Their Celebration, Our Frustration
by louismg on Sep 23, 2007 1:31 PM PDT
in News
56 comments
The A's lose 6-2, as the team's 3-8 hitters go 0-20, and Dallas Braden gives up 6 runs in 3 1/3 innings... enabling Cleveland to clinch a playoff spot.
Hopefully, Lew Wolff and Billy Beane are working hard to erect bullet-proof glass and a thorough case of body armor around Daric Barton. Were it not for his 2-run megablast in the 6th inning, and a timely double in the 8th which gave the A's something resembling a chance to catch up to the Indians after spending the afternoon trailing, the game would have been completely without merit.
With an opportunity to delay the Indians' playoff-clinching celebration one more day, the A's followed the same script we've seen all 2007 season long: Put an inexperienced pitcher in a situation over his head, fall behind early, avoid getting on base, and when you do, be sure to strand the runner. Also, if possible, make the other pitcher look like a genius. Today, playing the role of the bullied, was Dallas Braden, who fell to 1-8 after spotting the Tribe 6 runs. Meanwhile, Shannon Stewart was the only Athletic not coming up empty, managing 2 base hits in 2 at bats on the way to a 3-4 day, before Barton too woke up.
While Braden slumped to the dugout, his counterpart, Jake Westbrook, was en route to a career high in strikeouts with 9, assisted by a home plate umpire, who clearly confused, thought the strike zone also included the widths of the adjoining batters boxes - ringing up strikes on Jack Hannahan and Jack Cust that were beyond criminal. The A's didn't complain, and look to be just going through the motions as the 2007 season comes to a close, eager to move along and start looking forward.
I'm ecstatic about what I've seen from Barton in this short time, just as I was when Buck debuted, and in Cust's seemingly superhuman first few months. I hope that as the new season approaches, we get the opportunity for each of them continue to amaze us with consistency, and that others who haven't yet done much, like Dallas Braden, can surprise us and prove us wrong.
0 recs |
56 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Props to Cust and Hannahan
for not hacking at slop. It's not their fault if they get rung up on obvious balls just because they're rookies.
Please, MLB, put in an electronic strike zone. This crap is just juvenile.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 1:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Umps calling balls-n-strikes is the functional equivalent of firemen on diesel locomotives.
by The Dogfather on Sep 23, 2007 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Henceforth
I will refer to any looking strikeout on a terrible call as a Jackout. As in, "he Jacked out Mark Ellis on a pitch in the opposing batter's box."
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't understand
why the A's let so many of these calls go uncontested. I wonder if it's a directive from the front office not to argue calls under any circumstances? If I were Geren I would have been tossed on at least three occasions in the last two weeks. But I damn sure would have made my point.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is
that it's basically impossible to see inside/outside from the dugout. (The angle is wrong.) So basically, if a manager argues those, he looks like a jackass.
I'd rather the hitters themselves argued them. At this point, I really don't care if they get tossed or even suspended, because the games don't matter anymore. Better to have the bench restraining them than the other way around. But neither Cust nor Hannahan seems to be that kind of dude.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 5:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True enough.
Our hitters will have to clue the manager that the calls are bogus. Cust and Hannahan are probably both grateful just to be in the show at this point in their career's. Still, Cust has given off enough body language that Geren should pick up on the fact that he's just been rung up on a lousy call.
The umpires are human after all. They are going to follow the path of least resistance. If the A's are going to idly watch their players rung up without objection, the umps are going to continue to go against them. It'll stop when the umpires know that all calls are going to be watched and acted upon when warranted.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We don't actually know that they're not
being argued. One thing that's sure to get you tossed is turning around and "showing up" the ump. But we've all seen a lot of "conversation" happening with the batter still facing forward or walking away, stepping out or what have you, and the ump still with his mask on. Very likely, though, the Custs and Hannahans of the world would have a lot less success with this than, say, Derek Jeter.
by oblique on Sep 24, 2007 6:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I heard the relevant parts of the game
on the radio. I didn't see or hear the bad calls on Cust or Hannahan. The A's are going to have to start contesting at least some of these calls. I'm looking at you Geren. Get tossed out of enough games and file complaints with the league and maybe some of the more obvious bs will stop. I can understand the umpires going against a rookie player on marginal calls. What I can't stand are obvious balls being called strikes.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 2:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i think it's funny
how on a day when we lament the A's reluctance to contest calls, Milton (again) goes overboard.
I am all for a player with some 'tude, and some fire inside him. Just not that much.
Still you have to wonder if it's a coincidence that our last three managers- Howe, Macha, and Geren- all graduated from Nice Guy University?
by 67MARQUEZ on Sep 23, 2007 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not about having an attitude.
It's about presenting an expectation of impartiality. It's easy to go against our guys because no one is going to bitch, no matter how egregious the call. It wouldn't take long to establish in the umpires mind that the A's are going to demand factually accurate calls. I'm not saying that they should argue marginal calls, but on two separate occasions Cust has been rung on very bad calls during the last two weeks. It's unacceptable for Geren to allow this trend to continue any further. Our rookie players deserve to have their manager attempt to protect them. Geren's rookie status non withstanding, it's time for him to show some "fire" when his guys are being ran over.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why is it a player's job?
The ump has to do his job, that just that.
The whole notion that an ump can call strikes different for rookies is offensive. (somebody should check if that's actually true, mind you.)
As far as all that goes, does it actually help to complain to an ump? Does it even change the calls one whit?
by MobiusKlein on Sep 23, 2007 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Umpires themselves have acknowledged
giving pitchers the benefit of the doubt on marginal calls, especially with rookie players standing in the box. I'm all for implementing an electronic method of evaluating an umpires performance.
You're correct in asserting that arguing will not change a call. It wont. But you're not arguing the call that was just made. You're arguing the calls that are yet to be made. One of the few things I like about Sciosca is his willingness to confront umpires. He knows damn well that he is not going to affect the call just made, but he also knows that he is planting a seed in the umpires mind that may bear fruit on the next call. Challenge them when they're clearly wrong and they may make the next call in your favor rather than have to deal with you screaming in their face on national TV. It's a strategy that Earl Weaver employed to great success. Umpires were loathe to deal with him and usually only engaged in confrontation with him when they were certain that they were in the right. Earl didn't give a damn if he was wrong. How many marginal calls do you think went his way? I'd venture that most of them did.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Starting Rotation
One thing should be pretty clear by now: Any plans for 2008 that include Dallas Braden or someone similar as the number 5 starter assumes the A's can win with an Orioles-like starting rotation...
by SA on Sep 23, 2007 3:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Braden appears to have
pitched his way into JoKe territory. We better hope Meyer can figure it out over the winter or we are seriously screwed. Unless we get an unexpected pleasant surprise this spring, our rotation is going to be our undoing.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 3:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If this is what we're going to expect from our #5
slot next year, we'd better be sending the two of them out there to start AND finish the games regardless of how bad they do because they're going to decimate our bullpen if they're forced to pitch 5 to 6 innings a every fifth game.
by DMOAS on Sep 23, 2007 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of our pen,
Based on the box score, our bullpen seems to have been effective. At least they held the tribe scoreless for the rest of the game. Brown gave up 3 BB's which is disconcerting. Only two hits, both of which DiNardo gave up.
By the way, anyone have any thoughts on what Schilling is going to get next year?
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too much?
Schilling is fading. He's lost a lot off of his fastball. He's still got enough guile to pitch well most of the time, but he's approaching the end of the line.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would that serve the A's purpose?
Assuming he's not going to cost too much? The guy seems more interested in winning than anything else. If he's got enough left to fill our 3 hole, would he be worth pursuing? He's had some time on the DL this season, but is it any worse gambling on an old guy than pinning our hopes on Harden?
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
how bout
carl pavano
i'd like to see andrew brown get a shot actoally
by closetasfan on Sep 23, 2007 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amazingly,
Carl Pavano's contract isn't up until the end of '08. But rehabbing from Tommy John will eat up the rest of his time with the Yanks.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dunno
Do you want a less durable version of this year's Tom Glavine? I could do without that, thanks.
I mean, if he goes low enough, I could see buying him, but some damnfool team is going to offer him $20 million for 2 years, and I don't want the A's taking any part in that.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The question is when do we need someone?
Per my Tuesday post, we'll be fine until Harden goes down (Haren, Harden, Blanton, Gaudin, DiNardo works fine for me). Even I hold out some hope that Harden might go down later than April 1st--so who knows how urgent it is to have another starter in place by Opening Day? Sometime though, that's for sure...
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From what I've seen of our minor league pitchers
is we have guys who don't have an out pitch. None of them have what I would call a plus pitch To be marginally successful, they have to have perfect location on every pitch. Major league hitters don't miss a lot of mistakes as we have seen when these guys are on the mound. Maybe one of the guys in the low minors will setup in the spring and give us a pleasant surprise.
Without a trade for a established starter, I'd have to say we are looking at another season of poor results from the 4 and 5 holes in our rotation... unless we can outscore the other team.. and we've seen how well that works too:)
by 3up3dn on Sep 23, 2007 3:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the A's need to--and possibly will--find
a good one-year rental to bridge the gap between the pitchers who are ready but aren't good enough (Braden, Meyer, Komine, Windsor) and the pitchers who are good enough but aren't ready (e.g., Simmons, Bailey, Cahill). This year's opportunity would have been Greg Maddux. Guys are always out there somewhere.
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You keep saying this
and I keep not seeing who you're talking about. Do we want the A's to try and rebuild Bartolo Colon's career? Hope Kenny Rogers still has his Coliseum mojo (and that his arm isn't amputated midseason)? Remember, everyone who isn't a. ancient, or b. severely injury prone, is going to be signed to a huge long-term contract, given how pitching-starved this market is.
Right now the best bet looks like putting Colon and Harden together and hoping they add up to one Cy Young winner, but I doubt even that's going to come cheaply. If the A's sign Shrek, you can forget about filling the CF and SS holes from outside the organization.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We just saw one prime example in Cliff Lee--
That's a "buy low" opportunity that could yield a #3 starter if Lee returned to form. Freddy Garcia (if his shoulder is supposed to be ready by April, 2008--I don't know what the prognosis is) would be another possibility. Longer shots would be Scott Olsen (has the ability but is having an atrocious year, possibly due to the distractions of his legal problems), Chris Capuano (was #3 starter material last year and then inexplicably sucked donkey kong this season), or Livan Hernandez (if the A's wanted to make a more expensive 3-year Loaiza-like investment).
Remember, guys like Oliver Perez were "too bad to consider" until they resurrected their career, and few pegged Fausto Carmona as a #2 starter who would lead the league in ERA.
Lee, Olsen, and Capuano could spiral into oblivion within 18 months or they could be the next great finds. The art is in guessing who will make you look like a genius and who won't. The A's are pretty good at finding those guy (Cust, Gaudin, Hannahan...); my point is just that they ARE out there.
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, in case it wasn't clear,
I know Olsen and Capuano aren't FAs, but they would be cheap to get in trades.
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Capuano's very interesting
His OPS against in the 1st half last year was 679. It was 856 in the 2nd half.
This year, his K and BB rates are similar to his rates from 2005. He is giving up much more hits on balls in play. His fielding independent numbers are similar to or slightly better than his numbers from 2005. Whether this is due to luck or something else, he looks interesting.
by rfloh on Sep 24, 2007 1:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess
but a lot of those guys have the potential to be expensive disasters if they don't work out. The A's can't afford to take those kinds of chances with players; we're liable to end up with a rerun of the Kotsay situation.
I just don't think you're fully thinking through the implications of last year's free agent market. Every single free-agent pitcher who is capable of posting (much less likely to post) a sub-4 ERA is going to be given a multiyear contract by some team or other, because this year's market is even worse than last year's. Mark Mulder got a deal for essentially a prorated $10M a year (given that the Cards knew he was missing 4 months of this season).
Rolling the dice with free agent pitchers is a fool's errand for a small-market team like Oakland. No matter how "undervalued" they might be relative to their peer group, they're vastly overvalued in the context of actual baseball talent.
I'm confident that the A's can pluck a #5, perhaps even a #4, off the minor league scrap heap if it comes to that. But unless Gaudin returns to his early-season form (which is, admittedly, quite possible) or Harden miraculously returns to health (not bloody likely), I have no confidence in the middle of next year's rotation. Signing one of the above will do nothing to increase my confidence. Far better to spend the money on a hitter.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not all those guys are FAs
Cliff Lee, Chris Capuano, and Scott Olsen could be gotten on the cheap in trades, and their salaries are totally affordable. One of them will probably pitch like a #3 starter next year; two of them probably won't.
by Nico on Sep 24, 2007 8:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you have a basis for that statement?
(The first one, I mean. That they can be gotten on the cheap.)
Again, teams are going to be desperate this offseason. The Brewers are already short of quality starters, and you're hypothesizing them trading one away for a bag of baseballs?
by PaulThomas on Sep 24, 2007 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Scott Olsen is convicted,
I would imagine (from statements the Marlins have made BEFORE any verdict has come down) that they will trade Olsen for anything they can get because they want him out of town. Either way, the guy is persona non grata AND he has an ERA over 6.00.
Capuano pitched his way entirely out of the Brewers rotation, and Lee pitched his way all the way out of the major leagues. I doubt their asking price is anywhere near their actual track record of ability/performance.
Like I said, they are "buy low" opportunities. In the cases of Capuano and Lee, I'm not saying they'll be given away but I'm sure they can be gotten for far less than, say, their 2005 performances would have suggested.
by Nico on Sep 24, 2007 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Milton Bradley found a new way to get injured,
he was hurt by his own 1st base coach, trying to makes sure he didn't get to the umpire, he was taken down by the 1st base coach of the Padres, and was seen holding his knee, or somewhere on the leg.
by theblackpearl on Sep 23, 2007 4:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
His own manager is how I heard it
Meanwhile, Andrew Brown pitched well today. Or should I just leave it at: He didn't fight with a single A's coach and he didn't injure himself!
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just finished listening to Vin Scully
lecture the kids on loosing one's temper via the latest Milton debacle. It sounded as though Vin was backhand bitch slapping Bradley while maintaining his own pristine reputation. It was hilarious.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley...
...is not likely to stay in the majors much longer with all of the problems he has been having. Wonder what he has in mind for a 2nd career?
by doubleplayer on Sep 23, 2007 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can watch the Bradley play
I liked him in Oakland but anyone who watches Bradley hurting his knee while being separated from the umpire by his manager will understand why he's been on so many different teams. That is one of the silliest ways to be injured I've ever seen. (Go to the Padres home page on mlb.com for the clip). And Bradley had just missed about 11 games with an oblique injury.
by SA on Sep 23, 2007 7:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting to hear you say that, doubleplayer,
because a while ago (around the time of the DFA, I think) I said I thought there was a good chance Bradley would be out of baseball within two years, and my comment was met with a lot of skepticism.
But already, look at where things have progressed. Do you think the Padres will want him back next year? No. So now he'll go try to find yet another team willing to take a chance on him. Someone undoubtedly will. But when he flames out yet AGAIN, after flaming out in Oakland's easy clubhouse and another place, after wearing out his welcome in Cleveland and LA, will any team really want to touch him?
Doubt it.
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say we get him again
for the MLB minimum, and give him surgery that removes his vocal cords.
by louismg on Sep 23, 2007 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, surgery's a last resort.
Let's try lithium first.
by Poppy on Sep 24, 2007 6:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
{tries lithium}
Or did you mean the injured players?
by Nico on Sep 24, 2007 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, originally, I just meant Bradley.
But hey, it'd work for us, too!
by Poppy on Sep 24, 2007 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to yahoo..
Good ole Wash is looking for a "veteran closer". We've got closer options galore. Maybe we can sell him on Embree... I've said before, I'd love to have C.J. Wilson, who if I remember right, once was a starter. Sure, he'd be a #5 at best or he could go into the BP. And as an added bonus, he is left handed.
by AsWin on Sep 23, 2007 4:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure Embree would be appealing
to a team that had C. J. Wilson, when Wilson is arguably Embree-only-better. Everyone but Street is "someone who might close well"--Street is a "closer". I'm sure the only guy Texas would be interested in is Street.
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And God so loved the world,
he sent his only son, Daric Barton, to play first base for the Oakland Athletics.
by walk off bunt on Sep 23, 2007 4:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And the Angels did weep
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OT : Baseball rule question
With runners at first and third and no outs the batter hits a ground ball to the SS, who throws to second and the runner from first breaks up the double play with a slide. The runner is called for interference and a double play is ruled as the batter is declared out for the bad slide.
My question is, does the runner from third score on this play, or is he forced to stay at third based on the interference call? Anyone that knows the answer it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
by AsFanInLA on Sep 23, 2007 8:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I believe Rule 7.09 (g) prohibits
other runners from advancing/scoring. "(On double play interference)...the ball is dead...In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner." That doesn't specifically talk about runners who might have advanced/scored anyway, but I think the rule is that all other runners return to their previous bases.
by Nico on Sep 23, 2007 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is
I've seen it happen. It's not something you want to occur if you're the hitting team. Still justified, IMO.
MLB really needs to crack down on "takeout slides." They're incredibly dangerous. Stuff that would be an instantaneous red-card in a soccer match (spikes-up slides directly at a guy's legs) is routine in MLB games. College baseball has come down hard on the practice and reduced injuries to middle infielders.
by PaulThomas on Sep 23, 2007 11:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
braden, barton, and hannahan
So far 2 out of 3 is working. Braden looks like to me a bullpen guy not a starter. Barton looks like he will be the starting 1b in 2008. Hannahan will be atleast back up is chavez is ready. Murphy is struggleing so don't count on him being here next year.
by Arcman on Sep 23, 2007 10:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It could be worse...
we could be Pirates or Devil Rays fans.
by buddahead9 on Sep 23, 2007 10:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
A toast to the hardest...
of the hardcore fans. A special breed indeed. We can drink in the cellar with these folks this year, secure in the knowledge that at least we have a chance of seeing the sun again.
by alox on Sep 23, 2007 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i can't wait to see pictures!
Hazing ritual: While the Indians were pouring champagne in their clubhouse, the A's were celebrating their annual rookie dress-up day, and with 11 first-year players, there were a lot of costumes to be donned.
Among the highlights: Dallas Braden's white trashcan costume, complete with a lid for a hat; Donnie Murphy's brilliant green leprechaun outfit; Kurt Suzuki's Asian-themed Super Girl; and Andrew Brown even more towering than usual in a purple Frankenberry costume. It's the third time Brown has had to do rookie dress up, he said good-naturedly. He also was hazed in Cleveland and San Diego.
Bullpen catcher Casey Chavez didn't escape, either. He sported a Nacho Libre costume with great aplomb.
by gotgreen on Sep 23, 2007 11:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
the only way Braden will
"prove anyone wrong" is to develop some more pitches (minimum one, better two) that he can throw for strikes.
by OaklandSi on Sep 24, 2007 6:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
alhough, to be fair
let's see how he does next spring. He may still be recovering arm strength from his surgery.
by OaklandSi on Sep 24, 2007 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's Keep my favorite A for much longer!
I love Mark Ellis. I would like to see the A's extend him for 3 more years. He is as solid a ballplayer and citizen as there is on the baseball diamond these days. He is so easy to root for--and he rewards by so often coming through--or at least getting a good at-bat. No flailing for this infielder.
It is time for the A's to hold on to some players and let them form the nucleus and identity of the team. A team that is identified by Ellis and Swisher is the one I want to see.
by oaklandcrazy on Sep 24, 2007 3:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
