we would be getting if we traded Blanton for Milledge based upon PECOTA projections. There was also a fascinating study done by I believe Baseball Prospectus a few years discussing players that are able to reach the majors and hold their own at an early age: the basic conclusion of the study was that these players have a very high rate of stardom. As I said, Milledge could be a bust, but there are a whole lot of very astute people and a wealth of statisitical data to support the theory that he will be a future star. There is no one in the A's farm system who compares, and Beane would love to have him.

My problem with Rios is that he is unlikely to come cheaply. If Ricciardi is stupid enough to give him away for Blanton then we should do it. I would be shocked if Rios ended up on the A's. The Marlins seem a better fit, because I believe that the Jays are going to want more than we have to offer.

I'd like to eat my lunch, but Billy just kicked me out of my office.

by BlameChannel53 on Jan 1, 2007 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

"who all think he is ... a future star."

Isn't the emphasis on "future" & "projections"?

Crosby and Harden have enough "future" and "projections" for me.

Why isn't LM playing RF everyday?
Why does LM mostly play LF?
Why doesn't LM EVER play CF -- minors or MLB?

Marlins like Baldelli's 5 yr contract (who doesn't?) but are a bad match with D Rays - BB could exploit that or keep Baldelli for the A's CF/RF - he is an upgrade in all ways over the '06 JPay but much cheaper and just may prove to be Kotsay's replacement.

Lastings-or-Baldelli + Windsor-or-Komine might be enough to get us Willis' last 2 arb years. Maybe LM is good to have, ...for a very short time :)

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 7:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Milledge?

Does anyone else think that Milledge is just as unproven as any other young star out there? No disrespect intended, but for all we know, he turns out to be the next Dan Johnson. Blanton is a proven commodity, and if he was a free agent this offseason, well, he'd be raking in the bucks too. Luckily for us, we have him for a few more years so might as well keep him.

Trading Blanton sounds a lot like letting Aaron Harang go. We tire of his inconsistency, lands in the NL, and a couple years later he's the anchor of the staff of another team still on the cheap. Either way, another two years of 2006's performance qualifies him in this day and age as consistent and a worthwhile starter.

by cuppingmaster on Dec 31, 2006 10:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Bad comparison

Johnson was a guy we drafted out of Nebraska in a late round that was never considered a top prospect despite his consistent success because he's unathletic and is limited to 1B or DH. Johnson made the major leagues and has struggled in his mid-twenties. Milledge was drafted out of high school early in the first round and has consistently been considered one of the best prospects in baseball because he has great athleticism and the ability to play all three outfield positions. He has every bit of the raw ability that Vernon Wells just got paid over $100 million for, and struggled in the major leagues at the tender age of 21.

Milledge may turn out to be a bust, but comparing him to Johnson is rather silly.

I'd like to eat my lunch, but Billy just kicked me out of my office.

by BlameChannel53 on Dec 31, 2006 10:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Allow me...

...to defend Joe Blanton with numbers. In 2006 he recorded 16 wins, 12 losses, and 4 no-decisions. Of those 16 wins, here are the IP and ER numbers:

4/7 - 8 IP, 0 ER
4/24 - 6 IP, 2 ER
4/30 - 5 IP, 4 ER
5/16 - 7 IP, 2 ER
5/31 - 9 IP, 0 ER
6/13 - 8 IP, 0 ER
6/18 - 8 IP, 2 ER
7/3 - 7 IP, 3 ER
7/16 - 7 IP, 1 ER
7/22 - 5 IP, 5 ER
7/27 - 7 IP, 2 ER
8/6 - 6 IP, 3 ER
8/12 - 6.1 IP, 2 ER
8/26 - 6.2 IP, 3 ER
9/6 - 6 IP, 6 ER
9/17 - 5 IP, 2 ER

Thus, it's clear to see that Blanton pitched deep into most of the wins, and if he had just 4 runs of support, he would still win 13 games, which is not at all bad. Next consider some of the wins he didn't get:

5/5 - 7 IP, 3 ER
5/26 - 5 IP, 2 ER
6/23 - 6 IP, 2 ER
8/1 - 6.2 IP, 1 ER
8/18 - 6 IP, 2 ER

So if he got the 4 runs in those games, he'd finish with 18 wins.

This isn't to say that Blanton is a great pitcher, but it does dispel your point about his wins coming mainly from run support. His poor ERA actually comes from giving up lots of runs on the games he lost. Put another way, judging by 2006 he's not a pitcher who needs great hitting to win consistently, but when he plays poorly he may need 8 or 10 runs of support to save the game.

by GlassHeart on Dec 31, 2006 11:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Slight detour

The claim im about to make wont be backed by evidence of any kind just mainly memory but if my memory does serve me correctly, it seems like Joe feasted on the weaker teams of the league like the Mariners and Royals and Devil Rays and got a lot of his wins off those teams while struggling against the tougher teams like the Yankees, BoSox, and Tigers. If thats true then the claim that Joe got his wins off lots of run support could be true because those lesser teams have 0 pitching.

In addition, having lots of run support can help a pitcher relax and take a lot of pressure of his shoulders so it's true that Joe could be getting 5-7 runs/game and only allow 1-3.

"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin, Seattle Mariners

by Helloooo 1st on Jan 1, 2007 12:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And now i have the evidence

http://oakland.athletics.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_individual_player_gamebygamelog.jsp?player ID=430599&statType=2

April W's: Sea, Tex, KC
April L's: Min, Det

Notes: Pitched horribly vs. Min and Det, but did pitch well vs. Texas' tough lineup.

May W's: Sea and KC
May L's: Tor and SF
May ND's: Tex

Notes: Once again beat the weaker teams while losing to one tough team and one weak team and getting a no-decision vs. a tough lineup while going 5 innings allowing 2 runs.

June W's: Sea, Lad
June L's: Cle, SD
June ND's: SF

Notes: Carved up Seattle again while losing to a heavy hitting Indians team and SD while getting a no-decision vs. SF due to lack of support.

July W's: Det, Bos, Det, Tor
July L's: Laa

Notes: Good month for wins vs. tough teams however in one of the Detroit wins he gave up 5 1st inning runs and only lasted 5 innings. In both Detroit wins he gave up 9 hits but did pitch well vs. Bos and Tor.

August W's: Sea, TB, Tex
August L's: Laa, KC

Notes: Big surprise for the wins one surprise for the losses but nothing of note really but he was a victim of poor defense vs. Anaheim allowing 2 unearned runs but a high total of hits allowed for the month with 42.

Sept. W's: Tex, CWS
Sept. L's: Min, Laa
Sept. ND's: Bal, Laa

Notes: Nothing to note of the win vs. CWS, they were ripe for anyone's taking in that series. Lost to tough teams and ND vs. tough teams. Only 3 innings in ND vs. Anaheim.

Total Wins: Sea 4, Tex 3, KC 2, LAD, Det 2, Bos, Tor, TB, CWS

That is 11 of his 16 wins vs. easy teams either all season or at the time.

Total Losses: Min 2, Det, TB, Tor, SF, Cle, SD, LAA 3, KC

So with the exception of TB, SF, and KC he lost to good teams, all with good pitching staffs.

My point of this whole spiel?
A). He beat up on poor teams with run support possibly helping in those victories.
B). He lost to good teams with good pitching staffs with possibly poor run support in those losses.

Which all means that Joe Blantons true value lies in his ERA and his month ERAs are as follows in order: 6.14, 4.50, 4.06, 4.55, 3.13, 6.61. Throw out August and thats a pretty lousy season.

So if his true value lies in his ERA, what was the point of this post if all I showed were wins?
I dont know.

"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin, Seattle Mariners

by Helloooo 1st on Jan 1, 2007 12:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Risky Analysis

Your analysis here risks of being a self-fulfilling one. How do you define "easy team at the time"? I certainly would disagree that beating TEX was easy at any point in 2006, and KC has been quite erratic. A week before Blanton's 8/18 loss, KC got swept by MIN, swept BOS, got swept by CLE, then split the games against CWS and OAK. Were they an easy team that month? Yours is a very difficult assertion to back up with numbers.

Besides, if you look closely at any pitcher, odds are they lose more games against the good teams, and more often win against lousy ones. That's what a "good team" means!

As for your Point A, please look at the numbers I cited again. They clearly show that he didn't need a lot of run support in most of the wins. The stats also show that he got his share of good pitching without the run support to get the win.

Finally, throwing out the good month is a ridiculous way to judge a pitcher. Why don't you throw away the lousy month and call it a good season? You can't just throw out stats!

by GlassHeart on Jan 1, 2007 4:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

18 starts of 3 or fewer runs is not that common

in the AL

Blanton has a lot of value and especially in front of an infield that can play defense.

The Mets have such a defense, and facing pitchers instead of DHs won't hurt him either.

Blanton is very under rated by a lot of us

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 1:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

what American League pitchers have gone over to the NL and been dominant? Clemens and the Unit were dominant in both leagues without a doubt, who else?

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 2:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Pedro immediately comes to mind.

Though his days of being dominant in either league appear to be over.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Jan 1, 2007 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Pedro

Well Pedro went from NL to AL and then back to NL, dominant in all areas.

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 5:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Last year: Bronson Arroyo

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=4416

by Eric in Atlanta on Jan 1, 2007 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe it's a stretch but

Aaron Harang. Or is he just in the category of "Went over to the NL and at least stopped sucking"?

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 1:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't consider Blanton dominant in

AL or NL and I'm surprised you go that far with it.

18 starts of 3 or fewer runs stands on it's own. Blanton has real value.

I'm sorry if it bothers you.

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 2:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

heh

It was just a question. I dont think Blanton is comparable to Clemens, Schilling or Pedro.

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 5:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That's cherry picking your data

It's absurd, it doesn't even come close to "standing on its own" or even being a legitimate point, because it completely ignores all sorts of data that involve Joe Blanton sucking. A 4.82 ERA stands on its own. A 92 ERA+ stands on its own. Crappy peripherals stand on their own. But 18 starts of 3 runs or fewer? That doesn't stand on jack squat. That's one of the poorest "statistical" defenses of a pitcher I've ever seen. If you want to argue that Joe Blanton isn't as bad as he appeared to be last year (he isn't) and that his incredible ability to be durable give him a lot of value, that's perfectly legitimate. But 18 starts of 3 runs or fewer? Jason Marquis had 16 starts of 3 runs or fewer, and he's absolutely awful.

BeaneBall: This is a guy playing baseball. BeaneBall: But then, suddenly, MONEYBALL! HendryHuggins: Wait, I missed the part where moneyball.

by walk off bunt on Jan 1, 2007 6:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

bravo

of course it's one of the poorest statistical defenses of a pitcher, as eh's misuse of stats is right there with oaktoon and foolshgame22.

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Jan 1, 2007 7:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

just because you don't like the stats...

that show that Byrnes is better than Kotsay, is not a good reason to say that I misuse them.

"When I got injured, I felt disrespected. Waaannnh!" - Mark Kotsay

by FoolshGame22 on Jan 1, 2007 10:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks X-Man

Could you give us comparision rating for Loaiza & Blanton?

I rate them as equals, ...as close to a dead heat as you might get.

Could you enlighten us?

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 10:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

We basically agree - those 18 games are just

historical facts that lead to other data as you rightly imply.

Crappy peripherals and players that suck attract me to baseball like no other qualities. I love the Scutaros, Blantons, Pete Roses, Jairos named Casilla, Molinas, Pudges, Abbotts, Marichals, Berras, and World Series winning St Louis Cardinals, and underdogs for flying in the face of all data. I love it when $20 to $27 million per year players on other teams with the best peripherals ever seen are totally helpless to get their teams the wins they are so desperate to get for post season play.

The human element that F*cks with data and projections is what gets me going.

The A's used 93 wins to get the AL Championship Series. In spite of his crappyness and bad peripherals Blanton's 18 games of 3 or fewer runs assisted with that team effort. It does not endorse or validate his value beyond the rewarding season the A's had. "Contributor" is enough for me.

If you looked at my other posts you'd see I'm for trading Blanton to the J's or Mets in the right deals. I have a clue of the data and would like Blanton to stay in spite of that. I enjoy his bulldog tenacity and though not as evident as in '04 - '05 it is like a piece of Hudson remains. (I know, I know, ...no statistical data to recognize bulldog tenacity and therefore just like "clutch" it does not exist! Oh-oh, I shouldn't have said "clutch", ...I'm liable to go on Bradley's Playoffs Performance being "clutch" and data... well, you know.)

Of course the main reason to trade Blanton is what we will get in return, but a contributing factor might be how the A's treated him when they passed him up for the playoffs, preferring Loaiza. Maybe Loaiza's peripherals were better? Loaiza got 2 starts, 0-1, 9 runs in 11 innings. (Bad data day!)

The A's sent Blanton's crappyness and bad peripherals the wrong message with that move.

Bulldog tenacity plays best with pride intact.

This is AN, not Baseball Prospectus.

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 10:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

feasting on the weak teams

is a sign of the good teams. Good teams dont go out and lose to the bad teams. Losing a game to the Yankees is nothing to be ashamed of anyway.

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 1:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Seattle was not a weak team.

They were 25-19 against AL East, 20-23 against AL Central, and 14-4 in interleague. Unfortunately for them, they are 19-38 against AL West, despite going 9-10 against LAA and 8-11 against TEX. In other words, except for the A's the Mariners are a 76-67 team! Part of the reason why Seattle is 2-17 against the A's is Joe Blanton, who pitched 29 innings and allowed only 5 ER in 4 games against them.

The point of my numbers is that Blanton's wins don't generally come from being saved by run support. He has beat BOS and TOR, going 7 innings each and giving up 3 ER in those two games. He's also lost to LAA and KC, despite going 6.2 and 6.0, and giving up only 3 ER.

Now, your point that a pitcher may be more relaxed with abundant run support could be true, but it requires more complicated stats than I can find to prove or disprove.

Another way to look at the stats is using the knowledge that Macha tends to ask his starters for 6 innings unless they are being battered. So, we can look for short games that Blanton won and guess that those may be cases where run support saved his stats. Here are the games he won with less than 6 IP:

4/30 @KC - 5 IP, 4 ER
7/22 @DET - 5 IP, 5 ER
9/17 CWS - 5 IP, 2 ER

Again, not convincing that Blanton's wins come mainly from run support. The 9/17 performance isn't even bad when you consider the opponent!

by GlassHeart on Jan 1, 2007 4:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

1 - 2 years ago a lot of AN was claiming

Zito did not belong at the top of the rotation.

How he was maybe a #2 or even #3 on better teams (plural) and no better than 3rd on the A's behind Haren and Harden.

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 5:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

what has changed

zito doesn't belong at the top of the rotation and he is a 2 or 3 and behind haren and harden.

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Jan 1, 2007 7:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

A player is not a factor

if he does not play.

Harden = incomplete; sample too small. Even Saarloos was more valuable this year.

Zito & Haren are close calls at this point but Haren has a chance to be better over his 6 years.

We will see.

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 11:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Howdy, stranger!

Heh... 18+ hour days with work and rehearsals. I don't miss 'em! Luckily they don't come along too much for me.

What other shows you doing now? :) Nothing on my plate at this point (except maybe LVO as we previously talked about... except I'm not at all crazy about the guy they hired to be the musical director this time!!).

by anomaly_kat on Jan 1, 2007 12:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Blanton-Milledge

If it's Blanton for Milledge, I'm not too excited. If it's Blanton for Milledge and Heilman I think it's a fucking a trade.

Heilman's peripherals have been better than Blanton's in the majors and Milledge has a great upside although I don't think he contributes much in 2007.

by pinkfloyd on Jan 1, 2007 9:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Personally...

I think the real test of how good of a GM Beane is will be if he can get Milledge and Pilfrey instead of Milledge and Heilman. Pilfrey could be the next Verlander, I'd even give up Harden if it would mean they would throw him in on top of Milledge and Heilman.

by Threepwood XX on Jan 1, 2007 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Though it's not Friday

secret asian returns here
as will the flowers

welcome back!

"I had to turn my weaknesses into my strengths." -- Milton Bradley, October 6, 2006

by Englishmajor on Jan 1, 2007 9:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Secret Asianman...

He's takin way your number, and givin you a name.

by Salvatore on Jan 1, 2007 11:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I'd do...

Blanton-Milledge straight up.

by chri5 on Jan 1, 2007 12:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Why would you screw the A's that way?

The Mets know they have to pay more than that.

This guy is dead! We'll list him as day-to-day for possible reincarnation.

A's Medical Staff, 2006

by grover on Jan 2, 2007 8:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Whew...I'm glad I read your diary.

When I saw the title, "Ray Ratto has awaken me from my slumber," I was a bit worried that a still-drunk and slightly hungover secretasianman rolled over in bed this morning only to find a semi-clad and smiling...Ray Ratto. That would NOT be a good way to start the New Year.

But yeah, I agree, that would be a good trade.

"[Frank's] a big battler. He's the mother of battleships."

-Nick Swisher

by kaweahkaweah on Jan 1, 2007 1:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

<SHUDDER>

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 1:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Am I alone in being fairly content

with the team we have today? I would like a true slugging first baseman, but all in all, I wouldn't be disappointed to start the season with the roster we have. If by the deadline we aren't hitting on all cylinders, then I may be inclined to part with a pitcher. Other than that, I am reluctant to deal any of our starters. Is this feeling off base?

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jan 1, 2007 1:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

first baseman

we don't need a first baseman, we need an OF. or a pitcher if we trade blanton for an OF.

swisher is our slugging first baseman. we have two injury prone outfielders, if either one goes down or if DJ or durazo are hitting well, swisher could always move to the outfield.

we have like 4.5 potential 1b/DH types (piazza, DJ, durazo, swisher, barton), but only three outfielders (bradley, kotsay, swisher). the dropoff to kielty is too great considering he's only an acceptable option against left handed pitchers.

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Jan 1, 2007 2:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess that's my point.

With Johnson, Durazo, and Piazza as potential first basemen, are we really that short on outfielders? How about Barton as a mid season callup at first? Is it so bad that we should risk trading away a starting pitcher for an unproven or questionable outfielder? Is it reasonable to give Kielty a shot at hitting RHP?

Pitching seems to be at an all time premium. If this is true, why not trade scrubs, whose value should be inflated, for a 4/5th outfielder?

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jan 1, 2007 2:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd be reasonably content

with the team we have today, all healthy. I just wish the odds of that happening seemed good, or decent, and not terrible.

I think this team, as is, could contend for the AL West title. But I don't think this team, as is, could hang in there without Harden, Crosby, and Bradley. And when exactly have those guys--any of them, let alone all of them--been healthy all season?

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 2:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Alox?

Piazza is no Thomas. The rotation isn't going to be as good as last years without Zito and Kielty isn't as good as Payton was. AND we didn't go to the World Series last year. So no, I am not happy with the team as is. We need a big slugger.

by IM4Oakgal on Jan 1, 2007 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Nico nailed it for me.

I see a healthy Harden taking Zito's spot in the rotation. While Piazza may not be Frank Thomas, he's no slouch either. If Crosby, Chavez, and Bradley stay reasonbly health, our offense should be improved.

I hate the idea of weakening our rotation any further than it already is. I think Blanton may have a break out season. While I wouldn't mind the impact bat you speak of, I'm not convinced that we need to mortage the rotation to get it. I think we have enough to start with. Perhaps we can re-evaluate as the trade deadline approach.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jan 1, 2007 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I hear ya...

but it doesn't seem to me that we should count on Harden's health. And Piazza is a dependable guy but not a HR producer like Thomas. We can't keep ignoring the fact that the team just doesn't hit enough.

by IM4Oakgal on Jan 1, 2007 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm actually prepared to

count on a healthy season from Rich Harden simply because in my estimation, if Harden is not healthy then 2007 becomes a rebuilding year anyway. I just don't think the A's can weather Harden missing 25 starts this coming season. But he is presumably healthy...Which is why I'm about 3 parts excited and 4 parts nervous.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 5:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I dont know

I dont know about Harden, I think theres a 50/50 chance he is great or he ends up needed surgery to repair that elbow.

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ends up

needing surgery to repair the elbow ligament.

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 5:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

He had a serious injury ...

that kept him from playing almost all year. I just doubt that rest alone is going to cure it. I am betting he plays for a bit in April and then his arm can't take the stress again. I don't want that to happen but he didn't have surgery or anything so I don't see why it wouldn't recure.

by IM4Oakgal on Jan 1, 2007 5:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

20 starts by Harden and healthy by the playoffs

...means Saarloos earns his pay.

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 5:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I hope Joe doesn't go anywhere

Thank you GlassHeart for the stats. This is what I remembered about JB from last season but I wasn't sure if the data would back it up. I think Blanton (and his cat-like reflexes) for Milledge would be a terrible trade.

by Reg on Jan 1, 2007 3:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

If you think Blanton

has "cat-like reflexes" then you need a new cat.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 5:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

first QOTM nominee for the year

by Rickeyfan on Jan 1, 2007 5:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

or

That or he had an abundance of catnip cupcakes around the house.

Rickey Henderson: 35, 24, hall of fame!

by Athletics fan and runner on Jan 2, 2007 7:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That comment

was from Fosse or one of the other announcers.

by Reg on Jan 2, 2007 9:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Earned Runs Per Game Started - 2006

0 Runs
5 Zito - 34 GS
4 Haren - 34 GS
3 Blanton - 31 GS
3 Loaiza - 26 GS
0 Saarloos - 16 GS
1 Harden - 9 GS
2 Halsey - 7 GS

1 Run

11 Zito - 34 GS
8 Haren - 34 GS
3 Blanton - 31 GS
3 Loaiza - 26 GS
4 Saarloos - 16 GS
3 Harden - 9 GS (1=3 inn., 1 = 4 inn.)
1 Halsey - 7 GS

2 Runs
2 Zito - 34 GS
5 Haren - 34 GS
9 Blanton - 31 GS
3 Loaiza - 26 GS
6 Saarloos - 16 GS
0 Harden - 9 GS
1 Halsey - 7 GS

3 Runs
5 Zito - 34 GS
4 Haren - 34 GS
4 Blanton - 31 GS
5 Loaiza - 26 GS
2 Saarloos - 16 GS
3 Harden - 9 GS
1 Halsey - 7 GS

4 Runs
4 Zito - 34 GS
5 Haren - 34 GS
3 Blanton - 31 GS
5 Loaiza - 26 GS
1 Saarloos - 16 GS
1 Harden - 9 GS
3 Halsey - 7 GS

5 Runs
3 Zito - 34 GS
4 Haren - 34 GS
4 Blanton - 31 GS
4 Loaiza - 26 GS
0 Saarloos - 16 GS
0 Harden - 9 GS
0 Halsey - 7 GS

6 Runs
2 Zito - 34 GS
0 Haren - 34 GS
3 Blanton - 31 GS
2 Loaiza - 26 GS
2 Saarloos - 16 GS
0 Harden - 9 GS
1 Halsey - 7 GS

7 Runs
3 Zito - 34 GS
3 Haren - 34 GS
3 Blanton - 31 GS
0 Loaiza - 26 GS
0 Saarloos - 16 GS
0 Harden - 9 GS
0 Halsey - 7 GS

8 Runs
0 Zito - 34 GS
0 Haren - 34 GS
0 Blanton - 31 GS
1 Loaiza - 26 GS
0 Saarloos - 16 GS
0 Harden - 9 GS
0 Halsey - 7 GS

9 Runs
0 Zito - 34 GS
1 Haren - 34 GS
0 Blanton - 31 GS
0 Loaiza - 26 GS
0 Saarloos - 16 GS
0 Harden - 9 GS
0 Halsey - 7 GS

by A s Eh on Jan 1, 2007 6:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Cherry-picking the data,

I choose only to look at starts where the pitchers gave up at least 9 runs.

Conclusion: Dan Haren really sucks. (Although he is 1-0...)

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 7:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

baseball players are so selfish these days

if haren really cared about the team, he'd give up 9 runs every game.

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Jan 1, 2007 7:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course then Haren

would have to officially change his name to Mike Oquist...

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 8:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Cherry-pickin' or...

Perry chicken?

French Vanilla

by Ice Cream on Jan 1, 2007 7:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice!

But shouldn't your flavor of the week be "Freedom Vanilla"?

"...sometimes I can't tell the difference between baseball and magic."- salb918 "Ellie plowed into him like an evil, pink unicorn."-ArakSOT

by McFood on Jan 2, 2007 8:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, McForage. Wouldn't be the same.

But along those lines check this out.

French Vanilla

by Ice Cream on Jan 2, 2007 9:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

neat stats, thanks

Go Kirk Saraloos!

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 9:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

*Saarloos

by apilgrim on Jan 1, 2007 9:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Scaaramooche!

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jan 1, 2007 9:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Blez's Tuesday opening contained an interesting

discourse on Milledge.
--------------------------------
Milledge's stats...
or why I think he's more hype than player.

277/388/440 in 307 AAA at bats. 44 BB/67 K.

Not bad on the surface, but you need to look closer to see why I worry. Let's look at Milledge's monthly splits:

April: 357/500/524 in 84 AB. 18 BB/13 K
May: 235/353/418 in 98 AB. 14 BB/29 K
June: 667/667/1.667 in 3 AB. (He spent most of June in NY.)
July:237/314/387 in 93 AB. 8 BB/18 K
Aug/Sep: 276/344/310 in 29 AB. 3 BB/7 K

Last year was Milledge's first in AAA. Usually a prospect struggles some when he first gets a promotion to a new level, but on the other hand a player comes into a new league without anyone knowing about his weaknesses.

Milledge dominated the IL his first time through but he struggled once teams saw him the second time around. Almost half of his walks came in the first month of the season. He averaged 1 K per 6.5 AB in April but that figure was worse in every other month (3.4 in May; 5.2 in July; 4.1 in Aug/Sep).

Milledge has a lot of natural talent but he's far from the sure thing people are making him out to be.

And for the record (as there seems to be some confusion on this matter) Milledge logged 464.3 innings in CF last year for Norfolk. Statistically he rated as slightly above average on defense.

This guy is dead! We'll list him as day-to-day for possible reincarnation.
A's Medical Staff, 2006
by grover on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 03:30:44 PM PDT
[ Reply to This ]

Fair enough.
But his home park was a brutal environment for hitters.

Home: .710 OPS (lg-average: .732), 0 HR, 10 XBH (all doubles)
Road OPS: .951 (lg-average: .701), 7 HR, 22 XBH

The road stats are probably not really Milledge, but the home stats aren't either.

Stat Wonk Futurist

by salb918 on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 03:39:06 PM PDT
[ Parent | Reply to This ]

His OPS splits were wonky, tis true
but his BB/K numbers were almost identical on the road (21/31 150 AB) vs. at home (22/36 in 157 AB).

In this case, his OPS tends to follow the same trend as his BB and K rates. And this trend is not his friend. His numbers got worse after April.

This guy is dead! We'll list him as day-to-day for possible reincarnation.
A's Medical Staff, 2006
by grover on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 03:58:46 PM PDT
[ Parent | Reply to This ]

You are. . .
pretty good at reading a lot out of a pretty small statistical sample. Almost everyone who isn't a testy Met fan (and this is stat-heads and scouts alike) thinks this guy has all the tools to be a great ballplayer, but whoooah wait a second his 120 ABs at the end of the year (after a depressing ML call up) weren't up to snuff! It must be because the pitchers have figured him out! A-HAH!

by clubberlang on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 03:43:18 PM PDT
[ Parent | Reply to This ]

You make this too easy for me
I guess I could point out all the uber-tooled "can't miss" prospects that have failed to produce in the Show.

Or I could go back and highlight the part where I said Milledge has a ton of natural talent. But that could be seen as insulting because I'd be implying that you aren't smart enough to realize that "natural talent" = "tools".

Maybe I should harp on the basic reality of professional baseball, one that has been acknowledged by scouts and stat heads alike, that success is about adjustments.

But I think I'll focus on your "small sample size" arguement because really, that's what makes me laugh the most.

277/388/440 in 307 AB. That's the entirety of his AAA production. Your defense is largely centered around the 84 AB he had in April which produced a 357/500/524 line. That's a fine month by any standard. But those 84 AB that you hold so dear are a lot smaller sample than the "120 ABs at the end of the year" you accuse me of focusing on.

In reality, I'm focusing on the 223 AB he had in AAA AFTER the month of April. In those 223 ABs, Lastings Milledge posted a 247/341/408 line with 25 BB and 54 K. That's a decidedly "meh" performance by every standard.

Now, I'm not saying Milledge is going to bust. I'm saying he's got a lot more work to do to become a big league ballplayer than it appears at first glance.

This guy is dead! We'll list him as day-to-day for possible reincarnation.
A's Medical Staff, 2006
by grover on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 04:20:48 PM PDT
[ Parent | Reply to This ]
-------------------------------

LM is 21 has not made MLB adjustments and no one knows how or when that will turn out. Expecting him to join the OF as a regular may be rushing it.
Rios is tested and has made his adjustments in the competitive AL East. Rios plays in the A's outfield from day 1 and on, 4 years if we want it.
Blanton is a valid #3 for many teams. Bulldog makes HIS PITCH more often than not which utilizes the defense's abilities well.

by A s Eh on Jan 2, 2007 11:45 PM PST reply actions 0 recs