Joe Sheehan Weighs in on Holliday Deal
by Tyler Bleszinski on Nov 12, 2008 3:32 PM PST
94 comments
For those of you still hurting from losing Carlos Gonzalez, Joe Sheehan has a word of advice for you. Don't be. I think Sheehan is one of the smartest baseball journalists out there and he comes out in full favor of Billy Beane winning this deal with the Rockies. Sheehan essentially points out that C-Gon's numbers were never really that great in the minors any way except for a two-year stretch in 05-06. He actually says that he has no idea how Gonzalez wound up in the bigs with the numbers he had.
But my favorite part of the article is this (you'll have to be a BP subscriber to read the rest, sorry!):
For the A's, Holliday fits like a glove. In addition to getting him for a reasonable price, they slide a hitter into their lineup who does exactly what they need. The A's draw walks; that pretty much sums up their offensive skill set. They don't hit for average (last), they don't hit doubles (last), they don't hit triples (tenth). Even the walks they draw (fourth) don't lead to a high OBP (13th and not last, thanks to the Royals) because they hit so poorly. I lost track of the number of times they had two runners on with no one out and didn't score.
Now one bat will not completely change this equation. The A's need more than just Holliday if they really hope to compete in 2009, which is why I think that Beane will be pretty aggressive on the free agent market.
Nico and I talk on the phone about the A's quite a bit and something that he and I have said for the past two, maybe three years is that the A's don't seem to have any "hitters". By that we mean, not just a guy who knows how to work the zone and get on base, but someone who actually hits for a high average to take advantage of a lot of those walks the A's get. Holliday is exactly that and even if he does take a turn down because of park adjustments and moving to a better league, he should still be up close to a .300 average. Like Sheehan, I think it drastically helps the A's. I would still hope the A's can somehow lure Holliday into staying longer term, but my feeling is still one of extreme optimism after the deal, pending what else the A's decide to do this offseason.
0 recs |
94 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
"Sheehan is one of the smartest baseball journalists out there"
Street is a known quantity, a sidearming right-hander
Did you overpay for those eggs? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 12, 2008 4:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I can understand Street being referred to as a side-armer
His delivery has a lot of “sidearm” action at the end. It’s ultimately 3/4, but I can see how it would be referred to as sidearm.
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 Nov 12, 2008 7:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, sorta-kinda
But that’s way too categorical an assertion on Sheehan’s part for a sorta-kinda-if-you-squint-your-eyes description.
As I mentioned in the other thread, I guess it’s also possible that maybe Sheehan has only happened to have seen Street pitch on the occasions when Street has lost his arm slot and dropped down even further (those being the occasions when Street fails to get on top of his pitches, and his effectiveness drops; might also explain a dimmer view of Street than his overall stats indicate).
Did you overpay for those eggs? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 12, 2008 8:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Considering the rubbish that Sheehan usually writes
this doesn’t surprise me. At all. Want examples? Deriding Yunel Escobar by nicknaming him Yutility Escobar. Calling the Twins offense “anemic” in a recent column, even though by BPro’s own stats, EQA, their offense was above average in 2008. Often ignoring defensive value, such such as suggesting that the Orioles sign Ray Durham to play 2b, and move Brian Roberts to SS.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Nov 12, 2008 10:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Good points brought up there Blez
I for one am hoping that BB can somehow talk Holiday into an extension and, in turn, tell Scot Boras to take a flying f#*k off the 880-80 interchange! Probably won’t happen but a brother can dream, right?
by mrod on Nov 12, 2008 11:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just a note:
It appears as if this BP article is free for now, so get it while it’s hot!
by RenoTy on Nov 12, 2008 4:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
If Sheehan is so smart,
and he says that C-Gon was never that great of a prospect, what does that say about Beane making C-Gon the centerpiece of the Haren trade? I know the A’s got a lot more out of the Haren trade, but I keep hearing that Gonzalez was the key. Did I miss something? Since I don’t get BP, does Sheehan ever mention Holliday’s pending free agency and anticipated asking price? That’s what concerns me most about this trade.
by guapobob on Nov 12, 2008 4:11 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He does say something about it
He basically says the A’s won’t miss anything they gave up and that Holliday will be the best A’s player since they lost Tejada.
And I don’t think that Gonzalez was the centerpiece of that deal. I honestly think that it was the collection of talent. When looking at the Hudson deal, it was clear that Meyer was the centerpiece. But in this instance, Gonzo wasn’t the centerpiece because I know the A’s really coveted Anderson too. In the Haren deal, I really don’t think one player can be called the reason the deal happened simply because they got so much.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Nov 12, 2008 4:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've now read the article
thanks to the links in the posts above. I have to say, a very convincing argument. I thought giving up a budding Gonzalez and also Street, who I thought would be an effective part of a killer bullpen, was too much for one year of Holliday. But if Sheehan is right about Gonzalez, then the A’s, and Beane, have certainly made a good deal. And my partial season, left field season ticket plan payment will soon be on its way!
by guapobob on Nov 12, 2008 4:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is, I really believe that Beane wouldn't do this deal
without adding at least another piece or two as well. The A’s should have a very interesting offseason.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Nov 12, 2008 4:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"The A's should have a very interesting offseason"
When was the last time that wasn’t true?
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
by Nick on Nov 12, 2008 6:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah....
The difference being that we could have an interesting off season in a good way this year. For the first time in a long time it feels like the A’s are actually adding instead of detracting from the team.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Nov 13, 2008 7:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the 2006-2007 offseason was uninspiring.
Mike Piazza, Donnie Murphy, Jay Marshall, Alan Embree, Todd Walker, Erubiel Durazo. Oh, and the Kirk Saarloos trade.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Nov 13, 2008 8:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You forgot Shannon Stewart.
(I wish I could.)
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
by andeux on Nov 13, 2008 8:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh.
How did I miss the guy who led our team in hitting that year?
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Nov 13, 2008 8:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're too short to see over the rail?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 8:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
despite all of his shannonness
I haven’t had a better day in Boston than when he broke up Schilling’s no-hitter.
Save Rajai Davis
by oakinboston on Nov 13, 2008 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that Gonzalez was not "the centerpiece" of the Haren trade
We can say with a fair degree of certainty that Eveland and Smith were peripheral. But I have a hard time distinguishing between the rest of the talent package. Cunningham has been routinely derided by scouts, yet he’s never failed to hit at any level. Carter just came off a season in which he hit 39 home runs and demonstrated himself to have probably the second-best tools power of any prospect in the organized minors (after Stanton of Florida). Anderson was outstanding before the A’s got him and continued to be afterwards.
Ask 10 people about the best player in that package and you’re liable to get at least 3, maybe 4 different answers.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 12, 2008 4:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Which is why it was a fantastic deal
You’ve got a chance for so many of those players to develop into very good major leaguers. With the Hudson deal, it was basically all about Meyer panning out.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Nov 12, 2008 4:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Also Gonzalez looked a lot prettier 12 months ago than now
And count me in as one saying that Anderson will be the long term gem. I never quite got why the A’s wanted Gonzalez, though I understand why BA loves him, given their tools-centric outlook.
by jdr on Nov 12, 2008 5:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's say there was a 20% chance Gonzalez was going to figure it out
That was certainly worth the risk. Maybe now that’s down to 15% or so.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
by Nick on Nov 12, 2008 6:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
what % chance do you give the A's signing Holliday long-term?
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Nov 12, 2008 11:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
15%
"With 16-year-old Dominican righty Michel Inoa in tow, Gio Gonzalez improving at Triple-A and lefty Brett Anderson carving up Double-Abatters along with Simmons and Trevor Cahill, Oakland’s pitching depthis officially the envy of baseball." - BaseballAmerica.com
by Syphon on Nov 13, 2008 1:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
About as much of a chance the Angels have of resigning Teixeira.
If Holliday is truly the impact player for the A’s, the way the A’s budget and future financial commitments are constructed, the A’s can easily take on a big contract (6/120, etc.).
This.
by Blicks on Nov 13, 2008 5:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I totally agree
And I think should work his ass off to get Holliday extended asap. I think 5 years with an option for a 6th with salary between 18-20 mil per year is more than generous, in my opinion.
It sure would be nice to have a player of his caliber be a cornerstone for this team the next 5-6 years.
And, Beane still has plaenty of resources to go and grab another couple bats thru FA or via a trade.
by mrod on Nov 13, 2008 9:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
there's no way
Boras lets Holliday not enter free agency. at which point I see it unlikely the A’s keep up in the bidding.
Save Rajai Davis
by oakinboston on Nov 13, 2008 10:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Why would he exclusively deal with the A’s when he could let Holliday hit the market, potentially driving up his price because of all of the competition?
by Jack Cust is valuable damnit on Nov 13, 2008 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Because waiting a year is a risk
Injury, bad performance now that there’s no coors, etc.
Plus, he’d probably like his commission.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Nov 13, 2008 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Your opinion does not control what Matt Holliday does
and since other GMs are going to be of the opinion that he deserves a far more generous contract than that, your opinion is pretty much irrelevant.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 13, 2008 10:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hold on a second
Beane is now free to discuss said extension with the player’s agent for the next year or so. Yeah, I realize we’re talking about Scott Boras but Beane can and should get some general parameters of what Holliday’s new deal could/will look like.
That way, if the a’s like what Holliday’s done for them and he’s happy in Oakland and interested in maybe staying… then maybe a deal gets done.
On top of all that, telling mrod his opinion is irrelevant is rather egotistical of you. No one annointed you as the end all/be all of what is relevant.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How is it egotistical? My opinion isn't relevant either...
It’s more than a little ridiculous to say “He should sign for x” based on nothing more than your own say-so. You got evidence that he actually would consider that, bring it to the table.
Right now, given the contracts that are handed out to players of Holliday’s stature and age, that contract would be well, well below market rate. Holliday is a 6 wins above replacement player, which is worth about $25 million on the free agent market at present rates of pay.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 13, 2008 11:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But not many free agents sign 6 year contracts, so you're missing a large part of the point
I doubt he gets a 6/150 (or 7/175).
I think 6/120 is about the right ballpark, and I think the A’s should do that.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Nov 13, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I do not doubt in the slightest that someone will give him 6/150
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 13, 2008 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're own write-up says
Holliday is a +45 player, doesn’t that break out to 4.5-5 wins?
And 11,173 posts of irrelevant opinion? Who you trying to kid.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for sticking up for me grover
Although I can and will defend myself from comments that I term “snooty and know it all”.
S, PT…..
It’s my fucking opinion, alright? You don’t like it…. move on to the next one. There’s about a 1000 other things I could think to do with my time other than to demean someone because you think your opinion is better than someone else’s or term an opinion of other fans on this site “irrelevant”.
Sometimes, you really take the fun out of posting and reading on this site.
Peace out………..-MRod
by mrod on Nov 13, 2008 12:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not "demeaning" you
Players sign contracts through a competitive auction process. In an auction, bids that are not winning bids are irrelevant. That’s the whole point of an auction.
I’m sorry if the comment came off as insulting, dude.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 13, 2008 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's relative to average, not replacement level
Hell, if anything, it suggests he should be making closer to $30 million.
And I didn’t say ALL opinions are irrelevant, I said that opinions that a player “should” take discounts are irrelevant. There is a very specific reason WHY those opinions are irrelevant— namely, that other people are going to outbid your opinion of what a player is worth. If I, playing GM, tell Holliday I’ll pay him $100 million a season, that’s very relevant (very stupid, but very relevant). Way under market value? Not so much.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 13, 2008 2:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How about just,
“Sorry”?
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 Nov 13, 2008 2:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I'm confused then
Aren’t Smith’s defensive figures based on replacement level? Or have I crossed my metrics?
As for relevancy, my point is you don’t get to publically judge which opinions are or are not relevant.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope, they're relative to average
In fact, all defensive metrics that I’m aware of other than FRAR, which is lame, are relative to average.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 13, 2008 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand at the core what you're saying
The way you word things sometimes, however, could use a little work. I’m a people person for a living so communication is something that I take an awful lot of pride in, even if it is just a blog.
Cheers! -MRod
by mrod on Nov 13, 2008 4:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
$25 million is pretty high, isn't it?
Miguel Cabrera was three years younger, has more career PAs with a higher OPS+ when signed for a shade over $19 million for 8 years. Soriano got $17M over 8 years.
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Nov 14, 2008 7:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And neither of them is anything like as good as Holliday defensively
Soriano isn’t even as good offensively, either.
Cabrera’s deal was undoubtedly future-discounted by the fact that he’s developing into a fatso and might eat himself into the DH spot halfway through it. Soriano just isn’t a particularly good player.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 14, 2008 8:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But isn't the whole point of recent A's teams that defense is overrated
See Ellis, Mark.
Disconnects between “are worth” and “should be worth” involving defensive ability make the former lower than the latter.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Nov 15, 2008 11:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cabrera was younger when he signed, and his contract covers his peak years
and neither of those two had the stigma of hitting in Coors. In fact, they had both shown they can hit in parks that favor pitchers.
Obviously, these players aren’t equal. Not many players are truly equal in terms of age, skill set, past performance and future expectations, so it’s hard to make arguments saying “Player A makes this, so Player B deserves that too.” Cabrera is Holliday’s #5 comp at Baseball Reference, fwiw.
Incidentally, Cabrera should fire his agent if he agreed to a future-discounted contract based on the possibility of weight gain.
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Nov 16, 2008 2:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Anderson
will be the gem of that deal in the long run, IMO. I think Gonzalez will end up a very useful CF in the future, but not the “impact” player that some thought he might become. If he can learn how to take some walks I think he has a solid chance at being an .800 OPS’ing CF which is pretty good. I really believe Anderson is going to be the guy that anchors this rotation from 2011 on. He is good, and I think he will be better then Cahill when all is said and done.
by JPShark on Nov 12, 2008 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that was the point too
to get a package of potential….quantity over quality. If there was a true centerpiece, the A’s wouldn’t have gotten five other guys along with the centerpiece, even with Connor Robertson included.
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Nov 12, 2008 11:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow... here's me disagreeing with someone. I never do this!
Blez
Carlos Gonzalez was indeed the centerpiece of the Haren trade. That’s not to say that Cunningham, Anderson, Carter didn’t provide quality value at the time but the deal looks bad without CarGon.
Gonzalez was the prospect with the best combination of potential ceiling and current development in the deal. Remove him from the equation and the A’s would have dealt Dan Haren for an enigma (Eveland) a destined 5th SP (Smith) a guy many scouts pegged as a 4th OFer (Cunningham) and two quality prospects (Carter & Anderson) that had very little experience above Low-A ball. No Gonzalez and the deal looks horrid based on 2007 values.
A year later the picture has changed. Anderson dropped some baby fat and in the process found something more on his fastball. Cunningham has fewer doubters, Carter continues to show mad power (although contact issues have cropped up) and Eveland has almost established himself as a legit big league SP. Gonzalez kinda ran in place, which happens sometimes. The A’s had a year of 1st hand experience with CarGon and decided it was worth the risk to let him go to get Holliday. Fine. But let’s not diminish what Gonzalez represented when he first came over in the Haren trade.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 7:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Carter was swapped for Carlos Quentin the same offseason
You have to believe that he was a decent element in the deal… otherwise why not pick up Quentin in that deal?
The Stockton Ports pitching staff is better than the Orioles.
by gdub171 on Nov 13, 2008 11:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would've done the Haren deal without Gonzalez in it
Even at the time. It was that good of a haul.
"A’s baseball….It’s almost better than a stick in the eye." ~ alox
by Gallagher's Watermelons on Nov 13, 2008 5:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"He actually says that he has no idea how Gonzalez wound up in the bigs with the numbers he had."
Outfield of death in those days.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Nov 12, 2008 4:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Eloquent and true
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 7:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ray Ratto weighs in (heh heh) on the Holliday deal
And in this corner, the Moustachioed Menace …
the Dan Haren deal that turned out so meh
Uh …
Did you overpay for those eggs? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 12, 2008 4:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Wow he's even more clueless than I thought
I wonder if he found that thought in his mustache somewhere. Seriously.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Nov 12, 2008 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the thing is
That’s grudging support coming from Ratto. Usually he really goes nuts on any A’s move. I seriously think Beane must have backed over his dog in the parking lot early on in his tenure.
by jdr on Nov 12, 2008 5:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ratto is a Giants writer masquerading as a "bay area baseball" writer. He really wants to belittle the A's so that his Giants come out looking better and Sabean looking smarter (if that's possible).
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 12, 2008 6:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't say that
He’s an equal opportunity cranky-pants.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 12, 2008 6:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
wrong Chron columnist
Did you overpay for those eggs? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 12, 2008 6:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
does he ever predict the giants will only win 65 games?
because they come pretty close every year.
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05
by xbhaskarx on Nov 12, 2008 8:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
re: ratto
I’m hoping he means Gonzalez turned out so meh
by blee1134 on Nov 12, 2008 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose that's possible
Once again, Celebrity Columnist trumps line editor.
Did you overpay for those eggs? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 12, 2008 5:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I read that yesterday
and wondered if “meh” had an alternate meaning that I wasn’t aware of, such as “awesome”…
by whiteshoes40 on Nov 12, 2008 5:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
massively exciting, hefe
Did you overpay for those eggs? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 12, 2008 5:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It was a typo for "teh"
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Nov 13, 2008 1:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
kansas city royals west
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05
by xbhaskarx on Nov 12, 2008 8:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ratto giving us what he normally does ...
he’s a writer … who happens to get paid to write about sports. No matter, a good writer can write in an enticing way about any topic … so long as you don’t actually expect any insight to be found among his collection of well connected and constructed words, you should be happy with any article he pens.
I’m not, but, you know …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Nov 13, 2008 12:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
still not loving the trade
holliday will be a one-year rental…there is no way boras and beane are going to work out a deal. i’m okay with losing street (but only because we have devine and ziggy), and smith is a good #4 starter, but i think we might regret trading c-gon so early. i never got all the criticism about him. played a great CF and was a 5-tool player who did hit pretty good everywhere. he was young – the power was going to develop, and had we not rushed him up, i have little doubt his strike zone judgment would have improved significantly. if holliday had 2 years on his contract, i’d be fine with this trade. but 1 year…i dunno, this is a steep price. admittedly, gonzalez might not work out, but i think he’s got a pretty good chance to develop into a good/great player.
by guy incognito on Nov 12, 2008 5:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I get this point of view
But the track record of players developing strike zone judgement, particularly in their 20s (as opposed to their 30s) is very very poor.
by jdr on Nov 12, 2008 5:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What Holliday can bring to the other A's outfielders is tremendous. He is an all around hitter and the other younger
guys will have a chance to learn from him much like Swisher did from Thomas in 2006. Of course I wouldn’t mind an outfield of Holliday, Sweeney and Buck with Cunningham as the 4th.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on Nov 12, 2008 5:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever Swisher learned from Thomas, he apparently had forgotten it by this season...
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 12, 2008 6:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, but for the season they played together Swisher was great. I can see that with our current group of young outfielders learning from Holliday.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on Nov 13, 2008 6:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Sweeney factor
Lets face it he was the most reliable hitter in the lineup. Not allstar stats but a good year at the plate. All the while playing hurt. His defense was above average and his bat will improve. This is the main reason Carlos became expendable and with Cunningham moving up the ladder faster than expected Calos may have been the A’s future 4th outfielder. For those of you that wrote off Buck he will be very good as our RF for the next 5 years.
by Arcman on Nov 12, 2008 6:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
if buck stays healthy...and if you're A's fan, you should realize the implications of an "if he stays healthy" statement
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 12, 2008 6:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Hitters"
I’m pretty sure that Beane would agree with you and Nico, Blez. Mike Sweeney fits that description to a T. Milton Bradley was a hitter who was also a 5-tool player. I think Beane was probably hoping that Kielty was that kind of guy when that trade went down (that’s certainly the profile of a Twins prospect). Barton is another Beane acquisition who’s supposed to be a pure hitter (and sure looked like one in September 07).
So I think that Beane has a track record of trying to get that type of player. The problem is that those guys are sort of anti-Moneyball hitters — everyone values their skills, sometimes even beyond their real production, so unless you give them a huge contract you can only get them when they’re hurt, or unproven, or crazy, or soon to be on the free agent market.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
by Nick on Nov 12, 2008 6:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
"He actually says that he has no idea how Gonzalez wound up in the bigs with the numbers he had."
once again, blame of the game: zonis
i hope foolshgame22 and waddellcanseco are paying attention.
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05
by xbhaskarx on Nov 12, 2008 8:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Looking at the Zonis thread
It’s kind of amazing how few people (myself included) were worried about the A’s offense turning out as dreadful as it did in 2008.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 7:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well no one should've been that worried
Most projections had the A’s close to league average in 6-8 positions if I remember right.
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's or Golden State Warriors? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's and Golden Stat Hoops
by iamawesomer on Nov 13, 2008 8:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I love the ridiculously long debate between you and devo...
by Jack Cust is valuable damnit on Nov 13, 2008 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Grover really puts the "dic" in "ridiculous"
Did you overpay for those eggs? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 13, 2008 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
True...
but at least I was right.
Again.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 11:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i thought the parallels were amusing
cargon —> pujols / ted williams
anderson / cahill —> dwight gooden
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05
by xbhaskarx on Nov 13, 2008 1:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't take the credit for that round of laughs
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 5:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No you weren't ...
The argument was not about whether or not CarGon would turn around the offense, I plainly stated that I did not expect that he would. The argument was about whether it was possible for a player in his position (a rookie in a below average lineup) to turn around an offense.
Clearly it was, though, as Evan Longoria turned a below average Tampa offense into an above average one … Check and Mate …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Nov 13, 2008 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the rookie had support, remember?
When you actually look at the Rays 2008 roster you see that the top 12 guys (in terms of at bats) feature 7 players NOT named Evan Longoria with an OPS+ over 100.
2 players with an OPS+ of 96.
Carl Crawford went 91.
1 player (SS Jason Bartlett) with an OPS+ of 85.
And Jonny Gomes bringing up the rear with a 77 OPS+.
So take out Longoria and the Rays featured a line-up with two offensive problem children and six average or better hitters. Longoria certainly made the offense better but he was joining an average offense from Day 1.
So check your mate and your coat at the door. You’re nowhere close to proving your point.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 5:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
On second thought
Why doesn’t devo get the credit this time?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 13, 2008 11:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hear he puts the dic in a lot of things
"A’s baseball….It’s almost better than a stick in the eye." ~ alox
by Gallagher's Watermelons on Nov 13, 2008 5:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I loved this quote:
Over the years here I’ve learned the iron-clad rule: when devo and grove have arguments, devo is always right. You might have better luck debating him on trade policy or religion instead of baseball…
-mikeA
http://www.athleticsnation.com/2008/4/19/420996/time-to-callup-cargon#5330803
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Nov 13, 2008 3:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it's early yet this off season but at least we have one bat we need
I like the trade.
And I think Nico maybe on to something about Jason Bay.
Did anyone see the comments by Boras to Billy after the trade.
I can’t quite remember the quote but it was something like " how smart you are to have traded Haren for………names players."
It was interesting to see an agent make that remark about a GM.
by Mike Heath on Nov 12, 2008 10:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It's an interesting idea. It could absolutely happen.
However, if we’re not competing at the trade deadline, I think Beane will continue the move towards youth, and flip him to the Mets for a guy like Dan Murphy or a young SS from someone.
I don’t think the A’s will ever have a huge payroll, and if we’re going to compete for several years in a row, we need them to be cheap for as long as possible. I don’t know. My predictions on BB trades are about as high as yours.
by NateHST on Nov 13, 2008 6:27 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
people really overrate murphy
he’s a solid/good 3b prospect, but if A’s wanted him or someone similar hodges, craig, freese, etc then can trade for them with prospect depth
by Asfan4ever723 on Nov 13, 2008 8:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
this is a comment from my friend Dan about the Holliday trade:
“Matt Holliday is the sweetest thing going. Beane is such a puppet master.
All-Star powerhitter thinks he is worth $25mil/year and has one year to
prove it to MLB….for HALF PRICE !!! Classic Beane. We need a couple more
pieces for the puzzle, but I don’t think he’s done pulling strings yet.” -Dan Marks
by mrod on Nov 13, 2008 4:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
Related FanShots on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
