The 2006 A's Are Contenders, But What Kind?

by Nico on Jun 13, 2006 8:56 AM PDT in News

With Harden's future uncertain, to say the least, the prospect of losing Barry Zito and getting nothing immediate in return, leaves the 2007 rotation looking somewhat grim at the moment. The 2007 rotation was supposed to feature "4 young studs" in Harden Haren, Blanton, and Meyer, all with 2-3 full years of major league experience, along with the veteran Loaiza. At the very least, this looked like "the new 3 aces," and "2 solid innings eaters," piloting the 2007-09 dynasty that the A's so carefully assembled.

Boy how things have changed. Harden and Meyer have fallen about as far backwards as you could conjure up in your most draconian nightmares. Blanton has wobbled in place, and Loaiza still has several solid starts to go before he can erase our vivid memories of watching "batting practice without the cages".

And so the question is being raised, in its various forms, "Should the A's see Zito through to the end of the year and go for it in 2006, or should they use him to acquire another Haren or Meyer, and hope to God it's Haren and not Meyer?"

A lot of it depends on what the A's are in contention for in 2006. Here's how I see it. There are various levels of "contention" and they are:

I. "Legitimate contention" This is where your team is good enough to win 95+ games. Any team that can win 95 games can win the World Series, plain and simple--they just have to play well and/or get the breaks, because for any and all of their flaws they have enough strengths to win any series any time. Thanks in large part to Harden's injury, the A's, unfortunately, do not appear to be this team.

II. "Contention" This is where your team is good but not great--probably good enough to win 90 games and take a weaker division, but ultimately too flawed to win a stronger division. Teams good enough to win 90 are also bad enough to win 85, so it's touch-and-go all the way. But teams good enough to win 90 are also a deadline-trade away from becoming legitimate contenders. Whether these teams are viable World Series contenders, however, is a tough call. Billy Beane would argue that say are, because short series are such crapshoots, and I tend to agree with him--the flurry of Wild Card-to-World Series champions suggests this much. The A's may be this team, and if so I think they ought to hang on to Zito, while there's a division weak enough for the taking. But are the A's this team?

III. "Padre contention" This is where your team could still win a weak division, but isn't even good enough to win 85 games and should expect to be trounced in the first round of any playoffs. These teams are not World Series contenders, as only the graded-on-a-curve division enabled them to be in contention for anything. If this is the A's, they should trade Zito before July 31st, even if they have a shot to win the AL West.

I do think the A's may be just good enough, even in their crippled state, to lay claim to "contention" and not merely "Padre contention". But is it worth hanging onto Zito to try to scratch out a playoff berth in a weak division, perhaps only to be slaughtered in the first round by a "real team"?

Yes. First of all, playoffs generate revenue--directly through TV revenue, added ticket sales, concessions, and souvenirs, and also indirectly through added publicity, fan interest, excitement, and ultimately even added season-ticket sales. Do not overlook the financial impact of making it even to just one post-season series. And maybe this time Pierzynski will forget to slide, or Youkilis will stop running, or...As long as the playoffs are a possibility, keep your best team out there, because baseball is too crazy a game and too much can happen in any given week.

Unless, of course, we're just "Padre contenders"...This is a tough call...

Tweet Comment 82 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Nico, your second

to last paragraph says it all. Ownership groups are always interested in making the jump from 89 to 93 wins because of the added playoff revenue. There is a business reason to not spend the money on improving an 80-win team by a few games. But there's no excuse for not shelling out a little extra to make the playoffs. There's money to be made from getting there, and there's always a chance that your pitchers get hot and a kid hits a few key bombs to get you a title - and more cash.

Can intangibles exist? Only the ones you can touch.

by salb918 on Jun 13, 2006 9:01 AM PDT reply actions

"Padre contention"

Is that like "Coyote Ugly"?

"The sun don't shine on the same dog's ass all the time."

-Catfish Hunter

by kaweahkaweah on Jun 13, 2006 9:24 AM PDT reply actions

Yes, it is.

And it's an ugly thing to say about out team, Nico. Take it back or I'm gonna have californiagirl stuff peanuts into your dirty, dirty mouth.

"the reason why hitting the ball on the "sweet spot" of the bat feels so good is that the ball is contacting at the bat at a vibrational node." - salb918

by McFood on Jun 13, 2006 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Zito

I don't think the A's are going to resign Zito. After seeing what happened to Harden, I think Beane will be reluctant to stash a ton of money into one corner of the roster. I think the injury to Harden has sealed it. Granted Zito has been between an ace and a number 2 guy, but he has logged a ton of innings. I know I'm not taking in to account the possible infusion of money that goes along with the team relocating. I think Beane will hold on to Zito for the balance of the year and be happy with the draft picks.

by rocket on Jun 13, 2006 9:36 AM PDT reply actions

I'd love to get something for Zito

But you gotta go for the playoffs. You really can't do an in-season white-flag trade even if it makes longer-term sense. We'll just have to take the draft picks for Barry and let Beane figure it out. Who knows, maybe Gaudin will turn into Haren, or maybe Meyer will turn into what Meyer was supposed to turn into.

And teams have won it all, or come close, even with "Padre contention." See the '73 Mets, finishing 82-79 but going up 3-2 in the World Series before our A's came back. Better still the 1987 Twins, World Champs despite being a mediocre team that was outscored by its opponents during the season. I'm not sure the 1991 Twins don't belong in this category as well, though I'm not taking time to back up my memory with Baseball Reference.

by Faust on Jun 13, 2006 9:37 AM PDT reply actions

91 Twinkies

Won the division by 8 games and had the best record in the AL.

Hard to claim that they were "padre contenders" with those numbers.

What you were probably remembering about them is that it was the first time a team had gone from last in it's division one season to first the next season. In fact it happened with both them and the Braves.

------ 84.6% of all statistics are made up.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/athleticsnationpodcast

by gallopingael on Jun 13, 2006 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions

I certainly didn't remember them being that good

But I think I was mainly conflating them with their '87 predecessors. Plus, I believe the '87 and '91 Twins teams also had in common that they were the only two MLB teams ever to win a 7-game series winning 4 home games and losing all 3 on the road. Damn Metrodome. They were fortunate they got their pennants in odd-numbered years.

by Faust on Jun 13, 2006 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions

history shows that Beane is more likely

to ADD a player, than to subtract one...if we are a 'contender' (a few games out, or holding down first place).

This is a great diary, and something to think about obviously. But i'm more concerned on who we can ADD, along with keeping Zito for the rest of the season.

I see us contending down to the wire. So why not add Carlos Lee...for Kielty and DOminguez. If healthy, we are really good, powerful hitter away from being a world series contender (imo)....REGARDLESS OF HARDEN (who i think will be back by August anyway). Zito, Haren, Loiza every series in the playoffs, with Sarloos/blanton in the bullpen in case one of them struggles early.

Who else besides Carlos lee? Brewers are struggling....he could easily be dumped.

$1000 worth of liquor for Cupcakes and Swish and 'friends'. Hope it worked...

by jrwolf on Jun 13, 2006 9:40 AM PDT reply actions

but also, aside from this offseason ...

... Beane's never done one or the other -- he's always added and subtracted.

But if you think the Brewers will deal Lee for that "package," you're sadly mistaken.

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions

Carlos Lee + Two 1st Round Draft Picks

That's what you would be receiving if the A's Dealt for Carlos Lee. So, No. It ain't happening solely based on the A's having little to give to the Brewers.

It all depends on where the A's are in 30-45 Days.

Under .500 , Trade Zito
Over .500 , Keep Zito

COME ON, OAKLAND, COME ON! June 19th - June 21st, 2006 ** Oakland Athletics @ Colorado Rockies **

by Colorado Fan on Jun 13, 2006 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions

Come on, now.

When has Beane EVER made a deal that was predicted here? He always works under the radar except to let things "slip out" in order to mess with the percieved value of a given player.

Plus, who does he have to trade? The farm system is not that deep right now, and the only "surplus" area that stood out at the beginning of the year was starting pitching, no more.

Perhaps Billy Beane's genius this year was in creating depth, almost anticipating the DL for many players Read Rick Kaplan's piece on Marty Lurie's blog and you'll realize that the A's problemsm may just be part of a long term trend in baseball.

http://loveofthegameproductions.com/modules.php?name=News&file=categories&op=newindex&ca tid=4

by Rob @ Athletics Nation on Jun 13, 2006 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions

Intersting article

Thanks for linking.

Nothing says fun like Premium Meat!

by lurkerD on Jun 13, 2006 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions

ditto

Rob, you should throw that in the Link Dump, too.

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions

"Illegitimate contention"

That's when you've got an excellent team, but they're all a bunch of bastards <cough>Yankees<cough>.

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 9:41 AM PDT reply actions

Agreed Monkeyball...that is not a good enough

package. My mistake, but you get the idea.

A promising hard throwing pitcher, a serviceable switch hitter, and ___? (who else)

p.s. can anyone post a good portion of Rob Neyer's inside article on the A's (espn.com MLB page)

$1000 worth of liquor for Cupcakes and Swish and 'friends'. Hope it worked...

by jrwolf on Jun 13, 2006 9:45 AM PDT reply actions

What about 2007?

No Zito, and probably no Harden(either he has Tommy John surgery or becomes a relief pitcher)
Where does that leave us? A playoff appearance that doesn't go beyond the first round does NOTHING for us because we've been there too many times before.

The key this year, next year, and beyond is(big surprise) the offense. If we're barely in contention("Padre" or otherwise) it's because our offense scores under four runs in too many
games. Again, if we'd had Hudson, Mulder, and Zito in place last year we'd have still only won 88 games because of the offense.

The problem is that no one's going to take Zito unless they can SIGN Zito. Otherwise, he probably would have been traded during the off season. And because of that, the one or two teams that WOULD make a deal will give us little in return.

Zito stays for that reason, no other.

by Rob @ Athletics Nation on Jun 13, 2006 9:45 AM PDT reply actions

Harness Zito's contract-year energy

Face it, the dude is going all out right now for the dream contract. Same for Jason Schmidt and Sorriano.

On the other hand, the AL West is weak and the A's could still contend minus Zito. So if the A's could package Zito for a package such as the Mets' Reyes/Milledge/Soler/etc., I'd say go for it.

My A's lineup: Rickey (LF), Dw Murphy (CF), Miggy (SS), Reggie (RF), McGwire (1B), Giambi (DH), Chavez(3B), Fosse (C), Dick Green (2B).

by BobbyKrosby on Jun 13, 2006 9:52 AM PDT reply actions

Wow. That's quite a package

A top-5 MLB prospect, a starting SS, and a legit pitching prospect all for Zito. How about we just trade him to the Hall of Fame for Cy Young, Babe and Honus?

Jesus. Zito alone wouldn't even bring back Milledge alone. And if he could, I would pull the trigger in a heartbeat.

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions

Zito for Milledge?

Lastings Milledge is this years Charles Thomas.

Remember him?

Zito has chewed through 200 innings in each of the 5 seasons, and is well on his way to another 200 innings. Career 3.50 ERA.

It's not ridiculous to call a trade of Lastings Milledge, Alay Soler and Jose Reyes from the Met's perspective - although I tend to think that their starting pitching is fine. Way too much is made of the 4-5 starters on good teams like the Mets. The question really should be what would the A's want with this years Charles Thomas and a shortstop who barely hits his weight? They already have Charles Thomas and he's no threat for promotion to the majors any time soon (.646 OPS at Sacramento) and how much better an offensive player is Reyes than Marco Scutaro?

With 21 bombs in his rookie year, look for 42 jacks in '06, and 105 round trippers by 2009. - Baseball-Reference.Com

by NicksDreamy on Jun 13, 2006 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions

Wow.

First of all, I don't think that Reyes would ever be someone a team like the A's goes after. He has a lot more value in the NL, and we don't particularly covet his skills. That being said, he is regarded as one of the Mets' future stars, and he has star appeal in NY and they have invested way too much time and energy to throw him into a trade. So, it's a moot point. We don't want him; they're not giving him up.

More importnantly, how- in any way on God's green Earth- is Milledge like Charles Thomas. You're talkign about a guy that is considered by everyone in MLB to be a top 5 prospect. All he does is hit. The guy will be a star. I guess all the GMS and scouts don't know sometihng a guy named NicksDreamy on the internet does. Give me a break.

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions

Wow Tony

You have a one-word vocabulary? Sounds like it.

By the way, I want the Mets to throw in Jessica Alba for yours truly in that deal.

My A's lineup: Rickey (LF), Dw Murphy (CF), Miggy (SS), Reggie (RF), McGwire (1B), Giambi (DH), Chavez(3B), Fosse (C), Dick Green (2B).

by BobbyKrosby on Jun 13, 2006 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions

New York

I'm sure they think they own the rights to Alba as well. Greedy sons of B-atches.

COME ON, OAKLAND, COME ON! June 19th - June 21st, 2006 ** Oakland Athletics @ Colorado Rockies **

by Colorado Fan on Jun 13, 2006 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions

I would definitely trade you for Jessica Alba

Wow.

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions

knocking Lastings Milledge.

Easy. He's another outfield prospect brought up in the National League East that is wowing us all with his potential. There's your comparison. Don't use hindsight to cloud your judgement - we all figured Charles Thomas to be a pretty solid prospect in 2004.

I'm not trying to knock Lastings Milledge like I know he's going to fail. After the Hudson deal went down, we all thought that the outfield was solidified with Kotsay, Swisher and Thomas. It hasn't worked out that way. Thomas was a solid prospect who had a good couple of months in Atlanta. Milledge on the other hand has been in the majors for less than a month. That said, I get it. He's good. He's an outfielder, and frankly, as much as I'd love to see the A's upgrade at that position, I'm not sure that Lastings Milledge is some kind of guaranteed upgrade over Jay Payton even.

What's fascinating is that you can't possibly tell me that the A's would ever really consider trading a Cy Young award winner who is undoubtedly one of the top pitchers in the league as of this very moment for a prospect in the outfield, do you? (and that's the point of the reference to Thomas) It's damn near a guarantee that Zito will go the rest of this year with a 3.25 ERA and make big starts in the playoffs should the A's make it there. I'll grant that a guy like Milledge has upside, but he's fair from the guarantee that Zito is.

I would be shocked to see the A's do a deal for him straight up like you propose. I'd go so far as to offer to eat your socks if they do.

Furthermore, Milton Bradley is finally healthy and don't take your posts to the level of personal insults. It detracts greatly from any intelligent and worthwhile point you may have been or would ever attempt to make.

With 21 bombs in his rookie year, look for 42 jacks in '06, and 105 round trippers by 2009. - Baseball-Reference.Com

by NicksDreamy on Jun 13, 2006 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Alphabet Soup

A) I never personally insulted you. I don't even know who you are, so that makes personal insults pretty difficult.

B) The fact that both guys played outfield in the NL East is about as much as they have in common. Milledge is universally regarded as a top prospect. Charles Thoams is, AND WAS AT THE TIME OF THE TRADE, universally regarded as a guy who plays baseball. So, you keep saying that they're possibly the same, but you're not backing it up at all. You're using your opinion as your sole fact. I'm at least using the opinion of the people who get paid to make those calls plus the opinons of al the writers at the sites that everyone here and the A's front office themselves refer to (ie, Baseball Prospectus).

C) Most importantly, this will hopefully end this argument, because we're just two people on the internet that in the grand scheme of MLB, don't know shit. It's a documented fact that Beane has told Minaya that any deal for Zito would have to include Milledge. How's that for fascinating?

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions

Hmm...let me tick you both off:

I'd say Lastings Milledge and Charles Thomas have about as much in common as Tony's post and not insulting someone.

Which is to say that no one--Beane included--thought Charles Thomas was anything special, which is why he was a throw-in, whereas I believe Beane would trade Zito for Milledge in a New York minute...and Tony, you don't have to have met someone to have insulted them.

by Nico on Jun 13, 2006 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Thanks Dad

"I guess all the GMS and scouts don't know something a guy named NicksDreamy on the internet does. Give me a break."

Is that the insult? It's the most inflammatory statement in the whole post. I'd say it's about 1/100th as insulting as comparing someone's intelligence to that of a monkey, but what do I know?

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions

<scratches head>

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions

Now THAT takes some intelligence

Monkeys are way underrated.

by Nico on Jun 13, 2006 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions

only by human metrics

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions

monkeys

a truer thing has never been said.

With 21 bombs in his rookie year, look for 42 jacks in '06, and 105 round trippers by 2009. - Baseball-Reference.Com

by NicksDreamy on Jun 14, 2006 6:23 AM PDT up reply actions

<slips on banana peel>

DAMN IT!

by DMOAS on Jun 13, 2006 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions

once again, talent versus production

If there's anything that Billy Beane values, it's performance over potential.

It doesn't matter that any number of mlb scouts get together and label Lastings Milledge a top-5 prospect. You've got a guy who had not exactly eye-popping, but certainly impressive minor league statistics, come up and make a splash in the majors playing in the outfield for a title contender in the National League East. Is that last sentence in reference to Thomas or Milledge? It may be my sole opinion that he was a dazzling outfielder, but Thomas showed he could hit. His numbers at Greenville and Richmond don't lie - that's "proof".

I'd almost take issue with the notion that Thomas was a throw-in because he was at the time of the trade and up until the end of April 2005 was considered a vital part of the A's outfield. Almost - because the obvious star of the trade was supposed to be Dan Meyer, even if few people thought that Meyer would be in the A's rotation in 2005. It's further fascinating to me to note how you can change your point in midstride without so much as a noticable down-shift. Is it that the A's are trading for Milledge straight up or want to make sure that he's included as part of a package of players? You may be personally bothered that I refer to Milledge as Charles Thomas, but my point wasn't to claim that his career is going to go into the tank due to a perceived lack of effort, but rather that the A's wouldn't trade Zito straight up for the guy. There's nothing to prove there, really, unless you want to revisit this on August 1st. In the case that you do, can I please request some sauce for those socks, just in case?

It is personally insulting to claim that just because I want to have Nick Swisher's babies that I can't make a sound baseball decision that defies your perception of Billy Beane's motives. Anyhow, I commend you for noting that we are both just jerks on the internet. There's no point in you trotting out some pile of credentials and it's a waste of my time to do so either.

With 21 bombs in his rookie year, look for 42 jacks in '06, and 105 round trippers by 2009. - Baseball-Reference.Com

by NicksDreamy on Jun 14, 2006 6:19 AM PDT up reply actions

You forgot "crapshoot"

I don't think Billy Beane would agree with your analysis. From what's he's said, I think he thinks any team that makes the playoffs has a chance of winning it all. I think he only focuses on getting to the playoffs.

by matthias on Jun 13, 2006 9:57 AM PDT reply actions

especially given this past weekend

Looking at the lineup we rolled out Friday night against the Yanks, who in their right mind not only thought we could win that game, but sweep the series?

Anything. Can. Happen. In. A. Short. Series.

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions

Trade Zito for Bradford/Rincon/Hatteberg

just kidding!

Gosh, a year ago the A's had some dreary folks on the roster. Durazo, Hatteberg, Rincon, Bradford. It sucked. Now if we could only send Kielty packing...

My A's lineup: Rickey (LF), Dw Murphy (CF), Miggy (SS), Reggie (RF), McGwire (1B), Giambi (DH), Chavez(3B), Fosse (C), Dick Green (2B).

by BobbyKrosby on Jun 13, 2006 10:01 AM PDT reply actions

Weeeell

Hatteberg hasn't been too bad playing in the Great American Small Park . . . heh

by bluelightrain84 on Jun 13, 2006 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions

I think they should keep Zito

And go for it this season...

Carlos Lee might be a bit tough to pry away... but I have heard many clamoring for Craig Wilson, and I think he will be available much cheaper, and seems to fit the profile of a Billy guy - plus he can play a few positions to boot... Maybe we can package one of the Perez/Ginter/Scutaro guys along with Payton or Kielty... That would be nice...

by SD Erik on Jun 13, 2006 10:20 AM PDT reply actions

The only thing you're going to get with

that bag of trash (Perez/Scoot/Kielty/Payton/Ginter), is someone else's trash.

by DeeWayne on Jun 13, 2006 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions

One could hope can't they

Billy: Perez hit very well in the NL last year, and can play multiple positions... And have you seen JayPay numbers in the NL - these guys are middle of the lineup guys for you over there!!!

Pirates GM: You know what Billy - you're right!! How 'bout you throw in the switch-hitting clown you got, and I'll throw in Jason Bay... what do you say?!?!? Please?!?!?! Fine - you can have Zach Duke too...

AN: SWEET!!!

by SD Erik on Jun 13, 2006 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions

zito

Zito for Reyes, Milledge, and Soler? Are you serious? Ask the Mets if they'll throw in Mike Pelfrey too.

by rocket on Jun 13, 2006 10:38 AM PDT reply actions

Can you please pass me my cake?

Some of you are ridiculous. MLB is not your crappy fantasy league. You can't just package up a bunch of shitty parts and get back stars. The Brewers are not just going to give away Lee, no matter how far back they fall. They have a solid management team in place that has built a team that will contend for the next few years. They know how valuable the 2 1st-rounders he'll bring are. Not to even mention that w/ Pujols out, that division just got a lot weaker. If Sheets could stay helathy, they'd be right in it.

And the Mets are not giving us Milledge plus players for Barry Zito. Figure it out.

There are fewer and fewer really bad GMS out there. There are just too many resources telling everyone how bad the old ways were for p[eople to just get blatantly robbed anymore. It might happen form time to time, but not as much.

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 11:24 AM PDT reply actions

I think to pry away Lee,

the A's would have to part with Blanton. You have to give something that is at a premium and young starting pitchers with an upside fall into that category. Unfortunately, the A's are no longer in a position to subtract starting pitchers, what with Zito and Harden and Meyer's statuses (stati?).

by Nico on Jun 13, 2006 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions

The Mets

One would think -- hope? -- the Mets have learned their lesson from the Scott Kazmir trade: renting players can be a very, very bad idea. Granted, a Zito rental is a skooch of an upgrade from a Victor Zambrano rental.

But I suspect the Mets won't be trading their top prospects anytime soon.

by Gitz on Jun 13, 2006 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions

I agree

Craig Wilson is definitely a more viable option, but if DJ keeps hitting and Big Hurt stays healthy, he'd have nowhere to play anyway. The problem is, we need to upgrade the offense, but we have a bunch of guys that aren't coming out of the lineup like Kotsay, etc. We have solid guys, but not stars (except arguably Chavez and Swisher in a few yrs possibly). They're not bad enough to give up assets to replace, but they're not good enough to win titles. Like running in quicksand, huh? Kind of depressing.

Interestingly enough, you almost have to wonder if the rotation would be a target for a trade upgrade at this point. How's that for ironic?

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions

kotsay

much as i love the guy, the yanks were interested in him last year. if we could offload his 8/mil per to ny, i would say we should do it. we have bradley and payton who are almost as good as kotsay in cf. ny could put him in right (he has played lots of rf before) or, if their smart, put him in cf and move johnny to lf. he's not a hitter of the caliber of matsui or sheff, but he's a good veteran role player - of course, knowing the yankees, they probably want abreau or soriano or someone.

i like kotsay, but i think we are overpaying him. his contract isn't huge, but its a lot for us. unless he starts hitting like he did in 04 again. then he'd be worth every penny. with him off the books, plus money coming from pitt next year, we could possible look at actaully offering barry a contract. we all know he inconsistant, but the thing is he's never missed a start - ever. i am really coming to believe that a guy who pitches 200+ innings every year, and is almost always in the top 10 in baa and ops against is worth what he's gonna get. sure there's lots of guys with better stuff, but what good are they when they only make 20ish starts and pitch 150 innings a year. if only he could stop walking so many guys.

by Backspin on Jun 13, 2006 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions

Is your other sign-on name "reztips" ?

My A's lineup: Rickey (LF), Dw Murphy (CF), Miggy (SS), Reggie (RF), McGwire (1B), Giambi (DH), Chavez(3B), Fosse (C), Dick Green (2B).

by BobbyKrosby on Jun 13, 2006 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions

Moneyball

I agree with you, Tony. The release of Moneyball was the worst thing to happen for Beane and the A's. Unless teams still want to trade with him to try to prove him wrong. Who knows? I sure as hell don't.

by rocket on Jun 13, 2006 11:35 AM PDT reply actions

I say shop Zito now

That doesn't mean trade him, but move him if you get a good deal. I believe Detroit would have to consider trading for Zito, as they are in a tough division and have suspect pitching. They already lost Maroth, Robertson is not as good as he's been pitching (he's already plummeting back to earth) and Verlander is very good but unproven. Will he burn out in the dog days of summer? Is he burning out already? I think Detroit really needs a front line starter to be a WS contender (and they are very close), plus it would take the threat of Zito away from their playoff competition. Zito for Zumaya and Granderson, then throw Zumaya into the rotation and hope he's as good as he looks. The A's wouldn't be throwing in the towel this year at all, and they'd help fill out the rotation for the future. Granderson could play right and most likely Payton would be dealt (for a reliever or a prospect?). It would keep the A's competitive, lower current salary outlay and help build for the future.
There are many other possibilities, but this one seems to help both teams this year. It's a lot to ask from Detroit, but it takes Zito off the market and makes them better. They would probably ask for a reliever too, in which case we could throw in anyone except Duke or Street (or Calero or Kennedy???).

by iceplant on Jun 13, 2006 12:12 PM PDT reply actions

Zumaya and Granderson

I'd do that in a second, but again, I'm pretty sure they would never do that. Those two are both: A) carry big-time hype and B) are already producing.

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions

And C) they're cheap. Won't happen.

by Faust on Jun 13, 2006 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions

And D) They're under the Tigers' control

for 5 more years each after this year (I think, unless Granderson managed to piece together a full year's service time before this year, which I doubt). No chance, no how, no way.

by Faust on Jun 13, 2006 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Zumaya was ringing it up

at 102 the other night when he got his first save... 102 - now that is bringing it... Me likey a Zumaya

by SD Erik on Jun 13, 2006 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Zito

I'm sure Zito's been on the Market for some time. Beane said it would be malpractice on his part if he didn't listen to offers...Just no "Blue Light Specials" for other teams, and they know it.

COME ON, OAKLAND, COME ON! June 19th - June 21st, 2006 ** Oakland Athletics @ Colorado Rockies **

by Colorado Fan on Jun 13, 2006 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions

I think if the Tigers

do anything it will be for a bat. Plus they just drafted Andrew Miller, who could be in the rotation by next year. Pitching isn't their problem. But I would trade Zito for Zumaya and Granderson in a second.

by rocket on Jun 13, 2006 12:18 PM PDT reply actions

Andrew Miller

is exactly why the Tigers might consider trading Zumaya. He's probably the least coveted of their three young pitchers (of whom I'd take any one of them), but none is as close to a sure thing for this year as is Zito. Sometimes you have to give in order to get, and the Tigers may be one top of the rotation pitcher away from a WS ring. Surely they don't want to deconstruct what they have built, but at the same time they may never be as close to the ring as they are now. Things change, injuries happen, you can't predict the future, and no ballpark is better suited to "Flyball Barry" than Comerica (or whatever it's called right now).

by iceplant on Jun 13, 2006 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions

Here's the other question ...

... who, besides Zito, is likely to get dealt?

I think we're all on board with unloading Payton for, say, a middle-of-the-pen arm (+/- a second- or third-tier prospect?).
What about Bradley? If he's healthy mid-July and the A's aren't "legit," he'd be an attractive alternative to Jose Guillen for some contender. He's likely to be expensive next year.
Could Kendall conceivably be moved this season?
Witasick makes sense as a rental arm for someone in need of complementary players.
Is Melhuse's stock as high as it'll ever get? I believe he's arb-eligible this offseason -- but would he actually garner anything in trade?

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 12:31 PM PDT reply actions

Interesting questions...

Who might be interested in Payton? (White Sox? Yanks?) I think the other members of the lineup, like DJ and the Gamer, will determine JayPay's avalibility.
I think Milton will be here all year, but I could definately see him traded in the offseason.
On Kendall: I doubt it. I'd plan on him catch through 2007.
Possibly.
I'd be interested to know what other teams think of Melhuse. I read somehwere that St. Louis could use a lefty-hitting catcher to pair with Yadier.

I predict a fairly quiet trade deadline, though. Maybe a minor move but nothing earth-shattering.

"We've come a long way, and I'm not talking about Virginia Slims, either." - Art Howe

by EastCoastA on Jun 13, 2006 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Problem is: I don't think

any of those guys will bring you anything worth acquiring, separately or together. To get an impact player--someone who can lift this team to true contention or take the sting off of losing Zito--means parting with someone of the Blanton, Haren, Street, Duke, Crosby, or D. Barton stature, i.e., someone we really want to keep.

by Nico on Jun 13, 2006 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Fantasy world

but, .....Crosby and Balnton for Tejada. I'd do it. Crosby is going to frustrate us for years and years. Whether it's injuries or inconsistent play, he just has the stamp of one of those guys. I do think Blanton will regroup eventually. Might not be fully this year. I like his makeup, though.

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jun 13, 2006 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions

Meyer

Has anyone seen him pitch this year. His stats look semi ok, nothing to write home about. What is the word on him.

They mostly come at night, mostly.

by crd04 on Jun 13, 2006 12:46 PM PDT reply actions

I have. He's a poor man's Brad Halsey;

softer throwing with decent junk. He's not someone you look forward to wearing the A's uniform (unless it involves fielding the foul balls).

by DeeWayne on Jun 13, 2006 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions

What about Payton to the Yankees?

They need an outfielder - could we get some talent plus cash that can be used in a Zito resigning and/or other possible additions to the organization?

by SD Erik on Jun 13, 2006 12:59 PM PDT reply actions

i just posted above

but i think we'd be better off trying to get them to take kotsay and his contract off our hands.

by Backspin on Jun 13, 2006 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions

the yankees

are going to go after bigger fish. Jay Payton simply won't cut it.

by rocket on Jun 13, 2006 1:05 PM PDT reply actions

But as a stop-gap?

I'm not sure what outfielders are on the market right now - but JayPay can play all of the positions, and can come in immediately while they're shopping around...plus the Yankees don;t have much to offer other than money at their upper levels (Duncan?) so I'm not sure whom else they can acquire... Reggie Sanders? (I would rather have him than Payton - Dammit)...

by SD Erik on Jun 13, 2006 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions

anyone remember

the 1988 Dodgers? (yeah, nice memories, eh?) If they can win it, anyone can win it. Florida Marlins too. No one gave them a realistic chance, but with one hot pitcher, a la Hershiser, Beckett, Jose Rijo (another painful memory) a team can go a long way. And Zito can certainly be that pitcher. You gotta go for it.

by closetasfan on Jun 13, 2006 1:26 PM PDT reply actions

Great diary..

...I'm still mulling things over.

"Baseball is like church. Many attend but few understand." ~Wes Westrum

by baseballgirl on Jun 13, 2006 1:31 PM PDT reply actions

All of this talk about...

...Harden and TJ surgery, Zito and his imminent departure has gotten me SICK!
I like our boss (BILLY) and I think he's got a plan...Just like every other cat tossed out the window, it'll land on its feet, and I think so will this franchise.
The problem this year is that we listened too closely to the pre-season hype which raised our expectations to Steibrenner-esque proportions. As Grover stated in one of his posts, the next 6 weeks will be a strong indicator of how the team will do via Loaiza and Blanton's effectiveness.

"I've been accused of using too many words...I suppose that's like accusing Mozart of using too many notes." Bill King

by Gerard on Jun 13, 2006 2:52 PM PDT reply actions

Great post

Maybe we should keep Zito, since all this trade speculation is giving me offseason flashbacks. It's so frustrating--all the best trades are the ones other teams would never do.

by rubin sierra on Jun 13, 2006 3:13 PM PDT reply actions

I'm not sure yet...

The good thing, is that it's still over a month until the trade deadline.

After sweeping the Yankees, it's hard to completely write off this team. However, a number of questions have to be answered...

1) Is our rotation going to be Zito, Haren, Loaiza, Blanton, and Saarloos for the rest of the year? If so, we may be okay. It's impossible to know right now how much Loaiza is going to contribute, and whether Blanton will turn it on in the second half as he did last year. If both of those guys are stable, as they should be, then the rotation is alright.

but,

2) When is Justin Duchscherer coming back? Without him, and with 'Loos in the rotation, the bullpen is going to always have problems. This constant stream of GaudiKeisleroney is probably not going to take any pressure of the starters. Duke, Calero and Street have to be available.

and,

3) Have we seen the worst of the injury bug, position player wise? Will Bradley, Crosby and Chavez stay healthy more-or-less for the rest of the season?

If these things pan out, the team has an excellent shot at winning the division. Beyond that, well we already know its a crapshoot.

"A base hit would have been better, but the ground ball was just as good", Ray Fosse

by Alien @ Athletics Nation on Jun 13, 2006 4:02 PM PDT reply actions

I agree...

haven't been following the Harden scenario close enough to know if he would have a shot at being back for the playoffs(is TJ surgery a done deal?)... But IF our original(year starting)roster was healthy or very close to healthy around playoff time, I wouldn't automatically write the A's out in the playoffs. It's a tealented group if Bradley, Thomas, Chavy, Swish, etc...are all swinging the bat well, and Harden(?) Zito and Haren anchor a starting rotation that finishes with Duke, Calero, Kennedy, and Street. Good D as well...you never know; if the breaks fall their way????????

by accurate but not true on Jun 14, 2006 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions

There is a sleeper in all this

and that is Gaudin. I think his stuff is just electric, so far he has serious control problems, but as we saw last year after June when Blanton and Haren pitched lights out there is the possibility that Gaudin will finally realize that if he throws the ball over the plate he is mostly unhittable.
Many here have talked about Harden eventually being a closer or reliever, that to me sounds like a great idea. One thing that drives me crazy about following the A's is that when a guy gets injured we never hear anymore about them, are both Duke and Kennedy in the witness protection program? Will they ever reappear again?

by china bob on Jun 13, 2006 4:29 PM PDT reply actions

anyone know if thomas is in the mix tonight?

fantasy baseball would like to know!!!

Governator El-Slimebag

by greendatitiz on Jun 13, 2006 5:11 PM PDT reply actions

lurie just stated that thomas is in

bring on batting practice moyer!

Governator El-Slimebag

by greendatitiz on Jun 13, 2006 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions

Moyer's having a good year ...

... but we PWN him. Chavvy and Ktsay, especially.

bunt you hump @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 13, 2006 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions

It goes:

Chavy and Kotsay: "Who's your daddy?"
Moyer: "I am."

Actually, it could be true.

by Nico on Jun 13, 2006 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions

This is a critical question

and I can't wait for the A's to answer it.

Why yes. I am a ray of warm and fuzzy sunshine.

by grover on Jun 13, 2006 6:41 PM PDT reply actions

How about a poll option

for "think Harden will be fine, but keep Zito anyway?"

by atomopawn on Jun 13, 2006 8:43 PM PDT reply actions

Half-Game out of First

And many bright signs despite the Harden cloud:

loaiza and Blanton pitching better;

Street lights out;

crosby, payton, Johnson, Scutaro all starting to hit better.

bradley won't be fall behind.

Beane ain;t trading anyone.... in fact, the A's may be buyers in another 4-6 weeks.

oaktoon

by oaktoon on Jun 13, 2006 9:19 PM PDT reply actions

"anyone"?

I'll be somewhat surprised if Payton and Witasick are still with the A's in August.

And, yes, there are good arguments for keeping each of 'em.

I try not to think too much about the industrial cat farms. -- FSU @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 14, 2006 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions

Anything can happen in the postseason

Some teams might actually surprise us this year. It doesn't matter what you do during the regular season, all that counts is how well you do during the postseason. If we're within striking distance of first place around the ASB, I say we keep Zito at least for this year.

by hehelaughy on Jun 13, 2006 10:25 PM PDT reply actions