A's, Giants battling for Furcal
by JPShark on Nov 17, 2008 11:44 AM PST
Email
PrintMLBtraderumors.com posted this article from Michael Urban, of all people. It scares me a little to think that the Giants are going hard after him considering their history of FA signings. However $10mil a season is much more attractive then the $15mil a season we were looking at before. How about a 3/35 with an option for 2012? Also, Urban didn't really say how the A's were involved more-so then any of the other 4 supposed suitors so i'm not sure what to make of this. Either way this is the first we've heard about Furcal and the A's in nearly a week so it's a little action to get us through our monday.
297 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
the last free agent signing battle between the A's and the Giants
was won by the A’s — for Esteban Loaiza.
4 suitors
I love how the supposed 10 suitors in the early going have now been whittled down to four… and furcal’s likely salary is coming down with it
Cust is the new Jaha.
by johnjahafanclub on Nov 18, 2008 1:21 PM PST up reply actions
something tells me the giants won't sign him...
Sabean or someone (I don’t remember who, but it’s on their site) said that the Giants can spend up to $20 mil this offseason. If they only have that much to spend and they just signed Affeldt, then Furcal would most likely be the end of their free agent signings. I just don’t see the Giants spending that much on one player when they still need to shore up some other holes.
Giants Sign Jeremy Affeldt
Giants Sign Jeremy Affeldt
By Tim Dierkes [November 17 at 1:46pm CST]
According to Andrew Baggarly of the San Jose Mercury News, the Giants signed lefty reliever Jeremy Affeldt to a two-year deal. He was a Type B free agent, so the Reds will receive a sandwich pick for him in the June draft.
I’m surprised Affeldt didn’t pursue a closing job; ESPN’s Keith Law ranked him as the second best reliever on the market (ahead of Francisco Rodriguez and Brian Fuentes).
yeah I don't understand the Affeldt drum he's banging
He’s never been very good – even last year he wasn’t particularly good. Looks like a classic random good year by a crappy reliever. There’s been about 14 billion of those over history of baseball and the next year they go back to being who they’ve always been.
Affeldt isn't bad. He's decent.
He’s young Alan Embree.
by thejd44 on Nov 19, 2008 1:50 PM PST up reply actions
i dont' really get the hype surrounding affeldt...
not that its the most stat savvy statistic, but his career whip isn’t all that good, esp for a reliever. he’s had more bad years than good years, and other than this year he tends to walk a lot of people.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:02 PM PST up reply actions
FIP and tRA in the mid-3s last year
and his K rate improved a lot, as did the juice on his fastball, last season.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
do you think Sabean reads statcorner? if he does, he just earned a lot more respect from me and I will have to send him flowers in the mail sometime in the near future.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:18 PM PST up reply actions
Obviously Sabean doesn't read statcorner
And there’s no reason why he and Ned Colletti should ever start.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
I imagine he has a team of people who compile much more
complex stats than statcorner. Whether he uses them is another question.
Actually, I doubt it
There are still a lot of front offices that don’t do any real heavy statistical research. I’m pretty sure the Giants are one of them.
by thejd44 on Nov 19, 2008 1:49 PM PST up reply actions
But I'm pretty sure Sabean doesn't know what FIP or tRA are
Do you give a GM credit for making a smart move for dumb reasons? (I like to call that the Kenny WIlliams Effect)
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:19 AM PST up reply actions
I try to avoid giving Sabean credit for anything
Even a blind squirrel finds the occasional Rich Aurilia.
Unfortunately, he then often drops that Aurilia and comes back years later to discover that it has rotted and turned into a lame platoon corner infielder.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
The first.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Meh
Not much we didn’t know in this article. All the article did was talk to Furcal’s agent and raise Furcal’s price tag. What’s the agent gonna say if the Giants or A’s weren’t really that interested? Of course they’re both hard after Furcal! They’re rivals competing against each other! They should overbid.
I will say this. If it becomes a bidding war between the A’s and Giants, the A’s will lose.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
The A's versus the GIANTS?!?!?
Seriously. When your primary competition is Brian Sabean, that means you need to GTFO of negotiations and get as far away from that FA as possible ASAP. Brian Sabean’s stupid/fireable offense contracts don’t outweigh the Affeldt signing, which is probably an exception.
If it goes beyond 2 years, the A’s need to get the hell out.
Exception for Affeldt.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
none of the FA's
make a trade
i’m willing to take an mlb ready SS no quite ready at the very least
by Asfan4ever723 on Nov 17, 2008 1:38 PM PST up reply actions
Ugh. I hate hate hate trading good prospects. I'm still sore from the Holliday deal...
Can’t we do the spaghetti test, like third base? Then spring for Johnson and maybe even a bullpen arm.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
I am still sore from the deal.
Call me a pisswad, I really don’t care. I don’t want to see any more prospects traded this offseason. If Cahill/Anderson get traded, I will be sick.
What’s the spaghetti test, btw?
I know that's a pisser, baby.
Throw at wall, see if it sticks
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
The mother-in-law test?
"A’s baseball….It’s almost better than a stick in the eye." ~ alox
by Gallagher's Watermelons on Nov 18, 2008 4:45 PM PST up reply actions
Throw Petit, Pennington, Everett, etc. at the wall and see who sticks.
Cabrera and Renteria depress me more than Crosby.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
I'd rather see Petit than Crosby
au contra ire
by JediLeroy on Nov 17, 2008 3:38 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
if CarGon turns into the next Beltran, i'll eat my hat
I would trade for a proven and good SS, hands down. Good SS’ do NOT grow on trees, unlike many prospects who are more likely to flameout than produce in the bigs. Of course, i really dont want to give up anderson or cahill, but i’ll give up mazzaro or any of our other pitchers, as long as the trade is equal/we win.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
If AN ever stops offering to eat hats
I’ll eat my hat.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
If CarGon turns into the next Beltran I'll eat my cell phone
When Beltran was 22 he was already in the majors being good, and he always showed good patience in the minors. FWIW I take the Garrett Anderson comp when it come to the who-might-he-turn-into game.
Same here - I think G. Anderson's the best comp
I happen to think Anderson has had a very good career, so it’s a compliment to CarGon.
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
While I'm not the biggest fan of his,
if the A’s really just traded away the first 6 years of Garret Anderson’s career (plus additional assets) for one year of Matt Holliday, it was a moronic trade.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Unless they manage to extend Holliday,
which we really won’t know until later.
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
Perhaps, if you can demonstrate to me beyond any plausible doubt
that Holliday signed with the A’s because of playing here for a year and would NOT have signed with them otherwise…
Elsewise, I’m sticking with “moronic.”
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I don't think that will ever be knowable
But if they sign him to an extension, it will appear that Beane felt the A’s could greatly improve/contend with Holliday in 2009 and felt he could sign Holliday after 2009 to anchor the lineup in the “Cahill/Anderson years” – and he will have been right on both counts. That’s good enough for me.
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
The more I think about it...
… the less I think the A’s ever really intended to sign Holliday long-term. And that makes me sad.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
I don't see why wouldn't at least
kick the tires and see how high the market goes. Like Furcal, the price could get high enough that it’s wiser to retreat, but like Furcal why not stay seriously in the running as long as the price/years range remains reasonable?
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
a question on this topic
what happens to Holliday’s Type A status if he has a terrible year and/or gets injured this upcoming year? where does that leave him? I think part of the thinking in this trade is that in the WORST case scenario, he walks and we get two draft picks to replace Cargon and whatever else we lost…but if we lose those picks on account of injury/ineffectiveness…we are screwed…but then again, holliday might be more willing to resign a la mark ellis
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 9:29 PM PST up reply actions
It depends on how bad he is, and on how much time he misses
The rule of thumb is: DL time good, “playing through it” and sucking bad. DL time is good because there’s an injury adjustment that gives players “constructive HR” (and RBI, and any other counting stat) for the time they missed.
Yes, that makes no sense, since even a bad version of Holliday is likely better than any of the alternatives. But it’s how they do it at Elias.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Thanks, as always PT.
so basically our Trainer’s job is to make sure players either stay on the field completely healthy, or break their leg to keep them off it completely…there is no middle ground
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:04 PM PST up reply actions
Only for players 1 or 2 years from free agency...
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Forget the compensation
Can we get the A’s trainers to keep Bobby Crosby off the field just because?
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:20 AM PST up reply actions
With the A's training staff
it wouldn’t surprise me if Crosby went in for a routine physical and came out with a broken leg (but, of course, was day to day for 3 months).
by thejd44 on Nov 19, 2008 1:51 PM PST up reply actions
I'd be interested in knowing when a Boras client...
signed with the same team he played for before becoming a FA. Has it ever happened? Perhaps it has… I’m just asking. Because I don’t think Beane has any chance of extending Holliday.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 17, 2008 10:45 PM PST up reply actions
Yes
Andruw Jones. May be more, may not be…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I'm talking out of the side of my neck, here
But I think I heard something about Jones going over Boras’s head to get that deal done. I don’t know what I have to Google to substantiate that, but has anyone heard something similar.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
He stated without the proper question mark.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
Kyle Lohse just re-upped with the Cardinals
And he did it well before the start of FA. He told Boras he wanted to stay in St. Louis and to get a deal done. Few days later Lohse signs a 4 year/$41 million contract.
The monster at the end of this blog.
it's one thing if the player calls the shots...
I doubt Holliday will override Boras. Because he falls in love with playing in Oakland? Doubt it.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 17, 2008 11:05 PM PST up reply actions
So what you're saying is...
you don’t think Matt Holliday has the balls to tell Scott Boras he wants to stay in Oakland.
Know what… I’m going to call you out on this one. Please make your case that Holliday is a wimp that Boras can bully around and send him to whatever goddamn team the super agent feels like sending him to.
The monster at the end of this blog.
here's my case...
he hired Boras for the same reason Zito did. To get him the most fucking money he can get. It’s not a matter of balls. The guy is gonna sign with the team that offers the most money. It won’t be Oakland. It’s not personal, it’s business. Okay, I’ve watched too much Godfarther marathon, but… Holliday will never resign with the A’s.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 17, 2008 11:54 PM PST up reply actions
Complete and total bullshit
You asked if any Boras client had re-signed with his original team before becoming a FA. You were dead set on saying Holliday would never sign an extension with the A’s.
Then two people tell you about two different Boras clients who did EXACTLY what you thought impossible in the span of 20 minutes and rather than let the facts even begin to temper your position you decide to go full bore on why Matt Holliday would never stay with the A’s beyond 2009:
He’s too much of Boras’ bitch to have any say on where he plays baseball.
Like I said, bullshit.
The monster at the end of this blog.
dude, like I said...
I was just asking. Okay, Jones was a good example of one who did. Loshe is a shitty example. He re-signed with the team he wanted to play for… for more than anyone else would have paid him.
You must really love Holliday. I’ll love him, too, in 2009… cuz that’s the only year the A’s will have him.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 18, 2008 12:18 AM PST up reply actions
btw, I suspect Jones signed...
for more than anyone else offered, also. Anyone with a brain could see he was on the decline.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 18, 2008 12:24 AM PST up reply actions
OK, I gotta ask
What are the next batch of winning lotto numbers?
‘Cause you’re saying with absolute certainty that a 30 year old SP coming off a 15-6, 3.78 ERA in 200 IP season got every last dollar he could have possibly found when he signed his contract with St. Louis.
Even though Lohse signed his contract about a week before the FA market opened so his suddenly brain dead agent Scott Boras didn’t even have a chance to legally talk to the other 29 teams in baseball about their interest in his client.
You don’t think that Boras even tried to convince his client that simply by going out on the open market he’d be virtually guaranteed to find more money, even in St. Louis, because of the basic economics of Supply & Demand.
That is truly Foolsh.
The monster at the end of this blog.
no, not with absolute certainty...
I’ll concede that much. He may have gotten slightly more from some dumb GM. And, there are a few of ‘em out there. But, Lohse wanted to stay in St. Louis. Holliday won’t want to stay in Oakland. He won’t. You’re just gonna have to trust me on this one. Even if they win the World Series in 2009.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 18, 2008 12:32 AM PST up reply actions
I've been accused of having a god-complex
But even I am willing to stand aside and let a man I don’t even know make up his own mind.
Let me ask you this. Do you think CC Sabathia is a liar? Do you think he lied when he said he enjoyed his time in Milwaukee and would be willing to give the Brewers a discount in their attempts to re-sign him?
Because if you think he was telling the truth, that he would honor his word and consider staying with the Brewers if their money was close, then you just gave yourself all the argument you need to shut up about what Holliday will or won’t do 11 months from now.
You. Don’t. Know.
Neither do I, but at least I’m willing to let the events play out and not pre-determine the course of another person’s life.
The monster at the end of this blog.
if I were a betting man...
and, I no long am… (I no longer drink to excess or whore around, either)… I would bet CC doesn’t sign with the Brewers. For exactly the same reason Holliday doesn’t sign with the A’s. The money won’t be close.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 18, 2008 12:45 AM PST up reply actions
Are you sure?
Can you bring it up with him over Thanksgiving Dinner, just to make sure?
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
I think there's a distinction here
As far as I can tell Lohse has always had Boras as his agent. Holliday hired Boras later.
I agree that this probably means Holliday went with an agent who would get him the most money, period. Lohse was already with that guy, so his motives aren’t quite as clear. Same goes for Jones, who also has always been with Boras according to Cot’s.
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:23 AM PST up reply actions
When Holliday hired Boras is irrelevant
The Foolsh arguement is that Holliday is Boras’ bitch and he couldn’t stay with the A’s beyond 2009 even if he wanted to. His agent would make him go play somewhere else.
The monster at the end of this blog.
But that's not really the argument
The argument is that Holliday hired the agent notorious for only caring about getting every last penny and quirk for his client. Holliday made a conscious decision to fire one agent to go with Boras. To me that says he’s going to leave it up to that agent to get him the best money deal.
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:33 AM PST up reply actions
And there have been two cases presented
that strongly argue against the idea that Boras always goes after the last penny. We both agree that Boras will get Holliday good money, that’s a near certainty. Holliday is a damn good player, combined with Boras’ negotiation skills there’s going to be a lot of money going towards the Holliday family in about a year.
Even if Holliday hired Boras to get him the best money deal he is entitled to change his mind. And if he wants to try and stay in Oakland, if he is willing to give a discount to stay, then I say Boras is Matt Holliday’s bitch and will work to get that deal done.
Scott Boras works for Matt Holliday. If Matt Holliday wants to play in Oakland beyond 2009 I fully expect Mr. Boras to listen to his client’s desire.
Hell, what will probably happen is Beane will say “adios” after the season ends and won’t be willing to discuss Matt coming back.
The monster at the end of this blog.
that's not my argument...
but, thank you for paraphrasing it inaccurately.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 18, 2008 12:37 AM PST up reply actions
I'm sorry
How silly of me to take this comment from you:
“It’s one thing if the player calls the shots… I doubt Holliday will override Boras”
And think that you were saying Boras was calling the shots on where Holliday would play in 2010.
When I challenged you to back that up, you said:
“he hired Boras for the same reason Zito did. To get him the most fucking money he can get. It’s not a matter of balls. The guy is gonna sign with the team that offers the most money.”
You say nothing about whether or not Holliday actually wants to play for said team. You have created this image of Matt Holliday having no control over where he plays in 2010 and that is crap. Scott Boras will decide where Holliday and any family he has will live.
Bullshit.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Considering how much of a ridiculous overpay that deal is
it’s highly questionable whether he could possibly have gotten more on the market…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I was just about...
to add that.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Nov 18, 2008 12:07 AM PST up reply actions
Be reasonable about this
Lohse had a good year, especially if you don’t dig into his numbers too deep. He went 15-6 with a 3.78 ERA… he’s an easy sell to the hometown press. He made 33 starts and pitched 200 innings. He just turned 30.
He was clearly not one of the big 3 SP hitting the market but he’s also going to cost a lot less than Burnett/Sabs/Lowe. When the market is said and done what looks like an massive overpay now will look run o’ the mill average by March.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Except Kyle Lohse really kinda sucks at pitching
It’s pretty indefensible to sign a pitcher to a deal almost twice of what he’s actually worth just because it’s easy to sell. It’s not good business or a good baseball move.
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:25 AM PST up reply actions
They're hoping to catch lightening in a bottle twice
Look, I’m not arguing that Lohse is a good pitcher. I’m saying his basic numbers were good enough that to say he maxed out on his potential earning ability before he even hit the FA market is a stretch.
15-6, 3.78 ERA, 200 IP is going to draw interest from any team looking for SP help on the FA market.
The monster at the end of this blog.
i'm hoping Nico meant the LAST 6 years...
or maybe the last two…then i would be supremely happy
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 9:26 PM PST up reply actions
Which comment?
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
PT said that if we traded the first 6 years of Garret-Anderson-The-Redux (Cargon)
for 1 year of Holliday, it was dumb…but I say if we traded for the last few years, it was amazing.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 9:31 PM PST up reply actions
More precisely
We traded for some chance at the first 6 years of Garret Anderson. Depending on what that chance is, the move is either good or bad.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
of course, and therein lies the debate
i think that while Coors will help, he isn’t going to be anything special. I’d say its decently likely for Cargon to be just ok, and that we won’t win/lose the trade by a whole heck of a lot. I’d say its rather unlikely CarGon makes us regret having Beane as our GM.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:07 PM PST up reply actions
Of course not... no one transaction could ever possibly do that
Still, I think this trade could easily go down as worse than Harang-Guillen… if not quite to the Lilly-Kielty level of awfulness.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
well, I do hope for a rarity, and therefore that you're wrong sir
I can’t handle anymore of my favorite sports’ teams doing stupid things.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:16 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not saying it WILL be that bad...
I’m hoping Beane knows something we don’t… but hope and projection are two different beasts.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I won't be at all surprised if Holliday makes more All Star teams with the A's
than Carlos Gonzalez will in his entire career.
And I fully expect Holliday to play just one season in Oakland.
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:27 AM PST up reply actions
Garrett
First of all, I’m amazed at the massive and varied thread my comment lead to.
Second, to continue in its vein, when Garrett Anderson was 23 he was already in the majors being good. We’ll see how CarGon does this year. Personally I don’t think CarGon will turn into him unless his contact skills make a 180. Anderson didn’t walk but he also didn’t K much. CarGon is Anderson with a bunch more strikeouts – the guy just has a whole lot of trouble making contact. Anderson swings/swung at everything, but he hit the ball a lot.
Anderson has rarely ever been better than average for his position
And after that age 23 season, he had 3 terrible years before he was even decent.
by thejd44 on Nov 19, 2008 1:52 PM PST up reply actions
Anderson's not a bad comp
I think that’s his upside. His downside is probably something like Juan Encarnacion.
"May our feet be swift. May our bats be mighty. And may our balls be...plentiful."
by nothinlikethetown on Nov 17, 2008 9:20 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe his upside and downside are both G. Anderson,
just at different times in Anderson’s career.
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
I somewhat retract my statement.
If a good shortstop can be attained, who is not a one year rental, and who does not cost Anderson/Cahill/Carter or too great a volume/quantity of other prospects, I might support such a deal.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
I suggested trading Italiano or Lansford for Lillibridge on minorleagueball
and was, at least, not immediately laughed off the thread.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I'd do that. Not sure why the Braves would, unless they hate Lillibridge now.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:10 AM PST up reply actions
Carlos Gonzalez will not be the next Beltran.
He might be a homeless man’s Carlos Beltran.
I really was just not all that impressed by him. I know he’s young and all, but his pitch recognition actually got worse as the year went on.
by thejd44 on Nov 17, 2008 9:48 PM PST up reply actions
+1 and +1
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:05 PM PST up reply actions
I liked the Juan Encarnacion comparison.
Encarnacion had all the tools in the world, but couldn’t ever put them all together or make enough contact to hit for a high average or with good enough power.
Beltran also used to steal loads of bases. I bet Gonzalez never breaks 20 in his career. If not Encarnacion, I’d compare him to someone like Casey Kotchman.
"A’s baseball….It’s almost better than a stick in the eye." ~ alox
by Gallagher's Watermelons on Nov 18, 2008 4:51 PM PST up reply actions
Casey Kotchman is an above average MLB first baseman
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Hairsplitting!
He’s pretty close to average.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 6:03 PM PST up reply actions
Shrug
He could improve, he’s still pretty young. Point is, he’s not valueless.
On the other hand, he also is pretty much nothing like Carlos Gonzalez. Over his career he’s walked almost as often as he’s struck out.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
A bullpen arm?!?
The A’s just traded Street and declined Embree’s option. Why would you then turn around and overpay for a mediocre reliever?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Who said anything about mediocre?
Fuentes would be a better buy than Cabrera or Renteria, and bigger upgrade than +1 Giambi… no?
I wouldn’t want to have to outbid the Mets, but I’d be very interested in his price. Certainly O-Cab will get more than 11M/season. I’m just trying to be imaginative about adding wins.
I suppose you’re on the Dunn train?
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
Fuentes?
Complete waste of money.
Devine and Ziegler can handle the high-leverage roles, with some help from Blevins. Yes, there will be regression.
After the big three, the rest of the guys don’t necessarily have to be top notch. They just have to be competent relievers, and all the A’s have to do to find those is to look in AAA.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
Fuentes might add one win... two max...
I’d much rather sign Giambi than Fuentes. Probably cheaper, shorter commitment, similar results. And I’m not even particularly in favor of Giambi.
Also, I’d be pretty surprised if anyone gave Cabrera $11 million a season. He wasn’t making that this year when he was 34— you really think someone’s going to pay MORE for him coming off a lame season at age 35?
To the extent that I’m on any particular “train,” it’s the “sign Furcal even if you overpay for him” train. And I guess the Big Train. (Wait, that’s the wrong Johnson. OK, the Even Bigger Train.) If you insist on signing a first baseman, sign Pat Burrell.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
"Nice" quotes.
Of course I’d much rather Furcal, but, if we’re putting Johnson on the A’s, they can’t fit much more than 15M in for Furcal. And I’m guessing the Giants will be more reckless with spending than the A’s will be.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
The A's have a LOT more money to spend than the Giants do this offseason
Post the Holliday trade, next year’s projected payroll is currently at about $44 million.
That gives them a minimum of $30 million to work with, compared to what has been stated to be about $20 million for the Giants prior to their signing of Jeremy Affeldt. Post that, more like $16 million. So the Giants do not have a lot of maneuvering room here. Most of their posturing about acquiring top-tier free agents is just that— hot air designed to mollify the fanbase.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
PT its that low??
I’m not questioning you in the sense that I think your wrong, but I was under the impression that it was much closer to $50 million. That figure makes things look much nicer for potential additions. $30-35 million could bring in some nice talent. Furcal for $12mil and Teixeira for $20mil, any takers??
Math
Chavez $11 million
Crosby $5 million
Duke $5 million
Cust $2 million
Bowen $1 million
Holliday $13 million
19 players @ roughly $400,000 = $8 million
Total of $45 million. Bowen could easily be nontendered though.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Do we have someone internally
ready to backup? Seems like we have one or two would be ready for 2010. But otherwise, I don’t see Bowen dropped. Any other replacement would be more expensive and equally irrelevant.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
Seems like there are plenty of Bowenesque guys floating around the waiver wire
at any given time. He’s basically the definition of replacement level.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
There is that
I guess if you find a minimum wage guy, you might as well dump him.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
Plus, who cares who the backup catcher is
since he never plays anyway?
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
There's that too
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
Hilarious
Isn’t it funny that the A’s have used the DL 50+ times over the past 2 years. 100+ times over the past 5 years…and not one time has the Catcher been put on the DL (That I can remember).
Kendall took how many HBP’s? How many headfirst dives to eat spikes at home? Suzuki got bowled over a bunch this past year… No DL Stint.
It’s crazy when you think about it.
by Colorado Fan on Nov 19, 2008 10:15 AM PST up reply actions
I still think you're low on Cust
Why not play it safe and call it $46 million with Bowen on the roster?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Shrug
Whether the difference in cash is $14 million, $15 million or $16 million, it’s still considerable.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
What about Ellis and Murton?
Ellis is signed for $5.0 million and I believe Murton would be in his first year of arb. So add about $0.6 for Murton and $5.0 for Ellis.
Oops!
OK… we’ll try this again.
Holliday @ $13.5 MM
Ellis @ $5 MM
Chavez @ $11 MM
Duke @ $5 MM
Cust @ $3.5 MM (Going high here)
Crosby @ $5.25 MM
That’s $43.25 MM for those 6
19 Players @ approximately $400 K a pop = $7.6 MM
So round up and call it $51 million allocated so far. (Again, padding high is better than budgeting low.)
What’s the 2009 ceiling?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Reading the Wolff tea leaves, I see $75M for 2008-type draft expenditures
and $80M for more quote-unquote normal expenditures (paying slot, etc).
Needless to say, I’m assuming a payroll ceiling of $75M for any moves I advocate.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Aw, shit, I forgot Ellis
Murton’s still pre-arb.
Yeah, gotta add $5 million to that total.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I sincerely hope the A's don't use
more than half of that for anything that goes beyond 2009/2010.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
I can't say
I completely agree with this. I understand the thinking behind committing to Furcal past 2010, but i’m on the fence myself. If Furcal is indeed healthy and can stay that way he would fill a hole that we don’t have anything even on the horizon for until 2011. Cardenas is far from a sure thing to stick at SS, and the younger 3 guys in Leyja, Coleman and Christian have a long ways to go. If healthy 10-12mil a season is a bargain for a player like Furcal. However, if it turns into another Chavez situation that will be a horrible problem. Teixeira on the other hand is definitely a guy I am in support of the A’s signing. He’s a damn fine player, and one that could lead this team should Holliday leave after next season.
by JPShark on Nov 17, 2008 5:56 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The way I see it
is that if you get both Furcal & a Tex-ish (20mil) type player, you lose a lot of payroll flexibility in both keeping guys we have and/or acquiring guys. Now, Chavez comes off the books soon so it’s not the end of the world if we eat that it all up now, but capping our spending this year around the 15/20 million mark long term investments could pay off a few years from now where we could have another 25/30 million to work with again. Signing Furcal to a 3/4 year at 10/15, and a one/two year deal for a Giambi & Johnson at 10 a piece would work since the latter would be off the books quickly. But again, if we somehow wound up with Furcal & Tex (who a seriously doubt we’d get), it’s certainly not the end of the world payroll-wise.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
What he said
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
And me, too.
I’d rather see the A’s load up short term with two additional bats unless they’re going all in on Texiera or Holliday. Holliday, by the way, remains my plater of choice to sign long term.
Tranny!
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
How did you screw this one up?!?!
I couldn’t set that joke up any better and you blow the punchline!
The monster at the end of this blog.
3 years 37 mil + 1 year 13 mil option/3 mil buyout sounds like most reasonable for both sides to me
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's or Golden State Warriors? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's and Golden Stat Hoops
Too much...
Coming off an injury,
3 yrs 33 mil
or
2 yrs 24 mil w/ 3rd & 4th Option yrs of 12M/2M Buyout
The Stockton Ports pitching staff is better than the Orioles.
whoever wins, we lose
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
back injuries dont scare beane
since he signed kotsay to that extension
neither does declining bats on the wrong side of 30 = kendall
sign furcal for 3 yrs, ends the same time Jroll is a FA
perfect timing, in 3 years we can laugh at whichever team throws a ridiculous amount of money at a 33 year old rollins.
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
Except he's not had the injury history of Furcal yet
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:15 AM PST up reply actions
Sabean the icehole
Nicest thing I can say about him. Have you notice anytime the A’s talk about a free agent he tries to outbid the A’s. Can’t he think for himself. Beane needs to talk up Richie Sexson and then the giants would give Sexson a 5 year 50 million deal.
Or talk Sabean into believing that Bobby Crosby is a good player.
so Sabes takes him off the A’s hands.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
Are you kidding?
Cain is a sub-.500 pitcher!!!111
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
WINS FTW!!!!11
"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball
How about Crosby for Sergio Romo?
Young, cheap, serviceable reliever for Crosbob Errorpants.
"A’s baseball….It’s almost better than a stick in the eye." ~ alox
by Gallagher's Watermelons on Nov 18, 2008 4:55 PM PST up reply actions
Works for me
I kind of like Romo and I kind of love shedding Crosby and his salary.
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
You can pet it
but NO ONE is going to “PaulThomas” it. Whatever that even means.
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
I really hope we never sign Pat Burrell
Not that I think we will, but he is such an uncool lame player.
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
Do you think it's one of the Bay Area teams?
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
If I were Furcal, and if playing for a contender were a priority,
I’d favor Oakland over S.F. for a 3-year deal if the money was similar.
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
but the G's do have lincecum
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 9:36 PM PST up reply actions
it sure helped this year
"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball
i'd have to say that sexyness has to add at least .5 WPA over the course of any given year....
so by my calculations, Emil Brown cost us about 5 wins last year.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 9:45 PM PST up reply actions
So those 5 wins...
Is that before or after we blocked the sight of Emil Brown from our brains after midseason?
'Who's that guy we had to release last year because he robbed a bank?'- Billy Beane
Gio Gonzalez is my hero.
How are the A's more of a contender than the Giants?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:16 AM PST up reply actions
Depends on how you define "contender"
The A’s will have a (much) better team next year. The Giants, however, could conceivably contend for their division better as there are no really good teams (except, potentially, the Dodgers).
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Why is it obvious the A's will be better in 2009? They were a horrible
team in the second half last year after trading Harden and Blanton. The starting pitching fell apart. I think it could go either way.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:41 AM PST up reply actions
A few reasons
1. They were better (by 3 wins) last year, even with that terrible second half
2. They just added at least 7 wins by upgrading the Brown/Bad Buck duo to Matt Holliday.
3. Gallagher, Eveland, Braden, and whoever pitches #5 if we don’t add a SP figure to improve a bit as part of the normal progression of maturity/experience
4. Barton couldn’t have a worse year if he tried.
In sum, you take the better team and add a better player than the Giants are likely to get, and figure that they have young likely-to-improve players rather than old likely-to-regress players (Winn, Molina, Roberts) and no completely unproven players slotted to start in important positions (ESPN’s Depth Chart says “Bigger Gaping Hole than Chavez-Free Oakland” starting at 3B).
Also, the Giants bullpen is craptastic. Sergio Romo is the only one who posted acceptable numbers, and he did it with a .171 babip.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
The Giants do have young
likely to improve players: Fred Lewis, Pablo Sandoval, Nate Schierholtz. The question is whether the manger will play them.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
Fred Lewis is HIGHLY unlikely to improve
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Lewis is also not that good and not that young
He’s not old, just not so young great improvement should be expected.
by thejd44 on Nov 19, 2008 1:56 PM PST up reply actions
My argument has less to do with his age, which is admittedly a problem,
and more to do with the fact that he was almost unbelievably lucky last season and would have to improve his baseball skills massively to even tread water from a production standpoint.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
2 years max guaranteed, that's it!
If Beane wants to throw in a mutual option, fine. But, I really think the A’s should have learned their lesson by now in signing recently hurt players/history of injury to long term contratcs. And right now, even 3 years guaranteed to someone like Furcal just really does not sit well with me.
I don't really mind, though, if they sign Furcal
to a 3-year deal knowing it “should” be a 2-year deal and the third year will probably be a “mistake” – if that’s what it takes to get him for two good years (assuming they believe he’ll provide that), it might be well worth it. You now have a very solid looking team for 2009, your SS problem solved for 2010, and two full years to develop your next SS. If he’s good in 2011 you have made out in spades. If not…
…For 2011 (when Chavez is conveniently off the books) you can either try to trade him, let him be a so-so SS for a year, move him to 2B if the situation is right, or let him be an overpaid utility player for a year. Not the end of the world if you got enough value out of him in 2009 and 2010.
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
for the record
when does a major FA signing not come with an off year or two? it seems like any longer term deal has at least one ‘down’ year for a player (although a Pujols ‘down’ year is something that none of our players could touch if they were handed a rather large trampoline and your aunties walking stick). If Furcal had 2 good years and 1 bad one, sign me up for that train. That’s a lot better than something along the lines of our Jermaine Dye deal…which was like .5 years of good, and a lot of meh.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 9:42 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
probably
But do people really think Furcal is only going to get 3 years?
3 plus an option is sounding like a pretty good guess ...
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
yeah
But I suspect teams are going to reach a $/per year ceiling with him (I’ll pull 14m out of a hat, and I even think that’s high in terms of what he’s worth) and then will offer an extra year as inducement. If it’s a player option it might as well just be a 4th year b/c nobody’s going to offer in $14m four years from now. If it’s a team option that’s another story, but that’s not going to be much of a sweetener.
A $4m buyout of that option would set him up pretty nicely ...
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
mental image
jack cust bouncing on a trampoline.
internet laughing face!
BB should send scouts to watch cricket players.
by alea iacta est on Nov 18, 2008 1:06 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not worried about the last year of a Furcal deal being a bad one
I’m worried about every year being bad because he gets hurt again this year and never recovers.
If you told me that the A’s would sign Furcal to a 4 year deal, but they’d only get 2 1/2 Real Furcal years out of it because age caught up with him, I’d say do it. I just don’t see that happening. I think he’ll be able to hold up reasonably well if this injury is indeed behind him. That’s why I’m advocating a Maggs-type deal if at all possible. I see the situations as roughly similar.
by thejd44 on Nov 17, 2008 9:53 PM PST up reply actions
I think the Dodgers offered him 2 years guaranteed with an optional third year
and that didn’t do it.
According to mlbtraderumors.com
There is apparently interest in Furcal from the Braves. Personally I don’t understand it. I guess it means that Yunel Escobar would have to be included in a Peavy deal. Actually that’s the only way I can make sense of it. If it isn’t, Yunel Escobar would be an even better fit for the A’s.
Maybe a three team deal could be worked out between the A’s, Pads and Braves. The Pads wanted a young CF and young pitching. Maybe a deal around Sweeney and some pitching could get the A’s Yunel, the Braves get Peavy, the Pads get everyone else. I know the deal as is is extremely uneven, but hey it’s just a thought.
I wonder what's the least that could net Escobar without
including Cahill or Anderson – Sweeney, Mazzaro, Simmons, Carignan, and Pennington or Petit? Just curious.
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
I don't think they're trading Escobar unless they get back an ace pitcher like Peavy, but your
offer would intrigue me if I were Wren. I’d probably want a pitcher instead of Sweeney though, maybe Rodriguez.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:20 AM PST up reply actions
They were considering signing Furcal, which would make Escobar expendable
They could trade him and still get a good return. The Braves would probably want pitching. If it were a three-way deal with the SD, the Padres would want a young outfielder capable of playing CF and some pitching.
Wouldn't the Braves want some stuff to help them sooner than later?
Gio + Cunningham + H-Rod?
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
That sounds like a lot
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 10:40 AM PST up reply actions
It is, but I think that's what I'd want to start with if I was Wren.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
Escobar will cost a lot.
Really good, young, cheap shortstop, team control for 5 years. The only reason he doesn’t get more press is because he’s in the same division as Rollins, Reyes, and Hanley.
At least a top pitching prospect + one of the young outfielders.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
anything but Cahill and Anderson for Escobar and I'm down (equality for all in value, of course)
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 9:43 PM PST up reply actions
I would unhesitatingly trade one of those two for Escobar
5 years of control of a top 5 MLB shortstop about to enter his peak seasons? Yes, please.
He’s like J.J. Hardy. Except, you know, worth 2.5 times as much. (Actually, when you consider their salaries, it’s more than 2.5 times as much.)
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
yea i agree
except i dont really believe in any of the pitchers in our rotation outside of Duke (who i think is going to break down sooner rather than later). Gio has the best shot of being something special out of the guys who have seen major league time, but he hasn’t done anything to make me think that this will occur. Don’t get me wrong, Gallagher, Eveland, and Braden definitely have their uses and are valuable (Braden actually could come out pretty good if he isn’t already), but Cahill/Anderson could be cost controlled Ace’s, and thats something I feel that we’ve been missing since Harden/Haren left.
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:13 PM PST up reply actions
I actually think Gio has the worst shot of the prospects
Gallagher has much better stuff. They both have control problems. I think Eveland is just a better pitcher. Braden isn’t a prospect.
A lot of people think Swooney was the throw-in in the Swisher deal. I think it was Gio. I think he’ll stick on major league rosters for a while, but his upside is probably Oliver Perez (which is, sometimes damn good, other times awful, and altogether very frustrating).
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:30 AM PST up reply actions
Excuse me but
22 year old LHSP with his stuff and minor league success are not throw-ins in any deal. They are key components of the trade.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Agreed
A handful of crappy 2009 starts in the majors haven’t suddenly nullified the fact that the guy led the minor leagues in strikeouts, in AA, at age 21 in 2008.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Whoa
OK that was weird.
Obviously I meant 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I know Gio had a lot of strikeouts in the minors at a relatively young age, and I understand that is an important aspect of evaluating him. I accept that completely.
So don’t jump all over me here. I don’t want the usual dissertation about trusting facts and track record over observation. Right now, this one time, I aim to weasel a completely subjective small sample assessment out of you.
You are not allowed to use any acronyms in your response, or to refer to how many wins or runs above whatever he’s projected to be over the duration of his pre-arbitration years.
Also banned: Plus and minus symbols, and the phrase “marginal value”.
Okay, preface complete. Here’s the question(s):
What is your opinion of Gio’s stuff? Excellent, good, average, crummy? In what respect do you expect him to improve?
(I know, anticlimactic)
I’ve said this before, but I’m confused as to how a below-average fastball, decidedly mediocre command, and a possibly evolving but at-present sketchy third pitch translate to sustained success in the majors. Unless the latter two areas improve vastly (and color me skeptical on that), I’ll take Dallas Braden over Gio every day of the week. I’d be glad to be wrong, but Gio’s repertoire just screams “fringe” to me.
Addendum: I also fail to see the supposed double plus kapow blam wow awesomeness of his curveball that everyone keeps talking about. It’s a pretty good pitch. It gets swing throughs with two strikes. But to my eye it’s not outstanding, or particularly versatile.
ZiPS agrees with you.
Can we use acronyms if they agree with you? In fairness your description could apply to Barry Zito and he’s won over 100 games in the majors, although his curve does come with Batman sound and visual effects.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:24 AM PST up reply actions
1. No. All acronyms are banned outright.
2. PT will say (rightly, I assume) that Z*** projections are iffy with respect to pitchers with slim major league track records.
3. Pre-descent into suckage Zito threw (slightly) harder than Gio. And his curve was, I think, far superior. But I guess that’s a reasonable enough comparison. If Gio somehow turns into Zito, I will happily recant all this hand-wringing with some grand gesture of self-flagellation.
My take is that if Gio learns to throw his curve
at different speeds, his stuff will be “good”. As is, I think he’ll have flashes of brilliance but generally disappoint.
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
You're not going to eat any headwear?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:57 AM PST up reply actions
I don't want to box myself in
I could eat my hat, I guess.
But who knows, I might go shirtless to an A’s game with a giant green “GIO” spray painted across my chest. I might get “47” tattooed on my bicep, or force myself to write left-handed for a year.
Maybe I’ll make like Paul Bettany in The Da Vinci Code. Maybe I’ll bookmark The Corner, or switch permanently to Miracle Whip.
Lots of possibilities.
I suggest you avoid the write left-handed one
It isn’t for the faint of heart/less experienced.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
His curveball really is an outstanding pitch
It’s probably the best single pitch on the current A’s roster, not counting relievers. Hell, it might even be the best pitch counting relievers, now that they dealt off Huston Street. I’d have to ponder that for an excessive length of time relative to the actual relevance of the comparison.
I can’t figure out where you’re getting that his fastball was slower than Zito’s. If Zito ever averaged over 90 MPH for a season, it must have been in high school or something. 90 MPH is actually plus velocity for a lefty. In 2005, clearly “pre-descent into suckage” and the first season we have actual data for, it was 87.3. Gio’s was 89.7 last year.
His changeup isn’t fringey at all; it’s already a pretty good pitch from what I saw of it, although it would help if he commanded it better. Which you could say of all of his pitches.
His hammering at the MLB level last year was almost entirely caused by a ridiculous rate of fly balls leaving the yard and, like, every runner who got on base coming around to score (see, eg, Dallas Braden’s 2007). He’s probably going to give up a lot of fly balls, and thus be more homer-prone than usual, but that’s not going to continue. And actually, this year he was able to generate quite a few grounders, so that may not even hold.
Want another comp? He compares very well to Rich Hill, so unless he suddenly suffers an outbreak of Steve Blass Disease like Hill did, he should be a pretty good pitcher. (Hill was similarly horrific in his first touch of MLB, by the way.)
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Duke has fantastic control of his cutter
which makes it an outstanding pitch regardless. But anybody who has that good of control over one pitch will undoubtedly be able to exploit everybody (See: Greg Maddux).
In terms of pure pitches, his curveball is definitely Zito-esque. It seems like I’m trying to make Gonzalez into some kind of giant monster, but if he ever harnessed all, or even most, of his stuff, he’s going to be one hell of a pitcher.
I think the real problem here is that grover is 100% certain Gio is the second coming of Sandy Koufax. Fanpost and poll forthcoming.
1. I humbly submit that you are overrating Gio’s curveball by a wide margin. Pitches on the A’s staff that are better: Duchscherer’s cutter and curve, Casilla’s slider, Braden’s changeup, Ziegler’s … well, whatever it is. I haven’t seen enough of Devine or Gallagher to confidently include them, but I suspect their fastballs would be in the conversation as well.
2. We’ll see about his changeup. Maybe.
3. My comment regarding Zito was imprecise. I would say his velocity and stuff began to erode circa 2002-3 (the precipitous and permanent drop in his strikeout rate from its apex in 2001 attests to that). I am going from memory, but I’d guess his fastball averaged 90mph in 2000-1, hitting 91-92 at times.
He was able to mitigate this decline somewhat by throwing his changeup more often and more effectively, until, inevitably, plummeting fastball velocity doomed him.
4. “His hammering at the MLB level last year was almost entirely caused by a ridiculous rate of fly balls leaving the yard …”
Also the fact that he walked 25 guys in 34 innings, no?
I'd be stunned if Zito ever averaged 90 mph
I’m not talking about TV radar guns, here, I’m talking pitch f/x, which is consistently both more accurate and less gaudy.
With regard to point 4, his “true” ERA was about 5, which isn’t good (but is excusable for a rookie). But the “hammering,” the fact that it was 50% higher than that, is mostly because of bad luck.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I have vivid memories of Zito consistently throwing 90-91
On the other hand, there is but a thin, blinkering line separating “vivid memory” from “figment of imagination”, and I take your point regarding TV radar readings.
Possibly someone can confirm this. Or tell me I’m out of my flipping mind. I’m willing to accept either conclusion.
I can certainly remember Zito touching 91
on the FSN telecasts way back. Not very often though… I doubt he averaged higher than 89 in any ML season.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
A typical pitcher will "touch" 3-5 MPH above his average fastball velocity
so it’s well within the range of possibility for Zito’s 88 MPH fastball to occasionally get up to 91 or even 93 MPH.
Of course, nowadays he’s throwing 84 and touching 88…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
When Zito hit 90 we broke out the champagne.
It was more rare than a Cliff Pennington XBH.
"A’s baseball….It’s almost better than a stick in the eye." ~ alox
by Gallagher's Watermelons on Nov 18, 2008 5:01 PM PST up reply actions
That's that, I guess.
In summary:
1. Like a pining, freckle-faced schoolgirl, I have romanticized Barry Zito’s 2001 fastball. He threw 98! With movement! I saw it! God knows what else my memory has edited into unreality.
2. PT is irrationally in the tank for Gio Gonzalez’s curveball. It’s the best single pitch, bar none, in the universe (and, pending various conclusions concerning dark matter and cosmic expansion, possibly even the multiverse).
3. Somebody is going to have to eat a hat at some point.
I think his great stuff (which didn't impress me from what I saw)
will be canceled out by his awful control.
Hopefully he can figure out how to control his pitches. If he does, he’ll be really good. If not, I don’t see why he won’t be Oliver Perez. And that’s not a bad thing, really. He’s going to be useful. I just don’t think he’ll be great.
by thejd44 on Nov 19, 2008 1:58 PM PST up reply actions
If Gio Gonzalez is Oliver Perez, that is really, really good
He’ll flourish with a good defense and in the caverns of the A’s Coliseum.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
I would think a Sween/Mazzaro would net Yunel and everyone would be happy
Effectively it would be
Morton/Shafer or Gorky’s/Sweeney/Mazzaro to SD
Escobar to OAK
Peavy to ATL w Furcal signing as FA
If they move Kouz for Delmon they suddently become good quick, although I think that rumor died a few weeks ago
If Sweeney and Mazzaro could net Y. Escobar
(and I don’t think it could), I’d want the A’s to do it.
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
no chance
but i’d love it as well
"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball
Lol
If that offer was actually made to me, I would call Frank Wren’s wife and ask her if he was feeling alright.
If the answer to that was “yes,” the trade papers would be on their way to MLB in approximately .0003 seconds.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I don't care if Wren's OK or not. He made the call.
so the papers are being faxed in.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
Call the wife AFTER sending it in.
If he’s not alright, call him back and see what else you might deal for.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
I'd throw in a complimentary bottle of aspirin just for funsies
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 17, 2008 10:14 PM PST up reply actions
urban mailbag
A’s would have to overspend on furcal, doesnt see getting into bidding war…if true, i say go hard after the usual suspects like hu, lillibridge, valaika, etc
Reading between the inevitable euphemisms and spin,
you can tell that Urban pretty clearly thinks the A’s gave up considerably too much for one year of Holliday, too.
I suppose, given the fact that his name is mud around certain parts, that that might weaken rather than enhance my position in the eyes of some… but he’s right. It was really a rather inexplicable overpay.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Doesn't that all depend on how good you think CarGon is/will be?
I think Beane thinks this is the most trade value he’ll ever have. I was saying that about a month ago.
Hypothetically, if this IS the most trade value he’ll ever have, do you still think it was an overpay?
by thejd44 on Nov 18, 2008 12:32 AM PST up reply actions
Yes and No
Greg Smith was a legitimate trade chip, so was Huston Street. They would have gotten serious value in individual trades… Hell, one of ‘em might have even landed the A’s a new SS!
But I digress.
CarGon was certainly the piece that compelled Dowd to say yes. Smith and Street had enough value to address multiple issues on the Oakland roster rather than go towards one mammoth player. Beane is hoping Holliday will overshadow that lost opportunity.
The monster at the end of this blog.
If Street and Smith could have landed a legitimate SS that would have happened already.
I think it’s because Street did not have much value over the past year that they went for Holliday. I agree that Beane didn’t want to keep Gonzalez because he thought his value would just depreciate, and that he wouldn’t be that useful in 2009.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:27 AM PST up reply actions
agree on the CarGon thing
I think his value is the highest it will ever be. He obviously isn’t ready, so without a not-likely-to-happen great leap forward he’s going to play his age-23 season in the majors and put up bad numbers again. So now you’re left with a 24-year-old (too old to really be a prospect anymore) whose MLB clock has already been running for 2 years but still hasn’t done anything. IOW a guy who isn’t worth much. It’s not a perfect example, but the Cubs could have gotten a lot for Felix Pie two years ago. Not so much now.
Basically, if a guy is going to come up as young as CarGon did, he really has to be ready. Otherwise all sorts of bad things start to accrue. It was foolish to bring him up when they did, and I’m glad they got value for him now.
Yes
Holliday is worth maybe 6 wins over replacement level this season.
Street alone is probably worth at least 4 over the next 2 seasons, and he’s a known quantity at this point. Even if Gonzalez is a shitty fifth outfielder he practically cannot help but make up the remainder of the difference (replace “Gonzalez” with “Smith” and “outfielder” with “starter” and you have an equally valid point). I know Holliday brings draft picks, but Street would have done so as well.
It’s almost mathematically impossible for the players the A’s gave up to be SO terrible as to make this deal a win for Oakland. The only way it makes sense is if it’s capitalizing on a short-term opportunity— and I cannot recall ever seeing even a single person in October of this year saying “Gee, the A’s really need to sacrifice the future to win now.” This short-term “window of opportunity” doesn’t exist. If anything, there was good reason to believe that 2010 would be a much more favorable climate to win than 2009 will be.
And, you know, I hadn’t thought there was much that could make the Rich Harden trade look worse than it already did, short of Josh Donaldson keeling over and dying in a mud puddle, but the Holliday trade managed to do that.
I don’t want to sound like I’m carping excessively here. Add up the overall trade ledger since July of last year and it’s vastly in Beane’s favor. This specific deal just makes no sense to me.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
The Holliday trade is a bit puzzling up to this point.
For me at least. Beane must know something we dont. Im just really hoping we can find some way to sign him to something like 5 years 90mil. Im not holding my breath tho.
"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
Victor Wang did a pretty good analysis at THT
Here. He pegs Holliday’s value to the A’s in 2009 at $30M. Holliday’s salary is $13.5M in 2009, but Wang reckons there’s maybe a 45% chance they trade him in July (or sooner) so their expected cost of Holliday is really about $11M (if they trade him for a major leaguer making close to the minimum). So the value of Holliday to the A’s today is about $19M. Basically if you believe Street, Smith and Gonzalez are worth less than that, then the trade is good.
Wang’s assumptions are rather roughly arrived at, but they don’t seem wildly off the mark to me. Note that Holliday’s 6 wins in one season are worth a lot more than Street’s 2 wins per season over two seasons since making the playoffs is such a valuable thing. The Pennants Added calculation rewards high peaks over long flat performance.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 7:37 AM PST up reply actions
If Beane doesn't make another move then yeah, the Holliday trade makes no sense
He’s gotta make another move, right?
The monster at the end of this blog.
One would think.
I mean I cant believe Beane would trade for Holliday just to flip him come the trade deadline. Could he get better prospects than he gave up? Maybe.. But its awful risky.
"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
absolutley grover
I’d say there are at least two more moves coming.
And I hope there is an extension for Holliday as well.
surely the question is not
how good CarGon is going to be, but rather how good Sweeney is going to be as a long term CF, and how good Buck (etc) will be as a long term RF?
If the gap between them is not so great, then yeah – maybe gonzalez goes on to be a useful player, but long term, they’ve dealt from a position at which they’re not exactly short of talent.
i mean, it’s not as if Todd Linden is going to come in and play CF, is it?
BB should send scouts to watch cricket players.
by alea iacta est on Nov 18, 2008 1:23 PM PST up reply actions
It's a factor, but when you're trading a prospect, most of his trade value comes from his independent skill base
Theoretically (and maybe not so theoretically) you can trade Sweeney instead and obtain some better form of value.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
That's almost exactly my view
There is something to getting the best player in a deal that slightly eases the conscious, though. It’s rather weird, I keep thinking about trades/signings that help the A’s in the short-term instead of thinking how good we’ll be in 2011.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
I was reading on MLBTradeRumors that the Padres would like
to involve a third team in the whole Jake Peavy debacle. So, is it possible that this could be an opportunity for the A’s to step in and snag some infield help? I must confess that I know very little about the Cubs’ minor league system, so this idea would include the A’s, Padres and Braves.
Oak: Yunel Escobar
Atl: Jake Peavy
SD: Matt Murton, Vincent Mazzarro, Gorkys Hernandez, and possibly one other player from Atlanta.
This may or may not work. If anyone has any other suggestions or substitutions to my list, I would be interested in hearing. Also, maybe someone more familiar with the Cubs minor league system might have some ideas.
There would have to be WAY more coming from Oakland to get Escobar.
At least one other pitcher.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
You think so?
Atlanta was including him in a trade proposal to San Diego among other players. It was San Diego that turned it down. The Braves aren’t really parting with anymore than they initially offered. The only purpose Oakland serves in this proposal is to ‘sweeten the pot’ a little for San Diego’s benifit.
The ATL contribution looks about fine, if not too much.
Of course, I wouldn’t trade Yunel straight up for Peavy, but that’s a discussion to be had later.
Matt Murton and Vincent Mazarro is not nearly enough for Escobar.
A Peavy trade has to be comparable to the Haren deal in terms of what SD gets in return, only slightly less. The A’s will have to add two more top prospects.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
The package the Padres are receiving for Peavy in your scenario is
is worth less than Escobar.
So, no deal.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
Oh well
Worth a try. Getting desperate to replace Crosby.
Replace Mazzaro with either Cahill or Anderson, though, and it looks like a fairer deal
And a good one for the A’s.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
I considered that option.
But I was trying to come up with a way to get the deal done without including one of those two. Maybe Cahill, but definitely not Anderson.
The Cubs minor league system sucks, minus Vitters
and Vitters has been hyped to be more than he is.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
Beginning your list with Murton is a non starter
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
Furcal = Kendall/Loaiza
I like the idea of getting Furcal but it scares me that he will be a combined Kendall or Loaiza acquistion….not worth the money. Just entering his 30’s the performance would decline, like Kendall, or get hurt again and be a total bust free agent, like Esteban.
I hope I’m wrong!
Gas to Chicago- $23.87 A's/White Sox Tix- $28 Watching the A's whipping the Sox in July 05'- Priceless
If you're close to being seriously competitive,
and you have enough payroll flexibility, signing someone who is “not worth the money” can be…worth the money. If the A’s were to add Furcal and Giambi (as an example), they might become contenders and still come in at a reasonable payroll – so that Furcal could be a worthwhile addition even if a bit overpaid.
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
[Insert my repetitive "please stop mentioning Giambi, he makes no sense at all" post here]
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
It makes some sense to me
This lineup could be very competitive behind Duke, Gallagher, Eveland, Braden, and Gio, IMO:
Sweeney – CF
Furcal – SS
Cust – DH
Holliday – LF
Giambi – 1B
Suzuki – C
Chavez – 3B
Ellis – 2B
Buckingham – RF
It’s actually pretty durn good if you ask me. And defensively? Perfectly fine overall.
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
I think Outman's ahead of Gio at this point.
Who’s Buckingham? Lindsey?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 5:03 PM PST up reply actions
Combination of Buck and Cunningham, I'd wager
"A’s baseball….It’s almost better than a stick in the eye." ~ alox
by Gallagher's Watermelons on Nov 18, 2008 5:04 PM PST up reply actions
Lindsey Buckingham for MVP
He brought everyone on the Mac to their peak. Well, he and some white lines….A delicious guitarist.
Giambi will (probably) hit better than Barton next year
He will certainly give up a LOT more runs defensively than Barton does.
An optimistic view of Giambi’s 38 year old offensive season plus a pessimistic view of Barton may show enough extra wins overall to justify the big multi-year contract Giambi wants.
I, for one, would MUCH rather spend the money on Randy Johnson, Brad Penny, or Furcal.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
I wouldn't mind Furcal and a starting pitcher
I just think the Giambi addition, while arguably not the best move, is also not a move with no rhyme, reason, or justification. He would make the A’s lineup a lot better – he can still hit and he will almost certainly get on base a lot.
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
Maybe he can
I think there’s a real chance Barton puts up a near-equivalent OPS+. Giambi’s stats have been steadily declining since 2005 (161, 148, 108 (injury issues), 128) and I’m not at all convinced he’d do any better than a 118.
A 118 is good, but Barton doesn’t have to hit very well at all to be worth more as a player since he can defend circles around Giambi.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Why bother to defend circles?
How many times is a circle even hit to first base?
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
More often than you'd think.
Plus it’s thrown there a lot too. Sometimes you need to do the splits to corral it.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 6:42 PM PST up reply actions
Randy Johnson is a MUCH more efficient and effective hire than Giambi is
and since it doesn’t appear the A’s can do both and still hire Furcal…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I'm not getting how Furcal is a better hire than Dunn
Furcal plus Buck + Cunningham in 2010 is better than Dunn + Buck/Cunningham + Anyone Cheap in the SS thread only if Buck and Furcal are both healthy and good. I’d say the odds are greater neither will be, rather than both will be. And if Furcal makes it harder to re-sign Holliday, then it’s really not worth it.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 6:08 PM PST up reply actions
The reason why it's advantageous is that you can stick Cust in the outfield if Buck is hurt
and get any old schmoe to play DH and hit pretty well— whereas you can’t get any old schmoe to play shortstop and hit well. If you have to fill a position internally and/or with freely available talent, you really want it to be on the crappy side of the defensive spectrum.
Also, having Rajai Davis or Chris Denorfia filling in as 4th outfielders when Buck is hurt isn’t the end of the world.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
That would put the payroll at about $85 million, which is not tenable
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I'm with you Nico
Totally on the same page. I would love to have Furcal if the contract is short, like 2 years grnt./3rd year optional.
Him plus Giambi, with Holliday, Cust, maybe even Chavez gives us some major pop in the lineup. Yes!
Giambi is a fun name
If only he could hit like he wasn’t in his late 30s.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
His testicles make him look barely 5, though
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
Didn't he order in some Mexican?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 18, 2008 6:43 PM PST up reply actions
Now that, sir, is dirty.
One should at least finish before ordering.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
The remark was ballsy
I’ll give him that.
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
Especially if not adding more pieces for 2009 makes your latest blockbuster trade completely worthless.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
Let the Giants have him
On the older side and recently injured. I’d rather use the money on Harden if we’re going to be giving money to the injured….
agree
If they did offer a 3/39 contract let him be. Tejada is being offered on the low so why not bring him back for 1 year. I don’t like injured players like Furcal.
I thought it was made clear that Tejada wasn't being offered at this point
by thejd44 on Nov 19, 2008 2:04 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe it's on the "down low"
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
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
