If it quacks like a canard ...
by monkeyball on Jul 7, 2007 3:39 PM PDT
in News
Email
PrintOn the one hand, I love hate to say I told you so.
On the other hand, maybe there is something to the notion of game-to-game "momentum" in baseball -- at least for Adrian Beltre.
In the final analysis, we might have been left with more questions at the end of the game than at the outset: Is Harden healthy, but ineffective? Is Harden not entirely healthy and therefore ineffective? Will Harden be able to make his next start? Is Harden simply not mature enough to manage his own emotions and mechanics? Is a 2-2/3-inning stint too small a sample from which to draw any conclusions whatsoever? Is the KME simply not strong enough to overcome all of Harden's issues?
Here's what we do know: A matchup of King Felix against the A's offense is just unfair. Chavvy in traction is an upgrade over Scutaro at third. The iNardo may not have much resale value and may be inferior technology, but it's at least sturdy and reliable, if you don't mind a few dropped balls.
We are quickly getting to the point in the A's season where not only does a loss seem a likelier outcome on any given day than a win, but the interesting questions have less to do with the influences on the outcome of the game (no offense, pitching having to live up to an impossibly think margin of error, health impacting the A's defense more than then offense) than they do with tangents and prospects for '08.
209 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Starting to see the true colors of this team
Horrible bullpen, slightly above average starting pitching, and too many holes in the batting lineup. Quite frankly, we aren't really that good on defense either, especially in the outfield and with Kendall's noodle arm. Chavez and Ellis are really the only two guys holding down the fort on D. Injuries are the story of the year and this average team.
starting pitching
Oakland is right up there with the Padres, Tigers, whomever else in that department...much better than slightly above average.
Well...
take away the top 4 healthy pitchers...
from any team, and I don't like their pitching all that much
We only have 3 good starters
DiNardo and Kennedy are average #5 starters at best. Gaudin is pitching over his head, Haren has been as well, and although both are good, they are starting to show their true performance, which will end up being probably about a 3.00 ERA for Haren and a 3.50-4.00 ERA for Gaudin. Blanton has a chance to have a good year with an ERA of about 3.50. Aside from that, no way that Kennedy and DiNardo finish with ERAs below 4.50. We have a good ace, a decent #2, a solid #3, a bad #4, and an average to below average #5 starter. I call that a slightly above average rotation.
no
You timed your response perfectly, as I just returned. Harden. Any thoughts as to how he'll affect this supposedly slightly above average rotation? Loaiza. Even if you take what we have, the 5 guys that have been healthy and have comprised the rotation so far, you can't just say that what has been the #1 rotation in terms of ERA in MLB through 85 games will necessarily get worse...the vagaries of pitching results affect other teams too. Blanton has by all accounts actually pitched better than his performance has shown thus far. Haren has been dominant, and extremely consistent. Gaudin had what I consider to be one bad start, against Houston, and is in Beane's opinion the best guy talent-wise besides Harden. This is a great pitching staff.
Harden
Wasn't effective in his last start and he's so injury prone, how can you ever consider him to improve our rotation? He has a pattern of 5 or so starts before he breaks down. IF he stays healthy, he will improve our rotation by a great deal, but that is one huge if that hasn't been fulfilled for 3 seasons now.
With the other 5 guys, the peripheral stats don't look very good. Dan Haren's BABIP is around .240-ish, which is freakishly low. There's no way he can sustain that kind of ERA and batting average allowed without his strikeout rate rising. He is consistent and an ace, but there's no way he stays at his 2.20 ERA level. Blanton has been pitching great, but he has a career 3.92 ERA. Gaudin has been fortunate, especially in his last start, with his WHIP of around 1.35 to have as low of an ERA as he actually does. He's got talent yes, but this is the most innings he's thrown in his major league career by a longshot. Kennedy is struggling, as is to be expected, and DiNardo has just been really, really lucky. Don't get me wrong, he's a decent #5 starter, but he's not a good #4 guy.
You have to look at the trends. We pitched unbelievable well until we hit June. In the last 30 days, we have a team ERA of 4.50, with a starters ERA of 4.18. That is not a great pitching staff. That's good enough for the top half of the AL, but it's not great.
This team has the best ERA in the league
You are right about the offense it is fucking pathetic, The A's have 3 guys with sub 3 era's and blantona has a 3.09 era.
by 3Chavy3 on Jul 7, 2007 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions
No way that holds up
See my post above for where I think our guys will finish. Too many guys have been lucky/overachieving in the starting pitching department. If we aren't winning now with those guys pitching out of their minds, we sure as heck won't win when they slump.
I see...
this team being blown up pretty soon and focusing on 2008.
already begun
when BB got Denofria, Snelling, Cust and traded Bradley. The writing has been on the wall for over 6 weeks and BB knows it. Why else would they be waiting for Piazza to learn to catch again? Look for Kielty to be moved also, that is if anyone wants him. I look for BB to be a big time seller come July 31st.
To be honest I hope the A's don't surge after the All Star break, it has become a crutch to the players and management on this team which is why we squander games, and play poorly through June every year because "we always have a big 2nd half." The mindset of the organization has to change, the quickest way for that to happen is for the A's to battle Texas for the cellar this year, that way next spring the manager just might be able to get their attention to such things as moving a runner along, hitting an opposite field fly ball when a runner is at 3rd, moving a runner to 3rd when there is a lead off double. And god help us if Kendall is still on this team next year, I would say Crosby also but since there is no one in the minors to challenge him or Chavez for that matter that seems a forlorn hope.
by china bob on Jul 7, 2007 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Seattle's playing their best ball of the season..
right now, peaking at the all-star break...it will go downhill from here. The A's are better than them. That said, I don't expect to challenge for the playoffs barring the major move being made that I bet a diary on with FSU. Hopefully said diary, if written, will not include any sentences as awkward as the preceding one.
The Angels and the Mariners
are just men and there is still a whole half of the season to go.
We're only 9 back and I know we can pull some magic out of this season.
no big moves in store?
I might as well get write a "just in case" diary right now then. I think both of us should, then publish it anyway, heh.
"blow it up"
Here's my question (and this goes for you too, WaddellCanseco): sure, saying "blow it up" feels satisfying, but what exactly does that mean?
Sure, if you're Kenny Williams in '97, and you have a passel of established and productive veterans all of whom present perceived value to pennant contenders with deep prospect banks, "blow it up" and restock is a possible move.
But when you say BIU about the '07 A's, who exactly gets traded? Of the veterans, Kendall and Kotsay are so overpaid in proportion to their production that trading them would be too expensive to be worth it, and would garner little if anything in return. Of the injured, what team is going to risk a real prospect for an iffy Loaiza, Piazza, or Harden?
The only disposable A's with any real trade value right now are marginal/platoon players: Kielty, Stewart, Embree, Kennedy, DJ -- all of whom would only bring in the sorts of replacement-level players and high-risk/low-reward ex-prospects Beane's already acquired this year.
And of the non-disposable players -- Cust, Swisher, Haren, Blanton, Buck, Chavez, Street, Ellis, Crosby, Suzuki (with Powell's sheared ACL, Zuke belongs on this list now) -- with whom do you propose to replace them? Out of that group, only Ellis's position is readily filled internally.
Yeah, Crosby and Chavez are frustrating hitters -- but not only are they exceptional fielders, they're reasonably priced. Which means that they present value only to a team like ... the A's.
Saying BIU represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the A's roster, which has very little dynamite, and extremely short fuses. If you blow it up, not only will you not get much bang for your buck, you're likely to blow your own hand off in the process.
BIU is a reaction appropriate to a team like the Yankees, but not the A's.
The non-disposable list
Thanks for reigning in the blowitup definitional drift. Oakland's roster is always fluid, buy or sell...it's not time to scrap the plan; this is the plan.
My non-disposable list would be shorter than yours...Chavez, Street, Ellis or Crosby could all be moved (for the right price) without me worrying too much about who fills their positions until next next spring.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 7, 2007 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions
I really only have one untouchable: Haren
Anyone else: Bob Barker, Hawk Harrelson.
Yeah, that includes Swisher (who I think could bring in a really good return in trade): with Kotsay on the books for another year, Buck proving himself ready, Denorfia or Snelling possible part-timers, and Herrera and Putnam developing, as good and important and cheap as Swish is, he's not irreplaceable. 'Course, as good and cheap as he is, I don't realistically see Beane moving him. On the other hand, while Swisher's success as a major-leaguer is a big-time validation of Beane's drafting strategy, selling him off in a f%$#in'-A Trade could be an even bigger validation.
The only guy who comes close to Haren on my absolute untouchables list is Cust.
Moneyball is not the caste system
there are no untouchables, or at least there shouldn't be if Beane abides by his own principles.
true, that
Yeah, of course, if the Mets offered Wright + Heilman + cash for Haren, he'd be touchable.
I'm off the Heilman bandwagon
and have been for some time. I no longer see the fascination with him now that he has had time to prove himself (for better or worse) in a weaker NL.
Heilman, schmeilman
Wright + any VORP+ ML pitcher + cash
would it come in buckets, or barrels?
I don't really agree on this
Swisher's current contract is very valuable, and I don't think he is held in such high esteem by the rest of the league that Beane could improve upon it by trading for prospects. He's a top 15% hitter, locked up through his most productive years, on a somewhat offensively starved team. I would not trade him. If a trade happens, I want it to be for pitching, despite this year's offense.
I'm not advocating trading him per se
... just saying that it's possible to make a case for it.
I agree with you 100% -- and, of course, were I to advocate trading Swisher, I'd advocate trading him for Haren-and-Calero-at-the-time-of-the-Mulder-trade pitching.
In all seriousness furball
This is probably the best thing I've ever seen you write.
It even tops your 101 jokes about crapping in sal's pants.
salaam
That post was channeling 3+ years of your wisdom.
Flattery only works when you do it well
And that was very well done.
Flattery only works...
if it's imitation, as imitation is the best form of flattery.
I just felt like throwing that out there.
Kinda true
Imitation is the best form of flattery, but you can flatter without imitating. I'm more used to receiving the opposite of flattery so the bar is set pretty low, monkeyball doesn't need to do his best to achieve flattery.
When I say BIU...
I'm not necessarily advocating it, but guessing it will happen. Blowing it up to me means trading people who fill roles you normally consider vital to a playoff run closer, decent starting pitcher, etc.
People I can see being moved by the break -
Embree
JoKe
Gaudin
DJ
Ellis
Piazza
The only person I could see bringing anything good back would be Gaudin, with Beane leveraging a flukish 1st half ERA into a decent CF/SS prospect. I see the emergence of Casilla making Embree expendable for next season, and possibly being able to get something more for him now that he has "proven he can close".
Of course I'd rather see Beane tell me to F off, and pick up someone who fuels a second half run.
Gaudin? Are you serious? No way.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions
ditto that; I forgot to add him to my list
He'd be right next to Swisher on my list: I'd listen to offers, but they'd have to back the truck up to the loading dock.
I'd like to see the sort of trade
(which I think is not too implausible), where we package something of value (Rich (1 down, 9 to go) Harden or Street) with Crosby or Kotsay, and get back a top prospect and a serviceable replacement at CF or SS. If Harden can stay in the rotation until the trade deadline, I think he could prove irresistible to GMs looking for a WS title.
The thought of Kotsay starting 140 games next year consumes me with horror. And I still like Kotsay. He has a good swing. Really. That's why sophisticated baseball robots should run FOs. Their 1's and their 0's won't listen to my emotional protestations as the ship sinks.
sorry to intrude
but isn't it 2 down, 8 to go? I thought the terms were "appear in a game for the A's." Was the bet on starts?
Then it would be 3 down, 7 to go, n'est-ce pas?
But I don't see Hardy boy getting to 10 unless we start counting in base 2.
starts + saves
I'm still feeling pretty confident. Though Beane may yet stretch Harden out for 10 starts over the next 6 years.
getting fucking sick of this
I don't care how Harden pitched today. I don't care how [little] he's pitched all year...you simply CANNOT lump him in with Piazza and Loaiza and say that he has no real value. The guy is 25, and when he's right, he's straight-up better than your "one untouchable," and probably any pitcher not named Santana or Hernandez (and I'm exclusing Ervin and El Duque, thank you). Any prospect is more of a gamble than Rich Harden.
you tell me when he's been, or will be, "right"
Would you trade, say, Swisher for Kerry Wood or Mark Prior? Thought so.
Beane has dithered Harden into worthlessness. Now, granted, there's been no "cost" per se to keeping Harden and praying that he'll provide innings -- but there sure as heck has been an opportunity cost in not having moved him. And if an idiot like me can see that, I would sure as heck hope Beane can see it.
about one objection per sentence
Equating Harden with the Prior and Wood of 2007 is ludicrous...Prior was sent to AAA camp BEFORE he got hurt this year, after a few horrendous, short outings. Harden COULD go that route, I certainly wouldn't deny that, and the possibility does get greater with every DL stint, but...here's the key difference, currently: until Prior and Wood prove differently, they should be considered washed-up has-beens, as of right now; whereas Harden should be considered an injury-prone ace until proven differently. And not because of his potential, as some people seem to believe...but based on the track record he's already accumulated.
Beane his dithered Harden into worthlessness? Even with the advantage of hindsight, when would a trade of Harden have made real sense? We know he could've traded him for Austin Kearns a couple years ago; that was a laughably one-sided offer by the Reds at that point, and it remains so now. Before this season would be the likely answer, but that's selling a little low, because of the injury-plagued 2006 season. If you made a trade now, you'd be selling lower, but still not as low as you seem to think.
Can't really judge yet on whether the opp cost of not moving Harden will exceed the value of having him on the team...that will continue to play out. I don't think 85 games of Lastings Milledge and Aaron Heilman, say, would've done a whole lot.
And calling yourself an idiot is either false humility, or it should be false humility
claMAYto, claMAHto
The difference between washed-up has-been and injury-prone ace is an entirely subjective assessment of tense.
Yes, certainly, right now no one would dispute that Prior or Wood is the former. And I'd even agree that Harden is the latter. But, really, as grover said, what's the difference in performance between the two?
the difference is huge
if I clarify properly. Prior and Wood would likely have to re-invent themselves as pitchers if they came back now...they would not be the strikeout pitchers they once were...at least, not the overpowering strikeout pitchers they once were. Have you seen Clemens pitch this year? He's hitting 90 at best on his fastball. But he's been really good in his last two starts, because of savvy and location and whatnot. Prior and Wood would have to make an even bigger transformation, if they even get the chance to.
Harden, on the other hand, has the chance to at least return to form, if not improve on it. His development may have been stunted, but I don't think they've caused regression, or forced reinvention...I think Harden could return to 100%, whereas that's out of the question for Prior and Wood.
by Cutthemullet on Jul 7, 2007 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions
true, true
Nicely clarified and argued.
But -- there was a point in the careers of P&W when the very same thing you say about Harden could have been said of them. And they never did return to 100%.
Which, probably, at this point, mitigates against a trade of Harden -- any other GM will be paying for only potential.
Actually
Prior was hurt when he came to training camp. The Chicago papers talked about him and his shoulder/elbow all throughout January and February. He was sent to Iowa to try to throw through the pain, but shut it down when he couldn't. Both were damaged when the came to spring training, and neither were a surprise to the Cubs.
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 8, 2007 9:11 AM PDT up reply actions
I disagree
If Harden doesn't pitch he has no real value. If he can't pitch than he can't help the A's win. End of story.
Any and all value Harden has right now is centered around potential. We know what he could do IF healthy. Trouble is, he rarely is. If Harden's hurt again his "potential" value will drop to virtually zero, no one will want anything to do with a guy who can't stay off the DL. At least, no one will want to pay the standard going rate for a pitcher with Harden's talent... I'm sure someone would take him off Beane's hands for a bag of baseballs. I'll give you that Harden is less of a gamble than most prospects, but there are plenty of prospects who are both talented and healthy that would be less risky and offer more than adequate value.
So what do the A's do? Keep hoping that one day Harden will actually stay healthy for more than half a season and pitch for the team? I don't think it's wise to continually allocate team resources to Plans B & C for WHEN Harden gets hurt. I can never remember, is it called crazy or stupid when you keep doing the same exact thing over and over again while expecting a different result?
No one will pay full price for Harden, but if Beane could get $.90 on the dollar for Rich he'd be a fool not to take the deal. Sure, you run the risk of Harden blossoming somewhere else but if you make a solid enough deal than you lesson the hurt. But I think the odds are leaning toward Harden spending more time on the DL than they are of him breaking out.
Yup. As for
"I can never remember, is it called crazy or stupid when you keep doing the same exact thing over and over again while expecting a different result?" it's one definition of insanity. Meanwhile, the training/conditioning staff has been unable to keep the team anywhere near healthy three seasons in a row...
Nico,
I implore you:
If your students ask you for guidance in math, science, or other empirically-based disciplines, refer them to competent teachers.
Meanwhile, making manifestly innumerate comments on a repeated basis signifies to me that you are, well, innumerate.
innumeracy
by John Allan Paulos is what I'm reading right now...great book
by Cutthemullet on Jul 7, 2007 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmmm
Does that mean my comments are monkifestly innumerate?
(BTW, I've been re-reading Nico's post to which you responded for several minutes, and I think I finally see the numbers in it that you see -- they're right between the UFO and the unicorn, right? Damn, my eyes hurt.)
No number, you see..
Lots of inuries = bad medical/training staff. right? right? Some reports of misdiagnoses? Fire them!
My comment was addressed to Nico's (in my opinion, though he makes some good points) bias based on what is before him at the moment. He has produced little evidence (though much assertion) that the A's rash of injuries have been caused/not-prevented by the medical staff.
As for innumeracy: A sober look at the whole of MLB injuries would lead one to conclude that the training/medical staff has only a marginal effect on games played/performance, etc.
And frankly, I find the Nico/monkeyball view quite arrogant, which is why I sometimes chime in to Nico's posts on "you don't know what you're talking about" grounds.
How about the fact
that Swisher's thumb guard corrected Buck's thumb problem, and Buck had to suggest it after being put on the DL? There isn't any clearer evidence of the incompetence of the training staff in my opinion.
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 8, 2007 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions
There are no numbers in your post, IndianaAsfan;
therefore the training staff may still be competent. Or something like that.
Let me put it clearly:
LOTS OF INJURIES DOES NOT MEAN THE MEDICAL STAFF IS BAD doesn't mean it doesn't happen to be bad.
First of all, MikeA, I'm not sure how
you expect someone to use numbers or medical expertise to "prove" the level of competence in the A's medical staff. It's not like we can scan the MRIs or as if there are numbers out there that demonstrate competence or incompetence.
Second of all, I have provided plenty of reasons for questioning the staff that have nothing to do with "lots of injuries," from allowing Meyer and Loaiza to continue pitching in 2005, to the staff's ignorant responses to the notions of acupuncture and chiropractic care, to Chavez, Crosby, and Harden all pointing to weightlifting programs as contritbuting to their injuries, to the number of players who have gone around the team for treatment, to allowing players to return from hamstring injuries in an absurdly short amount of time, to...Oh by the way, Travis Buck could have been playing all this time if they had thought of a thumb guard.
If that's not enough specific evidence for you, the problem isn't the amount of specific evidence I've offered--that's a heck of a lot considering I have no access to the medical files and can only know what people are willing to say, against their colleagues, publicly through the press.
Finally, the comment about referring Math and Science students to competent teachers is a personal insult, and should not be made by anyone who wishes to call others arrogant, eh?
...
Finally, the comment about referring Math and Science students to competent teachers is a personal insult, and should not be made by anyone who wishes to call others arrogant, eh?
Quite true, and I apologize.
I find this particular topic quite irksome, and it can get my carried away.
No prob; olive branch returned
Back to the argument itself, given the specifics I outline above, I'm just curious why you don't question the competence of the medical staff. It seems to me that given how little information the public is offered, there's actually quite a bit to question. Don't you wonder, deep down, if the A's players are getting the benefit of the best possible guidance, by people versed in theories that don't date back to the '70s?
My gut feeling, FYI, is that Larry Davis, Clarence Cockrell, etc. are not lifelong learners, that they have done little to continue their education upon receiving their certification, that they don't believe they have much to learn, that they pooh-pooh anything they don't understand because it's easier than learning something new, and that they rely exclusively on a limited repertoire of "tried and true" practices that are in fact outdated. That's what I really think is going on, though I'd be the first to admit I can't "prove" it--just a hunch from everything I've observed.
Yeah, and the thing with Buck's thumb guard
I do
question them, and if I had to guess I would say they are worse than average rather than better than average. And I don't think it's the "best possible guidance," though I suspect it's not too much different from what other clubs offer. I wonder, and I wouldn't be completely surprised if you're right, but it's still basically speculation.
My basic gripe is that I think the injury problems the last few years can't be placed at their doorstep, and certainly not so confidently. Let's say you are correct about Meyer and Loaiza (my grounds for disputing that you're correct would be that I would guess that they both claimed to be fine, and that most clubs accept those assurances from their players, especially at the beginning of the year): that might demonstrate incompetence, but it doesn't demonstrate that the incompetence caused or even exacerbated the problem. They both got injured very shortly after joining the team.
I don't think it's actually true that they rushed Swisher and Bradley back from the hamstring injuries more quickly than other clubs. There seems to be a lot of inconsistency in how clubs do that, but I think pretty much all of them get their guys back out there when they say they're ready and look good running the bases, etc. ARod just came back from a pulled hamstring after just a few days.
As for the acupuncture/chiropractic thing, you may be right, and that does reflect somewhat poorly on LD's attitude. However, I think those tend to be last resorts for almost all teams, and there are many medical folks who claim that those procedures are not proven to be effective at all (chiropractic seems to be based on setting right some bodily substance that doesn't actually exist), though I don't know what to make of that debate.
Looking over PaulThomas's list in the other thread, it seems pretty inescapable to me that even if we had the best training/medical staff available, only a slight few would have been prevented or mitigated. There is very little reason to suspect that if Beane took your suggestion and fired everyone, the health outcomes would improve.
And I'll apologize again. I try to go about my life without being an asshole, and in this case I have failed
for that, you can blame Sal
more
Yeah, so, this book Innumeracy, it's so great that my buddy and I had some fun at the innumerates' expense based on a probability-deception scam pulled directly from the book. We used it at the weekly free downtown concert on Thursday night:
"Imagine a man with 3 cards. One is black on both sides, one is red on both sides, and the other is red on one side and black on the other. He drops the cards into a hat and asks you to pick one, but only to look at one side; let's assume [that side is] red. The man notes that the card you picked couldn't possibly be the card that's black on both sides, and therefore it must be one of the other two cards--the red-red card or the red-black card. He offers to bet you even money that it is the red-red card. Is this a fair bet?
At first glance, it seems so. There are two cards it could be; he's betting on one, and you're betting on the other. But the rub is that there are two ways he can win and only one way you can win. The visible side of the card you picked could be the red-black card, in which case you win, or it could be one side of the red-red card, in which case he wins, or it could be the other side of the red-red card, in which case he also wins. His chances of winning are thus 2/3. The conditional probability of the card being red-red given that it's not black-black is 1/2, but that's not the [whole] situation here. We know more than just that the card is not black-black, we also know a red side is showing."
So I made the appropriate cards, nice little handmade pieces of posterboard, and took them down to the concert, asked people to bet beer tickets on them. We made like two beers total, but it was good fun, and educational for the participants, heh.
I heard this one as a "Let's Make a Deal" problem
There are three curtains, one of which conceals a prize. You choose, say, Curtain #1. Before revealing your choice, Monte decides to show you what you would have chosen had you chosen (let's say) Curtain #2. That curtain is pulled back to reveal an empty floor or a "zonk" (booby prize). Monte then offers you one last chance to trade your choice straight-up for what's behind Curtain #3. Should you accept?
At first glance, it looks 50-50: two curtains, one prize, flip a coin. But in showing you what's behind Curtain #2, Monte introduced a non-random element. Assuming he'd never show you the room with the prize but will always show you a non-prize room before offering the trade, and assuming of course that initially there was a 2/3 chance the prize was not behind your chosen curtain, Monte has essentially "condolidated" that 2/3 chance into one curtain. He'd have shown you Curtain #2 if the prize was behind Curtain #3, he's have shown you #3 if the prize was behind #2, and of course it doesn't matter which he shows you if it's behind #1. Your odds are 2:1 in your favor if you make the trade.
You'd be amazed how hard it is for some people to get this. I think I can explain it pretty clearly from a number of angles, but I've had a smart grad student completely refuse to believe it was anything other than 50-50 no matter how I explained it. Having a repeatable experiment, as you did, where people can actually see that one result comes in twice as frequently as the other would have helped.
Mmm, beeeer.....
Einstein called it insanity...
But then, someone else said that there's a fine line between genius and insanity, and it's hard to argue with that.
It's not like we brought in Esteban Loaiza to be a Plan B...we can barely afford 3 year, $21 million contracts for guys who are supposed to be Plan A.
Yeah, if the right trade offer came along, go with it. I'm not arguing with this idea, just the overly harsh judgments of Harden, normally reasonable people concluding he's just about worthless, as a pitcher rather than a trade commodity anyway, at this point
by Cutthemullet on Jul 7, 2007 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
For the record
I haven't given up on Harden. He's got a world of talent but at this point he's bordering on completely unreliable. If he walks into the clubhouse this morning and says his shoulder/arm/forearm/uvula is hurting and the A's have to put him back on the DL for a month then he will have crossed over to completely unreliable.
At which point, he will be worthless both as a pitcher and as a trade commodity.
As for genius vs. insanity
I think the genius part comes when you try something different and get the desired result.
What does "Blow it up" mean to me...
It means figure out what your 2008 team is going to be and dispose of any and all players not in those plans:
Kendall -- trade him to open a spot for Suzuki (now that Powell in hurt). Pay whatever part of his salary you have to, take back whatever you can get, but the main advantage of his not being here is that Suzuki can play every day. Maybe even get Brown and/or Closser up to see whether they can back up in 2008.
Kotsay -- keep him -- there's no real alternative in 2008 for CF (until Denorfia proves he's healthy)
Kielty/Kennedy -- see Kendall -- except they're opening spots for OF Cust and Braden/Madsen/Meyer
Piazza -- see Kendall -- except he's opening a spot for Barton, and he probably has more value
See what the kids can do and decide whether they can be counted upon in 2008. If the answer is "NO" then get FAs and make offseason trades accordingly.
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 7, 2007 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Oops I forgot Stewart
I'd actually keep him and see whether he can be signed as a backup in the offseason.
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 7, 2007 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Starters have been better than slightly
above average, but the pen is bad, and the offense is putrid. Blow it up. As soon as possible.
We've got 3 great starters
But Kennedy and DiNardo have been or will regress quite quickly to the mean. Haren has been having a rough stretch and won't have that sub 2.50 ERA all year. Gaudin has been a little lucky as well with his sub 3 ERA. Blanton may continue to pitch well, but odds are he will end up at about a 3.50 ERA by season's end (which would still be very good). The point is, we have 1 ace, 2 above average starters, and 2 guys that are both average 5th starters in Kennedy and DiNardo. I call that a slightly above average rotation. And I'm not including Harden in this discussion because he won't even be ready to throw meaningful innings until late July.
DiNardo
doesn't qualify as a good starter, but he did a great job today. 6.1 IP with no R allowed. he was efficient and did a good job of bearing down when the M's loaded the bases against him.
i thought he did really well today.
unlike kennedy, dinardo has been in much better control of the games he's pitched. when things go bad, dinardo seems to degrade quickly. kennedy is just bad.
Haren's only given up more than 3 ER's one time
this year and he had the flu during that start. I hope he continues to go through this "rough stretch." The sad thing is JoKe and DiNardo pitched over their heads for a long stretch of time but, unfortunately, we had Sactown's bullpen losing games for us then.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Focus on next year.
Goals for the year:
Trade Kotsay, move Chavez and his forearms if the right deal comes along, figure out what to do with Harden.
yeah
Blow it up, season conceded.
I don't think this team sees 1st place again for a long time, maybe even until they move. Maybe that's the plan, who knows with this carpetbagger.
Meh
What can you do when your team just has so many injuries and no offensive spark?
or drink less?
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Disappointed, O2B.
I expect more outta you.
Going to the game today was a bummer. I went with a bunch of casual A's fans/people I'm hoping to convert. Didn't go well.
Onto the drinking. We gotta split this series tomorrow!
Sorry :-( ASB can't get here soon enough.
I decided to behave in a civil manner today but those Coors Lights in the fridge were staring at me pretty hard.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Well if it's Coors Light in your fridge
then I understand why you would advocate drinking less.
by green star oakland on Jul 7, 2007 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions
That's all I had left after the Tecate ran dry.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 8, 2007 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Glass Half Empty
We've been waiting for all the injured players to come back, and they're starting to come back. The problem is that it takes a little time to get in gear (Harden had control issues last September/October as well), and we don't have time. The A's MUST start winning games NOW if the team has a chance down the stretch.
When Loaiza and Street come back, and if Harden stays healthy, there will be nothing wrong with the team's pitching. In fact, it should continue as the best in the league --- and, by the way, I disagree about Blanton having an ERA of 3.50 at the end of the season. I wouldn't be surprised if he has an ERA under 3.00.
But it may be too little and too late, and the offense is too weak.
Blowing up the team? Okay, then who do you trade and what do you get back? Kendall? Nope, not with his stats going against him, and not with what he could teach Suzuki going for him; Piazza? For what? A second-rate AA prospect? Kielty? You're joking. Dan Johnson? Sure, but he hasn't proved himself sufficiently to get decent talent back. Kennedy as a rental? After his last few performances? Everywhere you look there's less than meets the eye.
Billy Beane is already working on next year. Witness the Denorfia trade, the decision to play Cust every day, the Bradley dump. The only real blowing up he can do is to trade Embree and Loaiza, or give up on Harden. None of these choices will make the team better for 2008 and they all might make it weaker.
Billy Beane has built an entire team around patient hitters with mediocre batting averages, good fielding and some, but not enough, power. This is pure Moneyball circa 2002. These may be the undervalued players, but if you put out a full line-up of them, you're going to get swamped.
by richwol on Jul 7, 2007 4:26 PM PDT reply actions
heh
well, if it's pure Moneyball circa 2002, how come you reach the conclusion that "you're going to get swamped" by it? I don't think that's consistent with the conclusion that book reached, or suggested. And the only guys who really fit that overgeneralized hitting mold on this team are Kendall, Johnson, and the Chavez we've been seeing for the past 2 years.
I'm not ready to give up.
I'm not saying we're in a good situation, at all...just that we're 8.5 games back with almost a half season to play, we're over .500 after enduring the two worst weeks of the season, and we're still about as weak a team as we will be this season just with players returning from the DL. We have a better record than the Yankees, we have a better pitching staff than the Yankees by far, and we're closer to first place in our division (in terms of games back) than the Yankees are in theirs; still, I'm pretty sure none of them are giving up. If we lose tomorrow and they win, then we're tied, and we're still closer to 1st place.
While we're all aware of some of the gigantic holes in this team (Chavvy and Kotsay's bats, Crosby's head), here are a few good things to mull over:
- DiNardo was very good. He has been a real contributor, and has the potential to continue. Obviously he's not a power guy, so he also has greater potential to get lit up, but on the whole he's done very well, and today's outing shows that he still can do very well.
- Street and Calero on their way back. I'm pretty comfortable with the 'pen if it's got Street, a healthy (and newly changed-up!) Calero, Casilla and Embree in it.
- Piazza coming back. None of us really even know what this means and how it will change the situation, but it's not going to hurt unless the A's brass does something remarkably stupid (which is unlikely). Whether it's by his bat in the lineup, or his presence making someone else available thru trade, or his being available for trade himself, something good will come of his return.
- Harden didn't die today. Sure, he kinda sucked, but as far as we know, he made it to his pitch count and isn't dead. I'm sure he was amped up to start, and as we know from Barry Zito, that's not a good thing. I don't think Harden has suddenly turned into a bad pitcher...I don't think he's going to last long before his next injury, but still, maybe we get 3-4 wins in the mean time.
- Loaiza's return. Basically that means we can put either Kennedy or DiNardo into the back end of what will be a very good bullpen (see above), and we know that those guys can do very well in certain roles.
I know sometimes it's easier to go around with expectations of doom and sometimes be pleasantly surprised than it is to hold out hope and sometimes be sorely disappointed, and I certainly don't blame anyone for that approach. But hopefully at least a few of you are in the optimists' club with me.
Agree on Dinardo
I would think today's outing gives him the nod as the 5th starter after the All Star break over Kennedy. They way Kennedy looked last night doesn't give a lot of good feelings about his move to the pen though.
I just have one question about your post - since when did we start measuring the A's season against the Yankees? I, for one, really couldn't care less that they have a better record than the Yankees, when the Yankees are trying to fend off Tampa Bay for last place. I'm only concerned, right now, with how the A's season compares to the Angels' and Mariners' seasons.
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 7, 2007 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Just an example..
It's an example of a team that's doing worse than we are, whose fans have not thrown in the towel (at least not the ones I know). It's not a perfect comparison at all, it just helps me justify my hopeful position.
not to mention the fact that ...
... as I mentioned above, if there's any team whose fans could be justified in hopping on the BIU bandwagon, it's the Yankees.
I actually don't
think, outside ARod, the Yankees are in any better position than the A's to trade anyone. Who do you want from the Yankees that would get anything in return? Abreu? Clemens? Damon? I don't think so. Their bullpen blows except for Rivera, and their starting rotation is awful. They can't blow up their team any more than the A's can.
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 7, 2007 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions
after Clemens' perf today?
Matsui, Posada ... Abreu if he continues to turn it around. I can't imagine the Boss would let Cashman move Jeter or Rivera, but they'd bring back princely sums, and are both into their decline years.
I can't see Rivera ever declining
see Trevor Hoffman...not saying they're the same pitchers, but almost the same caliber. Also, Rivera talks of wanting to be a Yankee spring training instructor after he retires. Since he decided to take Luis Vizcaino under his wing, Vizcaino made huge strides for them. Pinstripes for life.
(lovingly folds A's sweatshirt, t-shirts
and places in drawer. stacks A's caps in back closet. shuffles off to library to join summer reading club.)
Who woulda thought
there are books in Alaska? Books, bears, and 24 hour sunlight. Does it get any better than that?
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 7, 2007 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions
heh heh, of course i am joking
about putting my gear away and reading...but boy howdy, it is an adjustment to make from being a fan of a contending team for so long...and suddenly hitting what seems to be real hard times this season.
well...
Coming off a 5-for-5, two homer night Friday, Beltre helped Seattle make short work of Rich Harden in his return to the Oakland rotation by hitting a three-run homer in the second inning. Harden (1-2) couldn't make it out of the third, leaving with a 4-0 deficit.
He told manager Bob Geren that he didn't feel quite right physically and the A's wanted to wait until Sunday to determine Harden's status.
"You're always concerned when somebody is questionable for his next start," Geren said. "It's a concern for sure."
Link
"Rich Harden, making his first start since mid-April, told manager Bob Geren that he "didn't feel exactly right,'' Geren said after Oakland's loss to Seattle on Saturday. Harden didn't wish to expand on that comment with reporters, saying only that he'll see how he feels when he comes in on Sunday. He didn't look too pleased when the topic arose...
This is a tough one to call. Given his history, some might figure Harden is heading for the DL again, and that maybe shoulder surgery is in his future. But Harden's performance on Saturday didn't show anything amiss..."
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 7, 2007 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Harden can be moved back as far as Saturday
if necessary. Of course he could be dead too...
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions
this team in the Beane era has always been built
strong starting pitching and the hope/need for one or two players to have a career year at the plate. This year was built for Swish, and either BoCro or Chavez to step up. The plain and simple fact is that is not happening. In the A's most successful years there has always been someone stepping up with career numbers that year Miggy, Giambi, Thomas, etc. We are seeing what happens when with that intention no one steps up.
I am not saying that is a bad philosophy to have, especially with the relatively tight purse strings of the A's, but when it doesn't happen boy do things get ugly in a hurry.
Cust
Wouldn't you say that Cust is having a bit of a career year? :)
Th problem is there hasn't been anybody else hitting well for an extended period.
Stewart has been stepping up.
He even wasn't horrible before. How many times in the last few games have you seen stewart left on base? It seems like it is happening all the time. It is just too bad nobody is hitting behind him.
true about Cust but he hasn't been doing it
consistently all year. Truth be told he has done it for two two week spurts, and as for Stewart (I am a big fan of his by the way) he is not in a spot to produce runs batting leadoff. I am referring to career years from 3-4-5 guys in terms of slugging, homeruns, r'sbi, and OPS. Aside from about 4 weeks of Cust no one has done it on a consistent basis for this team.
Bradley is apparently playing.
I thought he'd been DL'd.
He was DL'd, retroactively
to June 21.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 7, 2007 5:32 PM PDT up reply actions
retroactivly I believe
which means he could be playing now depending on the date of his last appearance.
Retroactive to his last game with the A's.
This team may have overachieved so far...
Because we are all fans we tend to have unrealistic expectations rather than looking at reality. Imagine another team experiencing our injuries and tell me where they would be in terms of wins and losses. It wouldn't be one game above .500.
Doesn't anyone believe that we can go 45-30 with our A-players? Calero and Harden (not saying forever) are back, Street should return in 10 games, Loiaza in 20 games and Kielty and Piazza will add pop to our lineup against lefties as soon as Thursday. Heck Travis Buck will only be out one more game too and our offense will improve with him in the lineup as well. Once Street returns it will allow us to have Calero, Casilla and Embree back up one slot making our bullpen a lot better.
I'm not sure if 89 wins will get us to the playoffs but I think this team can get there. Heck that is what I predicted for our season anyway. Let's try and remember to be fans of our team rather than basing our entire success on wins/losses. The team has had little chance to be very good yet and I'm not sure why we expected things to be any better considering the adversity this team has dealt with so far.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 5:27 PM PDT reply actions
This is the first season in ages where it's...
...been really hard to get excited about anything the A's are doing.
We're missing Thomas
We need somebody that is big and scary and makes you hope every single at bat. We need them for the entertainment value, and we need them for the presence they put in the lineup. We need someone with the nick name Big Hurt. It is really too bad we couldn't resign him, even if he isn't putting up the same numbers as last year. There is nobody in the A's lineup that is intimidating.
I totally agree
I made a post about this a couple weeks ago. We need that intimidator. Someone who everytime he steps in gets you thinking "this guy could change the game". It throws pitchers off their game and is really exciting to watch.
That's all I'll say considering I posted nearly the same thing already.
The A's would be better off if they
simply released Rich Harden. Either way, he doesn't pitch in the major leagues; one way you keep expecting him to, one way you don't.
Whether it's physical, mental, or both, the guy doesn't have what it takes to pitch major league baseball. Sad but true.
The tiredest refrain I know is, "What until our injured guys get back..." I've been hearing it since March. Heck, I've been hearing it for much of three years. We don't need them in November, we need them now and we don't have them.
Haven't watched him pitch lately, BUT
You'd like to believe pitchers who throw in the upper 90's with a nasty slider would have some value, even if he failed miserably to reach his original expectations?
by Pucking Insane on Jul 7, 2007 6:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Harden is fool's gold
Trade him to a fool for some silver, and both teams will think they got a steal--and we'll be right.
Anything but "30" pieces of silver. We don't
want him ending his life in some sort of tribute to Judas.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 6:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Nico, Nico, Nico ...
... you're slipping, dude. That should have been "steel."
Roy S is on my untouchable list
though like the rest of the roster, ailments have reduced his trade value to a mere fraction of his talent.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 7, 2007 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions
as opposed to Blanton ...
... for whom aliments have only increased his value.
It's almost as tiring as people expecting
the A's to be a great team when they have injured players.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions
except
they have been a great team, with frequent injuries, in the recent past. When Harden and Loaiza and Buck and Street return, this team is a potential force. I wish I could also include Bradley.
well, we do expect them to be better
when the players are well vs when they are injured.
When we go on losing tears when folks get off the DL, it does squash our enthusiasm.
But we really haven't got the guys we need
off the DL yet. That is my point.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 8, 2007 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
strange
You've always been a big Duke proponent, an injury-prone guy who was clearly overachieving when healthy, yet this is your stance on how to deal with Harden? For the record, I posted my "getting fucking sick of this" response BEFORE seeing this...
Here's how you go about dealing with Rich Harden. You keep him unless you get an offer you can't refuse. Otherwise, you run him out there until he retires, voluntairly or involuntarily, or until his contract runs out and he becomes too expensive to afford (which is STILL more likely). If he never does get it right, so be it. This is a guy you CANNOT give up on, ever.
Really, how come the overall tune has changed from "Beane is stocking up on injured guys because they're undervalued" to "let's get rid of our best injured guys for nothing while we're still above .500 at the all-star break"...this is fucking absurd, all of it. Give up on Kotsay and Kendall, fine, no one else.
You can't keep running him out there
that's the problem. He was awful today, and blamed it on "I just didn't feel right." That what will continue to happen until he retires - either voluntarily or involuntarily.
There are pitchers at every level who don't want to pitch unless they feel 100%, and every time they struggle they blame it on not feeling right. Harden looks increasingly like this type of pitcher. He complains once a week about "not feeling right" and the A's just are not in a position to sanction the performance they got today. Harden was out-pitched by Lenny Dinardo today. If that's not cause for concern, I don't know what is.
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 7, 2007 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions
To be fair to Harden they should have rehabbed
him as a starter in Sacramento. That way we would have known if he was healthy and ready to contribute.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 7:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Cause for being pissed off about the game...
not cause for concern, yet. He was fine in the other appearances post-injury. Harden said something similar after the two innings against the Yankees--but those were scoreless innings. The A's are in the position where they HAVE to sanction performances like today, knowing that the only way they're going to amount to anything this season is if Harden is Harden. You don't overreact to a guy's first start back from an injury...what they don't have to sanction is, in order, first, Mark Kotsay, second, Jason Kendall, and third, Dan Johnson.
you mean the Dan Johnson ...
... who is OPS'ing .836, 3rd among currently non-DL'ed starters?
Seriously why the hate for DJ?
Sure we would all rather see Swish at first, but DJ, although streaky, is providing a fair amount of offense for us.
yeah
he's also the Dan Johnson who's playing 1B...which Swish can play...which then opens spots in the OF for Buck, Kielty (LHP), and Cust (when Piazza DH's). Johnson is not good enough to be a regular.
"You don't overreact
to a guy's first start back from an injury."
Thank you. Before today Harden had pitched four innings since his return, and that was spread out over a week. Then he didn't pitch for a week. Of course he was going to be rusty. I'm not sure what people were expecting.
-10
A's should release Harden? No, you don't even believe that.
This post is an irritating mismash of meaningless cliches. I would like to trade Harden, but these flippant posts really irritate me.
I try not to write anything that is obviously stupid.
What does that mean?
You prefer cloaked stupidity? Double secret stupidity?
but the reverse is the best
my favorite phrase of all might be "but the joke's really on him/her"
by Cutthemullet on Jul 7, 2007 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Come off it, Nico
You don't usually say dumb things, but your comments towards and about Harden lately have been uncharacteristically mean-spirited (I don't know why you think Harden's problems might be "mental" or why you seem to blame him for the A's choice of rehabbing him at the major league level) and poorly thought out.
"Whether it's physical, mental, or both, the guy doesn't have what it takes to pitch major league baseball. Sad but true."
Sorry, but although you repeatedly make essentially the same categorical statement, the fact is that you don't know that. You're a doctor now? The odds that it is true increase with every setback, but sometimes guys have a lot of setbacks and manage to work through it. In each of his (increasingly brief) interludes of health he's still throwing 97, so he's not one of those guys whose stuff is irretrievably gone.
And what exactly are the A's alternatives here? You say the A's should just release him? They have him under contract for another two and a half years. Don't they have an ethical and professional obligation (not to mention simple due diligence for the fans and shareholders) to try to get him pitching effectively again? Has God informed you that this is an impossible task?
Sure, trade him if the right deal comes around, but no one's going to give us an A prospect for him at this point, and as for B- prospects and middle relievers, we've got those, and Billy doesn't have much trouble finding more. So there's not that much opportunity cost to keeping him around and seeing if we can get his arm screwed on tight.
The A's lack stars, and a healthy Harden is a star. It's true that at this point you have to make your plans without counting on Harden, but there's no reason not to keep trying. If your patience and hard work is met with a bit of good fortune and Harden can contribute, your chances of winning a championship increase more than with any other single factor out there. Hell, even if Harden and the A's spend the entire next year and a half figuring out what's wrong and fixing it (if fixable), and then he gives us one dynamic season in his walk year, that would still be more than enough to justify some patience now. The fact that you're frustrated and tired of waiting and want to stamp your foot about it now doesn't change that equation.
The A's best use of Harden for this year's chances (which aren't good at this point no matter what is done) is to get him on the mound; whatever Andrew Brown you can get for him ain't gonna put them over the top. And the A's best use of Harden over the rest of his contract is to try to see if they can fix what's broken and get their ace back--it probably won't work but the upside if it does is worth all the Denorfias you can possibly buy or rent.
Release him, my ass. Sorry for the screed, and I know (or assume) that your "release him" comment was hyperbole rather than a real recommendation, but I'm nearly as annoyed with your hyperbolic Harden statements as you are with the A's performance of Waiting For Harden.
Wrote my screed without noticing
hmm
Your attitude towards Harden kinda reminds of the Cubs attitude towards Prior and Wood, you know, before they got mangled beyond all recognition and now have no value whatsoever.
by lenscrafters on Jul 8, 2007 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions
Your point being?
Those guys prove you can wreck anyone if you try hard enough. The A's haven't abused Harden the way Dusty abused his pitchers, so there's more hope for Harden. On the other hand, Harden may prove that some guys can't be saved even with careful handling.
Harden's already proving that some guys
can't be saved with even careful handling. Look, the A's have tried pretty much everything with this guy for the last three years yet he has shown no reason that he'll ever pitch a full season healthy.
Basically my point is that there's no reason for the A's to keep him on the team. Every year the A's have been handicapping themselves hoping that if Harden stays healthy we'll have a chance to compete this year. And every year, that never happens which results in the A's having to use guys like Dinardo and Kennedy. I'd rather see the A's trade Harden for prospects (before he becomes another Prior/Wood which, based on recent history, is likely close to happening) and sign a SP who's less talented but will actually contribute to the team by making 33 starts a year. Harden has a lot of potential yes, but potential isn't helping this team win any games.
Kielty may be activated tomorrow to face a LH
I would say that BB still thinks this season matters. Hopefully they sit Kotsay tomorrow and play Cust so our offense can have an opportunity to keep up with the Mariners.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 6:58 PM PDT reply actions
with Kielty, not a bad lineup vs lefties
Stewart LF
Kielty RF
Cust DH
Swisher CF
DJ 1B
Suzuki C
Ellis 2B
Crosby SS
Chavez 3B
heh
Kotsay out of the lineup=decent lineup. Will Geren start Swisher, Buck, Stewart, and DJ? Something has to give, but I suspect Kotsay will find his way in.
Kotsay extension: Worst BB contract ever.
I'm not sure you can say
the Dye deal was bad, considering that Dye did come back to be of excellent--even MVP--caliber. He just didn't come back quite fast enough to help the A's, but no one knew exactly when he'd bounce back to his earlier form. The fact that he did suggests to me that his extension was warranted and the timing just unfortunate.
Yeah
As a frequent Kendall-trade critic I would have expected you to jump on that before Dye. But I'm thinking ex ante here, and the Kotsay extension offered extremely scant upside and vast downside as we are seeing.
I'm thinking ex ante ...
... and all I keep coming up with is "uncle."
You were talking about extensions...
the Kendall deal didn't qualify. I do try to stay on point occasionally.
boy, I dunno
Not that I necessarily disagree, but grover points to the Dye extension (which I think was pretty misguided), there's the Hatteberg extension (not as costly, but at least Kots can usually play defense), the too-costly Piazza signing, the Karros experiment.
But they're all gonna be topped by the 3-year Kendall extension in November.
My thinking is that
Dye was a too-expensive-but-still reasonable risk; Hatteberg extension was bad, but didn't really hurt much. Piazza was signed largely because there was no one else out there for one year, and it hasn't really hurt. The alternative was signing F. Thomas for 2-3 years (which I strongly supported at the time) and that would probably have been bad. Karros experiment didn't hurt that much; the horrible bullpen and Mulder meltdown cost us that year.
I'm sticking with Kotsay as the worst contract BB ever signed.
are you ignoring my wager-bait?
You mean the Kendall extension?
If so, I didn't think you were serious... If you want to bet on a 3-year Kendall extension let me konw...
1/10
I happen to think
the Loazia deal is worse. The A's have gotten half a year from their $14 million investment through this year. At least Kotsay is above average defensively.
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 8, 2007 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Travis Buck should replace Larry Davis, perhaps?
Travis Buck has had a breakthrough with his sprained right thumb while on the disabled list: He noticed Nick Swisher's thumb guard, asked the training staff if one might help him, and got a plastic mold to protect the thumb on Friday.
The rookie outfielder then tried hitting with the mold on, and he said he doesn't feel a thing while wearing it. No pain whatsoever.
"It kind of sucks -- if I'd got it before, I wouldn't have had to go on the DL,'' Buck said.
< bangs head on keyboard >
< asks training staff for plastic forehead guard >
This alone
should get Larry Davis fired. It is irresponsible that he wouldn't have tried that already. This is unbelievable.
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 7, 2007 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree. He seems to be out of touch with all
of these injuries and that's his freaking job to know. Surely they won't bring him back next year but he's already managed to eek his way through as trainer for 10 years now.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 7, 2007 8:37 PM PDT up reply actions
trainers are normally so anonymous...
do training staffs get fired midseason? Is this done semi-regularly, or ever, even? I would be inclined to guess not, but if any team ever needed an in-season trainer/medical staff replacement, this is it.
Yankees fired their strength/conditioning coach
on May 2 after the Phillip Hughes hamstring injury, which came after the Yanks had lost time with Wang, Mussina, Matsui and Damon for strain-type injuries.
Though the rash of similar injuries possibly could be explained by bad luck, (GM Brian) Cashman determined that cause and effect could not be ruled out. Sources say (trainer Marty) Miller's methods were not popular with the Yankees, and the players were in near-revolt over the situation.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 7, 2007 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions
thanks
see, this is where Bradley is missed most, he'd be the guy most likely to start the revolt needed to finally get Davis fired.
by Cutthemullet on Jul 7, 2007 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Cutthemullet, my stance on Harden
(and I don't seriously advocate releasing him, but I'd trade him in a heartbeat if someone offered value for him) stems from the fact that I concluded in APRIL that he was another Bradley who simply couldn't stay on the field and NOTHING that has happened since has done ANYTHING to change my mind--in fact EVERYTHING that has has happened has only strengthened that opinion. Basically, if Rich Harden is on your team you need to build a 6-man rotation.
which is what Beane did
The A's were much more prepared for pitching injuries this year than when Ryan Glynn was the next guy in line to get a start...they have a pretty good 7-man rotation this year
that he did
But imagine if, say, Beane had flipped Harden for something of value, and had the resources to bolster the rotation even further.
For someone who gets paid to lecture financial services professionals on risk management, Beane certainly seems to leave an awful lot to luck and reliance on unreliable (or reliably bad) performers.
If you only looked at 2007,
would BB inspire anyone to write a book? Seems to me the mistakes and miscalculations have far outweighed the shows of brilliance.
You guys are acting like the season is over
There are still 75 or so games to play. The Angels are starting to look like paper tigers. Once Street, Loaiza, Piazza, and others come back, the A's could get hot. They could easily reel off 9 wins in a row and jump into the division race.
by BruceBochte on Jul 7, 2007 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions
The undervalued commodity was injured players.
It worked out last year when Thomas was signed. It hasn't worked out this year but c'est la vie. Part two of the season may show us something different. I am not willing to write-off Harden. So he showed some rust tonight...we have been patient this long ...let's continue and give Harden a little more time.
Thomas was not signed to be a critical component
He was meant to be a suppliment to the core roster of Crosby, Chavez and Swisher. Thomas ended up becoming the A's offense for the last two months of the 2006 season because most everyone else sucked. (I'm generalizing here for the sake of brevity.)
Rich Harden was supposed to be a key component of the 2007 rotation. He has, to date, failed in that regard. I'm not worried about how he pitched last night. I just want to know that he'll pitch again 5-6 days from now.
I agree with what you just wrote.
Hanging onto Harden coming into 2007
First, the A's have a number of solid-to-excellent players but are short of stars. Haren's close, but he's still more workmanlike than overpowering. I love Swisher, but it's not large-market bias that's keeping him off the All-Star team. Harden at his best is a stone-cold ace, the kind of player who by himself significantly increases your chances of a championship season. These kinds of players are very scarce and it's hard to go all the way without one or two of them, so it's worth some real risk to try to have one on your team. Sometimes the dice break the wrong way, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't have rolled them.
Second, coming into this year Harden had never had any hint of a shoulder problem. Obliques, yes (and one of his oblique problems wasn't caused by throwing the ball, anyway), but those aren't generally career-threateners and in any case were apparently successfully addressed (finally). He had an elbow injury, but guys have much worse elbow injuries than Harden did all the time and manage to recover completely. The shoulder injury is the real career-killing threat, and there was simply no real reason to think it was coming. Although retrospectively and fatalistically any injury to Harden seems inevitable, I don't think there's a medical or rational basis for saying "Well, he seems to get hurt a lot lately, so he's due for a shoulder injury." And if the shoulder injury wasn't predictable and the other injuries aren't career-killers, then I don't see a strong rational reason (A's fatalism aside) for thinking Harden's injury risk was excessive.
Too bad the issue was a thumb guard
and not a donut, or surely Larry Davis would have been the first to know all the particulars.
I sure hope THAT wasn't the answer!
http://www.posturainfo.com/donut.asp
"hello jennifer, i am doctor buck
no, please, keep the bathrobe on, i just want to draw some blood"
"Touch what? Why would I need
to touch that? I'm a dentist, for Christ's sake."
"I am the doctor
and no, I don't need you to grab my ass to make the correct diagnosis."
by IndianaAsfan on Jul 8, 2007 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Is cutthemullet
a euphemism for getting rid of Larry Davis?
If so, its a great one!
Cut the mullet!
by BruceBochte on Jul 7, 2007 9:44 PM PDT reply actions
Guess who I saw at the ballpark today
He looked pretty cheerful -- of course, this was before the game.
Beane's obviously about to be DL'ed ...
... with a detached right eyebrow.
If only Larry Davis had known about plastic eyebrow guards!
It's a .500 Club
Obviously I have tended to be pessimistic about this A's club, and wrote before they went to NY that I thought they would likely be 10 out at the break. Never occured to me that the Royals would sweep the Angels ... and the A's would still be 10 out at the break! Simple statement though true: even with terrible, terrible injuries this club pitches pretty damn well, and can be counted on to get better with all the guys scheduled to return after the break, except Duke. And I think the club is pretty damn good on defense, too. But this club is just awful at the plate, and there's no reason to believe it's going to get much better.
Crosby is now a known commodity and, sadly, he just isn't a very good hitter. In fact, he sucks. Chavvy is an OK hitter, but should really be batting 8th. Kendall is clearly done - just awful. Kotsay looks pretty bad, and hasn't really hit well since his first year in Oakland. Johnson's had a great month, but you never know if or when he might dive into one of those horrendous slumps. That's a lot of every day guys who might all end up under .250.
And none of this speaks to the fact that the A's whole lineup is pretty much awful with RISP this year, just as they were awful last year, and just as they were awful the year before. The second half was great last year, but Hurt is gone, and so is JayPay and so is Bradley. As much as the A's struggled to score for a good part of last year, it's tough to lose all of those guys.
You can say King Felix was dealing ... as was Washburn ... as was Glavine ... but when the bottom of the lineup is Crosby.Kendall.Scutaro.Suzuki, as it was on Friday night, well, it probably doesn't matter that much who pitches. Throw out a guy who won't walk guys around the bases and 2-0 deficits become seemingly insurmountable.
Don't see why anybody in the league would stand in line to deal with the A's. Sure, lots of teams would love a bat like our current left fielder, and I guess he's the best guy to move, as old as he is and so forth. But I can't imagine moving a good young arm like Gaudin, much less a guy like Calero who has been so good (until this year and its ailments.) Probably Billy will prove me wrong. For me there are no untouchables except Ellis.
Ellis, eh?
I hadn't thought about Ellis that way (as the only untouchable), but it makes some sense. He's the best fielding 2B in the league (hands down) and offensively he's consistent and solid, with some patience and power. Other teams really seem to respect him as a player, more so than we do perhaps. Also, he's super cheap for a player of his caliber, at least through next year, I think. And then, maybe the Yankees will come calling ...
Good point on this.
I would add to the "untouchable" list:
Ellis
Haren
Blanton
Buck
Swisher
Street
I think that's everyone on the major league roster that the A's should not consider trading at all this year. Everyone else is fair game. And this means YOU, Eric Chavez.
alright guys
going to the bar for a few, maybe I'll be even more fired up when I return. There's a grover post begging for a response that I can't neglect
Just back from the Rivercats/Grizzly
game. The cats eeked out three runs, one a solo HR. GIDP's at least twice. Barton looked good but didn't produce. Two really great AB's, Putnam looked good. Weak offense, great pitching (saw Brad getting his side work in), turned a couple DP's....all while taking the first four of a five game set. They lead the PCL by a good margin now. In short, these guys are all qualified to be A's players....and a good many of them have been already. Think I will go see them again tomorrow and see if they can sweep all five.
Also, Kielty was nowhere to be seen.
As far as I can remember ...
Sacramento has never been a hotbed of major league caliber talent. Anyone that much of a stud makes a short stopover there, or skips that level altogether. (Harden, Street, Buck ...) I know Swish played a year there but he had (and has) some serious holes in his swing. We all know how little good that whole year at AAA did for Crosby ...
It's always been my feeling that, especially considering how many injuries we suffer every year, Beane keeps AAA stocked with replacement players, nothing more. Just guys who can be called up and spell a guy like Kotsay or Chavez or Crosby and then go back down again. Rarely have we had a guy like Barton there for long.
eh
Buck would likely have been there with Barton the whole year if not for ST injuries. Street also benefited from an injury to Dotel...so while it may be true that Sac hasn't had top guys for too long in recent years, I wouldn't make the sweeping conclusion that it's not A's policy to keep top prospects there for any significant time, or something.
Maybe there is something to what Crosbino
says....I would leave it to far wiser minor league guru's such as grover as to whether it's little more than an open reserve pool for the A's. But one thing is for sure, Sac is always contending for the championship. These guys are in first by a comfortable margin and if anything, their roster has been in a higher state of flux than the A's themselves. If one of their guys heats up, it's almost a sure bet that the A's will confiscate him...especially if he can pitch. The least you can say is that there manager is every bit Geren's equal when it comes to dealing with adversity. Bean seems to place a priority on building a winning philosophy up and down the minor league system. Guys that expect to win usually do a lot more often than not. Which leads me to believe that Beane will not "blow up" any team. If anything, he will pare it down to its usable core. That said, I don't believe there will be any shocking trades.
I fully expect that the A's will rebound after the ASB. Crosby may suck right now, but I won't believe he is no good until September. The guy missed most of the season last year and all of ST this year. He is young and hasn't had enough time to hit a groove yet. I think we will see good things from these guys.
That seems a little unfair to give Crosby only
until September to determine his true suckiness. Considering he never played in sping training, I'm at least giving him until 2010 to determine his true worth.
I dunno...
I wouldn't go all the way until September 2010. We should know one way or another by September 2008.
Well, that's a little more generous of you to
give him until September '08. Thanks for your patience.....
I try!
All sarcasm aside, I think the guy will step up. He has gotten it done before and I think he will again.
No He Won't
Crosby doesn't make adjustments at the plate - EVER. I've never seen a player NOT make any adjustments at the MLB level, and succeed.
Crosby's #1 Problem - He stands too far away from the plate. Pitchers pitch to the outside corner, knowing he can't reach the outside of the plate w/ the sweet part of the bat.
It's so obvious, yet he never adjusts.
by Colorado Fan on Jul 8, 2007 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
There is no A in offense.or in our case offensive
After reviewing many threads and posts
during this past week and carefully analysing the content of all. I have assembled the names of a Blue Ribbon Committee of AN experts to compile the 2007 Athletics Report, to be completed by Monday and presented to Billy Beane immediately following the ASB.
Unlike some other executives I am familiar with, let's hope he follows the Committee's recomendations.
<scribbles furiously in notebook,
complains to cat>
< Felini and Poochini >
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 8, 2007 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
