Has Billy Found the new Moneyball Niche?
by jarforcefatherofforce on Jan 5, 2008 4:36 PM PST
39 comments
For the last few years we have seen the A's trade off potential major league prospects for sonetimes marginal major league prospects to remain competitive. This has helped as players like Kielty' Bradley, etc. have made the A's successful. These players are not star quality and are not the type to build around. Instead star player have mostly come through the draft or inflated free agent signings. Until now.
With trading just two players off the 25 man roster, the A's have more "B" or better (Sickels's ratings) prospects than they probable every had. With Buck and Barton from our own system beginning possible very successful major league careers and the potential of adding four or five above average plyers from our system in the next few years could mean having aome star quality players for many years.
Nick Swisher was certainly a good player but would he be considered "star' quality? Probably not. Dan Haren? Maybe. But what are the possibilities of some of the players the A's received in return? Can they replace Swisher's 25 homeruns and 80 RBI's? What about replacing Haren's 15-20 wins?
Along with the 2007 draft and the Haren trade the A have power hitters in AA and below. How long have we been hearing that "the power wiii develop later" and it usually doesn't. We not have pitchers that could rival Harden in skill level.
While other teams are actively trading to get their stars now, usually at outrageous cost, we will just have to wait a few years.
When refering to 2008, Billy Beane was recently quoted that we couldn't expect to succeed on hope. If all we have is hope, I for one, feel better for the future hope of the A's than I did about the 2008 hope.
Meanwhile, who is going to bat third this year for the A's?
0 recs |
39 comments
Email
Print
Comments
But of course
there are many risks involved in each of the prospects, whether it may be injuries or they just self-destruct and not become what everyone thought they'd become. It's a very optimistic standpoint saying that the prospects will develop into future Swishers and Harens, and it is very possible. One can never really peek into the future to see how these young players will develop and perform in the Majors.
By the way, I don't see much coming out of the Scutaro trade. Any word on those two pitchers?
by muffinpryde on Jan 5, 2008 4:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
risks involved with prospects...
have to be considered, of course, and I think that's why BB is taking the "shotgun approach" by acquiring prospects in large quantity rather than stake the A's future hopes on a few "can't miss" names. It seems like the "can't miss" prospects too often do miss (like our own Richie Harden). If BB can pile up 12-15 of these B+ rated guys and give them the time to properly develop, I think there is a reasonable expectation that 5 or 6 will be key pieces in the "rebirth", and that 1 or 2 will be "stars".
by kitoko on Jan 5, 2008 6:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One of the concerns . . .
. . . that Billy had to have was that in 2007 we had no quality debth when all the injuries hit. Having a quantity of above average players give more options.
by jarforcefatherofforce on Jan 5, 2008 7:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Everytime Beane does something
people harp about it being "The New Moneyball"
I don't think he has a "plan" like that. I think he's just decided to deal from his stregnth and get the best he can get, and prioritize Starting Pitching in the trades he gets.
And Beane did not invent the method he's using now. Both the Florida Marlins and Arizona Diamnondbacks have done this succesfully, with the D'Backs doing it best, as they drafted much better than we did.
What the A's need to do is not only combine our prospects we've acquired by trade, but improve our drafts as well.
The A's need to stop being cheap when it comes to drafting. Enough "Safty" picks like Cliff Pennington. What if, instead of the "Safe" pick of Pennington, we had taken Jacobi Ellsbury? Matt Garza? Craig Hansen? Colby Rasmus? Luke Hochevar? Clay Buchholz?
IF we arn't going to invest the $$$ into the Major League club, lets at least invest in the draft.
by Zonis on Jan 5, 2008 4:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
That third point is what I've been
wishing for for years now. Brian Snyder, Bradley Sullivan, Cliff Pennington, the list goes on. I have my doubts about James Simmons (who seems to have the upside of Joe Blanton and the downside of Jason Windsor) and right now I have no faith in Sean Doolittle. And those two picks were made this season. Imagine if, right now, we had Michael Burgess instead of Sean Doolittle?
Cheap safe picks haven't produced quality major league prospects. So you either start spending for expensive safe picks or you take some risk in the draft. Personally, I'd prefer the former, and if we're not paying freaking Kendall and Loaiza and such anymore, I don't see why we can't take that route.
by walk off bunt on Jan 5, 2008 5:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
On Doolittle:
I'm a believer. Kid's a class act, with talent to burn.
And he talks to the animals, which you've got to like as an undervalued segment of the market.
by Ozzz on Jan 5, 2008 10:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Simmons's stuff
makes Jason Windsor weep in a corner with jealousy.
He also had the single highest rated fastball command of any pitcher in the 2007 draft. As far as I can tell, virtually every scout who rated him gave him a perfect score in that category.
I think it's selling the kid a little short to compare him to Jason Windsor at this point.
On Doolittle: What on earth do you mean about "talking to the animals"?
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2008 12:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dont get it
If you look at the stats, Windsor was superior at similar levels (and they both played in the Big West).
and
James Simmons
I think he means Dr. Doolittle as well for the talking to animals thing.
by apilgrim on Jan 6, 2008 2:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, there is the age to level issue
Simmons is a 20 year old at AA.
Jason Windsor first reached AA at age 22.
by rfloh on Jan 6, 2008 6:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Windsor lost his fastball
Theory is he burned himself out trying to pitch Fullerton to a title. He showed a low-90'2 fastball in college, he was down to 86-88 in Oakland's system.
Simmons, on the other hand, is still pitching in the low-90's.
Both have the plus change-up and plus command, Windsor the better breaking ball but that's why the A's are having Simmons work on his slider.
by grover on Jan 6, 2008 8:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
For the record:
by Ozzz on Jan 7, 2008 1:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In the stats that I actually care about
i.e. K rate and walk rate, Simmons was better at a similar age-- and he was superior in AA last year as well. Not by a lot, granted. Their numbers are similar.
In fairness to Windsor, Simmons was more homer-prone in college (but not in AA).
Basically, as long as a guy's ERA isn't outlandishly high, it's pretty irrelevant to evaluating him as a prospect.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2008 11:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not remembering what they cost
but don't Swisher, Blanton, Suzuki, Buck, Ethier, Teahan, and Street count as "cheap, safe picks"? They were all college guys, and none of them were guys who dropped down because of signability concerns.
by Nick on Jan 6, 2008 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You know, there's a diary in all this
Cheap is a matter of perspective. Both Simmons and Doolittle signed at the full slot recommendation. Only 3 college prospects taken in the 1st round (including the supplemental round) received over-slot bonuses. All were juniors, and two of them (David Price and Matt Wieters) went in the top 5 of the draft.
A high school 1st rounder was/is much more likely to command an above-slot bonus because if they're talented enough to go in the 1st round they've most certainly got a college scholarship lined up.
So the A's are "cheap" in that they don't go after talent that will demand above-slot bonuses. But they have not gone after players willing to sign well below slot recommendation since 2002.
by grover on Jan 6, 2008 11:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The A's were pretty much strictly a "slot" team
in the most recent draft.
Pretty much, you got whatever the number was and could take it or leave it. For the most part, the draftees took it-- the highest unsigned pick was an 8th rounder.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2008 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Err,
Craig Hansen isn't turning out to be a good pick.
Also, while I am certainly not a fan of the Moneyball, Moneyball, market inefficiency mantra that people chant whenever Beane does something, it does seem that his plan right now, as indicated by his moves and his comments, is to load up on as many good, ie B+ and B prospects as he can with the idea that at least some of them should turn out to be good players.
by rfloh on Jan 6, 2008 6:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
beane and beane watchers around mlb
have to be astonished at the reception these latest two "trades" have gotten here - on the best barometer of all that is a's. these are/were salary dumps. to billyball moneyball 'em is idoltry gone wild and weird. . we have become the royalsdrayspirates. but, fortunately, we haven't paid for matt morris or gil meche yet. when you "trade" established stars for minor leaguers ...
does this mean i'm bummed? opposite. this is a baseball dream come true. i would love to see a 25 man roster of cheap, hungry prospects if we're not sniffing the playoffs. see you in march in phoenix.
by oakath on Jan 5, 2008 7:45 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
C'mon, oakath -
Haren and Swisher were, for their productivity, among the best bargains around (especially Haren, but Swisher was locked up for four years at well-under "market value"). If anything, their trades were surprising precisely because their salaries were so reasonable, not salaries you'd want to dump.
by Nico on Jan 5, 2008 8:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
These wern't salary dumps
Haren and Swisher were signed to good contracts.
A Salary dump would have been dealing Kotsay, Crosby or Chavez.
A salary dump is what we did with Kendall and Loaiza last year.
by Zonis on Jan 5, 2008 9:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kotsay, Crosby and Chavez:
We can only hope they're next.
That's one salary dump I look forward to.
by Ozzz on Jan 5, 2008 10:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I am contractually obligated
not to respond to this post.
Please see the main Swisher thread if you want to find out why.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2008 12:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
thataboy
by flipgatey3 on Jan 6, 2008 7:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the "new moneyball niche" angle
= really tired act, as zonis said above.
"This has helped as players like Kielty' Bradley, etc. have made the A's successful."
really? we traded ted lilly for kielty, keeping lilly would have probably made the a's more successful.
and what is your definition of "prospects" (first sentence)?
by xbhaskarx on Jan 5, 2008 10:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Prospects
Since I was referring to Sickels grades I use his definitions to define prospects. Grade A's have a good chance to be stars. Almost all grade A's will be regulars unless injuries or other unforseen problems.
Grade B players have a good chance to enjoy successful careers and some will be stars. Grade C guys have something positive going for them but have a question mark or so and a few may become stars
At this point Sickels has released his top twenty grades for twenty teams and only 10 A's have been issued.
No A's received an A grade but there we 6 B+'s, 2 B's, 5 B-;s, and 8 C+'s. Good grades from Sickels.
by jarforcefatherofforce on Jan 6, 2008 1:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1 on the tired act thing
Saying "x is the new Moneyball" shows a pretty basic misunderstanding of the whole point of the book, which was that the key to success is finding and exploiting market inefficiencies.
It may be that there's a market inefficiency in B prospects vis a vis A prospects right now. Even if true, that doesn't make it the new Moneyball-- just the new market inefficiency.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2008 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But isn't market inefficiency . . . .
. . . what moneyball is all about?
by jarforcefatherofforce on Jan 6, 2008 3:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i just noticed the tags...
Tags: Billy Beane, Monetball
lol
by xbhaskarx on Jan 5, 2008 10:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
DaVinci Cotroneo has a lot to answer for.
Markelangelo Ellis, too.
by Ozzz on Jan 5, 2008 10:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Count De Monet.
For the Mel Brooks fans.
by alox on Jan 6, 2008 8:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm more of a
Lili von Schtupp kinda guy :)
by ChickenStanley on Jan 6, 2008 4:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Monetball!
by iglew on Jan 6, 2008 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I swear, it showed up fine on the preview :-(
by iglew on Jan 6, 2008 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ok i'm easy fair enough
i'm a little late to the party. i thought nick was 5 yrs 25mill or so - 5 mill this yr. espn says he's 400k this year. and a few days ago it was pointed out to me the savings this year 3.5 mill. i'll shut meself up and go back to trying not to figure these two moves out.
by oakath on Jan 5, 2008 10:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Or study painting
by reading Monetball. I've studied Art, and Howe!
by Nico on Jan 5, 2008 10:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
or richard estes or richard diebenkorn
by oakath on Jan 5, 2008 10:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey wait a minute.
Shall we trade our prosects for more prospects?
In reading MLBRUMORS
it was suggested that the Red Sox go after Daric Barton. They stated, "He . . .should be out of the A's price range soon. The A's have always been one to sell and the Red Sox might come calling."
Must have been a Rex Sox fan who wrote this. Should the A's consider trading The Bartons and Gonzalezs?
by jarforcefatherofforce on Jan 6, 2008 9:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahahahaha.
The guy's at MLB minimum salary for 3 years. At least.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2008 9:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
