SWISHER TRADED
by OaklandA23 on Jan 3, 2008 11:33 AM PST
in News
Email
Print[EDITOR'S NOTE: The house cleaning continues with Billy Beane trading one his supposed "favorites". This does make sense in the fact that Swisher is 27 years old and Beane is apparently instituting a rule that no one over 24 can play for the team this year. - Blez]
Swisher to the Chicago White Sox
A’s Trade OF Nick Swisher to Chicago White Sox
Acquire LHP Gio Gonzalez, RHP Fautino De Los Santos and OF Ryan Sweeney
OAKLAND, Calif. - The Oakland A’s today traded outfielder Nick Swisher to the Chicago White Sox for left-handed pitcher Gio Gonzalez, right-handed pitcher Fautino De Los Santos and outfielder Ryan Sweeney.
Gonzalez led all of minor league baseball with 185 strikeouts while pitching for Double-A Birmingham last year. He was 9-7 with a 3.18 ERA in 27 games, all starts, for the Barons and was named to the Southern League midseason and postseason All-Star teams. The 22-year old left-hander also ranked fourth in the SL in ERA and led SL starters with a .216 opponents batting average. Gonzalez was originally drafted by the White Sox as a compensation pick (38th selection overall) between the first and second rounds of the 2004 First-Year Player Draft. He is 31-28 with a 3.49 ERA in 91 career minor league appearances, 89 starts, and has 577 strikeouts in 492.1 innings.
De Los Santos was named the South Atlantic League’s Most Outstanding Major League Prospect and was also named to the SAL midseason and postseason All-Star teams in 2007 after going 9-4 with a 2.40 ERA and .148 opponents batting average in 21 games, 15 starts at Single-A Kannapolis. He also made five starts for Single-A Winston-Salem and combined at both stops for a 10-5 record and a 2.65 ERA in 26 games, 20 starts. The 21-year old Dominican native ranked second in the White Sox farm system in ERA, third in strikeouts (153) and fourth in wins. De Los Santos pitched for the World Team in the 2007 Futures Game in San Francisco in just his second professional season. He has 214 strikeouts in 170.2 career innings.
Sweeney was named the White Sox number one prospect by Baseball America entering the 2007 season and hit .270 with 10 home runs and 47 RBI in 105 games at Triple-A Charlotte. He also hit .200 with a home run and five RBI in 15 games with Chicago and is a .213 career hitter in 33 games over two seasons with the White Sox. The 22-year old left-handed hitting outfielder played for the Arizona Fall League Champion Phoenix Desert Dogs following the season and hit .286 with a home run and 13 RBI in 23 games. Sweeney was originally drafted by the White Sox in the second round of the 2003 draft and will be added to the A’s 40-man roster, which now stands at 40.
Swisher batted .262 with 22 home runs and 78 RBI in 150 games with the A’s last year in his third full season in the Majors. He added 100 walks for a .381 on-base percentage and he had career highs in batting, on-base percentage, walks and doubles (36). The 27-year old switch-hitter ranked sixth in the American league in walks and was 10th in strikeouts (131). Swisher is a .251 career hitter with 80 home runs and 255 RBI in 458 games. His 80 home runs are a franchise record for a switch-hitter and his .361 on-base percentage ranks ninth in Oakland history.
613 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Shit
I guess that makes it offal
Damn. That's it.
Anyone want a genuine MLB hairpiece signed by Swisher?
Not that surprising
With the acquisition of Carter, Cunningham and Gonzalez to go along with Barton, Cust, Denorfia, and Buck, the A's have a real organizational strength in 1B/DH/Corner OFs. Gonzalez will be a candidate for a rotation spot as soon as 2008, and De Los Santos is a legit prospect. Sweeney is pretty meh to me, but he could have trade value and is great value as a throw-in.
Addendum
According to BP, we obtained the #1, #2, and #8 prospect from the White Sox system. It hurts to lose Haren and Swisher, but the A's have gone from one of the least talented organizations in baseball to one of the Top 5 systems with the two trades.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 11:25 AM PST up reply actions
My money is on Street.
Buy throwback jerseys
Because current A's jerseys get old real fast.
by oaklandSMASH on Jan 3, 2008 11:48 AM PST up reply actions
You should be expecting a phone call ...
from OaklandA23 in the next couple of hours
I believe we have an emerging consensus
Shit.
< hangs jury >
I've been agitating for a Swisher trade ... well, for probably over a year. And this looks like a really good haul of high-ceiling, near-ready players.
Yeah
Why not just clean house completely? Don't do it halfway. I loved Swish, just like I loved Haren, but you might as well go all the way.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Jan 3, 2008 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
We should trade you Blez. I'm sure we'd get a
haul for you when considering how bad that "other" blog is for that "other" LA team.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jan 3, 2008 12:13 PM PST up reply actions
This is a great trade
Billy Beane robbed Kenny Williams a third time on this one.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
especially when you consider Carter and Cunningha
We have a lot of former White Sox prospects now.
Don't forget, though...
Kenny Williams: 1 World Series Championship
Billy Beane: 0
Beane played 37 games for the '89 A's
that's something...
I Agree... Great Trade!!!!
Swisher is a good guy and a solid major leaguer, but he was overmatched by top pitchers. Yes, he's versatile, but the A's have a lot of guys to play right, left and first.
The A's truly needed a few top-tier up-and-coming pitchers and, by all accounts, they picked up two of the top minor league stud pitchers in baseball.
(Of course, Dan Meyer was once one of the top minor league stud pitchers in baseball.)
Excellent trade for the A's!
I say they hold onto Blanton and Street until the season and see which contender needs pitching help.
What I'd really like to see the A's do now is upgrade the scouting department (our drafts haven't been so hot recently) and improve/expand some of the overseas baseball academies.
This means we can play Kotsay AND Denorfia!
Gonzalez could (probably not unitl June)
Gonzalez is pretty polished and could skip AAA. De Los Santos is a couple of years away, but he is a more polished version of Henry Rodriguez. De Los Santos is a candidate for best pitching prospect in baseball if he continues to improve this year; his stuff is that good.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 11:32 AM PST up reply actions
Gio might
With Fautino, Cahill, Brett Anderson, and Henry Rodriguez, Beane is collecting a lot of very good young pitching prospects with high ceilings.
Have to think on it, but . . .
the A's might now have the best group of starting pitcher prospects in baseball. Tampa Bay has a very good group, can't really think of anyone else who has as deep a group as the A's.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
hells bells
this just sucks. I really loved having Swish on the team. Setting aside talent, future performance, value, blah blah, he was one hell of a fan friendly player who brought a lot to being an A's fan. I remember him at the end of the last game of the season walking down the third base stands handing all his extra gear out to the kids. I will really, really miss his personality. Not to mention his interviews on the post game show.
Boooooooooo!
AAAaaaaah!
No more "Country Roads"!
by popcornjames on Jan 3, 2008 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
This one
will really be hard to digest. Swish was one of my favorite players. I was just watching one of his many A's pregame interviews on Comcast Ch 36 On Demand last night. I feel like I lost a close relative. :(
by sf drift king on Jan 3, 2008 11:35 AM PST up reply actions
We all lose
No more of this:
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jan 3, 2008 1:51 PM PST up reply actions
Please
not Ellis, please, not Ellis, please, not Ellis, please. Please.
Well even if you click your heels
three times, that still doesn't mean it won't happen. Unfortunately ;-)
by Tyler Bleszinski on Jan 3, 2008 11:25 AM PST up reply actions
Wow....wasnt a huge Swish guy...
But this is going to be the worst offense we have ever seen. Goodness.
Wow...I am SHOCKED
no...really, really shocked. Did NOT see that one coming.
during winter meetings
There were a few stories mentioning that White Sox were interested in Swish. I remember seeing it on MLB Trade Rumors.
Granted, there were a LOT of rumors that week, and most of them never turned out, but this wasn't completely out of nowhere.
wrong Chicago team
My bad. I just reviewed MLB Trade Rumors -- looks like it was the Cubs who were expressing interest in Swish last month.
But the White Sox had been saying for some time they were looking to add hitters who were more patient and took more walks.
chemistry
the clubhouse is going to be awfully serious in 2008 with Swisher gone and presumably a sub-500 season.
It will be interesting to see how hitting in the White Sox lineup affects Swisher's batting stats.
by bolt on Jan 3, 2008 11:25 AM PST reply actions
on the plus side ...
... no more pulled hammies from participating in his HR dance routines.
I think it is more the park
than the lineup.....The Cell is a fantasic HR park
by OaktownPower on Jan 3, 2008 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
Couldn't they have traded someone else or not
let the farm get depleted? Fuck me. This just absolutely sucks. So hard to root for this team. We have zero offense and we trade our 'star' hitter/face of the franchise/coolest guy on the planet who is signed at low cost through 2012?
Keeping the screen name?
by franks a lot on Jan 3, 2008 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
maybe he smokes
and was born in 1974?
by popcornjames on Jan 3, 2008 12:16 PM PST up reply actions
OMG! The heart and soul is gone
I loved Nick. He was so refreshing, funny, and honest. What a blow to fans. Is there no one sacred on this team? This is so so sad to hear.
Can I get my season ticket money back?
Punch in the stomach
Holy crap. This had better be worth it.
I got Moneyball for Christmas and am in the final stretch. My appreciation for Swisher has just grown and then WHAM-- he gets traded.
I haven't even looked to see who they got in return. Holy crap. I thought Swisher would be the one constant.
Crap! I shoulda known he'd be gone...
after getting my daughter a Swish bobblehead for Christmas.
I'm beginning to think that
having a bobblehead as an Athletic is a curse.
Which doesn't bode well for Ellis.
by popcornjames on Jan 3, 2008 12:17 PM PST up reply actions
Raise prices and trade the coolest/most down to
earth player on the planet? At least we have a shit 3B and shit CF signed to big money. Way to go Billy!
From MLB.com Radio....
Concerning the A's : "Wow, this team does not look good...They're going to have alot of trouble scoring runs." (No shit Sherlock....)
Lots of talk about Swisher batting lead-off for the Sox. Not a bad idea. .381 OBP and Thome, Konerko, et.al in the middle of the lineup.
The problem is that the White Sox
actually like to steal bases.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Jan 3, 2008 11:30 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah
It's hard to believe that a manager like Ozzie who worships at the altar of small-ball would do something unconventional like bat Swisher at the top of the order.
Even with Swisher, the White Sox are likely to suck anyway. They had the worst offense in the AL last year, nearly 50 runs worse than ours, and they're in a division with Detroit and Cleveland. If anyone should be rebuilding by stocking up on prospects, it's them.
probably. He is more than just a player and had
a huge OBP as well.
by SwisherSweet33 on Jan 3, 2008 11:30 AM PST up reply actions
I call bias based on the username.
Can't hit breaking balls, can't hit for average, will probably never be a big home run hitter either. Gets a lot of singles, a good collection of doubles, and walks a lot. Not a typical middle of the lineup guy, but could thrive as a leadoff batter in Chicago's order.
The guy hit ****ing 35 home runs
two seasons ago.
I think that qualifies as "ever".
Good for him.
21 and 22 between that, and he hasn't had a 100 RBI season yet. At this point, 35 is the outlier.
And I said "will probably never be a big home run hitter." 35 isn't all that impressive for a guy you try to build your offense around, anyway.
He's just not really a slugger at this stage of his career.
He's going to a launching pad
I would be genuinely shocked if he hit less than 30 next season.
Fair enough.
If he didn't walk as much as he does he'd just be another .250 hitter with decent pop and a great personality. Nothing special at all.
If Ryan Howard didn't homer as much
he'd just be another .250 hitter with decent pop and a great personality. Nothing special at all.
Swisher has DECENT pop, Howard is a power hitter
and always has been.
by theblackpearl on Jan 3, 2008 12:11 PM PST up reply actions
You guys seem to be missing the point
which is that you can't sever out random stats and then say that "this guy wouldn't be that good if not for x". How good would Joba Chamberlain be with an 88MPH fastball? How good would Johan Santana be with an average changeup?
Who cares?
I think *you're* missing the point
Swisher's HRs went 21-35-22.
"Subtract" those 13-14 HRs from '06, and he's good, but not all that impressive.
No one's saying or even implying subtract all his HRs.
No one's saying or implying anything about HRs
Flashfire was saying subtract out his walk rate. Which IS exceptional and has been since he came up.
Take out 25% of Swisher's walks and he's...
...got a decent walk rate.
Take out 25% of Howard's home runs and he's still a slugger.
Take out 25% of Ichiro's batting average
and he's a below-average hitter.
This is not a mathematical operation that applies across all baseball statistics. You have to consider average (and replacement level) production.
Stretch my point?
You just proposed a completely invalid statistical comparison.
Who's stretching a point?
Yeah, what a bad thing that I should...
...expect Swisher to have a better average and OBP for someone who walks so much.
What are you trying to get at?
Ryan Howard is obviously a better player than Nick Swisher (though not by as much as you think, thanks to park effects).
If you take away a good chunk of either player's primary skill, obviously he isn't going to be nearly as good of a player.
Duh.
What's your point?
And you're the one ...
who tried to take away 25% of Swisher's primary skill ... that's what doesn't make sense and is at the core of the argument.
It's all pretty simple, really.
Nick Swisher is not a great hitter. Ichiro is, with or without walks. Howard is a great home run hitter and there's no debate about that.
The only reason Swisher has a good OBP is because of his walks, because he sure hasn't shown the capability of converting enough of those walks into would-be hits to compensate.
People who walk as much as he does should be disciplined enough at the plate to have a higher batting average.
Of the eleven hitters in the Majors last year with 100+ walks, Swisher's OBP was the WORST of them all. His SLG was second lowest (just above Hafner) and his OPS was the worst as well (just below Hafner).
2006? 13 players with 100+ walks. Swisher was 3 away from that and had he made only Dunn's OBP would've been worse than his, only Giles, Ensberg & Dunn's SLG would've been worse than his, and the same three's OPS would've been worse than his as well.
So please, don't sit here and tell me Swisher's exceptional offensively just because he walks a lot. He's not. Don't try to throw out other examples of players that have nothing to do with him, either.
So let me see if I can sum up your argument ...
Nick Swisher was not as good as Barry Bonds, Todd Helton, Pat Burell, David Ortiz, Ryan Howard, Jack Cust, Carlos Pena, Travis Hafner, Adam Dunn or Grady Sizemore?
I agree. I'll take it further. He wasn't as good as Albert Pujols, Jim Thome, Alex Rodriguez, Lance Berkman, David Wright or Prince Fielder either. (In case it wasn't obvious, I'm just going down the list of the league leaders in walks)
Which brings back the question, what's your point?
Is your point that it's impressive that he can even be mentioned in such impressive company?
Is your point that it's awesome that he has one exceptional offensive skill (drawing walks) to go along with another good offensive skill (hitting for power) and a third average offensive skill (hitting for average ... his average wasn't good, but it also wasn't bad ... in fact, it was pretty much exactly average)?
No, but seriously, what's your point?
Swisher is a good player. He's not a great player.
Duh.
So what's your point?
Basically this.
Swisher's a decent player but not as big a loss as a lot of people are making him out to be.
Somewhere in print in the next few months,
some publication somewhere might say this about Nick Swisher:
"After hitting 35 homers in 2006, many were disappointed with only 22 dingers in 2007. Don’t be: according to Greg Rybarczyk’s Hit Tracker, many of his 2006 homers barely cleared the fence. Nothing happened to his power stroke; those 13 homers that he lost in 2007 were offset by 12 more doubles, and his production was basically identical by Runs Created and OPS+. That projection looks about right."
If you look the distribution of the distance of his homers, the 35 HR season was more flukey than than the 22 HR seasons. Of course, he's moving to a better HR park, so don't be surprised if he clears 30 next year.
And he is a good, impressive young player. The average corner OF/1B last year were good for something like 90 Runs Created per 650 plate appearances, Swisher was about 10 runs better than that. So he was 1 win better than the average corner player on the hitting side of the ledger, and Swisher has good defense on top of that.
Really? Might it?
Perhaps a book about hard ball? Perhaps one that is published annually?
No, but seriously ... whatever publication contains that is offering excellent insight ... I would recommend any readers of this site purchase it ...
That OBP matters
A high OBP is valuable. Combine that with very good defense.
After adjusting for defense, and penalising him for playing a corner, he is about 3 wins above average.
You're not...
I think alot of this is the shock of losing two big-name guys so quickly and for uncertainty in return. Hell, Swisher was the most popular player in terms of interviews and commercials. I'll certaintly miss the entertainment factor of having him around.
what I dont get is
Didn't the A's have him under control for another 3-4 years?
I hate it when our top draft picks get traded.
All the best A's players are never drafted by us, only picked up from other teams.
by popcornjames on Jan 3, 2008 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
Um
What?
Haren? Zito? Mulder? Tejada? Chavez?
Not Haren
Meant Hudson.
Yeah, I hated losing all of those guys.
Giambi, Byrnes too.
Chavez, however, has two bobbleheads so he's gotta be next.
also I should apologize
for making such a blanket statement on the Interwebs, I usually know better than that.
I was a little emotional earlier, I'm sure you understand.
Boy, do I ever
: /
My nominee for 'Comment of the Thread'
Just put "Gonzales"
on the jersey and be done with it. Chances are there will be a fabulous prospect in the system that matches the jersey.
Why watch
It's really interesting. The A's could be a solid team in a couple of years. But even with all these young studs, there will be no veteran leadership to show them how to win when it counts (Chavez has never struck me as a leader). And the A's consistently give the casual fan very little reason to watch or attend games. For better or worse, sports is about stars and identifying with players. The team that the A's trot out in 2008 will be largely anonymous. It's getting really hard for my young boys to have favorite A's players when they are constantly being traded.
Feh. I know it's the way of the game. And it's an old lament about Beane. Maybe in three years I'll eat my words. But today, again, as usual, it sucks.
Go Warriors!
by mbaze on Jan 3, 2008 11:31 AM PST reply actions
my favorite
"There are a handful of players that you gut your future to trade for. Nick Swisher ain't one of 'em."
or this
"What the fuck do they know (athletics nation")?
They probably have very minimal information about Gio and DLS, and are automatically going to reject unknowns for a player like Swisher. Once they find out what they're getting, they'll be shitting their pants with glee.
by SwisherSweet33 on Jan 3, 2008 11:43 AM PST up reply actions
The Silver Lining
is that every Sox fan right now wants to murder Kenny Williams. The three guys we got are #1, #2, and #8 in their system, and they add Swish to a lineup that already has some pop in Thome and Dye. That being said, of course every fan is upset at Beane as well. Swish was the one player that everyone assumed was off limits. We would all be fine with a Crosby/Harden/Chavez/Kotsay/Blanton trade because they have been deemed expendable, and we've all been waiting for that shoe to drop. Swish was seemed to be a lock for the team, and possibly that is why Beane was able to get so much in return for him. In the end, Billy probably knows best, but now I have yet another outdated A's jersey hanging in my closet
by kb toyz on Jan 3, 2008 11:41 AM PST up reply actions
I'll probably get one finally,
since theyll be on all the clearance racks.
by popcornjames on Jan 3, 2008 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
and, re: AN'ers unfamiliar with the prospies ...
Once they find out what they're getting, they'll be shitting their pants with glee.
< shits sal's pants with glee >
Minor league stats
Ryan Sweeney
Fauti De Los Santos
Gio Gonzalez
Snap judgement: I think I like it.
As with the Hudson/Mulder trades in 2005, the second trade here comes somewhat out of the blue, without weeks of rumors preceding it, but looks like a good value trade, especially once it became clear that Beane was punting on the next year or two.
Swisher is a very good player, in his prime years, and signed long-term. The A's will miss him. But he doesn't seem likely to get much better - what we saw in 2006-2007 is what you'll get for the next few years as well - and as already noted the A's were beginning to have a logjam at LF/RF/1B/DH, while they had no clear long-term solution at CF, a problem that the Haren trade didn't address. Sweeney gives us a good prospect in CF, while the other two look like promising candidates for the rotation a year or two down the line.
You don't clear a logjam by
dumping the best option. I never thought I would not want to watch the A's but I seriously thinking about it now. Stupid Beane! I might be signing a different tune in March but right now I hate him.
I *always* clear a logjam by dumping
Amen to That
Looking at many of these comments makes me think you guys don't understand the team you root for.
This is the kind of team Beane runs. I love the fact that he looks ahead and makes trades like this, even if we lose good players like Haren and Swisher. This trade makes the organization better, and thus the team better.
Bull
You're allowed to be upset and sad about losing a favorite player, even while understanding that it is probably good for the team in the long run. Knowing that it will likely pay dividends later on doesn't mean you have to love it right now.
One last time...
Swish was a hell of a lot of fun to root for. I'll miss him a ton. But since we're in a rebuilding mode this trade looks pretty darn good to me!
by GreenNGoldSooner on Jan 3, 2008 11:35 AM PST reply actions
And this one...
I guess I can still use it when he strikes out against the A's haha
What are the odds that of the 9 prospects
we got for Haren and Swisher more than 2 turn out to be as good as or better than Swisher and Haren? If it is 2 or less seems to me to be bunk moves.
However, we've got to take risks being in a 'small' market and all.
I though it was
small 'market'.
I'm Calling Billy
Since the Finleyesque fire sale is on, maybe he would like to try me out in the outfield. I'll work cheep. I can still hit,but I'm a little slower than Jim Spencer.
White Sox fans apparently are hating the deal
Judging from South Side Sox as Sal mentioned.
They're now saying they have the worst minor league system in baseball.
And here is a classic. We've got people on AN disgusted with the dealing of Swisher, but Sox people are hating the deal.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Jan 3, 2008 11:37 AM PST reply actions
They probably do have the worst ...
Poreda is the only guy they have left who is worth much of anything. I bet Saint is shitting a brick that we didn't figure out a way to get him in the deal ...
Cannot understand what Williams is playing at
I hate this trade for Chicago, but it's not because Swisher is going to suck. It's because the team has nothing to surround him with. The Sox are simply not a contending team in that division. He should have gone into the offseason looking to deal Thome, Konerko and Dye and retool for the future. Instead, he's mortgaged their future on those 3's declining bats.
Houston and White Sox are head shakers
Both teams should be rebuilding but have weakened their farm systems without actually improving their teams all that much. Neither team is likely to win 81 games, and they now have two of the worst farm systems in baseball. Ugly days ahead for these franchises.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 12:10 PM PST up reply actions
IMO the situations are different.
Swisher is 27 next season and under control for about $25M / 4, with an option of $10.25M for 2012, all well below market rates. Even if he never improves, they can build around him.
Tejada is 32 next season, signed for $26M /2 and needs to rebound to be good; he is not someone they can build around for the future.
They're different in a more important way ...
trading for Swisher ensures that the Sox don't have any pieces to use to build around Swisher in the future.
They are not small market
They aren't large enough market ...
to simply buy a winner ... Jermaine Dye, Paul Konerko and Jim Thome can attest to that.
Their payroll has been above $100M
the last 2 years. No they aren't the Yankees or the RS, but they aren't the A's either.
As for those 3, I'm not sure what is your point. They retained Konerko, when letting him walk might have been wiser. They retained Dye.
Player ratings...
Those players the Sox gave up were rated B+, B+, and C+ according to the entry. Wonder if those are Sickels' ratings.
OUCH
I just paid for my season tickets yesterday and they trade my son's favorite player.Welcome to being an A's fan son.
Not to sound like a broken record....
But this is why I didn't get a name/number on my A's jersey. Only three option: traded, signs elsewhere as a free agent or ends up in the Mitchell report.
Jersey
My son just turned 12 and he learned about the A's jersey thing when he bought a Durazo with his own money.
well, can he at least trade the durazo jersey
for a holy grail?
by guy incognito on Jan 3, 2008 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
Me too
I was still on the fence about renewing. Not so much anymore.
In shock
This one really caught me off-guard. Guess Barton is next.
by Hawk on Jan 3, 2008 11:37 AM PST reply actions
Swisher on the White Sox
I wonder if Ozzie is going to make him bunt along with all the other guys.
A whole new lineup to memorize.
Baseball Prospectus Rankings
de los Santos, 5 stars, #1 in system
Year In Review: Beginning the year as an obscure Dominican arm in a weak system, de los Santos first blew away the coaching staff in spring training and then was almost literally unhittable in the Sally League, allowing one hit for every two innings pitched.
The Good: Built like a tree trunk, de los Santos gets tremendous drive. His fastball sits at 91-95 mph, touching 98 at times; it also has late movement, and he commands it very well. His breaking pitch is a power curve with hard late bite, and it's a true out pitch when he’s on. He understands the importance of developing an offspeed pitch, and he improved his changeup over the course of the year.
The Bad: De los Santos gets into bad habits at times, and can overthrow all of his pitches, costing him life on his fastball, break on his curve, and decreasing the velocity gap between the heat and his changeup. Some worry that his aggressiveness might work against him when facing more advanced hitters, and that he needs to learn how to set up batters and be more aware of the count, as opposed to challenging hitters with every pitch. If his changeup doesn’t continue to improve, some fear he’ll be limited to a relief role.
Fun Fact: In 18 fifth innings, de los Santos allowed just three hits while striking out 26.
Perfect World Projection: Star-level starter or closer.
Timetable: De los Santos has the highest ceiling of any player in the system, but he’s still at least two years away. He’ll likely begin 2008 at High-A, with an expectation than he could be ready for a look at some point in 2009.
Gonzalez, 4 Stars, #2 in System
Year In Review: After a one-year sojourn in Philadelphia, Gonzalez returned to the team that drafted him but then dealt in the Freddy Garcia trade. He pitched much better in his second Double-A season, leading the minor leagues in strikeouts.
The Good: Gonzalez has average velocity (89-91 mph) on his fastball, but he can reach back and touch 93 at times, and it features natural lefty movement, almost looking more like a cutter on occasion. He uses it effectively to get ahead in the count and set up his curveball, which is among the best in the minors. It’s a hard-breaking power pitch that comes in fast, then falls off the table. His changeup is improving, and his control made significant strides from the previous season.
The Bad: Gonzalez’ smallish frame is a concern for some, but he’s proven to be highly durable so far in his career. Some wonder if he’ll need to pitch backwards more in the majors, and worry that he depends too much on the curve at times. Despite the improvements, his control problems still flare up from time to time.
Fun Fact: Monsignor Pace’s most famous alum is actress Catherine Keener, although political commentator Bill O’Reilly taught history at the school for a brief time in the early 1970s.
Perfect World Projection: An above-average left-handed starter.
Timetable: Gonzalez will begin the year at Triple-A, and should see the big leagues at some point in 2008.
Sweeney, 2 Stars, #8 in System
Year In Review: The former first-round pick spent his second year at Triple-A and went backwards. Many believe it’s time to stop talking about projection with him.
The Good: Sweeney is big, athletic, and not without some offensive skills. He has a quick, short stroke, gap power, and a nice feel for contact. He works the count well and doesn’t strikeout often. He’s an average runner who can play center field in a pinch, and his arm is among the best in the system.
The Bad: Always projected to develop power, Sweeney is now stuck as a tweener–-without true center field skills or the power to play everyday in a corner. He’s always struggled against good lefties, and failed to make adjustments in 2007 to address the problem. He played with little energy down the stretch, and did not get a September callup.
Fun Fact: While at Triple-A Charlotte, Sweeney hit .314 while playing center field, but just .234 when penciled into one of the outfield corners.
Perfect World Projection: At this point, it’s hard to see Sweeney as more than a fourth outfielder and occasional starter, though he still has some believers among scouts.
Timetable: While Sweeney has clearly stagnated, it’s hard to see him avoiding a third year at Triple-A without a monster spring training. This next year is absolutely pivotal for him.
Thanks Devo
I was looking for that on BP.
by kaweahkaweah on Jan 3, 2008 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
he throws 88-91 mph
"pitch backwards?"
What does it mean, that Gonzales has to 'pitch backwards more'? Doesn't seem like that'll get many people out at all...
I think what he means is
use the breaking ball/change to set up the fastball.
K-Rod does this all the time. He almost never throws a fastball in the zone to a right-handed hitter.
These 6 and 3 for 1 trades
are going to be murder on roster management hehe. offhand i like it. 2008 was shot, so why not really reload/rebuild?!
ughh.........
officialllly..
i am over baseball.
HOWWW?!?! WHHYYY??????
swisher was the heart and soul
what is wrong w/ bay area sports?? its like NO ONE wants to succeed...they WNAT TO FAILL...
Wasn't there some bad blood...
between Williams and Beane due to some comments that Beane made about Williams in the past? Seems that business overrides everything!
I think the main bad blood
is with certain rabid White Sox fans. They are very vocal in Internet forums and they like to imagine Williams shares their hate. There was a whole lot of anti-Moneyball and anti-Beane gloating in that year when the Sox went to the World Series.
As for Williams himself, I think he like many GMs had a bit of reluctance to deal with Beane, but nothing so extreme as what those fans say.
On the bright side
Swisher's mullet fits better on Chicago's south side than in Oakland.
SHIT!!
I just heard the news on KNBR (off the Jim Rome show and not off the local updates which goes to show you how the Giants Flagship station doesn't care about the A's).
Didn't we just give the guy a nice contract to stay? Are we really going to get rid of every popular Athletic we've had for the last five years?
I was so ready to cheer on the team despite being in a rebuilding mode, but after this move, I don't know if I will match the amount of games I went to last year.
And why deal him to the White Sox? I hate those guys!
Why the Sox?
They paid through the ass ...
de los Santos is probably now our best prospect and is definitely our best pitching prospect, Gonzalez is now probably our second best pitching prospect as well.
Yep
Although I think our pitching prospect order probably goes de los Santos, Anderson, Gonzalez, Cahill, Rodriguez. That is one hell of a group without even throwing in guys like Bailey, et al.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 11:52 AM PST up reply actions
I wouldn't argue with you ...
Anderson has a little more upside, Gio is closer ... six of one, half a dozen of the other ...
I'm very interested in seeing where the system now ranks, overall ...
I can't imagine any team other than the Rays being number one. Their system is just flat out sick -- but, after that ... I'm not saying that the A's would be #2 ... but I can't imagine they aren't at least in contention for it. It still is a little lacking in absolute, top level talent (of the kind that practically only exists in Tampa's system), but the depth of good to very good prospects is getting pretty silly.
Reds still have to be up there
mostly because Jay Bruce is worth about 15 other prospects.
Yeah, they probably beat us out ...
but not by a huge amount ...
If the A's trade Street, Blanton and maybe one other guy (out of Ellis, Duke, Embree) it's entirely possible that the Top 20 list wouldn't have a single prospect lower than a B- left on it ... how silly would that be?
We might have the best group of starters
But Tampa Bay definitely beats us overall; their system is so damn good it's scary. The A's are definitely Top 5 now.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
Jason Windsor is crying bitter, bitter tears
right now.
He's got hope ...
the A's could trade Blanton and he could find himself starting game 11 on April 11th at Cleveland. There's no reason they shouldn't give him/Meyer first crack at it.
Damn
This will bite us worse than the Eric Byrnes thing (another player who I loved on the A's).
by oaklandSMASH on Jan 3, 2008 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
How did the Eric Byrnes thing bite us
We got Joe Kennedy who was a tremendous help for us in the 2006 playoff campaign while Byrnes was struggling that year. Sure he was good last year but still over-rated
by GusanoQuemador on Jan 3, 2008 12:45 PM PST up reply actions
well he struggled
by GusanoQuemador on Jan 3, 2008 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
and byrnes
would never have had his '07 while with the a's. no way he gets 57 steal attempts.
if..
street goes....nd chavey goes....and ellis goes...
whats the point of the team?
To win games, same as always
Just because you haven't heard of the players acquired does not mean they aren't good. Billy has acquired a crapload of talent in two trades.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 11:50 AM PST up reply actions
To win games ... in 2009 or 2010 ...
None of the guys acquired in this trade are going to start the season in Oakland. Gio and Sweeney could finish the year in the show, though ...
Sweeney is kind of janky
I'm not a fan. Looks like a platoon 4th outfielder at best.
I'm not disagreeing ...
but he's headed for his third year of AAA, so if he's ever going to be anything, he'll probably be it soon ...
Not on Oakland's option list, he doesn't
He'll either be growing with the major league team or with someone else's team after 2008...
Billy Beane new motto:
Florida Marlina West or die!
Oh Man...
I held off renewing my season tix and with the Swish trade there seems to be no need. The A's will not be in the playoffs in 08..nor will it be hard to get a great seat to the games.
Adding insult to injury, the A's raised seat prices....only so that fans like me can watch a team that will be deep in the cellar.
Also, as a partial season ticket holder I stand no chance of getting decent seats at the new park (if it is ever built).
So why as a long-time A's supporter should I renew my season tix?
Right now I am depressed...the only thing that can help is if the A's also get rid of Crosby and Kotsay (this would be one example of addition by subtraction).
Geez.....
predicting the next bombshell ...
A's to tarp off second deck and bleachers?
by rubin sierra on Jan 3, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions
if they tarp off the trough urinals, I'm done
my prediction:
"The Oakland Raiders announced they will be leaving Oakland for LA/Las Vegas/Dubai. With the Athletics' pending move to Fremont, Oakland Coliseum owners are planning to build a small housing/retail complex where the current stadium stands now. Unlike the Raiders and A's new homes, there will be no professional sports franchise included in this new mall deal. However, former Athletic Dan Johnson will be conducting tours in the many available condo spaces still for sale, which are very competitively priced for units of this size in the Bay Area."
by popcornjames on Jan 3, 2008 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
I keep trying to decide how I feel about this
And doing my best to put bias aside, I just don't like it that much.
Sure, they got the 1, 2, and 8 prospects. But they got them from the 28th ranked (according to BA) farm system, a system that is notorious for having no clue how to draft or evaluate players. Are de los Santos and Gonzalez the tallest midgets or are they legitimate prospects? I tend to think it's the former.
Sweeney is a right-handed Chris Denorfia, or something. I dunno. I like him, but I don't like him for THIS team because they're loaded in the outfield anyway.
It's possible I'm overrating Swisher. I might also be underrating the prospects. This trade looks a lot more like the Hudson deal. The Haren trade was Mulderx2.
I also am shocked the A's couldn't get more for Swisher. They might have pillaged the Sox farm system, but that system was garbage anyway. Just...ugh.
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 11:52 AM PST reply actions
Look at the stars that Goldstein gave them
This isn't a case of tallest midgets with those 2.
De Los Santos has a sky high ceiling, best case scenario, a high K, nasty stuff, type ace.
Gio Gonzalez' ceiling is lower, but he is also very close to the majors. A reasonable, non-optimistic, projection is as a league average starter.
That is a GREAT haul.
Chris Denorfia is right-handed
Sweeney is like a left-handed Denorfia... except apparently a worse fielder. And also a worse hitter.
He's a lot younger, so he could break out. He's running out of time (and options), though.
I meant sweeney is a left-handed denorfia
But I'm still a little shaken by this trade. I am no longer responsible for what I say in this thread.
Sweeney is actually a couple years younger than I thought.
I don't think this is an awful trade. I just am not excited about it.
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 12:18 PM PST up reply actions
see
i confused sweeney with brian anderson, and i was heated at first. i knew gonzalez but not DLS.
now, after reading up, i love the deal. the rotation is going to be unbelievable by fremont.
Sign for fan fest
Merry Christmas: Haren
and a Happy New Year!: Swisher
Thanks Billy for the presents!
by Mr C on Jan 3, 2008 11:54 AM PST reply actions
Ratfarts!
Swisher is going to the hated White Sox!!!!!!!'
Well, at least I can see him whenever I want since I do live in White Sox country.
I think Nick will become a quick fan favorite here in Chicago. I really liked watching him play the game for our A's. I wish it had been someone else that got dealt.
I'm excited.
This trade is pretty awesome.
i think i like it
i was a fan of swish for sure. just an easy guy to root for. this seems like a sell high type deal because who knows if he is going to be a 22 hr guy or a 35 hr guy?
if i was billy i would trade street asap. gotta be some moneybags team that would over pay for him. make harden the closer, let him rake up 20 saves by the deadline then deal him as well. seems we have plenty of pitching a left handed hitting prospects now, so billy should target some right handed thumpers. i'd also hang onto big joe for now. 220 innings of 4.0 era ball is much more valuable than it sounds these days.
I like your Street-Harden gambit
I love Swisher
and believe that he's underrated, even by A's fans, including some in this thread
OTOH, those 2 pitchers are damn fine prospects.
trading swisher
why trade the heart of the a's clubhouse? couldn't billy trade kotsay and get rid of his salary? when i heard about this trade, part of me died inside.
by greenandgoldpolarbear on Jan 3, 2008 11:57 AM PST reply actions
okay, maybe not kotsay
the a's still should have found a way to keep swisher. wasn't he supposed to be the future of the team? the good news is that we did get some really good prospects so lets hope it turns out like the mulder trade and not the hudson trade.
by greenandgoldpolarbear on Jan 3, 2008 12:02 PM PST up reply actions
Sweeney was only a top 10 ...
because the Sox' system sucks. We've basically claimed the last of it.
Kenny Williams seems to think he can scrape another year of contention out of them ... but that team is going to be very, very bad for a long time in the very near future.
Yeah I know
Sweeney doesn't look great. Still, he was #1 in the organization at the start of 2007, so that counts for something, I guess. But my point was that Kotsay has no value, and you couldn't even get Sweeney for him.
Just a little hyperbole on my part.
Just imagine who
makes their top 10 now.
I'm actually considering asking for a tryout ...
I like this trade
a LOT; I LOVE the pitchers we got, both DLS and Gio, but Sweeney is not a good prospect. At this point, he looks like a Dan Johnson type, maybe.
I love this trade in a vacuum
While subjectively I'm sad to lose an awesome dude (and very good player) in Swish, objectively I think Beane just pulled a Mulder-lite level steal.
It's the Haren deal that bugs me - losing a cheap ace with 3 years left on his contract and not having a potential ace in sight for the next couple years. The Haren deal might turn out to be a good trade, but imagine if we could have dealt Blanton instead of Haren and restocked our farm system with what Swish just brought us plus what Blanton could have (had the right trade worked out - A. LaRoche and Hu, or Carlos Gonzales and only 1-2 others)...We'd be sitting pretty.
I'm going to miss Haren more - especially because I think the Swisher deal was "too good to pass up" no matter what.
Uh oh
I disagreed with almost everything Nico wrote about the A's last season, but we seem to be on the same page about this off-season's moves: I made a similar comparison to the Mulder trade above, and I think his other point, that keeping Haren instead of Blanton would be worth the trade-off of a slightly-less-loaded farm system is also a good one.
Should I be worried?
The problem is
that you can't just decide to make a trade or not in a vacuum. If Beane wanted Carlos Gonzalez, he had to trade Haren. AZ wasn't interested in Blanton.
That would certainly be a problem
if Beane's entire goal this offseason had been to acquire Carlos Gonzalez. Maybe it was, I don't know.
And of course I don't know what the hypothetical offers for Blanton were either. But on a broad level, I simply don't like trading someone as good as Haren for any number of B+ prospects, even when you're rebuilding. Trading slightly lesser (though still very good) players like Blanton and Swisher makes more sense, as there is a larger pool of comparable talent capable of replacing them a couple of years down the line, including, presumably, some of the prospects you get back.
you need to read sickels'
explanation on rankings. B+ is an awesome grade. almost no one gets an A, and there are few A-'s. A B+ just means he still has something left to work on in the minors.
I will miss Haren more too.
When they traded Haren I was furious. Because without him I knew we would not have a chance at winning the division. Trading Swish for two guys who could be potential aces of the future seems like a smart move if we aren't able to contend. But I will certainly miss the Swish charisma!
Where's Zonis?
I need to see a lineup ...
From South Side Sox:
On many AN folks negative reaction thus far:
"What the fuck do they know?
They probably have very minimal information about Gio and DLS, and are automatically going to reject unknowns for a player like Swisher. Once they find out what they're getting, they'll be shitting their pants with glee."
Can't I shit my pants and be negative?
Swish was damn near everyone's favorite player on the team ... he's a great guy to root for.
I can mourn his loss while celebrating what BB did to KW's posterior with a chain saw, can't I?
Goes to show you how smart
a White Sox fan is.
Honestly, this is probably could still end up as a win-win for both our sides, but I still think they are getting the sweeter end of the churro.
by oaklandSMASH on Jan 3, 2008 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
I love this trade, period.
I didn't see the point of giving up Haren, but Swisher is a perfect trade candidate, in my opinion. I don't think he'll ever make the leap from good to great as an offensive player, and we got legitimate scary pitching talent in return.
A+
If San Diego bit on Prior then...
Certainly someone out there will go big for Harden.
My guess is he is next.
by Hawk on Jan 3, 2008 12:03 PM PST reply actions
letsgooakland has a good Harden-enrichment plan
http://www.athleticsnation.com/comme...
we could do it in secret underground
We just better hope Iran doesn't trade Ahmadinejad for blowhard prospects.
Prior didn't cost anything.
Just a cheap contract for one year. Harden costs a lot more, both in salary and the talent a team has to give up.
True. Just talking interest in damaged goods but.
I definitely see your point. I would love to just keep Harden and have him stay healthy. BUT every time he goes out there and I see him shake his arm I know we are in trouble.
by Hawk on Jan 3, 2008 12:13 PM PST up reply actions
My first impression BUT
Look at who we got. We stole their future and are stock piling ours.
by Hawk on Jan 3, 2008 12:05 PM PST up reply actions
This isn't so bad.
This is actually kind of fun. Not as much fun as watching the 01/02 A's stack a lineup 1-9 with guys who could hit it out of the ballpark, while running out the best pitching staff on the team.
But there is something fun about watching a team completely restock its farm system (for a hardcore fan, anyways). At the end of the 2007 season, virtually all of the talent in the Oakland organization was in the MLB team. By opening day 2008, it'll be widely dispersed across the entire organization.
And for those of you who have no interest in watching the A's until 2009: Go ahead, take a year off. They'll be there when you decide to come back.
it is bad
it sucks actually.
what has billy beane won?
i'm an A's fan; I want results!
If you don't draft well... this Moneyball thing doesn't work. So, to make up for recent drafting, we sell our ML talent. Beane is entrenched. So we'll see how this works out. But, i'm not very hopeful.
by GrewUpAtTheColiseum on Jan 3, 2008 12:14 PM PST up reply actions
Nothing lasts forever.
Oh, and...
"what has billy beane won?"
Please don't get that train rolling. It's a ridiculously tired argument.
no it isn't
beane this, beane that...
what has he won?
there are all these beane guys getting jobs around MLB and they ain't won sh*t either!
Bill Walsh, now there's a guy who has won, and then sent pupils out to also win titles!
Moneyball is under the microscope.
by GrewUpAtTheColiseum on Jan 3, 2008 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
Bill Walsh
Now there's a guy who coached a completely different sport.
And how long have Billy's "pupils" been out?
Riccardi in 2001 was the first, right? Like, 5 years? And who else is out there? DePodesta, for 2 years before Plaschke ran him out of town. No other team has a GM from the A's organization, right?
And for the (hopefully) last time, Billy was all set to go to the Red Sox. But he didn't, so they got a guy they figured would run the team just like Billy Beane would. And they've won sh*t. Twice.
But this is a completely different discussion.
billy would have
slide
billy would have touched home.
billy would have not given up a three run yakker to booyah aj.
really can't blame him for the a's spectacular and inventive choke moves in the playoffs 01-04.
The heck?
"If you don't draft well... this Moneyball thing doesn't work. So, to make up for recent drafting, we sell our ML talent."
Yeah, the recent drafts have been terrible. Swisher and Blanton and Buck and Suzuki. Crap. Junk. Garbage.
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
They have been terrible
We had one of the worst farm systems in MLB going into this offseason, hence the need to replenish it by dealing away our best players.
Not really ...
2007 is looking great.
2006 is very solid (remember we didn't have a first round or any supplemental picks) with Cahill, Mitchell, Bailey and hopefully Matt Sulentic bouncing back.
2005 brought Buck ... and still has some promising young arms, if they can just get healthy.
2004 has two current starters -- Street and Suzuki as well as some other useful AAA talent (Windsor, Braden, Melillo, Putnam, Powell).
2003 was largely a bust.
Except for 2003 we haven't had any bad drafts of recent vintage -- they just hadn't been great enough to keep the farm system consistently restocked. They weren't bad, by any stretch -- just not as good as we have come to expect.
Wow, kind of a shock to the system
I had accepted the rebuilding but I guess I convinced myself that Swisher wouldn't be a part of the fire sale.
This is a real head vs. heart sort of thing. Objectively this deal makes too much sense to not pull the trigger on but it still hurts to wave goodby to Swish.
For the second time in a week
I find myself shocked, but not surprised. I'm glad we got a good return on this deal, and that Billy's willing to take a good deal for anyone.
What was the first time?
1) yowzas 2) haha, shit 3) next target?
From initial surprise to some "man, goddamn" type laughter, I now am thinking....
Who will we acquire next? We know who would be traded (Blanton, Street, Embree, anybody), but I would like to know what some potential targets would be. Now I wish I was more of a minor league fan. I'd assume a CF (still no true CF of the future in our system?), SS, and as always pitching... any names come to mind?
by Eric in Atlanta on Jan 3, 2008 12:13 PM PST reply actions
Brignac ... but he's untouchable ...
and he's a D-Ray, so they aren't trying to compete in 2008, anyway.
Hu (Dodgers), Lillibridge (Braves), or Lowrie (Red Sox) are probably the best fits from our perspective (not saying any of them are going to be dealt).
They're absolutely trying to compete in 2008
They have one year, maybe two, before Scott Kazmir's arbitration price goes bonanzas and they have to trade him.
Brignac is, however, not really a SS. The other guys you mentioned are better targets.
Goldstein disagrees on Brignac.
But if Tampa is really trying to compete and they think Blanton or Street could help them out, I'd be very happy to see BB take Brignac off their hands ... (and very sad to see Blanton and, especially, Street go)
The most positive thing to come out of his 2007 season was his defense, which made great strides in terms of both instincts and fundamentals, changing the minds of many scouts who earlier predicted an eventual move to third base.
that's why you know he's not done
still hasn't gotten a middle infielder
certainly
there are plenty of AA teams that could use a backup SS.
by guy incognito on Jan 3, 2008 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
These post-trade threads follow a pattern.
1--the chickens little
followed by:
2--the pissed-off player partisans
followed by:
3--the in-Billy-we-trusters
followed by:
4--the stat-heads.
Please label your posts accordingly. I like to promote personal efficiency by ignoring groups 1-3 -- esp. in January when I generally resolve to waste less time.
Groups 3 and 4 are often indistinguishable.
So, multiple labels will need to be applied where appropriate.
Efficient Stages of Grief
Oh my god the sky is falling! Swisher was my favorite player. This team is doomed. But, if Billy did the deal, it must be a good one. Gonzalez's adjusted mWARP was pretty solid in AA last year, so he's a stud.
I'm a multiple-grouper here
I'm a Swisher mark so this bugs me (2). I have no reason to doubt Beane, despite my disappointment (3). I recognize the numbers the prospects have put up, but I have trouble reconciling those with Swisher's major league production - and the money isn't much of a factor because Swisher is well under market value right now (4).
But I'm pretty sure the sky still knows its damn role (not 1).
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 12:36 PM PST up reply actions
I'm with you ...
the sky has stayed in place through worse ...
"I knew that was coming," he said, arrogantly.
Touche!
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
QOTM
- Gamingboy Posted: January 03, 2008 at 02:59 PM (#2659417)
Wow. At this rate, the A's will be so young, they'll be asking if the elephant will give them rides if he's given peanuts.
So long...
by LawDaddy on Jan 3, 2008 12:19 PM PST reply actions
Wolff makes it hard to root for a City...
and Beane makes it hard to root for players.
So root for the laundry!
...except for the black jerseys...they'll never be "true" Oakland Athletics laundry, no matter how many homers the A's hit wearing them!
by GreenNGoldSooner on Jan 3, 2008 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
Florida Marlins west
If the A's don't trade anyone with value and a contract then Billy should be shot. I think Billy has thrown in the towel on 2008 and we should hold a fire sale ala the Marlins. The A's payroll should be below $20 million if Billy plays his cards right (although if he has to keep Chavez then hitting this number will be tough).
Btw, with a payroll this low the A's make money even if noone shows up.
Well, that's nothing new.
The A's have been among the most profitable teams in baseball for a while now.
umm...
40 Rich Harden $2,250,000
3 Eric Chavez $9,500,000
7 Bobby Crosby $2,550,000
41 Alan Embree $2,356,496
21 Mark Kotsay $8,000,000
Find seekers for that group, then maybe you can touch <$20 million, otherwise forgetaboutit...</p>
by ST on Jan 3, 2008 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
keep in mind ...
25 players at the minimum is a little over $10m. BB would have to basically every player who has even hit arbitration except for Mark Kotsay to hit that number.
Ugh. I'm sick. :(
Good luck Swish. We'll miss you, and any one with talent who's been here 3+ years.
Sniff
Sniff.
Good trade
This trade definitely made sense for the team. Swisher's a likable guy and a good player, but we definitely picked up some promising talent that should pay off mightily a few years down the road when we can actually compete again. This year, though.... sweet sassy molassey, it's going to be unwatchable.
Next trade: Street.
Agree with letsgooakland on that one. Street's elbow is one slider away from Tommy John surgery, and if another team is yet to figure that out, let's by all means steal a prospect from them.
corollary: or that sez "BEANE"
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
I want a "Gonzalez Gonzalez" jersey
Can I just get a jersey with a number
and a dry erase board as a nameplate?
by oaklandSMASH on Jan 3, 2008 12:39 PM PST up reply actions
I'm tempted....
...to buy a jersey and have "TRADE BAIT" put on the back.
I just renewed my season tix in Sac
should be a couple of interesting years ahead...
by LawDaddy on Jan 3, 2008 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
Seriously ...
it's a good time to be a Sacramento A's fan, with Stockton an easy hop down the 99.
I wonder if Billy has decided the Minors are ...
... overvalued as a place to acquire experience.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
So long Swish. I hardly knew ya.
This one hurts more than any trade I can remember in recent memory. Huddy was pretty painful but his mystery oblique injuries made things a little easier. Swish is such a great personality but I will say he never seemed the same after Milton was traded. Who knows how devastated he feels right now?
Didn't see this one coming at all. I'm going to assume that Street is next unless someone decides Blanton is worth a haul of prospects before that happens. I guess Blez should come up with a nickname changing system so that I can change mine to "ohtobe21like
'whoeverthefuckIlikeonthea'sthathappenstobe21atthetime.'"
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jan 3, 2008 12:29 PM PST reply actions
Props, good man (or woman).
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jan 3, 2008 1:16 PM PST up reply actions
Swish was a great guy to watch.
But he ws no great talent on the field. With Danny Haren gone it makes sense to trade Swish. Good luck to Swish... he was a ray of light. The team just got a lot more boring to watch.
errr, I mean...
fast work, Sickels. :) he notes in it where they are in our system. new guys are 2, 3, and 12 in our system now. nice haul.
by Eric in Atlanta on Jan 3, 2008 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
Sweeny
went from #5 ranked Sox to #12 ranked A. How sucky a system did they have! He must have been the throw in player.
Top 20+
Carlos Gonzalez, OF, Grade B+
Gio Gonzalez, LHP, Grade B+
Fautino De Los Santos, RHP, Grade B+ (
Daric Barton, 1B, Grade B+
Brett Anderson, LHP, Grade B+
Chris Carter, 1B, Grade B+ (an aggressive grade but I LOVE this guy)
James Simmons, RHP, Grade B
Henry Alberto Rodriguez, RHP, Grade B (big-time sleeper, great arm)
Trevor Cahill, RHP, Grade B-
Aaron Cunningham, OF, Grade B-
Corey Brown, OF, Grade B-
Ryan Sweeney, OF, Grade C+ (I don't think his power is going to develop)
Andrew Bailey, RHP, Grade B- (another sleeper with an aggressive grade)
Sean Doolittle, 1B, Grade B-
Javier Herrera, OF, Grade C+ (great tools, but refinement??)
Dan Meyer, LHP, Grade C+
Greg Smith, LHP, Grade C+
Sam Demel, RHP, Grade C+
Andrew Carignan, RHP, Grade C+
Grant Desme, OF, Grade C+
Travis Banwart, RHP, Grade C+
Josh Horton, SS, Grade C+
Jermaine Mitchell, OF, Grade C
this sucks balls
i just saved up enough money to get a swisher jersey too! the scutaro trade stung a whole lot... haren was like the worst has come... and swisher hit too close to the heart... 2008 sucks already...
by TrizzleNizzle510 on Jan 3, 2008 12:33 PM PST reply actions
Me too, I'm very sad!
He made the game more fun.
aye yi yi...
this is shocking, but i'm pretty sure Beane knows what the heck he's doing. based on the prospects we've received in the haren and now swisher trade, i have a reason to be excited.
SWISHER STILL ROCKS!
by swisherroks33 on Jan 3, 2008 12:34 PM PST reply actions
Nice observation from BBTF:
"The White Sox fans are angry...the A's fans are angry...good trade all around! "
This is my wife on opening day
When the lineup is annouced
"who is that honey?"
"where did he come from"
"why are we watching this?"
sounds like my gf
hey, who's that?
"thats jack cust baby"
um, who's that?
"that's hannahan"
where'd he come from?
"billy found he drunk on the lawn"
then she goes on some rant about what are they doing, don't they care etc.
all i can answer is they're trying to win anyway they can.
Remind me of this:
Whose motorcycle is this?
It's a chopper baby.
Whose chopper is this?
It's Zed's.
Who's Zed?
Zed's dead baby, Zed's dead.
Acid Test
The thing about Billy trading Swisher is that you know Billy wouldn't do it lightly. Personal favourite, great contract, great face for the club; Beane wouldn't have moved him unless he was sure the offer was worthwhile. On first impression, I agree. And though I know everyone's gutted about how bad we're probably going to be in 2008, I'm happy to see Billy showing his commitment to the new order. If we should have learned anything last year it's that you can't go at this league with dribs and drabs. It's time to stock up and be patient.
Good post.
Beane liked Swish too. He must think this is a very good trade. I wonder if Swish is a little happy to be traded?
Definitely
Honestly I think you could tell Swish he got syphilis and he'd bounce around like an excited puppy. But from the hitter's perspective - particularly one coming from a team that's not going to win anyway - I can't imagine he'll be anything but excited to play in that ballpark. It should suit him down to the ground and I look forward to seeing him play there.
either that
or Beane is competing in a Bay Area sports version of a Pig Party. The General Manager of the Bay Area sports team that fields the worst team wins!
All of which is silly, since the 49ers will win that race easily.
Beane just wanted to get coverage of the Iowa
caucus off the air. Must be a Kucinich guy. Or he doesn't like the Virginia Tech-Kansas matchup tonight.
No, he wanted to preempt Blez' tattoo thread
Rock chalk Jayhawk! Go KU.
I hope that my team wins because this day officially sucks.
Not only would Beane sell his mother. He would send her C.O.D. Good trade, Lawrence the Raider.
Sincerely,
Gordon Gecko
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jan 3, 2008 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
you went to Kolkata University too?
Seriously though, Kansas fans need to come up with some other words that rhyme with Jayhawk. Bach Clock Jayhawk!
Tonights highlight: two teams with made up birds as mascots.
My last summer of going to games
...before heading off to college, and we're looking at a 65 win season. I miss Swisher and Haren.
My last summer of watching games
before I moved away was fraught with Arthur F---ing Rhodes. So count your blessings!
I wonder what attendance will be for the A's?
Pretty lousy
by 3Chavy3 on Jan 3, 2008 12:42 PM PST reply actions
Yeah but like Skwid said above...
If the payroll is low enough ...you don't need high attendance to make mula.
It really makes me feel good that they profit
While us A's fans granted there are not very many of us will suffer
by 3Chavy3 on Jan 3, 2008 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
I'm sorry,
where do you think that money is going? Not in billys pocket, I assure you. Nor wolffs.
by BWH on Jan 3, 2008 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
Ooh, ooh, let me guess ...
Fischer?
I mean, it certainly isn't going into my pocket ...
Back into the team...
Farm system, scouting, draft pick signing bonuses, future team payroll, etc.
Owners don't get rich off team revenue. They get rich, then buy the team.
What doesn't happen is a bunch of front office execs get raises because Swish and his $5 million salary are off the books.
Low payroll team does not equal greedy owners.
by BWH on Jan 3, 2008 3:47 PM PST up reply actions
The A's have been turning a profit
After all of these factors are taken into account. Just because the owners are already rich does not mean that they're treating the A's as some sort of philanthropic venture. They want it to be a money making enterprise. I don't know how to access the A's financial reports, but I strongly doubt that I'd see the same $5 million that was just saved being put into the scouting budget.
Well, yeah
It's no surprise they've been turning a profit. MLB made over $6 billion last year. Plus, the A's are trying to finance a new stadium, they should be turning a big profit for a number of years before they do that.
But I don't think that there's ever been a case in which Lew Wolff decided he needed new flooring in his kitchen, or something, and cut payroll because of it.
Owning a baseball team isn't philanthropic, I agree. Philanthropy involves giving up money. Most baseball owners just operate the team as a sort of hobby. They don't make or spend any money on it. The money Wolff makes off the A's will come when he sells it, after he builds the new ballpark.
In other words, I don't feel as if the on-field talent has ever been compromised or cut short because of front office greed.
I mean, we're all upset to see Nick go on some level, even if we're excited about what we got back (like I am). But don't turn that frustration into a knee-jerk, ad hominem attack on Billy Beane/Lew Wolff.
by BWH on Jan 3, 2008 4:33 PM PST up reply actions
Oh I agree
Certainly, these trades are not being made with the purpose of making money for the owners. It's not about greed on the part of Wolff or Fischer. But by the same token, I don't think that a statement can be unequivocally made that the money that has been saved is not going to be turned into profit. But now I feel like I'm just being unnecessarily contentious, so I'll just leave it by agreeing that the reason for this trade was not the owners' desire for more money.
Not until
Jeremy Brown is traded.
by LawDaddy on Jan 3, 2008 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
And Joe Blanton
Validates my tossing the season ticket bill!!!
I tossed it when Haren left......I wasn't up to spending that kind of money to see Rivercats.
So now the best pitcher is joined by the best position player--and the face of the team.
There is rebuilding and there is gutting.....I can hardly wait for my next threat that I can't get tickets at the Fremont Field. Without face names they won't need 32,000 seats.
Billy is Not a Genius
I am tired of everyone thinking Billy is so smart. When was the last trade Billy made that was good? Billy got rid of Byrnes for no reason at all and he had a great year last year. Billy signs people like Arthur Rhodes and Eric Karros. This isn't' rebuilding this is total destruction. The A's are clearly the worst team in MLB right now. I have been alive for 29 years and this is the worst team the A's will ever put out on the field. They used to trade away guys whose contracts were up, now they are just dealing people for nothing. What if all these guys are as big of busts as the prospects in the Hudson trade? Stop drinking the Koolaide people, this is a sham, the A's are going to lose 100 plus games for the forseeable future then move to Fremont. What a slap in the face to all the Oakland A's fans. Who would have guessed that the Warriors would be the best team playing in Oakland! At least we still have Crosby and Chavy in the lineup, but it could be worse we could be an NL team and then have to hit the pitcher also so we would have three sub .200 hitters batting down there. At least Kendall is gone. Go A's!
by Hubbard88 on Jan 3, 2008 12:47 PM PST reply actions
Sorry that I don't agree and I'm not a Kool-Aid
drinker. You haven't even seen this team on the field yet. Not sure I can give much creedence to your post, although baseball is all about good and bad trades. Trades are never an absolute one way or another but I'll guarantee he knows much more than any of us on AN.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jan 3, 2008 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
My favorite part
"At least we still have Crosby and Chavy in the lineup..."
Oh yes, thank the Lord. We weren't going to be good this year anyways, with Haren and Swisher, just like we weren't good last year.
Nice first post ever, Hubbard88 -
Welcome to Trollkland!
I think we should hesitate to call people trolls
Who are at least trying to make valid points, though perhaps not succeeding
Agreed
If he really is new here then he probably doesn't have all the background information we do. He hasn't heard all the arguments that we think have been made a thousand times.
Let him have his opinion. Rebut it with knowledge, not with ad hominem.
Troll!!!!
You've just been lying in wait with your sub-600 UID, dozen or so diaries and countless comments to spring forth with this sort of vitriolic comment years later ...
Troll!!!!!! With your jokes
about other people being trolls, and your trollish UID (or is it IUD?), posting for years with baseball-related analysis only to spring up on a thread that already has 500 comments on it... TROLL!!!
thanks for acknowledging
the sub-600. For years I've been wishing I'd picked a different username, but I just can't bear to give up my spot in line.
Blez can change it ...
though then no one would know who you are ...
That's what the signature line is for
yep
and Fremont has many (large) hurdles. I read somewhere on this site that the franchise is already worth a lot more than the current ownership paid for it. They are gonna go all out for Fremont, and if doesn't work out; we could be looking at another 5-10 years of this same pattern.
And the giants buying in to FSN will make all these terrible (2008) games hard to view.
by GrewUpAtTheColiseum on Jan 3, 2008 1:08 PM PST up reply actions
Fremont
I just wonder if the A's have really judged the SF Bay Area market well. They have openly said they don't care if they lose fans from through the tunnel because they will gain fans from SJ/southbay. But those fans have been SF fans and if the A's lose 100+ games until this mystical move to Fremont why the hell would those fans jump ship from SF to the "Silicon Valley/whatever our name is because we can't be called San Jose A's". I mean say those losers across the bay get good during this stretch, it isn't 1994 anymore, a new ballpark isn't what is used to be when it comes to getting fans to the park in the long term.
I am not a hater by any means, I love the A's with a passion, I am just tired of people thinking Billy Beane is a god. Billy Beane knows what it takes to get the playoffs, and for that I am thankful. I just think that the entire organization feels like if it gets to the playoffs we have "won" because we are the lowly, little, small market A's. All I know is that guys that are former A's, and not even the superstars, go to these other teams and win. Dye, Foulke, Byrnes, hell Terry Franconia was our bench coach before he went to the Red Sux. Something is off in A's land and I am not just talking the Giambi no slide jinx. What other team could go from the ALCS to 4th place without getting hell from the media? Billy Beane is a lucky SOB to be the GM in Oakland and not Chicago, Boston, NY or Philly
This rebuilding thing is more like a Marlins fire sale since we have traded away guys that are CHEAP and have years left on their contracts, and I can't get excited about the "future" when we use the guys who should be the veterans of the A's them of the future are the pieces used to get prospects. If it works go A's, until there is a parade down Broadway, or I guess Fremont Auto Row at this pace, I am not happy and none of you should be either. . Go A's......hopefully we can say go A's to the Oakland A's at some point soon!
by Hubbard88 on Jan 3, 2008 1:25 PM PST up reply actions
yeah, Slusser and Ratto should have pounded Beane
... for finishing fourth this year.
It was third place ...
the Rangers held on to their coveted spot ...
Fremont is no further of a drive for most of the folks in the outer East Bay. It's easier to scoot down the 680 than to brave the tunnel and 880 at rush hour.
I don't think there is any real chance of the Giants being contenders in the next 2-3 years.
I know it's frustrating, but what did you want them to do? The team looked like it was not going to be healthy enough to contend. With the state of the farm system, the team was likely going to get worse over the next couple of years, so it wouldn't likely contend while Swish or Haren were still under contract.
I want a championship, too ... but this is the most likely way that it is going to happen.
Really?
Billy Beane is a lucky SOB to be the GM in Oakland and not Chicago, Boston, NY or Philly
I would imagine that he could do a little better with a bit more payroll. Of course... Yankee fans aren't too excited about what money is bringing them these days.
by ohtobe21likehuston on Jan 3, 2008 1:33 PM PST up reply actions
BB
I meant that he doesn't have to have any media pressure on him at all. Don't forget that he committed to being the GM of the Red Sux but then backed out. I think Billy Beane has an ego and likes the fact that no matter what he does in the O he can always play the small market card.
I am glad we have him but at some point I think this ego is getting in the way of winning. How many teams have to win the WS that steal and play small ball before a change in philosophy is in order? At what point does a change in the clubhouse culture happen so the team doesn't choke. I guess those questions are done at this point but no one will ever say the A's were mentally tough all those years we choked in the playoffs. A few more gamers would have worked. I am just babbling now and throwing stuff out there I have been complaining about for years and that was relevant at this time last year after we lost in the ALCS. I think I am going to have to go the KC board to find out what loser teams fans talk about in the offseason.
by Hubbard88 on Jan 3, 2008 1:43 PM PST up reply actions
I feel your pain Hubbard88 but
With all that you hate about the team why are still a fan? I'm not hating, I'm just wondering.
Smallball WS winners?
The Red Sox have won two of the past four series...they're pretty much the opposite of a small ball team.
That's kinda funny
I forgot that Billy Beane almost traded himself for Kevin Youkilis. LOL that would have been kinda cool in retrospect because then Paul Depodesta would have been the GM. Who knows how things would have turned out. And what is Depo doing these days anyway? That man sure knows how to draft, just look at the Dodgers now, Depodesta built that team, and then was chased out of town before he could see the fruits of his labor come to harvest.
I like Depo
But he had virtually nothing to do with the Dodgers draft. Logan White is the Dodgers scouting director and the players picked both before, during, and prior to Depo were very much his choices.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 3, 2008 6:27 PM PST up reply actions
worst A's team ever?
You obviously don't remember the 95' - 97' teams. Mike Oquist, Brad Rigby, Ariel Prieto, Jason Mcdonald, Dave Taleghater, Tony Batista (when he was a starting SS for crying out loud). They were so lousy I probably forgot how to spell their names correctly.
Or the team that holds the franchise record ...
for losses ... despite playing a 154 game schedule.
By winning percentage ...
that was the best season of his career ...
and, you'll note, a 3.47 era wasn't very good in 1916.
lahdjkadhgdkajfg!
Sorry. Snorting Diet Coke out of my nose as I type. Hilarious post.
Oh, you meant all that? Wow.
Let's put it this way - If the trade was Swisher for two Daric Barton's and a Dallas Braden, wouldn't you say "hmm, that could be a nice deal"?
Because that's what we got. I'll take it.
Seriously?
At least we still have Crosby and Chavy in the lineup
The team would be about 1000% better without. Is it just 'cause you know their names?
I think that was sarcasm...
Considering he went on to predict that they would be sub-.200 hitters next year
Im not sure
If your post is a joke or not, but I disagree with everything that you said. Im too tired to break it all down to you, but the bottom line is that I think your dire summery of the state of things is narrow, and completely off base.
A few thoughts and questions
- Farewell, Swish, I really enjoyed watching you play. You will be missed, and I'll be rooting for you in Chicago (but I'll still mute the sound when you "put it on the boaaaaaard!")
- Wow, monkeyball may have been agitating for it and some others thought it might happen, but I sure didn't see this coming. Swish had rather a sweetheart contract for I think the next 4 years (Cot's is blocked on my company browser, so I'm not certain) and certainly could have been an affordable part of the next really good A's team. Still, we are getting a bit crowded in the outfield corners, and this is quite a haul. De los Santos could be Rich Harden with better health, and Gonzalez could be very good as well.
- Who the hell bats against lefties on this team? Even our hypothetical future team needs someone batting from that side, and Chris Carter is still years away (and will require clearing someone like Cust or Barton off the roster in order to make room). Swisher was it for us in terms of right-handed power. ("Power switch-hitter" counts as righty power to me, given that he hits righty in all the situations in which batting righty is actually an advantage.)
- I was optimistic that we'd win about half our games next year, even without Haren and maybe Blanton, partly because Beane is so good at getting replacement players who don't completely suck. I still don't see a future Beane team losing 100 or 95 (and personally I'd stretch that to 90, although maybe I'm getting optimistic there) games, but .500 is going to be a lot harder given the lack of major-league ready return on this deal (except Sweeney--yet another lefty--and I don't see him amounting to more than a 4th outfielder).
- This seems to show a commitment to Carlos Gonzalez as the right fielder, but I hope it doesn't mean CarGo (can we settle on a nickname?) breaks camp with the team. He really doesn't appear to be ready, doesn't have that much AAA time yet, and given that the A's aren't going for a ring next year there's no earthly reason to start his arbitration and free-agent clocks. His 2013 season is highly likely to be vastly more valuable than his April-May-June 2008 production, and I'd hate to see the A's trade the former for the latter.
- Can we revive that whole Adam Jones for Blanton idea? Center field is not yet solved, and much as I look forward to seeing Denorfia next year, Jones (supposedly a terrific defender) is a potential star in center. With all the pitching depth, Cupcakes is more expendable than ever. Still no reason to rush a trade, though, if the price isn't right (I don't really think we can score as high as Jones with Blanton, but damn I'd like it if we did).
if we
got jones for blanton, i think all of ll would commit mass suicide. that would be a great trade.
I believe the whole of the M's blogosphere,
not just LL, would commit mass seppuku if AJ is traded for Cupcakes.
I only want Adam Jones
If he has an arcade game nickname and will make it rain at Oakland nightclubs.
Adam "Space Invaders" Jones for Cupcakes? Yes.
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 1:37 PM PST up reply actions
How 'bout
Adam West for Cupcakes?
by LilAnnieOaktown on Jan 3, 2008 1:39 PM PST up reply actions
you must like the acquisition of Fautino
... even though he's missing an "s."
Yes! I meant to mention that.
But after writing up the other 6 thoughts my brain reached its natural limits and I forgot.
Next on the agenda....
...packaging Blanton and some of our new acquisitions for a hot SS prospect?
Mass suicide, anyone?
Actually, I kind of like this trade too. But my initial reaction to reading the news was the exact same as when Huddy was traded. An uncontrollable "OH MY GOD!!"
that brought my wife running into the room.
Tango sez:
Steve Swisher:
+1.0 win as a hitter
+0.5 wins as a fielder+position (fans see him a smidge above, UZR loves him in the OF, hates him in the IF, and Dewan sees him a smidge above overall)He gets 85% playing time. His WAR is 3.4. He’s young, obviously. He’s got 3+ years of service, meaning three more years before free agency (would have been for the 2011 season). He’s actually signed through 2011 (with club option in 2012).
Let’s give him a 0.25 aging, since he’s still at his peak, and applying 40%, 60%, 80% to his free agent value for the first 3 years.
Through 2012, Swisher Properties will generate 79MM of dividends. Including the club option, he will be paid 35MM. (He should be paid 60MM... what a deal the A’s got here.) He’s got a surplus value of
34MM[Ed Note: 79-35 = 44 MM].I don’t know about the other players. However, a single rookie, expected to be a 2 WAR player for each of the next 5 years, will generate 56MM in dividends, but will cost you 17MM in salary. That’s 39MM of surplus value.
***
Put another way, Swisher is expected to generate 14.5 WAR over the next 5 years, while the rookie of MLB average talent will generate 10 WAR. Those extra 4.5 wins will cost you 17MM.
***
What I am shocked over is that the A’s would take a player with so much surplus value and spin him for other players of presumably even higher surplus value. Typically, you would trade guys with limited (or no) surplus value for guys with some surplus value.
Who are these guys the A’s got?
Beane doesn't have any tradeable assets that have limited surplus value, that's why.
Well, Embree
but he's not in that league of importance.
Only +1 as a hitter?
I wonder how much of a positional adjustment Tango is using.
By Batting Runs, he is about +2.5 wins as a hitter, without positional adjustment.
By BRAA, about 2-2.5 wins.
See above.
I have Swish at about 100 RC and the average LF/RF/1B at 90 RC (last year, anyway). +1 above average as a hitter sounds right, including position.
I'M SHOCKED!
Now what do I do? I named my cat after Nick Swisher. So, do I keep his bad ass, or, trade him back to Tony LaRussa's ARF???
Well...
I guess its another Billy Beane special. You know, the one where he kicks you in the balls, but then kicks you in the balls again, just to make sure he hit both of them. We’ll see how it turns out. It would be great if someone invented a pill I could take where I magically gave a shit about the River Cats just as much as I give a shit about the A’s. Shorter drive to the stadium, cheaper tickets, and a more stable roster. Go Cats.
by TerrenceLongsTaint on Jan 3, 2008 1:15 PM PST reply actions
+1
Beane always hurts his fans to see how much they really love him.
by pickinmachine on Jan 3, 2008 1:20 PM PST up reply actions
My thoughts...
whether you like the trade or not is a matter of interpretation so I'll leave it be. But personally, I am very concerned (for a lack of a better word) that BB has now traded two people Haren and Swisher that wanted to remain As and played major roles on and off the field. Sure, there's a plan but I certainly question it from a PR standpoint.
by AsWin on Jan 3, 2008 1:23 PM PST reply actions
A PLAN?
To draw people into the Coliseum by saving money on player salaries, ergo, bring down the price of CHURROS!
by LilAnnieOaktown on Jan 3, 2008 1:26 PM PST up reply actions
Or...
preventing the annoyance of having people sit next to you at a ballagame. If BB keeps going, you might be able to claim your own row(s).
(And yes I am joking.. I hope)
by AsWin on Jan 3, 2008 1:29 PM PST up reply actions
Krazy George
will have to run a whole lot to get people to do the wave that he invented.
isn't this plain and f'ing simple -
the second money saving "trade" this offseason.
Right. That whole 4% of the payroll.
Boy, it's amazing what 3.5 million will buy in baseball these days, ain't it?
Don't be ****ing ridiculous.
STOP THE PRESSES!!!
Everybody hang on and prepare to reassess all your biases and beliefs, because Ray Ratto has weighed in on the trade.
Not really ...
as the team stands right now, it should win about as many games as it did last year (it underperformed its pythag and will have several key parts for a full year). If just a few things go right, it could top .500.
People find winning baseball interesting and this team will likely win more games than the Giants, even if the average fan hasn't heard of nearly as many A's players.
I also find young, talented, developing players
interesting--warts and all.
Remember 2005? Sure, it was at times agonizing to watch, especially early in the season, but it was also a lot of fun seeing what some of our young players could (Street) and couldn't (Cruz and 2-Buck) do.
and there was plenty of winning
If Beane keeps making trades
and Ratto keeps writing snarky columns, he'll be right one day.
Ratto would like the A's better if ...
... they were a baseball dessert.*
*yeah, I know it was in the comments to his column, but at least I wrote it.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 4:05 PM PST up reply actions
I really dislike
Ray Ratto, ive found him to have a really shitty track record as far as his doom of the Athletics is concerned. Ray Ratto needs to stick a ding dong in his fat mouth, and have a nice warm cup of shut the fuck up.
LOL
ratto never learns.
Remind me to rewrite the lyrics
to my already previously-written Ode to Monkeyball, to make them insulting.
My thoughts on the Ratto column, as previously posted on SFGate.
by rubin sierra on Jan 4, 2008 11:22 PM PST up reply actions
somebody has to have mentioned that swish gets
more expensive starting this year, right? not only are we getting great prospects, but the a's are saving a ton of money by dealing early, also making it easier to deal swish as well
by maffew @ Athletics Nation on Jan 3, 2008 1:32 PM PST reply actions
I check my emotion at the door 'cause I'm a robot
and thus I am fine with this move. Stat geeks love Swisher, Baseball players do not. Swisher still has never learned to use all fields, and chases way too many pitches. He's a good player on a good offense, but on our team he is very pedestrian. Seriously, how many less games do the A's win next year because Swisher is not there? One? Two? If that's makes us miss the playoffs, then I'll be damned.
Beane is showing me something here; he checked his ego at the door and traded a player whom he loved. That is a GM for you folks. Get rid of Crosby, Kotsay, and Chokey Chavez, full steam ahead for the new park in 2011, and I'll see all y'all there at opening day at the Mac.
I met Swish at fantasy camp last year
Couldn't have been a nicer, more friendly dude. He's a great guy, and a friend of a friend. He left me tickets a couple of times last year (once in Oakland, once in Anaheim). Sounds like we got a good haul, but on a personal level, this totally f'ing blows.
No offense
but "personal level" makes absolutely no difference at all. The team is in better shape now, that's all that matters.
I'm sure
that everyone here will accept that at some point... but not everyone is able to stay emotionally detached to the names on the back, even when they know they won't be around forever.
Swish was one of my favorite players on the team, and it was more because of how much fun he has playing the game than it was his OBP.
In 2009-10
The A's will have a ton of cash to spend 1-5 key components in building a holeless roster. It makes sense to dump all possible contracts before then to maximize flexibility as the minor leaguers develop. If Freemont works out and a handful of these prospects pan out the A's could be in a position to consolidate funds on a couple of established star players to complement our soon-to-be emerging stars from the system.
Go A's! (I'm not changing my nick though)
by SwisherSweet on Jan 3, 2008 1:55 PM PST reply actions
Trade everyone
Seriously. Get it over with quick, like the proverbial band-aid. I understand this trade. I can see the merit of this trade. That doesn't mean it has to feel good. And now that the A's have dealt the best pitcher and position player on a team that didn't have much to begin with, sell the rest of them. And not necessarily for value. There's no point in not fielding a team of AAA players at every single position to see who can compete and get a head start on 2010.
Additionally, I feel terrible for guys who were starters in the beginning of the 2007 season. What do any of them have to look forward to? Don't trade Ellis? Trade Ellis yesterday! I want the guy to have a title shot before he retires. Same goes for Chavez. That poor guy, jeez-- he logs all those games, plays through injuries to his (and many would argue, in retrospect, the team's) detriment, just to see any chances of a World Series fall by the wayside during his prime years.
So get rid of absolutely everyone. It's not like the fans expect to win anytime soon at this point, and the older (i.e., over 24) players on the team deserve better.
Seriously why should the vets
even want to be on this team anymore. Why wouldn't Chavy demand a trade at this point. I fully agree, give Chavy and Ellis a chance on a contender. Get rid of everybody at this point, free up the money and get ready for the move to the new digs.
by kb toyz on Jan 3, 2008 2:15 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed
It's not like my kids have any current players' jerseys anymore (Swish, Big Hurt) and it's just about time they learn the pain of being a small market team. We just saw -our- Warriors eat ass in the Sugar Bowl, so there should be no hope in their hearts now. We all lose our innocence sometime.
My one request is that if we have to watch the Oakland Rivercats, can we please steal back Kendall as a back-up catcher/bench coach?
Maybe it doesn't make immediate sense, but we need a tough-minded veteran who is not afraid to kick rookie ass. If we're not gonna win anyways, can we at least get him back on the cheap to be the heart of the clubhouse? It's clear Chavez and Kotsay, should they still be around, will never step up to that plate.
Farewell Swish....we really loved what you did for the team. You and Byrnsie can share a beer in my Oakland Valhalla of Baseball Memories.
Goddamn it
Having already given up on "wins" in 2008, must I now also give up on "personality" and "entertainment" as well? I certainly have no intention of celebrating the extra $3.5 million Wolffish Partners get to pocket next year.
Oh, wait, that's right, Lew is utterly indifferent to cash flow and would just as soon blow little Johnny's birthright on FA's, were it not for Beane's restraints.
Fuck Billy Beane.
Cut and paste from above
Right. That whole 4% of the payroll. (0 / 0)
Boy, it's amazing what 3.5 million will buy in baseball these days, ain't it?Don't be ****ing ridiculous.
Dear dumb argument: Please go away. Thanks.
So, what, Lew's gonna light the money on fire
To recycle the old DC adage, a million here and a million there and pretty soon you're talking about real money. Particularly since it is essentially pure profit into ownership's pockets. What, $20, $25 million? Are you so pig-headed and tone deaf that you can't conceptualize these sums in toto?
I am so weary of your constant repeating of what you take as irreproachable wisdom that I will gladly here invite my first CGV: go fuck yourself you arrogant stolid humorless little punk. Your obvious baseball smarts are dwarfed by your even more obviously repellent persona. I will endeavor to not again rise to the nauseating chum you spoon upon the water, and though it's beyond my control I'd ask you to stop replying to my posts, since nothing good can come of it.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jan 3, 2008 2:52 PM PST up reply actions
OK
What.
The.
Fuck.
Boy, that escalated quickly...
I mean, that really got out of hand fast.
I don't know ...
I'd say it's more like Scots and other Scots ...
Brick killed a guy...
Didn't you throw a trident or something?
by BWH on Jan 3, 2008 3:50 PM PST up reply actions
Next time please..
FSU... email your response to the person...so that the rest of us don't have to read this ugliness when you lose your temper.
+1
"I am so weary of your constant repeating of what you take as irreproachable wisdom that I will gladly here invite my first CGV: go fuck yourself you arrogant stolid humorless little punk. Your obvious baseball smarts are dwarfed by your even more obviously repellent persona. I will endeavor to not again rise to the nauseating chum you spoon upon the water, and though it's beyond my control I'd ask you to stop replying to my posts, since nothing good can come of it."- FreeSeatUpgrade
I 100% agree in regards to PaulThomas' actions on this blog.
by AsWin on Jan 3, 2008 3:35 PM PST up reply actions
My "actions"?
Which "actions" would those be? Sarcastic replies to tendentious, repetitious arguments?
I think I can live with myself, thanks.
BTW, if you're going to insult me, at least be brave enough to do it yourself. "+1"ing a quote is about the silliest thing I can think of. At least I can respect, in some sense, FSU's decision to throw CGV caution to the wind.
tendentious? really?
I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, but when you use unnecessarily large words in informal settings, like a blog, it doesn't make you seem smart.
Seriously, take Grover, for instance. He can be as much if not more of an asshole than anyone (and he knows I say that with much love, humor and respect) -- but he comes off much better and offends less than you do because he does it in colloquial language.
The rest of the world isn't Pomona. I had to learn that when I graduated too. After spending four years there, with them insisting we understand how smart we are and how special we are, it can be hard to remember that while we may be smart and special, its okay if not every single person we come across recognizes it immediately.
I've been using "big words" since grade school
Afraid there's not a whole lot I can do about that one. Maybe it's subconscious posturing, but it's not out of any active desire to make myself sound intelligent. I talk how I talk-- which is, basically, like an intellectual. For better or for worse.
Well, I've gotta say ...
I think it's in your own best interest to learn to talk/write, at least some of the time, in a more typical manner. I'm not saying speak like an ignorant retard -- just, one know, tone it down a bit.
It will help you make friends, it will help you influence people, it will help your career, it'll just make you a more well rounded individual.
You're likely right
It just doesn't feel right, somehow. To me, it feels like contempt.
This is probably an illogical attitude... I'm just explaining my thought process.
I hear you ...
but, especially when you're arguing, the big words come across as contempt.
Basically, between the lines you're basically seeming to say, look I can use these big, fancy words, so I'm clearly smarter than you and there's no reason to even consider any opinion but mine.
I don't think you mean to come across that way ... but as an oft amused, observer of many of your discussions I feel confident in saying that's how you typically come across.
I know where you're coming from. Believe me ... back in high school, I had a lot of trouble relating to a lot of folks ... I just couldn't help but come across as an arrogant, superior smart-ass ... and more than a little bit of it had to do with the fact that I too had the vocabulary of someone who scored in the upper 700s on the SAT verbal.
Here's the part when I'm going to come off as completely arrogant ... but I basically realized that I'm the really, really, ridiculously good looking (well, that too) smart one. I'm the special one. I shouldn't expect others to just appreciate that. I should be able to figure out a way to make this work.
I certainly ain't perfect -- far from it -- but I've come a long way and I'm definitely better off for it.
Well devo...
Here's the part when I'm going to come off as completely arrogant ... but I basically realized that I'm the really, really, ridiculously good looking (well, that too) smart one. I'm the special one. I shouldn't expect others to just appreciate that. I should be able to figure out a way to make this work.
Sorry get me a shovel is an expression from the old days. I grew up in Hickville Wash. It means get me a shovel to deal with this Bullshit...which is what you said(back in the day) to people who were bragging about themselves...or making a joke about how great they were.
Ah, gotcha ...
yes, I am pretty full of shit, I suppose ...
you're missing a comma
pretty, full of shit
Aww, that's sweet ...
thanks, monkeyman ...
Maybe this explains why I always fail
to comprehend the PT hate in this forum.
To me "tendentious" seems like a perfectly reasonable word. It's exactly the right one for making the point he wanted to make.
(Serious question, Devo: how would you make the same point without using "tendentious"?)
I know it's not a democracy, but for what it's worth my vote is solidly against Paul dumbing down his vocabulary to avoid sounding like an "intellectual". I for one would hate to miss an opportunity to learn a new word.
I like his ways too.
I find it unique and kind of enjoyable. Paul is his own man...he shouldn't have to change the way he expresses himself with words...but since he is aggravating people in the way that he answers them maybe he should think about changing the TONE of the posts. Just a suggestion Paul.
The tone of that particular post was aggravatED
because I was. By that argument.
If it's a card FSU plays all the time (and it is), I can see why he would get the impression that I was constantly heavy-handed.
How does
'Sarcastic replies to accusatory, repetitious arguments?' strike you?
Honestly, I might choose to use two words instead of his one -- I'm not in Jack Pitney's classroom, that's perfectly acceptable.
I'm not suggesting that Paul dumb down his vocabulary all the time.
I speak very, very differently depending on my audience.
If he's conversing with you or I or IM4Oakgal, he can use all the big words he wants. No biggie.
If he wants to communicate with a more general audience, instead of just communicating at them, he'd have better luck if he spoke/wrote in a more familiar way.
"you or me"
Devo can converse with I anytime him wants
agree also
for whatever it is worth. I have never understood where the opprobrium directed towards PT comes from.
There are other posters who frequently annoy me, or even offend me with their vitriol and vehemence, often leaving me wishing I hadn't read their posts. PT is not one of those people.
P.S. I think that AN continues to be an exceptionally well behaved web community. What goes on here is tame. And my sincere thanks to all the many people who add humor, levity, and perspective to the threads.
Invitation to insult you...
I'll pass, thanks though. And for someone who has a caustic reaction to so called repetitious arguments, I think you would appreciate not covering the same territory twice. PaulThomas, the ignorant act only works for so long.
I've fully proclaimed my problems with your insulting posts before and surprise, you feigned ignorance there too. And it wasn't, once again, my post you were responding to. But you are a smart guy, you remember full and well that.. you were just fishing for an argument. I find nothing brave about starting a meaningless argument with someone on a baseball blog.
So no, I have no desire to insult you. However, be certain that I will speak my mind freely on a bunch of topics here. And like FreeSeatUpgrade, I honestly could care less about your response.
by AsWin on Jan 3, 2008 4:33 PM PST up reply actions
Really?
You mean people in the throes of raw emotion don't like when you tell them how they should or shouldn't feel about something that is obviously very close to their heart?
Everyone on AN has the right to express how they are feeling about the A's at any given time, and no poster has the right to deem their arguments 'repetitious'. Swisher has been traded for a matter of hours. This is brand-new news, he was a popular player, and people feel differently than you do about his loss.
I happen to agree with your position on this trade, but your absolute arrogance about it makes me wish I didn't.
And as for your tiger comment--what do you expect someone to do when you keep poking them with a stick? When someone pushes all the right buttons to the point of an explosion, who is really at fault?
So...
It's ok to make tiger-provoking analogies now?
Or is it still too soon?
by BWH on Jan 3, 2008 4:44 PM PST up reply actions
OK, somehow my position has gotten TOTALLY
misconstrued here.
I don't like seeing Swisher go either. He's an awesome guy, good player (I've been defending him strenuously-- see above) and a great contract deal for the A's. I understand the trade as being what it was-- an opportunistic rebuilding move which may or may not pan out in the long run (but looks pretty good right now).
Not once-- here or on any other thread-- have I implied that anyone who's upset about losing Swisher (guh, that sounds like he's dead... let's not go down THAT path again. Well, you know what I mean) doesn't have a right to be. They do. Nor have I said that people aren't right to be apprehensive about the future of the team. The players the A's got back are nice, but they're prospects. All prospects carry warning labels about risk of failure. It's fine to be nervous about them-- heck, I'm nervous myself.
What irks me is this notion about the trade having secretly been about money. Every time the team makes a move that reduces payroll, it comes up-- whether it's a logical conclusion (the Loaiza transaction) or an inane one. I mean, talk about poking someone with a stick. No matter the situation-- and no matter the actual evidence, or lack thereof, on the table-- the same people keep throwing it out there like it's some kind of self-evident fact. Having the exact same argument every time the A's trade someone gets old really, really fast.
'Tis not the message, it's the messenger.
Being about the money is actually still debatable. TPTB have proven that they don't want to sign anyone big, and are resigned to a team without aYankees/Dodgers/Red Sox payroll, so to say that it's never about money is a bit disingenuous.
But in the heat of the moment, when you are reeling from a loss, people are going to lash out at anything that makes sense, and Beane and the owners are right in line.
And yes, it may be old news to you, and you feel that the argument is dead and buried, but you fail to recognize that your posts manage the exact same thing.
And again...
...I think you know a hell of a lot about this sport. But coming from that position, doesn't mean that there aren't other ways to look at the game.
It's the same argument!
How can my reply NOT be the same?
I suppose I could argue the opposite... in which case I'd have grover barking up my tree about flip-flopping. And rightly so, in this case.
In any event, I'm not the one who brought it up.
FWIW
I actually don't think the Swisher trade was solely or even primarily motivated by money. Nor did I say so in the comment which got derided. Same with the Haren deal. As I've said many times, even back last summer when the CW was that we were just a little good health away from contention, that the A's roster needs rebuilding.
All that stipulated, barring unforeseen FA signings or extensions, it's undeniable that the A's will spend less on payroll in '08 than in '07. It's undeniable that they've made money each year of the Wolffish era. It's barely deniable that their revenue will still exceed expenses in 2008. Ergo, each dollar saved on payroll in '08 (and likely '09, and maybe '10) goes pretty much straight into pockets as profit, except to the extent ownership reinvests in the franchise in some way. Which to date they've seemed loathe to do.
Why is this controversial? It's pretty simple. Doesn't mean the Haren/Swisher/Ellis/Street deals are bad...I certainly haven't said that. Just that they profit ownership in the immediate sense. Any assumption of my feelings of cause-and-effect here don't derive from my actual posts.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jan 3, 2008 7:13 PM PST up reply actions
because he's the best-looking GM in the game?
Yes, and his pockets are 4% ownerifficly deeper
But mostly because he stabbed a knife of icy-cold dispassion into one of the very few places where unreasonable passion trumps other factors in my personal A's fan calculus. As owner/GM Billy may be right or wrong; as guardian of that upon which I pour my heart soul and disposable cash, well, that's where the fuck him part comes in.
And then there's his dreamy smile...
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jan 4, 2008 8:59 AM PST up reply actions
Also ... your comment
"Dear dumb argument: Please go away. Thanks."
While more cleverly indirect and certainly much more abbreviated really was no less mean spirited than any of FSU's comments (okay ... maybe there was one).
Seriously, you basically said, "Hey, you're a moron for thinking that. Thanks!"
not to throw myself into this fray
But I think the difference between those two quotations is that PaulThomas disparaged the argument itself, which has been made by multiple people, rather than directly attacking the person who made the argument (except maybe indirectly).
It's a very, very fine line ...
one that tends to disappear entirely when posters resort to flippant, smart-ass remarks like the one I quoted.
Especially when the comment
appears to make a personal attack in the guise of only discussing the argument. The sub-committee doesn't allow users to hang onto technicalities. It's all about the spirit of the comment. FSU's comment (by his own admission) was obviously a CGV (if reported). Paul Thomas'? My guess is the committee will see it as being in the spirit of a personal attack - what else is the comment intended to really mean besides "You idiot"? But that's for the committee to decide, if the comment is reported.
Right. I personally attacked him,
by copy and pasting a comment I had made to another poster.
If that's not Grade A evidence that I was attacking the argument and not the poster, I don't have a clue what is.
I actually was specifically referring to the part
that wasn't copied and pasted. Quoted it and everything.
I'm not playing that card
As I've said before, I think the distinction is basically a meaningless one.
That being said, I don't think my comment could possibly be described as "intense, personal hatred." Which is exactly how I'd describe his. If my comment was voluntary manslaughter, his was murder in the first degree.
I know ...
I largely agree ...
I was just responding to harenshair ...
Nobody, including FSU himself,
is suggesting his comment isn't a CGV or isn't worse than what you said. It's just that the visitor who pokes the tiger, as well as the tiger, is to blame when things get ugly.
Overreaction
is overreaction. Snarkiness is going to happen on AN. Uncivilized responses should be criticised. Not explained away as "But Pauly starrrrrrrrrrrrted it!" Shame on You.
He's not explaining it away ...
to keep with the tiger analogy ... the tiger will be put to death after attacking Paul. Paul, should he survive the attack, should be banned from the zoo for life for poking the tiger in his eye, causing the condition that allowed for the attack/reaction.
The tiger is getting the worst of it, but Paul isn't innocent, either.
I don't think the anlaogy is right.
Because a snarky little comment isn't poking the lion in the eye. I read the comment ...it wasn't that provacative. FSU is a grown man not a little kid. People are going to make posts that are critical and the tone less than nice. Now...you may disagree(and apparently do)and that's your right. But I don't think Paul was all that outta line. But I am getting uncomfortable because at this point it seems like I am upset with FSU in a personal way. I am not. I think he is usually even tempered but let his temper get out of control on this one. Paul has his own personality. He is not Mr. Sensitivity but this isn't a church social either. There is room for some snarkiness for goodness sake.
Yeah ... it's probably about time to let this go
but before I do, I just want to go on record as saying: I think putting FSU to death and banning Paul from the zoo for life would be very appropriate punishments ...
; )
uh oh
What irks me is this notion about the trade ...
You shouldn't have said "irks". That's an intellectual word. What kind of a dork says "irks"?
If you want to be one of the popular boys, you should say "What pisses me off..."
Oh, and "notion"? Please. Just call it a "thing".
PT's comment
was not enough to warrant the cruel and insulting comments that FSU made. PT does not have a "People " person way about him. That's to be sure. I have often been taken aback by some of his gaucheness in that area. But lashing out in the way FSU did is not appropriate. and for you to defend the behavior as a site admin. is not very becoming or helpful IMO either. FSU is one of the most engaging and popular posters on the site. He's the only guy I ever wrote a "fan" letter to on the site. But the fact that he's a terrific writer doesn't excuse the behavior at all. His response to Paul was childish and made me uncomfortable.
I never defended FSU's comments.
Understanding where he is coming from and condoning his actions are two completely different things.
I don't think it is ever appropriate to rise to the bait in a disagreement, whether verbally or physically. But do I understand when people do? You bet. I also understand the "Nico theory", as he calls it, where somehow only the kid who strikes back at someone who baited him is ever punished.
FSU's complaint is by no means unique, and I was simply pointing that out. Paul Thomas is an exceptionally smart baseball persona and could bring a lot to the table, but there are certainly times when he pushes hot buttons.
Making the comments he did after a trade of one of FSU's favorite players, when he was obviously reeling and upset, was in my opinion, uncalled for. There are other ways to interact without calling someone's post 'dumb'.
Did he overreact? Sure.
But if someone had made any kind of similar comment the day of Canseco's trade back when I was sixteen, I would have a few choice words for them. Baseball is emotional for some people (a lot of us!), much like other subjects in people's lives, and belittling people is not the way to go about enlightening them.
Being a site admin doesn't make me the board's morality police. If I was asked to voice an opinion on a CVG, I would do so, without regards to who I like better, or who I agree with. But as a fellow poster, I thought Paul Thomas baited FSU, and simply called him out on it.
I guess we disagree on
this one. I don't think Paul's comment was so flagrant to warrant that kind of lambasting. He was attacking the comment not the person. People debate and make snide little comments to each other all of the time on this site. You have to have a little thicker skin than that. IMO
As for Paul baiting folks then those folks should say so as it happens in a clear way. Not in an insulting manner. And BBG? I am a big fan of the A's. I get pretty emotional myself ...do you think that you needed to explain that to me?
I wasn't refering to you...
I think you are a great fan :-)
I just think some people on the site (not you) see the business of trades as so cut and dried that they can truly see at the moment what is best for the team. Sometimes in that, they forget the overwhelming emotion that goes along with trades for other people, and can't understand why they are so upset to lose a player, even when it is better for the team as a whole.
by baseballgirl on Jan 3, 2008 11:12 PM PST up reply actions
I know that you weren't BBG
I am sorry that I got a little snippy with you. I was just so bothered by someone that I think so well of saying the things that he said to Paul. I work with kids who have impulse control and often say the ugliest things to each other. To see someone that I flatout admire like FSU acting like a 12 year old upset me. and then this business of Paul provoking the attack by being critical...well that reminded me very much of a student I had a few years back who forced his fingers into a girl's privates on our way back to the classroom from lunch. When I asked him about it he asked me ...well if she didn't want me to do that then why did she wear such a short skirt?
Anything ugly that needed to be said Between FSU and Paul could have been said in private.
If you are including me in the category
of "some people," then I just don't know what to say. I haven't criticized anyone for being emotional over the loss of a favorite player, and I'm not planning to start.
I suppose this could be directed at someone else, but seeing as how it's on the thread, I feel like I have to respond to it.
OK, this is really setting me off now
"Baiting"?
If ever-- I mean, ever-- there was a classical example of "attacking the argument, not the person," that was it. And with good reason, in this case-- I don't think FSU is "dumb," on some extensive personal level. I think he's severely mistaken on this issue and that his comments have become repetitious.
I'd say that that's qualitatively different from thinking (and saying) that I am, in effect, loathsome reptilian slime on the basis of some blog posts. And in this case, at least, your site's CGV policies seem to back me up on it. I think the agreement is semi-incidental-- I think I've made myself pretty clear on what I view as the inanity of the "personal attack" distinction at this point. Nonetheless, it's there in this case.
I don't think there's any doubt ...
if anyone felt the need to lodge a complaint against FSU, he'd receive a strike.
I doubt the same could be said for your comments.
Her point is that his comments, while certainly worse, did not come to exist in a vacuum. You said something pretty mean spirited to incite them.
He, as I noted at the time, kicked it up a notch.
He was certainly the most guilty party -- and he effectively admitted as much.
In this case, though, there was no innocent victim.
Except, perhaps, the ladylike sensibilities of IM4Oakgal ...
I think that, in a nutshell, is BBG's point.
While I have no doubt that you are smart enough to rationalize a way around it, the fact is, you offended the guy -- whether or not you think your point was a valid one, you should care that you offended someone. That's a large part of the basis of our collective humanity.
And the fact that PT has now inspired
pissed off replies from baseballgirl, monkeyball, grover, FSU, certainly me on multiple occasions, who else am I forgetting - at what point, when you keep ticking off different people who aren't always easily irked, does it stop becoming "everyone else is too sensitive"?
I don't have a category for this exchg, either.
I'd say it was sui generis, but, you know ...
Or I could call it a clusterfark and be even closer. Maybe if somebody would put up a "Swisher Appreciation Thread" we could all just get along.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 7:03 PM PST up reply actions
I didn't say that
and in any case, sensitivity is largely not something which a person can control. So even if everyone else was in some sense "too sensitive," it wouldn't be any defense. Please don't impute that argument to me.
Look, there are only two comments that I've ever taken serious personal offense to on this site. One of them was Vacafan's remark about "living with Mom." The other was this. I'm absolutely willing to take what I dish out. If someone thinks my posts or diaries are full of shit, I'm open to hearing it. That's how arguments get refined.
This was not an argument. (Or, at least, the last paragraph and a half weren't.) It was pure, unadulterated hatred. I challenge you, or anyone for that matter, to unearth a single example of me resorting to that kind of trash. You won't find it, because it doesn't exist. Say what you will about my style-- and it's clear that it can rub people the wrong way-- I'm not mean spirited.
I'm italicizing this, because it's important: I put huge emphasis on intellectual integrity. I'm not right all of the time-- heck, I might not be right even MOST of the time. But when I go after someone's argument, it's because I dislike the argument.
No offense to you guys, but I've never met any of you. It would be beyond foolish to nurture hatred for someone I know only through a screenname and a sig line. It's not worthy of my time. If you think I dislike you or are targeting you personally-- get over it.
As I've said before, I really like this site. I think most of the people here are right most of the time. It's a great resource and a fun community. I have no interest, personal or otherwise, in driving anyone away from it. If it appears otherwise at any time, it's my own fault, and for that I really do apologize.
Alright, I think I can get off my soapbox now.
What I don't understand, PaulThomas,
is if you like this site why don't you choose to work really hard on avoiding a tone that can be received as abrasive, disrespectful, etc.? If the tone you're using is bothering enough people, and if it threatens your being welcomed on a site you like, why not be the one to make a change? Because saying "Hey, that's just the way I am, take it or leave it" is a great way to get left.
I've attempted several replies
and all of them seem either asinine or self-pitying. So I'll give the "just the facts, ma'am (or, in this case, sir)" reply.
I will certainly work on the above. I will almost certainly not succeed in it to the extent that you are satisfied with it, because your opinions on the free speech/censorship spectrum are simply, irrevocably, hopelessly different from mine.
I believe in free speech, PT, and
I don't believe in censorship. I also believe in insisting on civil discourse in a venue (blogging) that is famous for its out-of-control lack of civility. It's never necessary to be rude, or abrasive, or sarcastic - just tempting.
Serious advice, Paul,
from someone who thinks a lot like you do.
Very often, the appropriate response to a supremely idiotic argument is to say nothing at all. Sure, I know how it feels to read a post that makes you want to scream, "Aagh, there it is again! How can people be so stupid?!" But it's a big world out there, and it's OK to just let a post like that go unanswered.
The Preview function isn't just for checking for typos. It's a chance to look at what you wrote and ask, "Do I really need to say this?" I can't tell you how many times I've chosen Cancel instead of Post.
Same here ...
excellent point.
I had a boss who once said...
"Never argue with an idiot, because those watching may not be able to tell the difference.
by Threepwood XX on Jan 4, 2008 12:19 AM PST up reply actions
I try to do this
Unfortunately, I often fail.
But let's be honest here: the people who I've gotten in recent arguments with (monkeyball, grover, FSU) are certainly not idiots, trolls, or any of the other easily dismissed categories of poster.
No, but neither are you ...
and I can assure you ... I've canceled replies to you.
Not everything needs a response. Not every response needs a rejoinder. Sometimes its okay to just think ... you're wrong and I know that, but that's okay.
or
I disagree ... and we all know that. But there's nothing I can add that I haven't said and we haven't all heard before.
The second, I think you'd agree, could have well been applied in this instance, oh so many posts ago.
If you think my advice
was meant to apply only to idiots, trolls, and others who are "easily dismissed", then you've missed my point.
goddamit
CGV or no CGV, this is some of the best writing I've ever seen. Excuse me while I go and cut and paste your insulting prose before it gets pulled off the site.
And then let me also recommend to you: Apricot's killfile. It works! It will be such a joy to you to see: "PT's comment was blocked"
I don't have the instructions handy but if you do an AN search for "Apricot's killfile," you can download it pretty easily. Now if you'll excuse me I have to killfile monkeyball, because the bastard keeps disparaging Ray Ratto.
by rubin sierra on Jan 4, 2008 11:40 PM PST up reply actions
Dogfather didn't give a category for this
6. Catfights break out.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
If this is a catfight,
that post above was the equivalent of a tiger jumping a 12-foot wall and biting my head off.
Yeah, well, FSU was through with suffering ...
... the slingshots and arrows of outrageous postings.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 3:22 PM PST up reply actions
Not too surprising
Aren't there always catfights on the blogs whenever something big goes down with the A's? The five stages of grief and all. Maybe next time we can hold a lottery, a la Shirley Jackson.
we should sign Rick Dempsey?
And the ghost of Max Patinkin?
If you mean:
... Max Patkin, then yes.
... Mandy Patinkin, then no.
My name is Illiterate Monkeya
You corrected my spelling. Prepare to die!
Mandy was awesome in Dead Like Me
And I have a crush on Ellen Muth.
I'd accept a Kotsay for Ellen Muth trade. Can we make this happen?
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 8:25 PM PST up reply actions
that would be a Muth-A f'in'-A trade
Swisher wasn't on the block
Well, this sort of makes me feel better.
Kenny Williams said that Swisher wasn't being shopped, but knowing the A's were rebuilding they went after him. If Beane moved a guy he didn't want to move, he must really like the pitchers. This still sucks, but it might not really suck. (3)
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 2:03 PM PST reply actions
Damn. That's it.
OaklandA23....who the hell are you?
Everything s/he says is so matter-of-fact.
It's like s/he's mocking my anguish!
I am upset.
I need time to digest this. I mean, it was REALLY obvious we were rebuilding this year when Haren was gone... but Swisher?! I was prepared for Blanton or even Street at this point... but not Swish. And to the White Sox... he could've at least gone to a team I like. Ugh.
No pain, no gain.
I'm sorry, but the ad hominem bellyaching around here has gotten to me.
Billy is trying to build a World Series contender, and that's no kool-aid. He can't do it with the current cast, so he's investing in the future. He said he was gonna, and he has the big, brass cojones to actually do it, instead of wallowing around in mediocrity, like most of the rest of the league.
Now, whether he's doing it right is fair game, but all this shyte about nefarious motives is just that. Anybody who truly believes that Billy doesn't eat, sleep and breathe WINNING just hasn't been paying attention for the past decade.
Cue the Teddy Roosevelt quote:
"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."
Amen Brother
It pissed me off so much I had to start a new thread about it ... sorry ... if I had seen this, I wouldn't have.
You, my friend, are one of the few people who get it. Thank you.
Have to agree.
No matter that I loved Swisher as a player. Of course I'm sure you realize that Teddy was also shot. I don't think it was while making this particular speech though.
Plus -- now the clubhouse beer ban makes sense.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 2:45 PM PST up reply actions
The whole team will be under 21.
Not that that stopped my daughter(s).
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 7:05 PM PST up reply actions
I'm struggling to *not* misinterpret that ...
My pups seem to enjoy a rich and ...
... varied social life, for which I tried to prepare them, and now try to monitor, but "incompletely" on both scores, I'm guessing. The elder, now 25, survived her late teens with the indulgence of a beneficent deity, modern pharmaceuticals (travel/adventure-related illnesses, lest anyone misinterpret) and well-built passenger compartments on two cars. The older I/she get, the more is revealed about those wonder years. I'm told that adult beverages were involved, on occasion, although she managed her crashes in full control of her limited powers.
The younger pup, just turned 18, has caught the adventure bug, too, tho' she is thankfully still on her first car. She's currently lying on a beach in Brazil, recovering from the "rigors" of college. I'm told they sometimes enjoy a spot o' rum in that culture.
by The Dogfather on Jan 4, 2008 8:06 AM PST up reply actions
Very well said
I especially liked the use of 'shyte'.
yeah -- and I got the greenlit link on fark.
Not much action on it yet -- but a few ChiSox fans seem to be unhappy.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 3:03 PM PST up reply actions
There should be more action later
Fark thread is still for TF only.
here's my favorite quote
The secret of success in life is known only by those who have not succeeded.
What "shyte"?
What ad hominem bellyaching?
People not liking the move is ad hominem bellyaching?
"Anybody who truly believes that Billy doesn't eat, sleep and breathe WINNING just hasn't been paying attention for the past decade."
So games in 2008 don't count? All that matters is the distant nebulous future in Fremont?
It's harder to find now, but I am referring to ..
... the dark insinuations that the A's are somehow tanking the next few seasons to facilitate the move, discredit Oakland, yada yada. You know -- the same old shyte. I thought my post was pretty clear in making that distinction, frankly -- see the para on "fair game."
And as to 2008, sure, we could stand pat and maybe win half the time, but a guy who really wants to win will endure short term pain for a brighter future than .500 ball.
by The Dogfather on Jan 4, 2008 7:03 AM PST up reply actions
Or we could sign Andruw and Bonds
keep Swisher and Haren and win more in 2008.
Yes, the future is brighter, the pitching prospects are great, but the trade exchanges wins in the present for wins in the future.
But the intent is to trade a few wins now ...
... for many more wins -- maybe even, dare we dream, a Championship? -- in the future. The higher risk associated with prospects vs. established players is why these trades can be good for both teams. If the Sox don't win now (and it's verry hard to see how they will, in that division), then they may have wasted their prospects -- esp. if we win with them later.
And of course, there're multiple species of risk with Bonds -- age, prison, no record driving him -- and Andruw's recent performance, that, combined with their lofty income expectations, make them bad bets, imsho.
by The Dogfather on Jan 4, 2008 8:17 AM PST up reply actions
Bonds first
the trial is nowhere close to being conducted. Even if you are concerned about prison, it shouldn't be a problem to include a provision in the contract covering that.
Bonds still doesn't have 3000 hits. That is one milestone there to drive him. Also, do you seriously believe that Bonds will choose to come back to play baseball, and then slack off? Seriously?
Andruw: the recent performance was one bad year that appeared to be a fluke caused by idiotically trying to play through an elbow injury. Even with the concerns, you aren't tied into a big long term contract with him. $36M is really not much more than the money that the A's have pissed away on Kotsay, Kendall.
"for many more wins -- maybe even, dare we dream, a Championship? -- in the future. "
Sure. But this isn't trading a broken down Mark Mulder with one year left on his contract and one option year for one good already ready MLB pitcher (Haren) who was already arguably better than Mulder, one good ready MLB reliever (Kiko), and one very good positional prospect.
This isn't even trading Tim Hudson with one (option) year left on his contract.
Haren and especially Swisher can be part of the future. Beane traded for some very good prospects, yes, but he also gave up very good players who are signed at bargain contracts and in Swisher's case, under control for the prime of his career, from ages 27-32.
I subscribe one quasi-nefarious motive to Beane
Megalomania. No other GM in the game gets his own name in the headlines more. Does he eat, sleep and breathe winning? Sure, but sometimes I think he might put his own personal success ahead of that of the team. See FSU's original post above (the one that came before all the shite started) (and I apologize in advance, FSU, if I'm taking you out of context).
The quasi-nefarious-ness I suggest here is that the A's could be spending more and winning more (and could have been for the past five years)--but they don't, because Beane is all about proving that he's such a goddamn genius that he can win without money. So he says, "No, Lew--let's keep the payroll low," and Lew says, "Why, sure, alright!" and so the A's continue to be Billy Beane's Look-How-Smart-I-Am show.
I could be wrong; he might not be that egotistical at all. And he's certainly proven himself baseball-smart in the past. But the vibe I've been getting for years is that his ego rules the team, and for me that wore thin a long time ago.
by rubin sierra on Jan 5, 2008 12:17 AM PST up reply actions
I have not seen this floated
and to preface, I am not advocating this myself, just musing.
If Beane still wanted to try and field a competitive team for '08 (which I am pretty sure is not the case) couldn't he just now sign Bonds -- who may not have any other suitors -- to replace the offense we will lose with Swisher gone?
I know, that there are arguements about PED use, and clubhouse chemistry, etc which could all be perfectly valid. Ignoring that for the moment and looking just from a numbers standpoint, we would take a hit on our outfield defense, but gain a bit offensively in a Swish/Bonds exchange.
Not saying Beane will or should do this (I mean it looks like the rebuild is on now full tilt) but if Billy made no other trades -- and then signed Bonds as a free agent -- wouldn't we be bascially just as good for post-Haren-trade 2008 and much, much better for the future?
Yes ...
we'd have a team that could very realistically reach .500, would get a ton of press, both positive and negative and would probably draw a pretty decent (relative to recent years) attendance.
Is it worth it?
I have no idea.
Unless the team actually believes in Dan Johnson, I think they can afford the spot in the lineup/field without impeding the development of future contributors.
It's hard to imagine that Bonds won't bring in enough marginal revenue to make up for his marginal salary ...
Medium/long term marketing?
Player happiness/development and reputation around the league?
Organizational value?
Like I said, I have no idea.
At this point in their respective careers
Swisher is a significantly better player than Bonds. Bonds and/or Jack Cust in the outfield would cost the A's 2-3 wins over Swisher while producing similarly on offense.
This isn't exactly an argument against signing Bonds. Just pointing out that it would be a downgrade.
That's silly ...
I know you have a huge man crush on Swisher ... who wouldn't, with those beautiful, flowing locks ... but Bonds is clearly the vastly superior hitter. He is much better at drawing walks and much better at hitting home runs. He's also better at hitting for average. Is he actually a better player? Maybe not, I'd guess they're pretty comparable, but it's just silly to say that Swisher is significantly better than Bonds.
Swish is about 2-3 wins better than Bonds
defensively, Bonds is about 2-3 wins better than Swisher offensively.
Was
Not is.
I have to believe that Bonds will decline somewhat from last season's numbers due to aging, and that teams will stop intentionally walking him at such ridiculous rates at some point. It was already a lunatic move for most of last season, and I think managers did it as much out of craven distaste for the record chase as for legitimate strategic reasons.
I also think Swisher will improve, for the reasons I outlined in the Balls in Play thread. His HR/FB was radically out of line with his prior seasons.
So call it Bonds: 0-1 wins better on offense. Add that to the defense and I think Swish will be 1-3 wins better.
Teams might stop walking Bonds
as much. Conversely, he might make them regret it by hitting for more power.
Also, the defensive assessment of Bonds relative to Swisher is a worse case scenario for Bonds and a best case scenario for Swisher.
Bonds isn't Carlos Lee bad, in that every metric AND fans hate him. I am assuming that he is that bad. Worse case scenario.
Swisher also isn't universally considered very good. Having him at 10 runs above average is close to a best case scenario.
That should be on dogfather's list
Every time the A's make any transaction, no matter what it is, eventually someone will say, "Hey, given what just happened, don't you think it makes sense now to sign Bonds?"
In my defense
all I was really trying to say was that if we signed Bonds, we would be essentially the same offensive club in 2008 we were before the Swisher trade.
I still am not convinced it is actually a good idea to sign him, it is more just an observation that we could fairly easily (and probably not too expensively) maintain the offense's status quo while still getting two kick-ass pitching prospects.
i fully support this idea
actually, scratch that, it shouldn't be about competing. hell we're still probably going to trade some of ellis/embree/blanton/street so that's out of the question. but at least a lineup with bonds would be fun to watch, and it would boost ticket sales and media coverage.
the offense may not be *good* ...
... but a lineup that clumps Ellis, Kotsay (his one remaining offensive skill), Barton, Cust, Bonds, and DJ (yeah, I've got Cust playing SS and Bonds in LF) -- and, heck, maybe Denorfia -- would force opposing pitchers to throw a lot of pitches.
Kotsay?
Kotsay has never had that particular skill. He's consistently been around 3.5 P/PA, which is quite low.
he's selectively selective
The granular statistics may not bear out this guess, but from watching Kotsay's PAs, I'd suspect that he has very few PAs where he sees 3-4 pitches -- that he's got a ton of 1-2-pitch ABs, and an above-average number of >4-pitch PAs.
That is, when he decides to, he can make a pitcher throw a lot of pitches. He has the skill, he just doesn't choose to exercise it as often as he should/could.
I threw this out jokingly on BTF
But, seriously. Sign Bonds and Clemens to roid discounted contracts and we could maybe actually still compete.
(No, I wouldn't really want to actually see this happen, I don't think, but in my mind it's delightfully funny to envision.)
Also I like the talent we're bringing in, but at some point Billy's going to address the future at short, center, second, and third, right?
I am going to try and think of it as 162-games ..
... of Spring Training.
Seriously -- would we rather be Giaunts fans -- with a crappy team and no hope?
I do think these guys may become interesting as they develop, even this summer.
by The Dogfather on Jan 3, 2008 3:36 PM PST up reply actions
If anyone is listening to KNBR, Byrnes is talking
about the A's, and says Beane traded him at the right time, but doesn't think the A's should have traded Haren, or Swisher.
I'm listening
and he's right.
I am disappointed with Beane because we did need a link from the Colisseum to Fremont.
Why bring a minor league team to a new stadium? If anything we needed the veterans to ease us into the transition.
We better come out of this year with five guarenteed aces and three great bats, because I feel like we just gave up the rest of our heart today.
They may be good pitchers...
but can they remain healthy? The last thing we need is 5 more "Hardens".
by AsWin on Jan 3, 2008 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
Swisher's website already has a pic of him in
a White Sox hat. He's moving on, guess I will have to as well.
http://www.nickswisher.net/index.html
But, I'll be a fan of his for life. I think his charity work in the Bay Area will be missed as well. Wasn't there supposed to be a post Moneyball book, with him as a featured player?
Actually,
Swish looks pretty good in the Sox cap, but much better in an A's cap, always! As I see it, once an Oakland Athletic, always an Oakland Athletic...except in the case of assholes like Canseco!
by LilAnnieOaktown on Jan 3, 2008 4:16 PM PST up reply actions
He will need to change
The whole color scheme of his page. He's going from Glam to blah (green & gold to Black, white, and Gray) what boring colors.
Aw come on
Look, it sucks when your favorites leave, but this is ridiculous. Is there anybody here who lies in their bed at night underneath their Oakland A's blanket and thinks to themselves "I miss Huddy, Mulder, Zito and Tejada?"
Odds are probably not.
When you're running a small market team you can't afford to be sentimental. You gotta be a hustler looking for every chance to make your team better and if it means trading your first-born son, then you do it. Beane can't wait a year or two and let guys walk or get hurt before deciding that he's taken this team as far as it can go and that it's time to rebuild. It's a snap decision.
The best he can do is stockpile prospects and hope most of them turn out well enough. Job done on that front, I'd say.
If Beane was sentimental, he'd end up running the West Coast version of the Royals.
AKA the Giants.
by FlynnSox on Jan 3, 2008 4:57 PM PST reply actions
No ... when I'm lying alone in bed ...
the memories (and a vivid imagination) are all I need ...
And a nice bottle of KY?
Wait...what are we talking about?
by thejd44 on Jan 3, 2008 8:42 PM PST up reply actions
I want my money back.
I wish Billy Beane had told me the A's were going to suck before I paid for my season tickets.
by Concord Fanz Dad on Jan 3, 2008 5:27 PM PST reply actions
He's waiting to trade them for robots
when the robots become available.
Beane: the first post-humanist GM.
you know he would
i was actually going to make a comment
where are the beane is racist people now? i still remember one argument for beane being racist, he kept chavez while trading tejada. i guess he'll be racist again in 2013 when he trades fan favorites gonzalez and gonzalez.
I'm afraid to check the transactions page
Except that I'm waiting to see where my minor league favorite Jake Robbins signs. Since Jake was in the White Sox org last season, I read a lot of talk about Gio and how excited the fans were about him. Ryan Sweeney was a favorite in Charlotte, but got mixed reviews from Chicago. I know getting these prospects is a boon to the A's Org, but losing Swisher takes a lot of the fun out of being an A's fan. I didn't like losing in 2007, but there were a lot of bright moments and a real connection to some of these players, Swish being one of the easiest for fans to relate to. I was thinking about heading out to Oakland some time this season but I think I'll wait a year. Maybe I'll change my mind after the season starts and I see what the team chemistry is like and if they make it fun to watch.
Should I run down to Austin and steal Street's cell phone? Would not getting the call negate a trade? I finally get my son to be an A's fan and all he talks about is Huston Street. Can we keep at least ONE of my favorite guys?
Bye Nicky. We will really miss you.
No matter how bad...
the season will be, going to a game will still be more fun than work anyday. Learning the new boys and seeing what's on the horizon will be exciting even if we are losing for now. (Just not as fun as winning.) Buy your tickets and join the rest of us. (Misery loves company) Let's-go-Oak-land!
I can't wait
for those 2 dollar Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday.
Brittany Spears was so devastated by the trade
that she finally cracked
Spears in hospital for mental evaluation
Bonds...
I second the opinion that signing Bonds is not as much about competing as it is entertainment. We don't want to rush our prospects and we don't want to bat Kotsay in the Lineup, so we might as well throw Bonds out there.
By signing Bonds we not only get to watch an extremely polished hitter, but we also get to watch Cust struggle in the OF, and then in the unlikely event that Eveland, Meyer, Denorfia, Crosby, And Chavez have breakout seasons we are right back in the 2008 hunt.
by SwisherSweet on Jan 4, 2008 4:20 PM PST reply actions
I would kind of like to see Bonds
signed just as a screw you to all of those that made him the scapegoat for an era strewn with users... but do I really want to see our A's be the 2008 version of the Giants? But then again...maybe he'd bring new fans to the A's and they'd stick. A lot to think about.
Yes!
It would be worth it for the controversy factor. Wherever he goes there will be a circus- like atmosphere. Plus he will help win a few more games than we are likely to with the status quo.
[placeholder]
by The Dogfather on Jan 5, 2008 10:33 AM PST up reply actions
601, you jerk!
Anybody can do comment #600 - it takes a special talent to do #601 (and #602 is strictly for wimps, sissies, and Crosby-believers).
I'd call it the "civil discourse, AN-style", but it wouldn't fit on the robot, so:
by The Dogfather on Jan 5, 2008 10:39 AM PST up reply actions
I thot you guys <i>like</i> water.
.svg/480px-I-605_(CA).svg.png)
by The Dogfather on Jan 5, 2008 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
And I know you're fond of these ...
by The Dogfather on Jan 5, 2008 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
You're replying to yourself
but thinking like Nico.
That's freaking disturbing.
Baah.
by The Dogfather on Jan 5, 2008 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
No nose or tail? Looks more like grover
I never knew
beast loving led to color blindness.
I'm blue you doofus.
613.
by The Dogfather on Jan 6, 2008 7:08 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
