sluggers for sale
by notah8er on Oct 17, 2007 3:55 PM PDT
Email
Printimagine, if the CA condo market was still soaring instead of going belly-up, we might be splurging on one of these guys - anywho...
so barroid, a-rod and dunn are all theoretically on the auction block unless I'm mistaken.. who will buy? who would like to sample their supply? who's prepared to pay the price for a trip to... ahem...
here's a better question - who in their right mind would want ANY of them? one is almost certainly totally washed up, the next is perhaps the worst postseason batter of all times, and the third is enough of a fan dancer to make barroid sr seem patient (God rest his soul) at the plate.
is there any chance we could see a combo of two of these guys in a lineup?
or imagine this as next year's yankees:
4 - a. rodriguez
5 - a. dunn
6 - b. bonds
is it possible to have four strike-outs in an inning? (why yes, of course, just ask joba..)
145 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I for one would love to have any of those players
Those players are good. Expensive, of course, but good. Hell if I'm the Yankees that 4-6 looks mighty fine, tho it'll mean both Damon and Giambi will be in the field and Abreu would be gone.
But a lineup of Damon, Jeter, Bonds, Arod, Giambi, Matsui, Dunn, Posada (tho this would start being expensive even for the Yanks), Cano is sick despite the crazy number of lefties. That offense might very well be the best in history. Who cares about K's?
Dunn's affordable for one more year ...
and Barry is going to be a heck of a deal, at least before factoring in 'intangibles'.
Letting Abreu and Clemens walk would more cover their salaries.
But then there's Posada as well
Plus they need to re-sign Mo and if they aren't focused on the SPs they should be. But, hey, they're the Yankees so I still wouldn't put all that past them.
As for what I think would be realistic offseason targets for us, I'm praying for Tejada and a guy I would love to inquire about is Noah Lowry. He's a good young pitcher and he's already friends with Danny. If there's any way we could get him for DJ + I'd do that in a heartbeat. But even it's for Street, I'd have to think about (provided they throw in someone else).
Agree on Lowry...
However, I'm not sure if we have the parts to complete the trade.
by AsWin on Oct 17, 2007 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Do. Not. Want.
Lowry was sick lucky to have the kind of numbers he had this year. His peripherals are godawful, and his stuff is (if possible) even worse than that.
My hope is that he'll be traded to Seattle, thus conveniently removing someone (probably Wladimir Balentien) from their equation and giving the A's an easy-to-handle pitcher to beat up 5 times a season.
i don't get the noah lowry hype
http://www.athleticsnation.com/comments/2007/3/2/132036/5618/13#c13
ridiculous
Blanton, at least this season, had ace numbers. He's Haren with fewer Ks and walks.
Some people were wrong.
Lowry's decline is puzzling, and Blanton's improvement is encouraging.
Bonds' OPS led the NL ...
how is that even remotely totally washed up?
A-Rod has a .844 career post season OPS -- that's well above average. He posted a .820 OPS this year, still well above average. For comparison, Captain Clutch, everyone in the national media's favorite hero, Derek Jeter has a career .846 post season OPS and a somewhat less than stellar .352 this year.
Adam Dunn has been in the top 6 in the NL every year that he's been healthy since his first full season in the league. Patience is not exactly a problem for him. He's also hit 40+ home runs each of the last four years. Not bad.
hotah8er on the other hand ... he's kind of a hater.
subtract the IBBs
and what do we get? how many total hits did BB have last year?
and as for a-rod - exactly how many rbis did he have in the postseason until his totally meaningless HR?
personally, i think Dunn is good stuff despite the guaranteed 30 SOs a month. also, unlike barry and a-rod, he isn't a proven commodity as one of the worst players in organized sports relative to talent when championships are on the line.
and how about that WS fielding percentage?
also good stuff, i'm sure
Yup, WS fielding percentage is a
great indicator of a player's performance.
You should become a GM.
how about B-RIOT % ?
bobbles when ring is on the table...
for one, you can't subtract the IBB's, and if you
watched Bonds this year, you could tell he knew this was his last year with the Giants, and was swinging at pitches he would not normally swing at, sort of like he was trying to not walk as much.
Without Arod, Detroit, might have been the Wild Card team, so it wouldn't matter what his postseason OPS would be, since there wouldn't be a postseason.
by theblackpearl on Oct 17, 2007 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Honestly
My only problem with A-Rod is the number of years Boras is going to try and hook to the deal. I don't see the A's actually dropping $30 million a year but that's another issue.
I was all for going after Bonds until HollywoodOz and a few others said they'd leave if the a's acquired Bonds. I like Oz.
Dunn costs too much in terms of traded talent.
A guy I like is Sexson. Seattle really wants to move him and won't ask for much. He's due $14 million next year, the more $$$ a team is willing to take on the less they'll have to give up in player talent.
That would entail
either Sexson or Cust playing in the field, and Sexson isn't likely to provide enough offense to make that worth it. Plus, his horrific year might signal a genuine decline.
and he was never all that good to begin with ...
Yeah, 'cause a career OPS of 859
is crap. And the run of 900+ OPS from 2003-2005 is something to be ignored. Especially since the A's have had all of 3 guys crack 900 since Giambi left.
a career OPS of 859
is good. But it's nothing special from a poor fielding first baseman.
Consider the anchor that his 2007 numbers are
his career numbers still look pretty good.
Hey, I'd rather have Bonds but I don't see that working out especially at $10 million. Dunn will cost too much in a trade. A-Rod is just a dream.
If Sexson is toast than he's toast. If he's not, if he's got anything left than the downside is above-average offensive production from the 1B/DH spot, wherever you decide to put him. The upside is really good (but not great or otherwordly) offensive production.
And all the A's would need to do is be willing to take on a contract the Mariners are anxious to get rid of.
i was all ready to argue this,
but you're right. He makes sense if we're not going after a SS or CF, or signing Bonds.
All in all, I'd rather the A's somehow acquire another starting pitcher.
It's rare for a player to go TU that quickly
Plus one should never underestimate the power of the contract year. Sexson turns 33 (which isn't that old) in December and while he had leg issues this year they sound like something that should heal up during the offseason. Even if he "only" bounces back to his 2006 of .842 it would still be a lot better than the A's got out of their principle DH/1B combo in 2007.
But what's the point?
We already have 1B. Or if we DH him, we're left with the worst defensive outfield in baseball.
Might not be that bad an outfield D
But it would be a downgrade, admittedly.
Still, scoring runs is good too.
Cust, Travis Buck and Nick Swisher?
I'm sorry, but barring some completely unforeseen alteration in Travis Buck's ability to track the flight paths of fly balls, this is one of the worst outfields in recent memory.
If Sexson is healthy...
I'd put $20 on the over for that projection.
See, now there's a big part of the problem ...
if there is an "if" in your willingness to take a bet, it's clearly not that good of a bet.
That said, I'd take the over too, no ifs ... but I wouldn't take the over on .840.
But lets think about this. It's hard to make too concrete of assessments defensively, given the inexperience of most of the guys involved -- but I think we'd be generous in saying the alignment you're suggesting wouldn't cost the team at least 30 runs. When the full season UZR numbers come out, we'll have a better idea, but, based on the most recent build, Nick Swisher was projected to cost the team 32 runs over 150 games in center. Jack Cust (in a VERY limited sample size) projected to cost the team 45.
In 2006, Sexson's bat was worth 25 runs over replacement. Combine that with lowering the standard for replacement for Swisher's position move and the defensive pain would be just balanced out.
Which leaves the question -- can we find a CF who can play league average defense and hit at replacement level for less than the ~$10m it would cost to add Sexson?
I would think so. Corey Patterson would like beat that standard. So would Kenny Lofton or Mike Cameron.
Any of those guys would cost less and help the team more than Richie Sexson.
are there any starting pitchers you like?
I'd love to see the A's go after Maddux or Wolf. Maybe even trade for Garland if the price really is a couple of relievers.
Maddux or Schilling could be worth the price of
admission ... there's no one I'd give a multi-year contract to. I might take a flyer on Matt Clement if he'd sign a two year, $4m contact.
If the Sox took care of a couple mil for Garland, I'd be interested.
I'd take a flyer on Clement too
if his middle name was Van Winkle and he still thought he'd be getting a seventies-era salary.
I think it's safe to say that's not the case. Someone will give him at least $6 million a year for 2 years.
He was only getting 8 and change per ...
in his last contract and he'd probably be lucky to be throwing by the all-star break.
The two year contract is effectively for about 1.25 seasons of play. He might be able to talk me up to $6m or so ... but I doubt he gets more than that.
Clement
Do we really want to go after a pitcher who's made Rich Harden look like an iron man over the past two years?
Clement has made at least 30 starts ...
every year except this one.
Or 2006
12 starts for Boston before shutting it down. Shoulder surgery, wasn't it?
right, my bad ...
I didn't actually look at the year ... the blank for 2007 didn't show up.
Everyone gets a cursery exam
His hamstrings were bothering him in 2007 and I haven't seen any news on his status since September. For all I know Seattle's medical staff went to the same witch doctor school that Larry Davis did, Sexson may have actually had his tibula fall out for all I know.
All I ask before I place my money down is a medical report less than 3 months old. Gimme an OK there and I'd pick the over on 840.
As for UZR and sample size... Cust was projected to be a butcher in RF and a plus in LF. So yeah, sample size has warped that call. As for Swisher, UZR hits him hard but Hardball's RZR places him in the same category as Wells and Sizemore and ahead of Rowand.
As for Lofton, I'll grant that he could hit above replacement level but he'll be 41 in '08 and the numbers say his range is decreasing. Maybe he could platoon with Defornia (cause he's not going to play a full season) but you've got no upside in the bargain. He'd be realatively cheap but he's a stop-gap, nothing more. He's the car you hope to sell before the wheels fall off.
Patterson has posted a sub .700 2 of the last 3 years, we've got Kotsay on deck for that.
Cameron is 35 next year and will be looking for a 2-3 year deal. I know he didn't exactly have a banner year in 2007 and Petco is a nasty place to hit, but even accounting for that he's likely to get $9-10 million annual in the FA market. Hell, he made $7 million this year, I don't see a reason to think he won't get a raise in his next contract. Would he be a better CF than Swisher? Most likely. But is he going to be worth the contract he's going to demand, a contract that is most definetly going to cost more than the $14 million due Sexson in 2008? I don't know the answer but it's definetly a fair question.
And of you want to go beyond Cameron and talk about Hunter or Jones or Rowand then that's a whole other discussion, isn't it? Because those 3 names are going to take a serious commitment.
You know exactly what it'll show ...
he's not completely healthy, he might be able to get healthy, he might not -- only time will tell whether or not he can get back to it.
Last thing I read said pulled hamstring
no deal won't happen before Decemeber, if he's not well by then the problem is more serious than a pulled hammy. If it's torn than the story has taken a whole other turn.
Here's a link.
Offseason o' rest and he should be fine. He should be well on the way to fine by December.
If he didn't have more wrong with him ...
than that, it's all the more reason that he's unlikely to bounce back.
I agree
if Sexson has some secret injury that will ruin his 2008 than acquiring him would be a bad idea. However, I have to believe that some medical staffs are slightly more forthcoming than the A's collection of bone cutters and Bavasi would be required by MLB in all its glory to inform the A's of said injury before a deal could be completed.
You're starting to go overboard with the paranoia.
Any of those guys ...
with the possible, though unlikely exception of Patterson is a stopgap. Patterson, by the way, has been above replacement with the bat every year except one in his career.
That's all he'll have to do in order to be more useful than Sexson.
Sexson, by the way, is as much of a stopgap as any of them.
I don't really want to talk about Hunter, et al ... Maybe Rowand, but only if the others dry up the market for CF before he can get his deal and he comes in below mamrket.
Is replacement level really so low?
Yech.
Considering how bad the A's offense is, I think we need to shoot beyond replacement level and go for league average at a minimum.
I agree ...
if acquiring Patterson is the cornerstone of our off season, that's a problem.
I just think it would be a better move, given our haves and needs, than acquiring Sexson -- even before factoring the money or any talent Seattle might want.
Seattle wants to dump him
It shouldn't take more than minor league roster fill to land him. (See: Abreu, Bobby)
As for fixing other problem areas (SS for example) there aren't a lot of options floating around. The FA SS list is fugly. The SP ranks are rather slim as well. The 2007-2008 FA ranks have talent in the outfield and in the bullpen.
The A's still don't have the farm system to trade prospects for proven talent and they don't really have a spare arm in the rotation to make a deal. They could move Street, trusting in Embree and Duke to fill in as closer or they could pursue one of the big name guys.
The problem with Sexson isn't budgetary ...
we can afford him and you're right that there probably won't be a lot of talent involved.
The problem is playing time.
We have at most two positions to fill -- CF and SS. The only way Sexson fits in is by moving Swisher or Buck to center. We'd be better off getting a fairly crappy defensive minded CF. The team would be better off.
Unless you're actually disputing that ...
As for Sexson the stopgap...
So was Frank Thomas, and for that matter Shannon Stewart. Piazza qualified as well, only he represents the downside o' stopgap. Sexson fills the stopgap MO. He's pricey but the A's have the money to spend. And if they aren't going to go after A-Rod or (maybe) Jones, I don't see the player worthy of the expensive, multi-year contract.
For the record, I know nada about the guy from Japan (Furkama?) who's got a bunch of folks all a-flutter.
When we got
F. Thomas and Piazza, we needed a DH. We no longer need a DH. Or a 1B. Sexson would need to put up a .900+ OPS to even improve the current team, and that's not even taking into account the cost. The offense is actually not much worse than the pitching/defense as the team stands right now. The way to improve it is finding a SS or a (real) CFer who can hit, not getting hitters at positions that are already covered. And it's unlikely that Sexson will even be that good of a hitter! It just makes zero sense.
Wrong
Last year A's 1B men, and I'm including everyone who spent time at 1B, combined to post an 802 OPS. And that only happened because Barton came up and went bonkers in September. The various batters used at DH combined for an 821 OPS.
So if Sexson comes back and can only post an OPS of 842 like he did in 2006, it would still be a minimum 21 points higher than the A's saw in 2007. And if he posts a 900+ OPS that's at least 100 points higher than they got from their 1B men last year!
If a 100+ point boost in OPS at 1B isn't good enough for you than I'm sorry, but you're just too demanding!
But DJ's benched
and Piazza is probably retired and certainly won't be wearing white cleats.
You're beating a straw man.
The Hell I am
I'm putting Cust in the OF. I'm going to gear up the offense as best I can.
Gotta hot date.
Later
Does your wife know?
I know exactly what you're doing.
You're arguing that Sexson is likely to be better than DJ and Piazza were.
Umm ... duh.
Hmmm
how about looking at the OPSes of the guys who are actually going to be on the team next year and get playing time at 1B/DH? Is Sexson an improvement over Cust or Barton? Even if you think he is, Cust and Barton are already on the team. Why give up anything, be it talent or cash, to acquire something we already have?
I would gladly see Sexson get ABs instead of Piazza or DJ, but that is completely irrelevant.
This is a rather strange argument
seeing as how the A's are planning to start Daric Barton and Jack Cust, not Toddanick Johnswalker and Jack Piazza.
yeah, what Mike said ...
Mike's wrong
My muse went off for some (admittedly) much needed I & I. When she returns I'll explain why.
inebriation and incontinence?
Half right ...
but your way is more fun.
That would be
Outfielder for the Chunichi Dragons and 2006 Central League MVP. Career OPS in NPB of around .950.
Yep ...
I think his offense will play -- but from what I read, he won't be long for CF. It doesn't make a lot of sense to invest serious money in a guy who's going to be competing with Swish and Buck for PT before too long.
He won't be long for CF
because he is not primarily a CF; much like Ichiro.
Denorfia
Is there some reason why Denorfia isn't going to play a full season? I don't think he has an injury history other than the TJ to fix his elbow this year, and that shouldn't have a lasting effect on an outfielder. It really seems to me that he could be the answer to all of this discussion. By PECOTA at least he was supposed to put up something like a 800 OPS while playing a credible CF. Am I missing something about him? Are we really talking about Corey Patterson as an alternative? Maybe PECOTA is off on him, but it seems like he is a better option than Patterson or Sexson.
by johnny D on Oct 18, 2007 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions
He is
Well, damned nearly anyone is a better option than Corey Patterson. But that's not the point.
Denorfia's actually been very durable over his career; he had no injuries to speak of in any season prior to this one and played over 400 games from 2004-2006. Seems like the elbow injury was just a freak occurrance.
Right
That is what I thought. I don't really have a problem going to camp with Denorfia the likely starter, Snelling as a possibility till he gets injured and Kotsay as bench filler cause we can't get rid of him. I can't come up with a better CF alternative that isn't going to cost a lot in money or assets to acquire. It also seems doubtful that another team would see more in Denorfia than we do, so there isn't much to be gained in trading him.
by johnny D on Oct 18, 2007 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions
The reason I would seriously consider ...
acquiring a guy like Corey Patterson or Kenny Lofton is because Denorfia only has 67 career MLB at bats and he's not the kind of premium prospect that you comfortably hand a starting job to.
I don't mind him being the presumed starter. I do mind not having a Plan B.
The reason I actually brought up Patterson is as an example of a center fielder who we could easily acquire who would help the team more than Richie Sexson.
I would actually plan on starting out
with a Kotsay/Denorfia platoon in center. Kotsay's OPS against lefties last year was in the 300s-- just unbelievably bad. Gradually, if Denorfia isn't really struggling, he could be phased into the starting role, perhaps with Kotsay being traded along the way (if he's semi-effective) a la Kendall this season.
Mike Piazza is gone, no matter what.
It's not a question of Sexson v Piazza.
Jack Cust -- who is a lot more likely to achieve and surpass that .842 than Sexson is going to be the DH and Daric Barton, who I think most of us expect to exceed Sexson's production, is going to be the first baseman. Nick Swisher and Travis Buck will be the corner outfielders and we aren't going to have either of them as the starter in center field. Of those four, only Swish didn't beat that .842 last year and he was only 6 points behind.
Stick Cust in the OF
Kotsay = $8 million 5th OFer. I'd love to trade him but I don't see how. Even if Oakland was willing to eat $6 million to move him I'm not sure there's much of a market.
Swisher in CF unless Buck shows better skills in ST. Whoever isn't in CF ends up in a corner. The defense isn't the greatest but Blanton, Gaudin and DiNardo all show groundball tendencies. Haren and Harden (might as well mention him I suppose) are the best strike out guys in the rotation so a downgrade in outfield D wouldn't affect them as greatly.
But your offense has just improved noticably.
Buck, Swish and Cust will hit. I trust Barton's OBP skills but his September power surge seems flukey. Still, he shouldn't be a detriment and could very easily post above-average numbers. I think Sexson has a legit bounce back year, maybe coming close to a 900 OPS again and THAT would combine with the other guys I mentioned to form a pretty solid offense.
OK, lets assume that Sexson
duplicates 2006 in 2008: 842 OPS, 120 OPS+. That's barely above average for a 1b / dh. Yes, it's better than DJ and Piazza. It's also $14M. Why not just beat the bushes for a Carlos Pena pre 2007 type, who can give an OPS+ around 105-110 and spend the $14M elsewhere?
because we already have a 1b and a DH ...
Yes, we know ...
but unless you can make an argument that after factoring in defense, the team would be better with him than with Corey Patterson then what's the point?
Fair enough
Not happening today though.
Isn't there a formula that's supposed to predict runs scored based off individual OPS, or am I mistaken?
If you really, really want
an ageing, injured, expensive, declining 1b / dh with no defensive value, you're better off looking at Delgado. Just as expensive, also getting old, also injured, also declining, but still a better hitter than Sexson.
Problem with that...
The Mets don't WANT to move Delgado. I'm sure they could be persuaded to deal him but it would cost equitable talent. The Mariners are looking to move Sexson and they're willing to do it on the cheap (in terms of talent received) IF someone were willing to pick up his contract.
It's the difference between trading a big league arm for Delgado vs. minor league roster fill for Sexson. I'm willing to eat the money but I'm not willing to part with talent.
Wait a sec
I'm saying Sexson is going to be healthy, so setting that issue aside the real question is does he have anything left? I'm thinking he does and if I'm right that .842 OPS is the bottom end of what he could provide. Top end could be 100 points higher which is very, very good.
Where are the biggest, bloodiest holes in the roster? CF, SS and SP. Where are you going to spend that $14 million? Actually (short version here) I figure the A's have $16-20 million they could spend in the offseason if they choose to do so. There isn't a FA SS out there that is going to give you the offense we're looking for. $20 million doesn't even get you in the conversation for A-Rod. The best SP on the market might be Schilling or Kenny Rogers, not really a couple guys I'm eager to invest in.
Which pretty much forces us into a discussion about the FA CF class. That discussion deserves a diary of its own.
Top end of 942
Sexson has NEVER EVER hit for an OPS of 942. EVER. His career HIGH in a season with more than 500 PA is 927. A more realistic top end would be an OPS pf 900.
So because you can't spend $16M well, you want to spend it badly? That's how you end up with Mike Piazza.
split his salary with GS where he can play SF
Seriously, the dude is the poster child for Marfan Syndrome. I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole (just long enough to reach his knees).
Aaaw.
Thanks Grove.
I've a suspicion that Bonds is going to get a LOT less IBBs next year, and will be exposed in no uncertain terms as far close to the other side of the hill than many think.
Also, he'll retire as soon as he gets to 3000 hits. Or gets indicted.
Big Country all over.
The A's don't need another DH
They've already got a DH-in-training in Landon Powell in addition to a carbon copy of Dunn in Jack Cust. None of those good-hit/no-field guys (Pat Burrell didn't seem to draw a lot of attention here, but he's another in the same mold as Bonds and Dunn) is going to help the A's as much, relative to his salary, as a decent hitter at shortstop or center field.
In the free agent market, A-Rod and Kosuke Fukudome are the best available targets. In trade, Miguel Tejada, Brent Lillibridge, and Carl Crawford look like the best options.
what we need is ryan zimmerman
who only made 400K last year. the kid had a ton of hits last year and had some nice plays on the glove side.
Um
You want to somehow obtain a cheap rookie of the year, from a rebuilding team, who plays a position already occupied by the current highest-paid, longest-tenured Athletic?
Please explain.
true, it is probably impossible
it has just been painful knowing that no one in that infield makes over a mil, yet they're substantially better than what we're stuck with. it just seems like what our formula is supposed to be. but, true, it has nothing to do with the reality of being able to get him (or belliard, or dmitri, etc)
I'm sorry, I disagree
I'd take Barton, Ellis, Crosby and Chavez over Belliard, Young, Zimmerman and... uh... derr, whoever is at shortstop (are they still paying Cristian Guzman money at this point?) for Washington in a New York microsecond.
Powell is out
ACL will keep him out until mid-season at the earliest, more likely he misses 2008.
Good god, I'd hope not
ACL tears don't take THAT long to recover from. At least, not in my experience.
Blew it out in July
Same knee he tore up a couple years ago. Typically takes about a year to get back to 100%, I don't know what the affects are when you do it twice. Last time he missed all of 2005 and started late in 2006.
And let's not forget, he's a catcher, so...
...he needs it STRONG.
Worse, he's an overweight catcher, so he needs it like iron.
Much higher chance, for mine, that he's done as a catcher, which means he's all but done as a prospect, because he ain't no 1st baseman.
As I've said elsewhere,
I have no expectations of Powell ever playing catcher again in his life.
But his offensive ability is unquestionable-- he was on pace to hit 30 HR while striking out barely 100 times in a full year this season. Even if his speed, or rather lack thereof, causes him to have a horrible BABIP, he's still going to post a good SLG with those numbers.
Not much value, though, with no position
It is very bad news to try to break into the majors as a DH.
Yes breaking into MLB as a 1b / dh
decreases his value, but if he can hit, he has value, at least to AL teams.
The Rangers dumped Hafner due to reasoning similar to yours.
But I think that sort of emphasizes my point
I'm not saying he can't/won't be a valuable mlb player as a 1B/DH.
But:
- The A's aren't really going to need that when he's ready to come up (Cust is question mark for 09-11, but so would be Powell); and
- It drastically limits his trade value, because there aren't many teams who would give up much for a DH who has never played in the majors. Getting rid of Hafner was a bad idea, but it's illustrative that they didn't get much for him. And obviously Powell is no Hafner.
Well, if you think that Powell
can duplicate Cust's exploits, you trade Cust has become a Proven Veteran after a couple good seasons.
That's how I see Powell's value
(if he indeed can't continue to catch), but it's a thread-the-needle type scenario. Powell would need to keep putting up big enough numbers that we would be confident having him as DH, and Cust would need to do well enough to interest other teams, but badly enough to make replacing him a good idea. That scenario is not really far-fetched, but I also don't think it's particularly likely.
Indeed it is
as minor league home run champ Craig Brazell and Jack Cust could tell you.
Then again, if any organization could see past it, I'd figure the A's would be the one.
As I said above
it's only relevant if the A's need a 1B/DH which the don't seem to for the next few years. And Cust's career indicates the kind of trade value Powell would have.
And your Brazell fascination has come up before
The guy will be 28 next year and couldn't put up an .800 OPS in the minors in any year from 02-06. In 2006, he had a .286 OBP in 400+ PAs at AA in his age 26 season! The guy is garbage. His minor league track record and Cust's are night and day. Brazell's gigantic offensive upswing raises eyebrows to say the least, especially for someone who made the sort of comments that you did in the Giambi thread.
Oh, I'm not suggesting that he's a great player
just that his numbers this year (and lack of concomitant MLB playing time) are indicative of how hard it is to break in as a DH. Cust's a better player, no doubt.
Quite possible that Brazell's roiding-- it's exactly that kind of almost-but-not-quite dude that's most vulnerable to the dubious appeal of PEDs. It wouldn't shock me a bit to find out that Cust is, or at least was, doing them as well. (I'd say "was" is more likely, since his personality seems to have mellowed out a lot in the last couple of years, perhaps as a result of going off the juice.)
Better example: Take Val Pascucci. Minor League OPS of 885, 159 minor league home runs, and yet only 62 MLB at-bats in 9 years of pro ball.
Cust
Cust has been hitting bombs since exiting the womb.
by Colorado Fan on Oct 18, 2007 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions
Which is what a childhood spent in Afghanistan...
From a purely visual perspective..
And, really, you can generally tell if someone is into them enough over a long period for them to have a serious impact.
Bonds' head, McGwire's acne, Sosa's forehead muscles, Bagwell's shift from base stealer to Molina...
From a purely visual perspective ...
maybe you should be talking about any of the guys that have actually been caught ...
There's not always going to be
"indisputable visual evidence" of a guy using. In the case of Cust, the evidence we have is pretty circumstantial-- some evidence of personality changes and a repetitive stress injury which might be a sign of strain on the joints. Pretty inconclusive. In any event, I don't think it's at all likely that he's using right now.
In fact, there usually isn't ...
indisputable visual evidence is what I was getting at.
The personality changes could just as easily be attributed to maturation as he passed through the "I miss my frat buddies" years and became an actual adult ...
Okay then.
Raffy after:
You want some forehead muscle?
Jason Grimsley before:
Jason Grimsley after:
Ryan Franklin recently:
Ryan Franklin 2005 version:
Any questions?
Touche ...
All of those guys definitely seemed to have put on a few pounds over the years. I'll grant ya that.
How about these guys?
or
People (especially athletes) get bigger as they age.
I know I have. I haven't grown any taller in a number of years, but body has continued to fill out (both in good and not so good ways) despite my not using steroids.
Also, the fact that Cust eats more than he should or doesn't do nearly enough cardio is not at all evidence that he doesn't 'roid.
some do suspect ripken was on the juice
Steroids and working out and
EATING PROPERLY and bodyfat don't usually go together. In sports where bodyweight is not a concern, there are steroid users whom "normal" people would consider fat.
If you treat donuts the way bodybuilders and weightlifters treat protein, no amount of steroids is going to prevent you from putting on fat.
I firmly believe Cal juiced.
I'm prepared to put them in the 'definitely suspicious' category.
And yes, of course people get fatter with age (sometimes), but those two Franklin pictures are 18 months apart. Unless he was simultaneously juicing AND binging on Krispy Kremes, I believe I've delivered exactly what you challenged me to.
You cannot always tell if a guy
has been roiding. If a young man starts as a teen then the visual evidence would not be pronounced. The physical transformation would not be as noticable.
The A's made it clear last week:
Which leaves him as a DH, and as we saw from Cust's career, it's TOUGH to get in from there, even if you can play outfield a little.
And Powell can't play outfield at all.
They did?
Where?
Not doubting this, just didn't see it.
Scout.com, interview with Kieth Lieppman.
He got his weight in check last year
If he's still looking good while re-habbing his knee (I don't know if he is or isn't) than the weight concerns can be set aside for the time being.
He dropped pounds, sure.
He dropped weight by changing his diet
Diet is key. If he's maintained his dietary discipline then things should be fine.
I never thought I'd say this in a post...
but given the options of Crawford, Lillibridge, and Miggy.. Miggy is our best option by far. I think you can cross off the other two as I don't see them going in a prospect deal. Which is what would need to happen for us to remain competitive with a return of Miggy.
I actually think that it's the off the field stuff that makes Miggy make sense. I think the clubhouse feelings and ticket sales/ fan interest would increase drastically.
And yeah put me still in the camp that wants to inquire about Pat the bat. Yeah he's another Jack but if he comes cheaply than he would be of benefit, subpar glove and all.
Keep the SP staff the same except for replacing DiNardo with Duke... Meyer takes Duke's place in BP, figure out the BP and trade the surplus for minor organizational depth deals, and sign a "Miggy" and/or "Burrell" and you'd have an extremely competitive team.
by AsWin on Oct 17, 2007 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Crawford will be dealt
It's pointless for Tampa to hold onto him. They aren't going to be competitive over the life of his contract in any case, and they already have way too many outfielders relative to every other position on the team.
As for Lillibridge, he's going somewhere. Atlanta needs pitching, not a second backup middle infielder, and Lillibridge is good enough to fetch a #3-#4 starter or a top-notch reliever.
Why would Tampe deal Crawford
when Baldelli can never stay healthy?
Crawford and Lillibridge may be dealt...
but what expendable part do we have to acquire them with the thought of remaining competitive? I don't think DJ and Lenny are going to get the job done, especially in regards to Crawford.
by AsWin on Oct 17, 2007 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Street, most notably
with assorted minor parts thrown in on one side or the other to make the deal an even one.
Baldelli's not even really at issue, as Tampa already has Young and Upton holding down 2/3 of their outfield (and Elijah Dukes still hanging around somewhere to boot). The outfield is not their problem.
Young and Upton are 2/3s
so who is the 3rd guy?
Planning on Dukes makes less sense than planning on Baldelli.
Why do you need to "plan on" either of them?
Look. Put yourself in Tampa's shoes. You can't afford any free agents, at all. You can't really even afford to keep all of your own star players through their arb years.
You happen to have 5 good outfielders, even if one of them's of questionable health and another of questionable sanity. You also have shit-all at shortstop, no #3-#5 starters and a washed-up Houston retread at closer. Sometimes you have to make some tradeoffs, man.
Ironically enough, it would make some little sense for Tampa to swap Crawford for Lillibridge themselves (especially if they could get a pitcher out of Atlanta on top of him).
Shit all at shortstop
First, you say that they need to trade Crawford because he isn't going to be around when they competitive. Then you act as if they don't have Bricnac as a SS prospect; you also seem to be unaware that Sonnanstine has reached the majors, while Price, McGee and Davis are not far behind. Niemann isn't crap either. Which is it? Win now, or wait for the future?
Sonnanstine?
Forgive me for being... unexcited by a guy with a 5.85 ERA and a fastball in the 80s.
I mean, saying Sonnanstine "has reached the majors" is like saying Dallas Braden has reached the majors. Sure. It's true. He's also sucked in the majors. Edwin Jackson actually has more upside than Sonnanstine (although he certainly has more downside as well).
Not familiar with the rest (other than Price). I do, however, notice from glancing at their AAA stats that their top two AAA hitters, Jason Pridie and Justin Ruggiano, are also both outfielders. (I'm already penciling in Longoria as a major leaguer next year.)
Yeah, and Sonnanstine's
stats in the minors mean squat. They don't need him to an ace. Just a decent 4th starter who eats innings.
Jake McGee and Wade Davis are both highly regarded prospects. Niemann hasn't lived up to expectations, but he still is decent. They are not as desperate for pitching the way fans of other teams who want their position players would like to believe.
The A's don't need Braden to be an ace either
The fact remains that neither of them has yet produced numbers worthy of even #5 starter status. Both are still "available options," certainly. If Sonnanstine has, I don't know, a 40% chance of becoming a quality starter, then they kind of have 2.4 quality starters instead of just two.
By any estimation, though, they're a long way away from a decent pitching staff.
So, McGee, Davis, Niemann
all don't count because you're unfamiliar with them?
Are you not reading what I'm writing?
I'm evaluating them probabilistically, as guys who have a certain percentage of working out (although obviously in the case of those guys, I'm generalizing, because I haven't studied their career histories or watched them pitch). Given what I know about pitching prospects (namely, that there's no such thing as one), the probabilities don't add up for me.
Certainly Tampa could get lucky and have all or most of these guys work out for them. But right now, they're a lot more likely to luck into a bad rotation than a bad outfield. Transfer some of the probability of good play from the outfield to other areas and the chance that the team writ large will be good will increase.
They don't need all those guys to work out
Does this mean that they must NOT trade any of their OFs? Of course not. It does mean that no wishcast trades are going to happen.
I'm sorry, did I say anything about
"wishcast" trades?
I said that it is likely that they will shop Crawford and in their best interests to do so, probably in return for reinforcements at shortstop or for the pitching staff. And that it's possible that the A's could structure a package around Street to obtain him.
Do you actually disagree with this, or are you just being contentious? Somehow this got sidetracked into a "who knows more about the D-Rays farm system" contest.
jacob mcgee
has some of the more incredible peripherals i've seen. i wish we had a lefty throwing in the mid-90s with stats like that on the rise.
mcgee
116.2 ip, 39 bb 145 k, .203 avg against, 1.07 whip over 21 starts in high A.
23.1 ip, 13 bb 30 k, .224 avg against and 1.37 whip over 5 starts in AA (almost all starts made when 20 years old)
Yes I disagree
Which SS prospect do you think they can get that is better than Brignac?
Do you think that they can actually get good pitching prospects on the level of Davis, McGee, Price?
Details matter.
Lillibridge may be lower-ceiling than Brignac
(or maybe not, really) but he's going to be relevant a lot sooner. Brignac was mediocre in AA this season, which probably means he's not going to be a factor in the bigs until mid-2009. Kazmir is gone after 2010 and probably even sooner than that (with the way arbitration is working for top pitchers these days, he might get upwards of $10 million for his year six season), especially if the Rays are still paying Crawford. So they'd better get a move on at some point.
Do you think that they can actually get good pitching prospects on the level of Davis, McGee, Price?
What am I, Nostradamus? I don't have any more talent into reading the minds of GMs than anyone else. I would think so, but who knows-- maybe no one feels a strong enough need for Crawford. Given his talent, I would find this hard to believe, but I've been surprised by the baseball meat market before.
So they should try to win now?
Crawford was about 12 runs above average offensively this season. BIS ZR had him at +2 runs defensively, STATS at +19, averaged out to +11. Collectively about 20 runs above average, 2 wins above average, without positional adjustment.
Brendan Harris, their SS this year, was about 4 runs above average this year, offensively. Defensively, fairly bad, BIS ZR had him at -1, Stats at -13, average -7. Collectively, slightly below average, about 0.5 wins below average.
If you're trading Crawford for Lillibridge to win now, you're losing Crawford's production AND displacing Harris.
You're demanding answers to unanswerable
questions. How on earth would I know what Crawford's replacement is going to do? I don't even know who it is-- Dukes? Baldelli? Ruggiano? Some combination of the three? That's up to the D-Rays.
If Lillibridge (or Matt Tolbert, or what have you) and whoever the hell is playing LF can even be league-average players, it's worth it to them to make that swap, because the D-Rays can't afford to be paying $5.25M for 1.5 wins (much less the much higher salaries of his option years). That's free-agent market money. Not when they need that money to sign Kazmir and his 8.1 WARP1, and soon enough Shields and his 7.4.
In any event, the point is this: Crawford's production is at least largely replaceable at the league minimum salary (and/or the sunk cost of Baldelli). Given this, the Rays need to shift those limited resources to the pitching staff while simultaneously obtaining more prospects (including hopefully a shortstop) to form the next wave. Past that, I don't know. I think the Twins would also be interested.
1.5 wins above AVERAGE
You're saying that the DRays shouldn't ask themselves those questions? That they should make trades without considering how many extra wins those trades bring?
I can't tell whether you're misunderstanding me
or just not reading what I'm writing carefully.
How on earth would I know what Crawford's replacement is going to do? I don't even know who it is-- Dukes? Baldelli? Ruggiano? Some combination of the three? That's up to the D-Rays.
I cannot fathom from where in this paragraph you managed to extract the notion that the D-Rays should make a trade without considering the likely production of Crawford's replacement. I said exactly the opposite-- that WE don't know what THEY know and are presumably evaluating. They know who that replacement is going to be a hell of a lot better than you or I do, partly because they have more access to Baldelli's medical files and partly because they know to what extent they're going to give Dukes another chance at becoming a civilized member of society.
My best guess, and it's a guess, is that the D-Rays can obtain average-to-slightly-above-average production in LF after trading Crawford, given the number of options they have there and their production at various levels of play in the past. As such I would estimate, given your figures, that the loss of Crawford would cause them to lose 1-1.5 games prior to the impact of whatever they get back. It would also, however, cause them to shed $5M in salary. That is what I mean when I say the D-Rays are paying $5M for a win and a half.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
