Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: RaptorsHQ for Toronto Raptors fans!


A's Offseason 40-man Roster Projections: notsellingjeans™ Edition

Is good hitting contagious? 

More to the point:  Do hitters perform better when they are surrounded by other patient, proficient hitters? 

Now if you've already decided where you stand on that question, you have probably also decided what you think the A's should do this winter.

Billy Beane has already mentioned an interest in finding out how much better Jack Cust could be with some established hitters around him.  From there, its not much of a leap to suggest that Beane might be interested in seeing if the addition of a few established hitters could have a positive effect on the rest of the young lineup as well.

With that I hope to plant the seed for a humble rebuttal to my colleague's well-articulated arguments in favor of shunning the pricey 1-to-2 year signing of an aging vet.

Parsing through both Beane and Wolff's recent comments, we've learned:

  1. The team is in the market for at least one hitter, and it won't be one of the big, expensive names that will command 4+ years and $70 million or more.
  2. Eric Chavez is still being penciled in as the team's third baseman, and the A's won't acquire an expensive third baseman as long as that's the case.
  3. The team and Mark Ellis are back in contract talks and both sides seem amenable to a deal being reached.
  4. Beane doesn't seem willing to trade from his farm system in order to bolster the major league offense.

We might as well use that information to inform our offseason predictions.  With that, here's my best guess as to the '09 Opening Day 40-man Roster, with the corresponding transactions and commentary in between.

Star-divide

After Kirk Saarloos and Donnie Murphy were outrighted to Sacramento on Tuesday, the A's have these 42 players on the 40-man roster. 

Part A - Ramping up for the Rule 5 - Late October to mid-November

Before November 20th, which is the date that teams must add players from their own system to the 40-man roster in order to protect them from the Rule 5 draft, I'd expect the following moves:

  1. Javier Herrera and Richie Robnett are both DFA'd.  These moves are indicative of this duo sliding backward in '08, but also of the organization's increasing depth. Herrera's once-promising numbers are muted by testing positive for steroids, concerns about his work ethic, and the fact that he didn't improve much in his second stint in Midland.  Unlike Robnett, Herrera may get snagged by another organization off waivers.  But he was going to run out of options before he ever contributed to the big-league club, so now is the time to try and sneak him through and allow his developmental process to continue.
  2. Keith Foulke and Emil Brown are both allowed to walk as free agents. We'll get to the team's three Type B Compensation free agents - Frank Thomas, Alan Embree, and Mark Ellis - a little bit later.
  3. Brad Kilby - and only Brad Kilby - is added to the 40-man roster for protection from the Rule 5 draft.  Somewhere in Westwood, right this second, PaulThomas is spitting out Chianti onto his property law case reading. No Anthony Recker? No Ryan Webb, Jesus Guzman, or Justin Sellers? With apologies to PT and our Rule 5 draft mavens, I think the team won't need to make as many moves as many of us originally thought.  The real Rule 5-eligible talent - Cunningham, Baisley, Gio, Outman - was added to the 40-man during the year.  And both Webb and Sellers are so young, and so far away from the majors, that if they were added to the 40-man now, they'd be out of options by the time they're finally ready to contribute. Murphy's recent outrighting to AAA may have foreshadowed Guzman's fate; Murphy's a better player than Guzman, and he obviouly wasn't deemed worthy of an offseason roster spot.  The best argument could be made for protecting Recker, given the lack of quality catching depth around the league.  But Recker's respectable season at Midland was buoyed by an unsustainable.384 BABIP, and he struck out in 29% of his at-bats.  He also doesn't have nearly the upside at this point that 22-year-old Jesus Flores did when the Nationals plucked him in '06.  I think the A's are safe.

Part B.  Free Agent Fracas - Mid-November to Mid-December

I like to fantasize about A's acquisitions as much as anyone, but if we're truly trying to project who the team will acquire, we should start with this question:

Why would Player X want to become an Oakland Athletic? 

Unfortunately, that filter removes some of the most exciting names.  Let's try this test out on the FA market's best shortstop option - Rafael Furcal.  Why would Furcal pass up a more familiar environment, a better chance to win the World Series, a better home stadium with higher attendance, better endorsement opportunities, being closer to his home country, and playing with several friends/countrymen, to play for...the A's??? 

Answer:  He'd only do it for a deal that grossly exceeded whatever else he was being offered.  The A's don't tend to handcuff themselves with these types of deals, which is probably one of the keys to their long-term success.

But going down that hypothetical road to rejection with Furcal, as painful an exercise as it was, can lead us to two players that do make sense and fit into Beane and Wolff's above-stated criteria:

1.)  Offer 1b-DH Jason Giambi a 1 year, $10MM deal with a $10MM vesting option for '10 and a $2.5MM buyout (as well as a partial no-trade clause). 

Sorting by OPS+, Giambi was the second-best hitter in '08 among all available FAs this offseason, behind only Teixiera. He projects to be worth just as much as Burrell or Dunn in '09, yet he'll come at significantly lower sticker price and without the long-term risk and uncertainly associated with a 4-6 year deal that covers the tail end of a player's prime and the beginning of his decline years. 

The option would vest at 450-500 at-bats in '08.  If Giambi gets that many at-bats, it means that he was healthy, and if he is healthy for an entire season, he'll be very successful. 

Why he'd want to be an Athletic:   Familiarity, mutual respect, the opportunity to play first base most of the time (which he prefers), returning to his native California, and because the money won't be significantly better elsewhere. 

Giambi will be a fall-back for other suitors (perhaps the Angels if they lose the Tex Sweepstakes?), and most teams will avoid him all together.  If Billy gave him a recruiting pitch and a competitive offer right as the free agent period opened, I think that would go a long way.  It's nice to feel wanted.

Obviously he'd rather play for a contender, but I don't forsee any contenders viewing him as their primary target, and I don't think the market for him will be commensurate with his impressive numbers. I think he'd sign that deal, or perhaps a slightly larger one.

2.)  Offer OF Juan Rivera a one year, $3MM deal with a $3.5MM team option for '10. 

I'm still seduced by what Rivera did in his last healthy season with a full-time job in '06.  In 448 at-bats, he slugged 27 home runs en route to an .887 OPS.  Then he lost nearly the entire '07 season after suffering a broken leg playing winter ball, and by the time he came back healthy in '08, the Angels had signed every outfielder in America and he was 13th on the depth chart.

With the inevitable rust and lacking a clearly defined role, Rivera struggled in '07 to the tune of a .720 OPS in 256 at-bats.

The blessing of these struggles is that the 30-year-old Venezuelan won't be the top item on any team's Christmas wish list, and he should be very affordable. 

Does he still have an .800-.825 OPS season or two lurking in there somewhere?  If used properly, I think he does, and for that price, he'd be an incredible bargain. This is not Emil Brown II.  Rivera is a legitimate right-handed power threat, four years younger and still in his prime, with a major league track record that exceeds anything Emil ever did.

Like Giambi, Rivera could play well enough during this contract to turn himself into an attractive trade piece or an eventual Type B Compensation pick after he leaves the A's.  See?  Even aging vets can help a rebuilding team get better for the future - it just has to be the right acquisition.

Why he'd want to be an Athletic:  I doubt it would be his first choice.  But more than anything, most big leaguers want to play.  The A's can promise him that opportunity (I'll get to the positions a little bit later), where the Angels didn't. The short term of the deal also should keep him motivated by the opportunity to finally earn a big payday, at the end of his prime, after 1-2 good seasons.

3a.)  Offer arbitration to Frank Thomas, Alan Embree (after declining his $3MM option), and Mark Ellis.  Hope that Thomas and Embree decline, seeking cameo roles on contenders in their quests for a ring. 

Thanks to the crazy math of the free agent compensation system, Thomas and Embree, despite their minimal contributions to the A's "success" in '08, could net the A's two of the first 45 picks in the 2009 MLB draft, if the A's offer arbitration and the duo sign with other teams.  They could tell both players that they plan to offer arbitration only as a formality and ask them to decline it.  These types of arrangements happen occasionally with Type B's and given the good relationship Beane seems to have with them, it's plausible.

3b.)  Hope that Mark Ellis accepts arbitration, agreeing to a one-year, $7.5MM deal, rather than demanding a 2-3 year pact or signing elsewhere. 

Tough situation here.  A ton of Ellis' value is tied up in his defense, and he's having offseason surgery on his throwing arm.  Will it affect him negatively?  If the second major arm surgery of his career drops his defense from "top 5 in all of baseball" down to "average for his position", then a three-year deal at the going market rate (~$21MM, or $7MM per) would look ugly).

But if he comes back at something close to what he was this year, he's head and shoulders above the team's internal options at second base, even in down year offensively.  His presence also makes it easier to stomach the otherwise-suspect defense the A's would be trotting out to the field in this hypothetical scenario (Giambi playing ~90 games at first, Cust and Rivera splitting time in left, with all three doing some DHing to stay fresh). 

The dream scenario from the team's perspective would be to persuade him into a one-year extension at a slightly above-market price.  Ellis gets a chance to prove he's healthy, the team mitigates its financial risk, and the A's get another year to evaluate Pennington/Petit/Patterson to see if any of them can carry Ellis' jockstrap in '10 and beyond - because they sure haven't proven that yet.

Part C - The Trade Winds Blow East - Late December

It's late December, and all the biggest fish on the free agent market have found their new homes.  The Cardinals anticipated taking a pass on the free agent pickings at closer (K-Rod, Fuentes), and always intended to fill the back end of their '09 bullpen via trade.  But after getting out-bid on Orlando Cabrera and Edgar Renteria, the Cards find themselves without a shortstop, too...with Spring Training less than two months away.

After paying Cesar Izturis $2.85 million to post a .628 OPS in '08, St. Louis appears resigned on Christmas Day to pay Izturis $3 million for the same predictable, uninspiring results. Until...

The A's offer Huston Street, Bobby Crosby, Dan Meyer, and $3MM to cover part of the final year of Crosby's deal for top catching prospect Bryan Anderson and either Allen Craig or David Freese, whichever one of the two 3b prospects they prefer. 

We could haggle over the money slightly, but I think this is a fair deal that benefits both teams. 

On the Cardinals' side, they fill their gaping shortstop hole with a five-year veteran in a contract year with a ton to prove.  Like most players, Crosby's stat line will probably see an uptick in the NL and in a better hitter's park (.700 OPS?), making him a significant upgrade over Izturis, despite the fact that he's cheaper than Izturis once the A's fork over $3MM in cash. 

Street will probably make about $5MM in arbitration this year, and the Cardinals get their closer for the next two years at least at a price far cheaper than FA value.  They also have a pitching coach with a great reputation for getting the most out of his pitchers, and Street needs that support. 

Meyer is a throw-in, but if there's one place he can stick, it's probably here, in the NL and as a reliever.  Tony LaRussa's yen for LOOGYs is legendary, and perhaps he an Duncan can develop one in Meyer for only $400K. 

On the A's side, they clear around ~$7MM in salary with this deal, even if they fork over $3 million for Crosby.  That $7MM almost covers the Giambi signing by itself.  It also ensures that the team gets good value for Street; he had a good final month in '08 and probably reinstated some of his trade value with that performance.  This is following in the footsteps of a Beane trend toward trading cost-controlled pitchers while they are at near-peak value (contractually and in terms of performance), before they break down and offer nothing in return. 

In Anderson, the A's receive one of the game's top 10 catching prospects, a pure hitter who will definitely stay at catcher with no major defensive question marks.  He lacks power, but he also reached AAA by the tender age of 21, so perhaps some will come with time.  With Anderson (L) and Josh Donaldson (R), the A's could potentially have an awesome 1-2 catching punch in Fremont, with the added flexibility and depth to trade Suzuki in his later, more expensive arbitration years down the road if they see fit.  Imagine - carrying two catchers that both hit well enough to justify playing them equally and keeping them fresh and productive, like the Indians did with Kelly Shoppach and Victor Martinez in '07.

Another potential haggling point in that deal is whether the second prospect coming back is Freese or Nico's Holy Grail, Allen Craig.  My vote would be Freese, despite slightly less impressive offensive numbers, in large part because we can be certain he'll stick at third base.  Freese was the California League Defensive Player of the Year in '07, while Craig's major question mark is shaky defense.  If Craig can't stick at third - a very real possibility - he's instantly much less attractive. 

Neither Craig nor Freese is a guaranteed future starting third baseman, the way Anderson all but is at catcher.  But they provide yet another decent breakout candidate for the role of Chavez' heir apparent, and acquiring them would continue an organizational trend of hoarding cheap depth (like Patterson and Murton) that ensure the team won't need to make the Shannon Stewart/Emil Brown, $1.5MM replacement-level stopgap signings in the future.

Meyer was out of options and wasn't going to make the A's 25-man roster next season anyway, so he literally doesn't represent a loss to the team, even if he does represent a slight gain to an NL team. 

But there's one more benefit to that deal from the A's standpoint:  It gives the opportunity to freely audition for the shortstop job.  As long as Crosby was in Oakland, he was going to grouse if anyone else saw time there. In fact, he was already doing it.  By jettisoning him, the A's get to keep both Pennington and Petit on the active roster next year, with one starting alongside Ellis at SS and the other as the backup middle infielder. Since the A's next shortstop was probably going to have to be developed internally anyway, this creates the ideal situation from a developmental standpoint:  a.)  Good healthy competition between two guys for the starting job, b.) a "crutch" if one of the guys goes into a horrible slump (simply play the other guy for a week), c.) no complaining from Crosby, d.) an incredible double-play partner, and e.) with the improved lineup, the winner of the Pennington/Petit smackdown is batting 9th with virtually no offensive expectations.

Wrapping It All Up - 2009 Lineup and Roster

A big part of the offseason was spent prioritizing the offense.  Furthering that trend, this hypothetical roster carries only 11 pitchers and 14 hitters, at least through the month of April with the additional off-days.

Lineup (vs. righties):

  1. Buck RF
  2. Sweeney CF
  3. Cust LF/DH
  4. Giambi 1b
  5. Rivera DH/LF
  6. Chavez 3b (we'll see about that, I'm skeptical)
  7. Ellis 2b
  8. Suzuki C
  9. Pennington/Petit SS

Now, how much better does that lineup look?  :)

Getting back to our opening question:  Do hitters perform better in a good lineup than in a terrible one, like the A's of '08? 

Well, I don't think it could possibly hurt.  There's actually 4-5 guys in there who could hit 20 homers now.  Ellis' potential production looks great from that 7 slot, as does Suzuki's from the 8 hole.  Perhaps all of these guys can also relax a little bit more with better hitters around them.  Unquestionably, they'd have more opportunities to face pitchers in the stretch, and they'd work the opposing starting pitchers more than 2008 Oakland A's did with the worst offense in baseball (.687 team OPS). 

But I'm also excited about the bench, which complements the starting nine very well:

Denorfia (R), Davis (R), Hannahan (L), Bowen (S) and Petit (R).

Denorfia, Davis, and Hannahan are three excellent defenders who can spell Giambi, Cust, or Rivera in the field in late innings, as well as give them plenty of off-days to keep them fresh.  And hopefully, Denorfia and Rivera can play enough to ensure that Buck and Sweeney don't play much against lefties, where they had very poor platoon splits (in admittedly small samples) in '08.  

There's also six or seven guys who can steal a base among that group of 14. It's a really nice complementary mix, and I could even see that offense being league average if it avoids injuries (which it might, if the playing time is doled out carefully).

Indirectly, that major league lineup also creates the best AAA lineup in baseball, by putting a few young studs in Sacramento to give them more time to develop.

C Powell, 1b Barton, 2b Patterson, SS Murphy (needs to become more flexible anyway), 3b Baisley, LF Murton, CF CarGon, RF Cunningham

You could see a few of those guys being angry about that, but I see no problem with them earning their way back to the big club.  Plus, when they look around the diamond, they'll know this isn't the California Penal League - there's a future big leaguer at every position on that team.

The staff then looks like this: 

  1. Duke SP
  2. Gallagher SP 
  3. Eveland SP
  4. Smith SP
  5. Braden SP
  6. Brown RP
  7. Casilla RP
  8. Blevins LHP
  9. Ziegler RP
  10. Devine RP

Candidates for the final bullpen spot, all of whom have options remaining and can shuttle up and down all year long:  Brad Kilby, Jeff Gray, Henry Rodriguez (he's a long ways off, I know). 

The 40-man roster doesn't really need to carry a mop-up man, since Kirk Saarloos and Lenny DiNardo are both only a phone call and a DFA away in Sacramento.

The sixth and seventh SP, guaranteed to be needed due to injuries or a Duchscherer midseason trade:  Outman and Gio Gonzalez.

With all of that offseason activity, we're still only at 38 spots on the 40-man roster.  So the team could also take a high-upside reliever in the Rule 5 draft and stash him in the final bullpen spot, and perhaps also leave one open roster spot in spring training, planning to sign the best player that gets DFA'd in spring by another team.  This season alone, AAA MVP Nelson Cruz and playoff stud Grant Balfour both passed waivers and all 29 other teams and returned to their respective organizations in late March.

Cost-effective, no sacrifices made for the future, and some hope for an offensive renaissance - If that's what the 40-man roster looks like on Opening Day, I'll be very excited about Oakland A's baseball. 

0 recs | Comment 155 comments | Share on Facebook Digg!

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

About step 3A -

Apparently, teams no longer have to offer Arbitration to Type B FAs.

by mikev on Oct 8, 2008 9:20 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, they still do

That was misreported/misinterpreted by Ken Rosenthal in a midseason column, and was then carried over to here.

But teams do still need to offer arbitration to Type Bs.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 9:44 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Dude, did BBG just bury your diary with her older diary?

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 8, 2008 9:23 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm putting this one up top in this afternoon.

So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one

by baseballgirl on Oct 8, 2008 9:42 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

My bad ...

BBG is an awesome person and A’s fan, no negative implications were intended …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 8, 2008 2:49 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It's all good :-)

We’re sorry about the mix-up this morning. I definitely wanted NSJ’s post to have some time on the front page. I thought it was a great post.

So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one

by baseballgirl on Oct 8, 2008 3:13 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I top posted her on accident

My diary/“story” was supposed to run on the sidebar as a fanpost, but it appeared on the front page somehow. I wasn’t trying to post over hers.

If anyone with admin power can somehow move this diary to the sidebar, I’d be grateful. I don’t know how myself.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 9:43 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Are you sure?

It’s way good; should be front page.

So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one

by baseballgirl on Oct 8, 2008 9:46 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Hmmm...can't figure it out, but I will move this to the front page this afternoon

So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one

by baseballgirl on Oct 8, 2008 9:53 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Thanks BBG

I felt real bad that it top-posted yours; I tried to fix it a few times but I couldn’t make it happen. Maybe the system refuses to allow “stories” to run on the sidebar with fanposts.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 10:33 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sidebar is better than front page for substantive, detailed articles

It gives people much more time to digest them and have lengthy back-and-forth.

Just sayin’.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 10:50 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I can't get it over there, unless NSJ does that himself

So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one

by baseballgirl on Oct 8, 2008 11:18 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

this was a wonderful read.

Giambi – my answer to BBG’s diary as well.

Thanks again NSJ, I always enjoy reading your contributions. From PaulThomas’ chianti to Mark Ellis’ jockstrap, and everything in-between.

Bob Geren, on 8/2/07, on the success of Alan Embree as new interim closer: "What can I say,... he's been our Steady Tremendous Bullpen Man"

by popcornjames on Oct 8, 2008 10:10 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

"From PaulThomas’ chianti to Mark Ellis’ jockstrap, and everything in-between."

The remains of the day………………….ahh, nothing like October rumblings!

by mrod on Oct 8, 2008 10:40 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The more I see ideas to sign Giambi

The more I think I’ll lose all interest in the 2009 season if they do it. I really just don’t see how it provides any significant benefit. All it does it take away playing time from guys who will matter the next time the A’s matter, and I think Giambi will be average at best when you take into account non-existant defensive ability and playing in a park that isn’t designed for left-handed hitters to hit home runs.

by thejd44 on Oct 8, 2008 10:54 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Hear, hear

Dud is old. Like, real old.

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Oct 8, 2008 11:05 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

"Dud" is old?

Typo, or freudian slip?

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 11:59 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Can't it be both?

Cut me some slack, man, I was in Trusts & Estates and I was on call.

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Oct 8, 2008 6:44 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Now you tell me

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Oct 9, 2008 9:17 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I hate top catching prospects...

They usually end up playing another position or don’t hit much for a long period of time.

"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra

by brenarlo on Oct 8, 2008 11:06 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

No ...

he said “or” not “and” …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 8, 2008 1:26 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

snap

"Lefty relievers are like the different Mountain Dew flavors. New ones keep appearing, and people are willing to buy, but in the end most of them suck." - Gallagher's Watermelons

by scatterbrian on Oct 8, 2008 7:31 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

At this point in their careers, they've had enough experience at high enough levels that

by now, they probably have a pretty good idea of whether or not they can stick at the position … which, as best I can tell, is very, very unlikely since neither Goldstein or Sickels even lists them as catchers …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 8, 2008 1:32 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I totally misread that ... he called them 3bmen, not catchers ...

It looks like Anderson has just enough defensive talent to stick as a catcher, albeit, not a good one …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 8, 2008 1:42 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah

My understanding is that Anderson will be able to be a big-league catcher. He’s the rare good-hitting minor league catcher who can say that (although he has lacked any power thus far).

With Freese and Craig, what I was trying to communicate was that a.) both of them are third base prospects, and that b.) Freese is a sure bet to stay at third, while Craig’s suspect defense may limit him to a lower rung on the defensive spectrum.

Although the A’s already have a young catcher, it would undoubtedly have value to pick up one of the ten best catching prospects in baseball. If nothing else, he’s yet another tradeable asset with a far later expiration date on his re-sale value than Street has.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 2:04 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm less knowledgeable on the finer points of trading players than most around here...

… but could we really extract 2 top prospects from any team with a Crosby/Street/Meyer offer? 2/3 of that package is pure crap (and I say that having a lot of irrational sentiment for Crosby), and the remaining 1/3 struggled pretty visibly last season. I know we’re talking in pure hypotheticals, here, but how realistic is that deal?

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Oct 8, 2008 11:18 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well, neither Anderson nor Freese is a top 50 prospect in MLB

And Street basically remains the best closer option for any team that can’t afford Fuentes or K-Rod.

As for Crosby…at $2MM, he’s not a bad value at all. And the Cardinals are the rare team for whom his services actually represent an upgrade.

Plus, the Cardinals should be playing to win now, for the next few years. They have the best right-handed hitter in the last 25 years on their team. How often does a team have the opportunity to build around that?

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 11:36 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The only proviso I would issue

is that they may not have said hitter next season. Pujols is contemplating TJS, which would render him hors de combat for all of 2009. If he packs it in, I can’t see how the team doesn’t write the season off as a rebuilding year.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 12:00 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

i think this may be a case where it looks fair on paper (as NSJ pointed out)

but I think that fan perception may negatively influence this deal. I’m not entirely sure how the Cardinals’ fan base feels about Crosby, but I have a feeling that they wouldn’t be too terribly excited were he to move to STL. I think if you coupled that with the fact that the Cards would be giving up some decent/good prospects, and I think that Mozeliak may be a little trigger shy. However, I think that it is a fair deal, and as long as Pujols plays, would benefit both teams (a win-win deal).

'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long

by DyeLongJustice on Oct 8, 2008 12:33 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The Cardinals also benefit from cheaply auditioning Crosby as their long-term replacement

They get to use ‘09 as a low-cost evaluative year for whether or not they’d like him as their shortstop long-term. That’s far less risky than simply signing a guy from another team in FA, with a vague knowledge of his personality and current health.

Crosby isn’t very good, but he’s going to get PAID in free agency nonetheless. Look at how much money Julio Lugo makes. Someone is going to throw money at 29-year-old Bobby Crosby next winter. If the Cardinals like what they see in a one-year audition, it could be them.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 2:11 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If I'm the Cardinals GM, that seems like a bad thing...

It’s like saying “you, yes you, could win our contest and get a GIANT PILE OF RUBBISH! YES! STEP RIGHT UP!”

With that said, I don’t think DLJ’s concerns are much to worry about. Fans in general always like any deal of prospects for veterans, and always hate any deal of veterans for prospects. Not the informed fans, mind you, but they’re a small minority of the total fanbase.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 3:41 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

True, I tend to forget that our fanbase tends to be a bit more knowledgeable

than a lot of other fans of teams with bigger payrolls. The A’s fan in me says that I don’t want Crosby for ANYTHING, let alone two prospects, with basically Street offsetting the loss of them. Sure Street is good, and they have Yady and Glaus blocking those prospects anyway, but you’re better playing Jason Giambi’s gold thong at shortstop than you are playing Crosby. Any internal option can’t be that much worse than Crosby, even if he’s cheap. And yes, I do think he’s better than some people have made him out to be this season, but I think that maybe this past season lowered his value a little bit, as far as “impressions” go, since he lost his closer tag (although I still think Street is a good reliever).

'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long

by DyeLongJustice on Oct 8, 2008 4:32 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It's true of A's fans too...

Mychael Urban said 80% of the fan reaction he got to the Swisher trade was negative.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 4:41 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

When someday you come to undertand

how a fan can be outraged in the moment they learn their favorite player was traded, yet can still appreciate the team’s roster planning, then perhaps maybe someday you’ll understand what most people feel when they call themselves A’s fans.

I'm a street walkin cheetah with a heart full of napalm.

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Oct 8, 2008 7:29 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm outraged at this comment,

yet will probably look back at it later and appreciate its wisdom.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 7:40 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Depends

on who we get for Paul in the Lookout Landing deal.

I'm a street walkin cheetah with a heart full of napalm.

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Oct 8, 2008 8:00 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I heard it's Jose Vidro and I'm pissed.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 8:03 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I was hoping for Miguel Batista

Lousy pitcher, but he’d probably write some interesting fanposts.

I'm a street walkin cheetah with a heart full of napalm.

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Oct 8, 2008 8:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

sounds like a good plan

although i dont see what why you’re so eager to trade away huston street without getting back what we need in return. we already have a solid catcher, and by the time we’ll have to pay him anything we’ll be contending again and be willing to spend more money. And I dont think we need to get allen craig becuase we have our own allen craig i jeff baisely, and correct me if im mistaken, he had a fairly decent september on the big club.
with the way street pitched the last month of the season last year, showing how well he can pitch when he is finally healthy, i dont think we need to sell short on him. if we keep him, we have a very good, if not the best 7-8-9 inning relievers in baseball. and were gonna need that with all the inexperience we have in our rotation.

by diehardoaklandfan22 on Oct 8, 2008 11:29 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I didn't know Mark Ellis was eligible for arbitration.

Or maybe I just don’t understand what arbitration means. Could somebody explain?

The plain sounds okay, but I’m not exactly fond of getting Giambi back. I know the A’s desparately need a good bat, but is he really the answer?

We're in a team-wide funk. ~Mark Ellis

by #14fan on Oct 8, 2008 11:32 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

All players after their first three years of service time are eligible for arbitration ...

in years 4-6 it is binding, if offered, they are required to accept. After year six the player can decline and become a free agent.

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 8, 2008 11:56 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

But what is arbitration exactly?

We're in a team-wide funk. ~Mark Ellis

by #14fan on Oct 8, 2008 11:58 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Not sure how deep you want to go here, but arbitration is a quasi-judicial proceeding

which is set up by the collective bargaining agreement to determine fair player salaries. The player and the team each submit salary figures to the arbiter (about a month ahead of time) stating what they think the player ought to earn the next season. They then have a hearing, in which each side presents the case for their figure. They can base that case on a variety of things— production, health, salaries of comparable players with similar amounts of service time, etc. At the end, the arbiter picks one figure or the other— he can’t split the difference.

That contract is NONGUARANTEED. If the player is subsequently released by his team, he only has to receive termination pay of 30 days if he is released before March 15 or 45 days if he is released between March 16 and the start of the season. So offering arbitration to departing free agents is pretty low-risk for the team.

In practice, like most legal proceedings (even though this one does not go through the formal legal system, the arbiters are often lawyers or legal mediators), the vast majority of cases are settled before they reach the hearing stage, usually somewhere in the middle of the two figures. Last year only Chad Gaudin on the A’s was still unsigned when the sides exchanged figures, and he settled for a middle sum very shortly afterward.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 12:11 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

after my head stopped spinning from the multitude of words...

I think I got it…maybe.
Thanks!

We're in a team-wide funk. ~Mark Ellis

by #14fan on Oct 8, 2008 12:41 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Very well written

enjoyable read. I’m ambivalent about Giambi, much prefer to leave Cust as a DH only, and the thought of Giambi at 1st gives me a headache. Hell, I don’t even want Ellis back but that is just me. This should be a very interesting off season.

by Laoren on Oct 8, 2008 11:44 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sign Fracas NOW!

The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus

by The Dogfather on Oct 8, 2008 11:53 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What league you come from?

California Penal.

Awesome use of a great baseball movie quote.

Not bad ideas either.

C/IF prospects sound good to me. C prospects are just one knee injury away from being a bust so it’s hard to have too many. Plus, if need be they are nice trading chips.

I don’t know anything about the 3B prospects, but we could certainly use one.

I understand your point on Chavvy, but I think the A’s will try and upgrade over Hanranahan.

I know we’ve had 3B discussions before…but it would be nice if we could remove Rivera and replace with a 3B of equivalent offense/salary.

Does Cantu suck that bad defensively? He’d have to be a trade target and is arby eligible I think. Uggla @ 3B? Can their offense outweigh their defense and how does this compare to Hanranahan?

Two-thirds of the earth is covered by water, the other third is covered by Kotsay...in his prime...like 3 years ago.

by carp on Oct 8, 2008 1:34 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Cantu is beyond horrible defensively

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 3:43 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Defensive Alignment

I think it might be interesting to see if we could teach Rivera 1st Base, a position where he has played in the past (2 games in his career! Woo!). Given that he’s played a multitude of positions in his career (Catcher, Right Field, Left Field, Center Field, First Base (2), Second Base (1)) he should have the versitility to learn the position, and do it better than Cust or Giambi.

That would put Cust in Left Field, Rivera at 1st Base and Giambi at 1B.

Otherwise-its a very realistic off season plan, though the St. Louis trade is questionable in that we never know what the A’s will do.

But there is also one thing you are assuming that quite likely will blow somewhat of a hole in your proposal-Tony LaRussa, and therefore possibly Duncan himself, might not be with the team next year.

There has been a lot of mulling this season that LaRussa could leave St. Louis after conflicts with managment/ownership. There has even been speculation that he could try his hand at becoming a General Manager and joining up with Seattle. If he does leave St. Louis, he will likely bring his coaching staff with him, as is usually the case (see: LaRussa going to St. Louis in the first place).

It is a fine point, but if LaRussa goes, than the LOOGY Loving Mentality goes. If Duncan goes, there goes the “We can fix Street” mentality.

Of course, the real key to this proposal anyways is the simple truth that the Cardinals need a Short Stop, need a Closer, and already have a solid, incumbant catcher/Molina Brother making Anderson expendable. I’ve also heard musings that Managment is down on Cody Rasmus, but I doubt we’d be able to acquire him in any deal.

On the bench, I could see the A’s deciding to try going with Baisley instead of Hannahan. Baisley can play the same positions Hannahan can; 3B and 1B, and we saw that Hannahan can not hit MLB pitching.

facepalm.jpg

by Zonis on Oct 8, 2008 2:06 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I see a hole in that alignment
That would put Cust in Left Field, Rivera at 1st Base and Giambi at 1B.

I think our defense will be even worse than I proposed if we play two men at first base, Zonis. There’s gonna be a hole somewhere in that plan. :)

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 2:13 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Do pitching coaches really affect GM's decisions all that much?

I mean this as an honest question, but my perception is that they don’t. Why would you hire a guy if you DIDN’T think he could fix pitchers, or be knowledgeable about his craft. I would agree that Duncan may be one of the best out there, but I would be surprised if Mozeliak declined a deal based solely on whether he thought his pitching coach was competent enough to fix someone.

'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long

by DyeLongJustice on Oct 8, 2008 2:39 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sometimes

One of the reasons Beane acquired the late Cory Lidle (RIP) was because Rick Peterson told BB to. One of the reasons the Mets traded Kazmir for Zambrano was because Rick Peterson (lol) told them to acquire Zambrano. I’m sure Schuerholz was influenced by Mazzone sometimes as well. So based on the success of following this strategy I think that it’s obvious that the Cards should do whatever it takes to get a guy Duncan wants on their team (even if it costs their top prospect).

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Oct 8, 2008 3:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

So it sounds to me like its predicated on the rapport between pitching coach and GM.

I could definitely see Duncan having a strong influence on pitching acquisitions then. I was just confused at why any GM would question their pitching coach’s competency, since after all it was the organization that hired them.

'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long

by DyeLongJustice on Oct 8, 2008 4:34 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I love this kind of analysis...

this is great.

But will fans really want to see Jason Giambi return? I hear nothin’ but boos when he gets out there.

I think it’s time for another survey…

by catattack77 on Oct 8, 2008 2:34 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

A very realistic fantasy

I could see all of this happening except the StL deal. The deal favors us as B. Anderson may just be a top 50 prospect (probably will just miss that arbitrary cutoff though) and Allen Craig/David Freese isn’t worthless (as Crosby at 2 mil still almost is as is Meyer). But even though it favors us in terms of hypothetical “value” it doesn’t really help us. We have Suzuki, and Anderson will probably be ready by midseason next year. Anderson’s bat, while very good as a catcher, won’t play well at 1b or DH, and neither will Suzuki’s. Plus if they were to play 1b, they’d have defensive struggles, at least at first (pun not intended), as well. So, unless you want to platoon them, or you think that keeping both of them fresh will allow you to field such a good hitter at catcher that you can accept a poor 1b/Dh it doesn’t make much sense. Even then, a platoon doesn’t quite work. Surprisingly, both Anderson and Suzuki suffered from reverse platoons in 2008. Suzuki, though a RHH, hit better against RHP and Anderson, though a LHH, hit LHP better (at least partially due to a .373 BABIP and only a 23.1 LD%, if you trust MiLB LD %). For their career, Anderson has a higher OPS against RHP (.795 vs. .721 in the minors) as does Suzuki (.749 vs. .644 in the majors). So, the only reason for us to want Anderson is either as a trade chip or if you think he can out-produce Suzuki.

Therefore, for this STL deal to work, you have to believe Allen Craig or David Freese to be a long-term answer at 3b. Freese is already 25 and will turn 26 in April next year. His MLEs suggest a .264/.318/.446/.764 line. Craig is already 24 but won’t turn 25 until mid-July next year. His MLEs suggest a .239/.309/.363/.672 line. Remarkably, both of those MLEs are better than the .223/.310/.350/.659 line that the A’s got out of 3b in 2008. People like to say that Freese and Craig are very similar to Baisley. Baisley is older than both of them and posted the follow minor league equivalent: .255/.333/.399/.732 though with a .280 BABIP and 21.2 LD% (again if you believe minor league LD%). Let’s be generous and say that Freese (especially with his fielding) represents an upgrade and that Craig’s extra upside also represents an upgrade. Do we really want to trade Street for a slight upgrade at 3b and a C whose only real value to us is as a trade asset? Do we really want to trade Crosby that much? OK, we do. Good point.

So, let’s take your deal and change it so that we still have the Crosby + $ for Freese or Craig part. We know they’ll want Street and they don’t really have a #1 SP unless they believe Carpenter will come back healthy. Plus who doesn’t want more pitching? We also know that they’re slightly ticked off at their top prospect. One Cards blog read between the lines and concluded that they believe the Cards will shop said top prospect this offseason. We also know (assuming that PT’s info is correct) that at midseason the Cards were interested in Ryan Sweeney as a replacement for said top prospect. Which all leads me to this deal: Duke, Street, Crosby (+$ for his salary), Sweeney, and Meyer for Rasmus and Freese/Craig. Basically it’s your deal with Rasmus subbed for Anderson and Duke and Sweeney added for us. That deal has all the same good elements as your original deal for us. The Cards sacrifice a great prospect but gain a great SP and a young, solid OF. If they wanted a similar insurance plan on Duke that the Cubs got with Gaudin for Harden, we could even offer Eveland, Smith, or Braden as well.

But another advantage of this deal is it also allows us to use our roster space a little more freely. Since it’s a 5 (6 if we add part of Danallas Smith) for 2 deal we can use 3 extra roster spots. One can be for Jesus Guzman who I think is just good enough that he should be protected. One can be for Jav Herrera who has one last chance next year at Sacramento to fulfill his potential (it’s his last option year, let’s not waste it). And the last one can be for Recker or Jose Guzman who both have shots at making it based on their tools.

A few more random comments:

That AAA team is about to become a AAAA team. Murton and Patterson are basically on their last chances as productive big leaguers. Baisley has maybe one shot at glory left in him. Powell could maybe make it as Adam Melhuse if he ever was healthy. Murphy could maybe make it as a bench player (and this comes from one of his biggest supporters) who plays against LHP. CarGo, Barton, and Cunningham are the only real prospects on that team. Now if you believe winning in the minors helps prospects "feel" what it feels like to win and promotes a good winning atmosphere in the organization then that team is perfect. And it’s certainly good to have a team like that which allows you to call players like that up when there are big league injuries (no more Emil Browns!). Maybe once in a while you’ll find a Luke Scott or Jack Cust or 2007 Jack Hannahan.

In your whole prediction of what could or should happen you never really found a 3b or SS a team can build around. You just found guys who could maybe produce league average or slightly above. How about the A’s get a cornerstone this offseason? Trade for JJ Hardy or Dan Uggla (and move him to 3b) and sign them for 5ish years. Beane/Wolff may have hinted that they won’t trade the farm away but they also said they’d get a big bat for the future and Giambi isn’t that. Hardy and Uggla are.

Where did Beane/Wolff say they wouldn’t get a 3b with Chavez still on the team? They were rumored to be interested in Beltre earlier in the year.

   

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Oct 8, 2008 3:16 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That deal for Rasmus is insanely favorable to St. Louis

It’s safe to assume that Sweeney, alone, for Freese or Craig is a win for STL. So you’re talking Duke, Street, Crosby, Meyer and possibly ANOTHER pitcher for one prospect? That’s half a frickin’ pitching staff for a guy who hasn’t hit above AA yet.

I like Rasmus a lot, but if that’s the price, I’m putting my wallet away.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 4:07 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I assume Crosby and Meyer are zeroes

Duke has only one more year left on his contract. Sure he pitched well but he also was injured and had surgery. All this after missing almost all of 2007 from injury.

Street is a very valuable reliever, but one who for whatever reason, hasn’t been good at getting saves as a closer. I’d call it luck but perhaps another team thinks that it’s a problem. He’s still a very valuable asset. But one who is getting expensive at one of the most fungible positions in the sport. And he’s only under control for two years.

Meyer is nothing to us. Crosby is just salary we get rid of. We end up saving 2 mil on BoCro, 5 on Street, and 3-4 (?) mil for Duke. So not only do we get 6 years of a stud prospect for 3 years of valuable pitching (but valuable pitching when we won’t compete) but we save $10ish million. With that ten million we can talk to the Tigers about Mags or save it for an extension on, say, Hardy (my number one target this offseason).

Besides to get a real superstar, sometimes you have to overpay.

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Oct 8, 2008 4:18 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Rasmus is "a real superstar"?

He’s a prospect who has maybe a 10 or 20% chance of turning into a real superstar. That is not close to the same thing.

If the A’s won’t compete, saving the money to spend it on Ordonez or Hardy to help out in that “noncompeting” year is pointless in the extreme. There’s no doubt that this trade would cost the A’s multiple wins in the short term, basically decimating whatever chances they had of making the postseason next year. In any event, the A’s have far more than enough money available for any move the team makes to be dictated solely by whether it is a good idea or not.

In any event, if the A’s were to deal both Duke and Street I feel like they can come up with something better than JUST Rasmus for BOTH of them.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 5:01 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If the A's were to trade both Duke and Street

Sure the A’s could 2-3 top 50 prospects, or a valuable major leaguer. But will the A’s be able to get a BETTER prospect than Rasmus? What people have said is amazing about the A’s minor league system is its depth. We have a ton of prospects who on the Sickel scale grade between C+ and B+. We have two pitchers better than that but no hitters who’ll rank better than a solid B (Carter got a very aggressive B+ last year but this year Sickels’ has hinted he’ll be a B). Cardenas is probably a B, as is Doolittle.

Rasmus is our only chance at getting a superstar. Because we’re not getting a superstar once he’s established himself. Rasmus has probably a 20% chance of being the next Jim Edmonds, 30% chance at being Jay Payton, 20% at being Ben Grieve, 20% at being Adam Piatt, and 10% of being injured and never making the majors. We have the depth to survive if we gamble a couple of times on superstars. But we won’t make the playoffs with a bunch of fringe players.

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Oct 8, 2008 7:09 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

There's a huge difference between "a bunch of fringe players"

and “a bunch of above average players,” which is essentially what the Rays took to the playoffs this season. Longoria might be a superstar eventually but he’s not there yet, Pena has as many weaknesses as strengths, and none of their other position players are particularly exceptional.

It would be downright embarrassing if the A’s could not extract at least 4 prospects in the B-B+ range for Duke and Street, and I’d take that over just Rasmus every day of the week. (Hell, Rasmus might not even be an A himself anymore.) Getting a B level grade does not necessarily mean that you lack the upside of a star.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 7:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Would you be happy if it was

say Rasmus and Pete Kozma? As for above average players, both Pena and Longoria posted OPS+s >130. While that may not be “superstar” it goes a long way towards allowing the rest of your lineup have OPS+s around 100 (except Bartlett). The A’s currently have one guy who OPSed more than 5 above 100 and that was Jack Cust.

And I would agree with you about having B-B+ prospects if they were 2b/SS/3b prospects. But we have the prospects/major leaguers to fill all of our positions except those three with average to slightly above average players. You were right to correct my use of “fringe.”

As for stars on the Rays, if we got one guy of the quality I think Upton and Longo will be, I’d be happy.

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Oct 8, 2008 8:00 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, those two may not be stars yet - but they're damn close!

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 8:03 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Kozma is a mediocrity

To make that trade, in addition to Rasmus, I want them to throw in one of the 3B prospects (it’s not like they’re doing anything with them anyway, between Wallace and Glaus) and I also want one of their good pitching prospects— Clay Mortenson, Jess Todd, Jaime Garcia or P.J. Walters. If the A’s are punting 2009, it had damn well better be worth it.

If not, I think the A’s can do better shopping Street and Duke elsewhere.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 8:37 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Oh, and while we're on the subject of the Cardinals

Who is this Jason Motte dude? I’ve never heard of him before, but he struck out 126 batters (and walked just 29) in 78 innings this year. For the mathematically challenged out there, that’s almost 15 strikeouts per nine innings.

As they say in the trade, “holy *&%^.” Them’s closer numbers, there.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 8:47 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

According to Sickels, he's a converted catcher

who started pitching in 2006. He seems to have taken to it rather well…

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 9:22 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, I didn't include him in the hypothetical,

Because I assumed that, when we factor in contracts, the Cards would probably rather have him than Street anyway.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 9:53 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I stopped liking Rasmus as much...

when he hurt his knee taking a called strike at the plate this year. How do you get injured taking a pitch? If that doesn’t scream future Oakland Athletic, I don’t know what does.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 4:18 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well...

he still had to have taken that strike as strike 3, and then havw a runner getting thrown out trying to steal second, resulting in a double play.

Procrastinators unite....tomorrow

by muffinpryde on Oct 8, 2008 6:59 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You've trademarked "notselling jeans"?

How very Pat Riley of you.

< hurries to tm office, locks down We’re All Gonna Die >

I'm a street walkin cheetah with a heart full of napalm.

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Oct 8, 2008 4:22 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

notsellinggoats™ was already taken

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 10:02 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I wonder if

Gary Sheffield would be a good fit. I bet he could play first base or the outfield and DH some. Maybe Street for Sheffield or some combination

they were 3-21 in one stretch? Yawza

Let's have our Piazza and eat the Cust too - SPWC

by closetasfan on Oct 8, 2008 4:26 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Gary Sheffield is OLD

2008 was the first year since the Brewers were in the AL East that Sheff posted an OPS+ below league average. But he played in over 100 games in 2008. Unless he was playing through an injury that’s now fully healed, what makes you think that Sheffield will at age 40 improve back to above-average offensive performance again?

And at $14 million, I doubt if I’d claim him off waivers, much less trade Street (our best remaining non-prospect trade chip) for him.

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Oct 8, 2008 4:36 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Giambi

I’m all for the Giambi idea. He’ll bring in fans and still has a decent bat. I don’t like Ellis but I’m not against bringing him back for a year. But not at 7mill a year. Way to much for Ellis. Offer him 5 mill he takes then great if not then bye. Trading for a good bat now like Uggla or Hardy is too soon. We don’t know what pitcher we want to keep. We don’t know if Eveland, Smith, or Gio will be keepers. All we know is Cahill and Anderson are off limits. Wait another year before traiding pitchers. See how they do this year. What about Casey Blake? A 3b possibility or 1b. Probably won’t be able to get him w/o over paying. Why trade for Sheff when we can sign Giambi? Plus Sheff has a limited no trade claus. Abreu is another possibility but once again will probably be too expensive.

by JFRIZZLE on Oct 8, 2008 4:49 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Don't like Ellis?

Out. Now.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 5:04 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Two questions for the community, related to this diary:

1. Can anyone estimate what the projected payroll will be for this hypothetical team (including Ellis, Rivera, and Giambi, minus Street/Crosby)?

2. What do our prospect mavens think of Bryan Anderson?

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 5:40 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sure

The current estimated payroll is almost comically low. $11M for Chavez, 5.25 for Crosby, 4-ish for Street, 4-ish for Duke, a $3 million option on Embree, 1-ish for Bowen, 2-ish for Cust, and a passel o’guys at the league minimum. Assuming the Embree option is declined, you’re looking at $27.25M plus 19 players at about $400K for another $4.6 million, or around $32 million total.

Your scenario would add $10 million for Giambi, $3 million for Rivera (personally, I’m signing Russell Branyan with that money, but YMMV) and $7.5 million for Ellis, while subtracting $1.2 million in league minimums. That’s a total of only about $51.3 million, or less money than the team spent in salaries this season once you include the Kotsay subsidy.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 6:05 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

what's a few million bucks,

but wouldn’t 19 guys at 400k be 7.6?

"...in baseball you wear a cap." -- george carlin

by Hot Cup Joe on Oct 8, 2008 8:57 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yes

I have literally no idea what I was thinking there.

OK, so revise those to $35 million currently, $54 million after the NSJ plan.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 9:04 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You're already practicing for your law career, Paul

Over-billing clients with fuzzy math.

Precocious as ever.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 9:52 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Paul, convince me why Branyan is a better idea than Rivera.

Just from a quick BBref perusal, Branyan strikes me as Jack Cust without the walks and with less homers, complete with awful defense.

Rivera seems like he was becoming a pretty damn good hitter until he broke his leg.

by mikev on Oct 9, 2008 8:21 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Is it awful?

It’s actually rated as very strong by OPD, less strong but decent by RZR last time I checked. And even if it is awful, it’s third base, whereas Rivera plays only positions which the A’s already have amply covered in-house (and Rivera’s defense is awful as well).

Branyan walks a lot… not as much as Cust, granted, but 12.3% for his career is indicative of a pretty good eye. And he has huge power— again, not as much as Cust, but 22% of his fly balls are homers. His career mark would, if he had qualified, have placed him eighth in MLB this season. (Cust was 2nd behind Ryan Howard. Other usual suspects— Thome, A-Rod, Manny, Adam Dunn— at the top of the leaderboard.)

Rivera’s career marks in BB% and HR/FB, for reference purposes, are 6.6% and 13.2% respectively. He strikes out a lot less than Branyan, so he’ll hit for a higher average, but otherwise there is very little going for him. Branyan is probably the only potential 25-HR hitter the A’s can acquire for under $5 million next season (and I think he’ll be SIGNIFICANTLY less than $5 million— probably closer to 2 than 5). Well, there might be some even more defective hitters in the minor leagues (eg Dallas McPherson) who could post 25 raw home runs, but meh.

How’m I doing?

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 9, 2008 12:13 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Decent enough, but what happens when (both of them) play half their games in Oakland?

A lot more of Branyan’s fly balls would turn into outs, right?

I mean, I’m not advocating “SCREW BRANYAN GO GET RIVERA” or anything, his name just doesn’t jump out as a solution.

What would you put him at next year in Oakland? 105 OPS+ with 25 homers or so? He’d probably have a SLG heavy OPS, too?

by mikev on Oct 9, 2008 12:43 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Since OPS+ is partk adjusted ...

and he was at 137 in ‘08 (SSS applies — about 1/4 of a season) while for his career he is at 109, a mark he has topped all but one of the last five years, I’d peg him at 110-115 with probably 20 HRs in 600 ABs (you may prorate, as appropriate).

His OPS will almost certainly lean on slugging — for his career he has been 10 points worse than the park adjusted average in OBP and 55 points better in slugging.

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 9, 2008 3:00 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

His OPS actually looks almost exactly like Torii Hunter's

in terms of the OBP/SLG breakdown. (But very different for batting average.)

One is .280/.330/.460, the other is .220/.330/.460. Weird, but true.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 9, 2008 5:55 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

A couple thoughts in reply...

Just for the record, Allen Craig is far from my holy grail – I kind of facetiously suggested he was for a week when I first discovered him, but upon further scrutiny so much of his offensive production this season came at home that at the very least, I would want to know more about park factors before gushing any more over him.

Also, I’m not sure how people are “not seeing how Giambi helps” the A’s lineup. Having Cust bat twice every nine times would be a lot better than having him bat once. The team had one productive power hitter in the lineup this year – two would not be better?

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 6:32 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Oh Nico

Two Custs = a lot of strickouts. Even if strickouts don’t really effect the A’s chances of winning that much, they kill butterflies and make angels cry.

For this reason, two custs would result in the death of too many butterflies, thus leading to mass hysteria.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Oct 8, 2008 6:40 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

STrikouts!111

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 7:20 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Great analysis, nevermoor -

I now advocate trading Cust for three caterpillars and a therapist whose specialty is grieving angels.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 7:44 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Buuuuuaaaahaha!!!!

Nice.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 9, 2008 2:06 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Two things

First, let me say I love the reaction that god. QOTM (wait ’till next year edition) to Green Star.

As for you, PT, if all the butterflies died the “OMG strickouts” community would flap their “wings” enough to create plenty of chaos.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Oct 9, 2008 5:04 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

as per DiNardo in Sac...

got his walking papers along w/ Bankston

Saarloos also has the right to declare himself a FA

"just a beating heart ... plasma that we'll put into our uniform." - Billy Beane

by athleticsBB4life on Oct 8, 2008 7:24 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

As does Murphy

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 7:29 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Help me out with the language here

I interpreting the phrasing/contractual language that they were “outrighted” to indicate that they both had already accepted it; is that not true? Wouldn’t the transaction report on MLB.com have indicated that they refused and became a free agent, if in fact they had chosen that route?

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 9:49 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Players who get the "second outright" have the right to become free agents either immediately or at the end of the season

With that said, I don’t know exactly when “the end of the season” is. Saarloos is going to be a minor league free agent anyway, so it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other in his case. Murphy may not have inherent free agency rights, but I can’t really imagine him voluntarily submitting to the A’s contractual control when he doesn’t have to, so presumably if they’re keeping him they worked out some kind of negotiated agreement.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 10:46 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Quibbles, comments concerns and praise

First off, let me say very well thought out piece nsj.

OK, now that I got the being nice part out of the way, I’ve got a problem with something you said.

Like most players, Crosby’s stat line will probably see an uptick in the NL and in a better hitter’s park (.700 OPS?), making him a significant upgrade over Izturis, despite the fact that he’s cheaper than Izturis once the A’s fork over $3MM in cash.

Can you please explain to me how you can say something like this when Izturis was on par with Crosby offensively and better than our piece of crap SS defensively this year? Where do you get off making this ridiculous claim? Is this another freaking attempt to talk about Bobby Crosby’s supposed potential? How many times does Crosby have to kick you in the junk before you realize this is as good as it’s going to get? You want to argue that Crosby at $1.5 million (I’m modifying your dollar figures) is a better value than Izturis, who’s likely to earn 3Xs that amount as a FA, then I won’t raise much of a fuss because I can see where Street + Crosby at around $6.5 million has value. Understand this: I don’t care about Cesar Izturis. But don’t distort the facts by claiming that Crosby was a better SS then Izturis was this year because the numbers say otherwise. And don’t you dare try to play the “Crosby has untapped potential” card because after 5 years it is clear any such potential will remain untapped as long as he stays in Oakland.

OK, rant done.

I’m a little confused about Giambi. You can’t want him to be the full time 1st baseman, who backs him up when he DH’s? I’m not against bringing him back, I’m just not sure how the playing time works out with him, Rivera (an interesting idea BTW) and Cust.

And add Ryan Webb to the 40 man roster.

Your trade proposal has some merit, but Meyer buys you nothing. You’ll have to drop him and include (at the least) one of the young bullpen arms coming through the system or maybe even James Simmons.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Oct 8, 2008 7:51 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I was thinking Outman or Braden, if the Cards are "LOOGY happy"

Outman and Braden may or may not be good major league pitchers, may or may not be good major league starters, but Meyer is pretty clearly not happening and wouldn’t change a trade’s viability one way or the other. In other words, if a team wants to take a flier on Dan Meyer they’ll wait for him to be waived/released. I don’t see a team trading for him, or changing what they will or won’t offer as a result of his inclusion/exclusion. Which is sad, but true.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 7:57 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It depends on how much they like Street

If they really like him they won’t push hard on the 3rd player leaving Oakland. If I had to choose between losing Outman or Braden… Hell, it’s no choice. Braden go bye-bye.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Oct 8, 2008 8:46 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I've always been a bit bearish on Braden,

due to the lack of movement on his fastball, but he might have a slightly better chance than Outman of making it as a starter. Outman might have the better chance to be a better pitcher, period, but just as likely in the bullpen as in the rotation.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 9:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

This is obviously a rough tool at best,

because it doesn’t account for deception, “late break,” etc. but looking at the player cards on Josh Kalk’s website I don’t see Braden’s fastball movement as being significantly different from any of the other A’s players… point of fact, it’s almost identical to Duke’s once you account for the fact that they throw with opposite hands.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 10:57 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That brings up an interesting point, which is

how to assess the rather large concept of “movement” when late movement, horizontal/vertical movement, gradual steady movement, etc. are not one and the same. Instinctively, I would think that the batter’s eye could track steady movement well compared to any other kind, but I don’t know how all kinds of movement can best be analyzed together to form an accurate rating.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 9, 2008 2:10 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Are we talking Warren’s Sapp routine on ’Dances with the Stars"?

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Oct 9, 2008 2:21 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

No system on earth can handle that kind of movement

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Oct 9, 2008 5:07 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

the pfx system accounts for break vs natural (from angle thrown and gravity) movement ...

I don’t think there is anything at this point that deals with the timing of the movement …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 9, 2008 3:02 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Giambi's backup at first:

Hannahan, regrettably. Hannahan makes the roster as a caddy for Chavez and Giambi.

(Or, in a more rosy scenario, Rivera is amenable to playing first and he plays most of the games there when Giambi doesn’t).

Bottom line: Between Giambi, Rivera, and Chavez, none of them are going to play 155 games or get 600 plate appearances. But by having all three and Cust, you can strategically rest them and ensure that you always have a minimum of 2-3 legitimate power threats in the lineup at all times.

As for Crosby vs. Izturis: You’re right, their 15 pt. differential in OPS isn’t much. However I’ve discovered in these debates that I tend to think the difference in league quality is greater than most folks do. I realize that’s a half-ass argument, because I can’t prove or disprove it…but I think if Crosby takes Izturis’ spot in the Cardinals’ lineup, we’d notice a significant (~50-75 OPS pts.) disparity between the two.

Crosby will also be in a contract year, increasing the likelihood that he’s taking “vitamins” to improve his performance, and he’ll have more motivation to show up in the proverbial “best shape of his life” in spring training. Grover, what’s not to like, my man?? I’m trying to create a plan to unload the bane of your existence and you’re not helping the cause. :)

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 9:47 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

EQA has them almost equal

Plus, Izturis had a 23 point edge in OBP. Crosby had the higher slugging percentage but 1 point of OBP is worth more than 1 point of slugging.

As for the bane of my existence, you must be speaking of my life on AN.

Oaktoon has already left the building.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Oct 8, 2008 11:01 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

More grist for our mill:
On the opposite of the effectiveness spectrum, Bobby Crosby’s -2.56 WPA/LI was by far the worst in baseball for shortstops, a full win worse than Yuniesky Betancourt. In the field, Crosby was a -13, with Betancourt a -19, so it is not as if Crosby played gold glove caliber defense. He had a dreadful season. Orlando Cabrera (-1.43), Edgar Renteria (-1.40), and Miguel Tejada (-1.27) round out the bottom five.

Christ, what a black hole.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 9, 2008 10:58 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Outstanding read.

Thanks, nsj.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Oct 8, 2008 8:49 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I am still trying to figure out how we can trade for Zimmerman and Hardy.

I wouldn’t mind some combo or Braden, Street, Andrew Brown, Eveland, Outman (rather keep him because of his owesome name), Crosby, Petit, Patterson, Murton and Denorfia for those two guys. I do realize that would be two separate trades but we have players above who would not really be missed.

Then we have Zimmerman 3B, Hardy SS, Pennington 2B and Barton 1B. I am also sure that either grover or Raj can make this happen.

"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"

by Eastbayjim on Oct 8, 2008 8:53 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

With that lot?

No offense, but God Almighty would have trouble “making it happen” with only that set of players.

Realistically, Street as the centerpiece might— might— land you Hardy, if you threw in some decent other pieces. Zimmerman, not a chance.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 9:03 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It's a shame that it's the Brewers scouts who

saw Street at his worst and gave very poor reviews – because in fact Street might be a great fit for Milwaukee and there’s probably a very win-win trade in there involving Street and Hardy. But somehow I suspect the scouting report from late-July will linger beyond its actual relevance in time.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 8, 2008 9:27 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

True, I forgot about that

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 10:58 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I agree JT, probably not a chance

But then again what change did BB have in trading an injured Kotsay to the Braves for Devine and Richmond? Or how about the Kotsay trade? I have no idea who else BB would be willing to throw into to this list but I bet if they were willing, BB could probably get it done for a lot less than most think.

One think I like about this type of trade is that either Zimmerman or Hardy is young enough to stay around a while. And Giambi or the others are only a short rental and probably can’t play more than a half year total time.

"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"

by Eastbayjim on Oct 8, 2008 10:08 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Beane subsidized 70% of Kotsay's salary

That’s how he got Devine (and his back issues) plus Richmond in exchange.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Oct 8, 2008 10:56 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

We've seen Beane turn crappy veterans into decent prospects many a time

but it takes an altogether higher level of skill to turn crappy prospects into decent veterans.

In fact, given the inherent biases of most GMs toward vets, the very existence of such a higher level of skill might be an impossibility.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 8, 2008 11:01 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Me neither

Pretty bad on-base percentage.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 8, 2008 11:04 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The reason I like Hardy

Is that he’s the best SS we could conceivably have in the next 3-4 years. Even if Cardenas stuck at SS, he probably won’t have Hardy’s bat and certainly not immediately. Furcal, Peralta, and Asdrubal Cabrera are the only SS available who I see as above average and possibly available. However, they all have major downsides. Hardy is the best combination of availability and risk out there.

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Oct 8, 2008 11:38 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

How much better is Hardy than Pennington?

Honest question.

If we factor in the fact that Pennington is much cheaper over the next 4-5 years, AND that Pennington is already here and Hardy costs something significant to acquire…

Hardy has to be significantly better to justify acquiring him.

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 9, 2008 9:55 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't think Cabrera is available

I suspect the Indians plan to acquire a 2B, move Cabrera to short and shift Peralta to third. They need MORE middle infielders, not less.

Damn shame, because I think Cabrera is going to be really good eventually.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 9, 2008 12:16 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

SS problem

I’ve always liked Adam Everett as a SS. Yes, he sucks offensively, but he’s good enough in the field to approach being a league average player. Ellis and Everett up the middle could make a guy like Eveland look really good next year.

I figure swapping Crosby for Everett would put as at about -15 runs on offense and +20 on defense. That’s a half win upgrade that leaves us able to deal Crosby to some poor sucker. If we could turn Street and Crosby into a 3B or middle infielder while bringing in Everett, that’s a major win.

by MrIncognito on Oct 9, 2008 10:29 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If I'm getting a Rodriguez, I want Sean (or Alex, heh)

The best case scenario with the Indians is that Beau Mills is sufficiently recovered to play third again. He’s clearly supernumerary in their organization, with LaPorta, Hafner, Garko, Hodges etc etc all lying around. I’m not terribly impressed with any of the prospects you mentioned here.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 9, 2008 12:25 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Other possible Huston Street Trades:

Assuming that an interested team is both a.) in need of a closer, and b.) unable to afford K-Rod or Fuentes:

Street to the Brewers for Scarpetta, LuCroy, and Gillespie.

Street to the Indians for Hector Rondon, Josh Rodriguez, and Nick Weglarz.

Not saying all three of those players come back in those deals, just that those are three interesting players in each organization who wouldn’t be labeled off-limits if Huston Street came over to their side in a deal.

Which deal do you like best for the A’s – the Cardinals one, the Brewers, or the Indians? Which is the most realistic?

"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ

by notsellingjeans on Oct 9, 2008 11:33 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Carlos Gonzalez

appears to have been forgotten in your scenario. Where you got him?

by jasonlbe on Oct 9, 2008 12:40 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Here:
Indirectly, that major league lineup also creates the best AAA lineup in baseball, by putting a few young studs in Sacramento to give them more time to develop.

C Powell, 1b Barton, 2b Patterson, SS Murphy (needs to become more flexible anyway), 3b Baisley, LF Murton, CF CarGon, RF Cunningham

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Oct 9, 2008 12:54 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Good Read - Well Done

I agree with a lot of what you wrote/thought. But, are we…

Door #1 – Thinking with Beane, or

Door #2 – Doing what we think Beane will do, or

Door #3 – What we would want Beane to do?

There’s a big difference.

If there’s one fault with Billy Beane (oddly enough), it is being too loyal to players he really, really believes in. Point in case: Bobby Crosby, Eric Chavez, Dan Meyer. Now whether that is by choice or by performance, he never seems to want to cut ties. I mean, he keeps holding on to friggin’ Dan Meyer… Just let it go, man. You know?

Anyways, to my Point. Do we really think that Beane will not give Daric Barton every opportunity to keep batting .230, and OBP .330? Yeah, that’s what I thought…. So, that takes Jason Giambi out of the equation entirely. And I want Giambi to play 1B/DH for the next 2 years, but Beane will never do it (Mychael Urban is right… for once).

On another note, Beane covets Pitching. He loves Huston Street so much, there isn’t a team who can offer enough talent to please him. So, I just don’t see Street going to another team unless it’s a Blockbuster.

Lastly, Ryan Sweeney is not a Centerfielder. Ryan Sweeney is not a Power Hitter (never will be unless he overhauls his swing…. and that’s never a good idea). I would sell high on this guy so quick, your head would spin.

So anyways, I don’t think Beane will do a whole lot this offseason. In fact, he’ll probably spend more money outside of the U.S. (Prospects), than he will in the U.S. (Free Agent).

(enters dreamlike state): If it were my team, and I had unlimited Cash, I would sign Manny Ramirez to 4 Years, 100 Million with a Player/Club Option for a 5th Year…. and then go from there. Great Hitters (Manny) make other Hitters good.

So, here we go…

1. Buck – RF
2. Ellis – 2B
3. Cust – DH
4. Manny (99) – LF
5. Chavez – 3B
6. Suzuki – C
7. Barton – 1B
8. Carlos Gonzalez – CF
9. Pennington – SS (He’s starting to grow on me – Speed & Defense)

by Colorado Fan on Oct 9, 2008 1:07 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Holding on to players ...

is there any real evidence of this? Up until this off season, BB never had any incentive to give up on Dan Meyer (roster issues may now give up some incentive). Why not keep trotting him out there, paying him a AAA salary and hoping. The odds may be low, but if there’s any chance, there hasn’t been any downside up to this point.

Chavvy has no trade value and he has pretty much always been at least an acceptable player when he has been healthy enough to get on the field.

I wouldn’t have minded the team giving a good chunk of BoCro’s PT to Petit, but I think it’s clear that the reason they haven’t has as much to do with not really believing in Petit as it does supporting BoCro …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 9, 2008 3:09 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I would not give Manny Ramirez a contract longer than one year under any circumstances

(unless he does something really weird like take half as much money as he could otherwise get…)

He’s already amply demonstrated that he will quit on a team if he feels like changing cities. Not a risk worth taking.

I’d second devo’s point, too… the players Beane has “hung on to” either had unmovable contracts or weren’t making any money in any case.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 9, 2008 6:07 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

When did he quit on Boston?

His OPS in July was 1.060

I’ll take a quitter like that any day.

by mikev on Oct 10, 2008 10:22 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Anyway, as long as Boras is getting his cut Manny won't quit

Boras just wanted to start getting paid already.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Oct 10, 2008 11:36 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Has 2 options

Manny has a club option at 20 mill for each of the next 2 years. After what he has do ne with LA you actually think they will let him walk after this season. They are in a big market so they can afford to keep him at 20 mill a year for 2 years.

by JFRIZZLE on Oct 10, 2008 11:49 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The options were voided as part of the trade

He’s as free as the birds which apparently inhabit his skull.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 11, 2008 9:26 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Crosby

“I’d second devo’s point, too… the players Beane has "hung on to" either had unmovable contracts or weren’t making any money in any case.”

How many times have you wrote that Bobby Crosby should be DFA’d?

by Colorado Fan on Oct 10, 2008 12:43 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Wouldn't save the team any money, is the problem...

Much as it would satisfy my vindictive sense of spite, I don’t think it’d make that much of a difference either way.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Oct 10, 2008 3:17 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

it'd be great to see ellis back

gotta love mark “the man” ellis. I think his presence is going to be crucial to the development of this young team during this short phase between dominances (i.e. before we get the ’ship in 2010)

by MaineAthletic on Oct 9, 2008 1:19 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

this was a great post....

but i have to say that i disagree w/ the notion that Oakland should go the way of the retread single year help. the team, while not that far from contending should stick w/ the game plan. namely, building up thru the minor leagues. while it is tempting to want to stick a solid .250-30-.875 guy on the team, i gotta believe all that would do is take a spot from a younger cheaper and to be quite honest a more cost effective player.

i would love to know if there is stat that quantifies a players contribution in comparison w/ his salary .

i say we just stay the course and build from the ground up.

by jtleroy on Oct 10, 2008 11:44 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Not that I disagree with your ultimate point ...

but I’ve got say, you’re being awfully optimistic you think we are likely to have enough players who can put up an .875 OPS or better that one would necessarily be displaced …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Oct 10, 2008 1:59 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Contending?

How is it you think the A’s are close to contending? Their starting pitching is unproven. They don’t have 1 starting pitcher who has proved he can pitch well all season long. Duke hasn’t proved he can stay healthy all year. None of the others pitched well all year. Eveland and Smith pitched pretty bad in the 2nd half. Eveland pitched better after a stint w/ the Cats. Plus they had one of the worst offenses in all of baseball. Are you also forgetting they don’t have much as far as offensive players coming up in the minors. All the hitters in the A’s system who might be decent hitters at the major league level just finished up with the Ports in Stockton. Thats only high A ball. Which means they are atleast a year away from the majors probably closer to 2 years.

by JFRIZZLE on Oct 10, 2008 11:59 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

in truth...

i doubt we have more than one who can do any better than .800. that would be the human HVAC Jack Cust. And i Want him gone so bad that its silly. he’s a supreme rally killer. and example of beaneball gone awry. extremely patient power hitter with massive holes in his swing. never mind his horrid defense.

i think that in consideration of the park they play in and the pitching they have they should be more concerned w/ building up the defense, instead of attempting to improve the offense by running out players that hurt the defense and pitching.

As much as love giambi, i do not believe he would be very helpful to the team in its current shape. yes he would provide power. but @ what cost if he actually wants to play the field. better to run out barton and hope he has worked thru his problems to the point he can hit .270 and cut way back on the strike outs

by jtleroy on Oct 10, 2008 5:31 PM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Rivera and Blake

What if the A’s went after Rivera and Blake. Rivera can play left or DH along with Cust. Blake can play 3rd or 1st. That will add a little pop to the line up w/o giving up allot on defense. Plus we wouldn’t have to spend a ton of money. Possibly Blake might be priced out of the A’s range. He’s just finishing a 6 mill 1 year contract. SO if there are multiple teams interested it will drive him outside of the A’s budget.

by JFRIZZLE on Oct 11, 2008 12:07 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms
Start posting about the Athletics »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Brill-naturefireworks-01_hlarge_small
Draft WAR by General Manager. Beane #1 in Baseball Analysts study. (Giants suck.)
Small
The Minor Leagues: Grant Desme and Co.
Joeandelizabethredone_small
Bid on a truly unique ball for the Jon Wilhite Fund, or, My awesome day at a crummy game
Pulp_fiction_small
If you think Beane is a bad GM, I hate you and find you stupid
Ziegler160px_small
Pics from the Triple-A Workout/Media Day

Recent FanPosts

Small
Creative Trades
Ziegler160px_small
Meeting the Chicken
Small
A little late: The A's All-Star Break Grades at Each Position
Small
If I were the A's GM For a Day The Changes that Would Be Made
Athletics-nation-avatar_small
# of Grand Slams in 2008?
Reporterguy_small
Pics: Dog Day 7/17 vs. Los Angeles of Anaheim
07272005_scutaro_small
My Upcoming First A's Game Sunday July 19
Small
The (Jay) Marshall Plan
Mike_norris_small
KC/Oak A's Stirrups

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

SPONSORS


Managers

Baseball_small baseballgirl

Poochini-butt_in_box_2_small Nico

As_kings_cal_small louismg

08-_the_author_small 67MARQUEZ

Martin_brodeur_300_small Blez

Ziegler160px_small Flashfire

Editors

Countdown_small Taj Adib

527918550406_0_bg_small notsellingjeans

Authors

P1010266b_small devo

Super_grover_small grover

The_baby_small salb918