Angels sign Brian Fuentes to replace K-Rod

Won't help them score any more runs

by Future Ed on Dec 31, 2008 11:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Yes, if this stops them from signing a hitter, it's not a good move.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

but it's a good move if it prevents more runs...

Fuentes is better than K-Rod.

This is a solid move by the Angels.

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

by brenarlo on Dec 31, 2008 11:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Arredondo can already be better than Fuentes

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Dec 31, 2008 11:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Doubt it

His K rate doesn’t suggest closer ability.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Dec 31, 2008 12:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The rest of his numbers are solid and Fuentes has ranged from solid to above that with is own K rate

Arredondo had a strikeout per inning in the minors and he’s a bit under that so far now in the majors (0.90). But he didn’t allow many baserunners at all – much better than his numbers had been in the minors. Could be a fluke, could be him not being scouted yet, so maybe it’s premature to say.

Fuentes was at about 1.2 per inning in the minors, 1.14 in the majors now, ranging from 0.91 in 2007 to 1.2 in 2005. He’s improved at not allowing as many runners on base his last three years, at least, though he allowed even more batters to reach in the minors than Arredondo did (partly in walking a higher ratio than Arredondo).

Based on what Arredondo did do for the Angels last year, it’s not unreasonable to suggest he can be a key late-inning guy at the very least, if not more. The most important thing isn’t how you get the outs, just that you get them without letting anyone score.

At the least, it should be interesting to see how it proceeds.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Dec 31, 2008 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is basically wrong

For pitchers, and especially for relief pitchers, there is nothing you can do that’s more important than striking people out. One exception is popups (one thing that some of the really dominant closers are superb at— Papelbon e.g.) but Arredondo hasn’t shown any special talent there either.

He projects in the mid-3s ERA range— a good setup guy but nothing to write home about.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Dec 31, 2008 1:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What about groundball rate?

For a guy like Zeigler, his 66+% groundball rate is paramount to his success as a reliever. His FIP is high because he doesn’t strike many batters out, but he also projects as a mid 3.00-ERA setup guy due to fact that he gets weak groundballs and doesn’t allow a lot of homers or line drives.

Arredondo, while not even in Ziegler’s league in groundball rate, still has pretty strong groundball tendencies due to his heavy sinker and even an better K-rate than Brad.

I would just think that the ability to limit hard-hit balls and keep the ball in the infield in the later innings is pretty important for relievers.

I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!

by Taj Adib on Dec 31, 2008 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ground balls are fine if the reliever isn't coming in with runners in scoring position

And, of course, if you have the defense behind him (but that goes for every pitcher).

Do any of us really want Ziggy coming in with 2nd and 3rd, nobody out? I think Devine and even Good Casilla would be better for that particular scenario.

I think this is what PT is getting at, but I could be wrong.

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 8:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought PT was just saying K-rate is a good predictor of future success, and

that success with a mediocre K-rate is a sign of worse things to come usually.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 8:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Right

Doesn’t guarantee that a guy will suck, but having a low K-rate puts a cap on a player’s realistic ceiling, especially for relievers. I don’t think Ziegler is going to be, long-run, more than a good setup guy either. Shit, that’s still an outstanding success story for a guy who was acquired for free and had to totally reinvent himself.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jan 1, 2009 12:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Trevor Hoffman doesn't have a particularly strong K ratio

Didn’t seem to bother him much.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 2, 2009 5:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Lee Smith's K rate was under 1

He was a pretty good closer, too.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 2, 2009 5:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Plus, sinkerballers have completely different goals

in pitching to contact. Dennis Lamp, Todd Jones, the late-great Quiz were as good as their ground ball rates, not their K rates.

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 Jan 2, 2009 5:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep. This just proves that you don't have to have a high K rate...

…in order to be an effective, even great relief pitcher or closer.

If you’re a pitcher whose success is in power pitching, a high K rate is likely. If you’re someone who allows contact but it’s usually bad contact, a high K rate is not a necessity.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 2, 2009 5:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

All this may be true in retrospect, but K-rates are still the

best predictor of future success. You’d have to succeed with a low K-rate for a long time before you’ve really proven that you’re the exception to the rule. Mariano’s done that. Arredondo hasn’t.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 2, 2009 5:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

There's a difference between saying...

…K-rates are the best predictor of future success vs. saying there’s nothing more important than striking people out.

I can be stubborn about it, but seeing some pitchers put up HOF careers without a high K-rate proves to me that while striking people out is obviously a good thing, it’s not more important than simply being able to get people out, period.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 2, 2009 6:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If you don't bother to look at their repertoire,

then sure K-rate is the best predictor. That’s just a way of saying if you don’t bother to do any homework and only want to glance at one stat, that’s a pretty good one to glance at.

Arredondo’s problem isn’t that his K-rate is too low. His problem is that he’s a power pitcher who relies on a mid-90s fastball and a splitter and that type of pitcher succeeds on missing bats and striking guys out at a good clip.

In other words, for Arredondo K-rate is an excellent predictor whereas for Ziegler, his GO/AO ratio is probably as or more important to keep an eye on because his success depends on coaxing ground balls (and taking his chances) more than on missing bats.

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 Jan 2, 2009 6:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that if Ziegler stops coaxing GBs he's in

trouble, but I don’t think his future is as good as a pitcher with a high K-rate. Can you give me an example of a pitcher who succeed for a long period of time with a low K-rate and high GB ratio?

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 2, 2009 9:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I looked up Quisenberry and he k'd

379 in 1043.3 career IP. I’ll see who else I might find (or I’ll get bored and give up)…

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 Jan 2, 2009 9:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Dennis Lamp was 857 K / 1830 IP

I’m not cherry-picking – those are the only two I’ve looked up. I’m thinking it’s going to be guys whose bread and butter is a heavy sinker.

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 Jan 2, 2009 9:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Greg Minton: 479 K / 1130.2 IP

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 Jan 2, 2009 10:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Kent Tekulve as well, but that seems

to be about it from the guys in the Top 100 all time ERA guys. I’d say that’s about Ziggy’s ceiling. It’s very rare. Strikeouts matter massively for a pitcher in predicting future success. Hence my support for Rodriguez.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 3, 2009 1:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

His ERA+ was 104 while about 1/2 relieving

Not bad, but not proof of excellence with a low K-rate either.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 3, 2009 1:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This was Lamp

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 3, 2009 1:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I love Lamp

by mikev on Jan 3, 2009 8:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Starring Lampille Ball

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 Jan 3, 2009 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

do you really love lamp brick?

or are you just lookng at things and saying you love them

"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"

by travdog6 on Jan 4, 2009 1:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure where to find K/BFP+

for all time pitchers, but it’s most likely possible in BB-Ref. It is beyond my technical capabilities though.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 3, 2009 1:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Who's a HOF pitcher with a low K-rate?

Even Glavine had 3000K’s.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 2, 2009 9:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Er, no he didn't

2607 strikeouts in 4413.3 innings. That’s about half the rate it seems we’re talking about for someone like Fuentes.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 2, 2009 9:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

OK but he was a starter.

I meant 2600 of course.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 3, 2009 1:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah. Obviously we don't expect starters...

…to post a K-rate the same as relievers.

I mean, not even Nolan Ryan really compares.

Randy Johnson, however, actually does.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 3, 2009 1:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Derek Lowe is another semi-example.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 3, 2009 1:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think that list of relievers makes your point

All those guys (Hoffman, Rivera, Lee Smith), all of whom are all-time best relievers, all have pretty great K-ratios. It doesn’t get that much better than 1/IP, particularly over a long career (i.e. we’ll see if Brad Lidge is still striking out 1.2 or whatever guys an inning when he’s 38). Smith’s ratio is the lowest but then he’s pretty far below Rivera/Hoffman. I think the list of guys further down the thread makes the point better – if you are preternaturally good at getting ground balls, you can be a very effective pitcher for a good while. But if we’re bringing super-elite relievers into the conversation, all those guys strike out a lot of hitters.

by jdr on Jan 3, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is why I would never argue that Ziggy

can/will be a premier reliever. I agree that the best predictor of top-level success is K-rate. But that doesn’t mean that K-rate has to be the best predictor throughout the entire continuum of relievers (i.e., “very good,” “good,” “above average,” etc.) or throughout every type of reliever. And one notable exception is sinkerballers.

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 Jan 3, 2009 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree, to a point

For a relief pitcher, the guys we seem to think of as being the types to blow people away with the strikeouts mostly have a K-rate around 1.2 per inning. Over time, that’s considerably more than the guys at 1.

Going back to Arredondo, where this all started, his rate was 0.9 per inning. That IS low for a rookie reliever and may not bode well for his future, but he still got people out and on top of that didn’t allow many baserunners.

We’re looking at the probability of Ziegler or Devine closing and we know Ziggy doesn’t strike guys out. He gets his outs with the ground ball. He only struck out a batter once every two innings. I don’t think you’re going to find a K-rate much lower than that.

Devine’s was 1.07, which isn’t spectacular but is at least around 1 an inning.

Street has two more strikeouts than innings pitched in his career.

Talking about Lidge, he’s probably about as high as you’ll get with most relievers: 1.4 an inning over his career. Even if he drops off a bit, it’s going to be tough for him to even dip much past 1.2 which is the area Fuentes is in (actually, 1.14 for his career).

Hoffman is at 1.07.
Rivera is at 0.91.
Smith was 0.97.

I’d say someone with a 1:1 ratio is about average. 1.1:1 and you’re getting better, 1.2:1 and you’re definitely a strikeout pitcher. Above that is just gravy in my opinion.

It’s going to be different for most starters because a lot of them don’t need to rely on strikeouts quite as much. Sure, you’ll have a Randy Johnson with a 1.19 rate, but what’s Rich Harden’s? 1 per inning.

Would you be surprised to know Roger Clemens has a career rate of 0.95? I was. I at least expected him to have as many strikeouts as innings pitched but he’s got 4672 in 4916.7. Nolan Ryan’s was 1.06.

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 3, 2009 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What I would say about comparing

guys like Arredondo, guys like Devine, and guys like Ziegler, is that pitchers like Ziegler do rely more on luck (see I’m willing to use the term when it applies!) – they coax a lot of groundballs and some days you’ll get more “at ’em” balls, other days more “seeing eye bouncers,” whereas Devine can better control his destiny.

Because Arredondo’s game relies on controlling his own fate, he will need to improve his K-rate in order to be successful. Zielger won’t, but he will also be more slave to the conditions around him (defense, fortune, and so on) and will have a far more difficult time being a “sure thing” – only a handful of sinkerballers, like Quiz and Tekulve, could reach that level.

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 Jan 3, 2009 3:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Makes sense

And for kicks:

Quiz: 0.36 K/inning (but also just 0.15 BB/inning)
Tekulve: 0.54 K/inning

Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog

by Flashfire on Jan 3, 2009 4:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

other hot stove news today....

DeRosa traded to Indians

Aaron Miles left Stl. for the Cubs

MLBTR says Milton Bradley to Cubs is a “done deal”

Looks like things are starting to pick-up

Also, Olney says Abreu & Giambi may have to settle for 1-year deals, which should benefit the A’s

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

by athleticsBB4life on Dec 31, 2008 11:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

A's had some derosa interest

at winter meetings

looks like indians gave up a reliever like a bailey/carignan plus 2 lower minors ones

by Asfan4ever723 on Dec 31, 2008 11:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess they thought that wasn't worth it to upgrade from Hannahan to DeRosa for one year.

I kind of agree. He’s $5.5M and 34 years old coming off a career year. He’s better than Hannahan, but hopefully they have better plans for the money.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm a little disappointed they didn't go for it...

His production was worth $19.4 Million last year. The A’s easily could have made the trade without any damage to the farm. He’s not just better than Hannahan, he’s significantly better- at the plate. I know he’s not the greatest defender but he’s not miserable either.
This is a great move for the Indians, he fills the void that Blake left. Plus, he’s an upgrade over Blake…

by stranahanahan on Dec 31, 2008 11:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

for 1 yr...no risk at all

i’d rather use 5mill towards derosa than anderson

by Asfan4ever723 on Dec 31, 2008 11:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think the A's are planning on using Joe Dillon in the Hannahn role next season.

If you look at his 2009 Marcels he projects to be a .750ish OPS hitter with pretty good defense, a little pop and the ability to play multiple positions. Basically a poor man’s Derosa. Hes also a righty, so I’d imagine that he could spell Chavez against lefty starters. All for the MLB minimum salary instead of Derosa’s $5.5 million. Give him a shot!

I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!

by Taj Adib on Dec 31, 2008 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hannahan has an option as well, but AAA is getting pretty crowded

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 12:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

jerry hairston is another poor man's derosa

he’s and intriguing player

"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"

by travdog6 on Dec 31, 2008 1:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd take Giambi at 1/10

I still prefer Dunn overall.

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

by brenarlo on Dec 31, 2008 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Giambi at 10M is not more valuable than Barton at 500K

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 12:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What do you suggest be done with the $10M if Barton is the 1B?

An OF blocks Buck. I guess that leaves a pitcher, since they’ve said they don’t want Cabrera.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If Derek Lowe is only getting 3/36 offer from the Mets offer 3/40

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's

by iamawesomer on Dec 31, 2008 12:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes this surprises me too. You'd think the Dodgers and Brewers would be all over him

at that price.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Dodgers are still in Mannywood, but I agree on the Brewers

Well, the Brewers IF sans-Hardy (Fielder, Weeks, Hall) is a problem if they got Lowe. Unless the issue is about the draft pick, since the Crew’s 1st rounder isn’t protected and they aren’t getting a 1st rounder for CC (and Sheets is up in the air). But giving up that 1st rounder is worth getting Lowe.

"And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic..."

by Blicks on Jan 1, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Which is why they need Hardy at 3B and Escobar at SS

They could even move Hall to 2B and Weeks to CF if Cain isn’t the answer there.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 1, 2009 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I believe Lowe isn’t interested in coming to the Brewers.

by Lovejoy on Jan 3, 2009 2:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Now that Unit is gone?

I’m not really sure. But just because there’s nobody better to spend the money on doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to waste it.

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 8:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess they could keep it till the season to see whether they can take on a salary dump.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 8:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ben Sheets plz.

"And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic..."

by Blicks on Jan 1, 2009 10:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Forget value...

Who’s better?

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

by brenarlo on Dec 31, 2008 12:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

word

www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.

by ChadGod on Dec 31, 2008 1:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Nah, don't like that at all.

It’s that sort of thinking that kills franchises.

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 8:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Acquiring better players kills franchises?

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 8:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

No, overpaying for a player because he's marginally better kills franchises

Hypothetical scenario.

You have a 2 win player who costs you 5MM a season and a 3 win player who costs you 20MM a season. Let’s assume they play the same position. The 3 win player is better, but the 5MM player provides much better value and one can easily purchase the 1 extra win the 20MM player provides with the 15MM savings.

"And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic..."

by Blicks on Jan 1, 2009 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a worse deal, but how does that kill the franchise if it's within budget?

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 1, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

A player like Giambi has value over his contributions to wins

Who will put more butts in the seats? Who will sell more jerseys?

by RayJEdd on Dec 31, 2008 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I do so love paying for past performance

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

by nevermoor on Dec 31, 2008 1:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Prove it. You can't, because you're wrong.

There is absolutely no proof that Jason Giambi will help attendance, unless you think he’s going to be so good he’s going to make the A’s a winning team (when they otherwise would not be).

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 8:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Weak argument

There is absolutely no proof that Jason Giambi will not help attendance either. Adding Giambi will make the A’s a better team, more interesting, exciting, and increase their victory total. Common sense says attendance increases.

by jdub69 on Jan 1, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

But would he help any more than Sheets, Abreu, or Nick Johnson,

who might do all that, and potentially do it more?

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 Jan 1, 2009 11:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

True Sheets could be the next Rich Harden.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 1, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd be happy getting any of them.

by jdub69 on Jan 1, 2009 6:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course winning helps attendance the most, but

If you have 2 players that will put up identical stats, but one is a 15 year vet that will hit his 400th HR this year, and get his 2000th hit the next. While the other is a 2 year vet, and his teammates still can’t remember his name.

I realize this is not statisical proof, but I think saying player personality and reputation and past performance have no impact on attendance is just wrong.

by RayJEdd on Jan 2, 2009 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Winning puts more butts in the seats than Giambi.

"And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic..."

by Blicks on Jan 1, 2009 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Assuming we spend the money more valuably elsewhere

big assumption

www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.

by ChadGod on Dec 31, 2008 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Stevens is an awesome strikeout guy -- 81K 27 BB in 58.1 IP at AA and AAA at 24 yo.

So as a prospect he seems better than Andrew Bailey, more major league ready than Carignan, but also three years older. So the A’s would likely have had to send Carignan to match Stevens.

Gaub is a 23 yo lefty reliever in A ball who had 100K and 32 BB in 64 IP. I’m gonna guess that Bailey or Demel comes the closest on the A’s, but they’re not lefties. There’s no way to tell whether the Cubs specifically wanted a power lefty.

Archer is a 19 yo righty starter who had 106K and 84BB in 115.1 IP at A ball. I’m thinking his value would be similar to someone like Ronny Morla.

I guess if the A’s gave up Carignan, Demel/Bailey and Morla it wouldn’t cripple them, but it seems a lot for one year of DeRosa for $5.5M.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 12:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Eh minor leage relievers are minor leage relievers

Quite fungible, plus you’re likely to get picks for DeRosa considering his monster season last year.

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's

by iamawesomer on Dec 31, 2008 12:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I love Demel so I’d hesitate to give him up, but I’d certainly deal three of the A’s other relief prospects for DeRosa (and his anticipated 2 picks). Something like Rodriguez/Kilby/Bailey matches up pretty well with what the Cubs got.

Oh well.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Dec 31, 2008 1:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You forgot the best part...

Fuentes is a Type A….

by eastbayexpat on Dec 31, 2008 11:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Angels gained 2 from the K-Rod, Tex deals...

not that big a deal

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

by athleticsBB4life on Dec 31, 2008 11:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

sunk costs

by eastbayexpat on Dec 31, 2008 11:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

he sucks

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by what_the_crap on Dec 31, 2008 11:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

better than k-rod

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

by brenarlo on Dec 31, 2008 11:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

More K's than H+BB is a good thing. Very good.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Relatively good deal financially.

Fuentes is clearly an above-average closer at this point and the Angels got him at a fairly good deal financially. But they also got him for his age 33 and 34 seasons (and quite possibly his age 35 one as well) so it’s not look his upside is huge or he is going to gain a whole bunch of velocity or anything.

As a short term deal, this move definitely helps the team win more games over the next couple of years as once again the Angel bullpen will be really deep.

Yet in the big picture, if the Angels only do this signing and the Rivera one and maybe one other mid-level move…you gotta believe that they’re still very beatable next season and especially come 2010.

I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!

by Taj Adib on Dec 31, 2008 11:28 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

They have to sign a hitter, don't they?

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, they re-signed Juan Rivera.

But I’m guessing they’d probably look to upgrade at 1st somehow if they were smart. Maybe trade for Paul Konerko? Besides 1st, they could look to upgrade at 3rd (Joe Crede perhaps?) but then what happens to Scioscia’s love child Figgins?

I agree that if I were them, I would feel COMPELLED to add another hitter, but how and where would add him?

I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!

by Taj Adib on Dec 31, 2008 11:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Giambi or Dunn at 1B; Abreu, Burrell, Dunn or Giambi at DH?

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Konerko has a no-trade clause

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, I think it's the 10/5 thing, which isn't technically a contractual no-trade

But a CBA thing. Either way, Konerko has to agree to a deal.

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not that anyone would actually trade for him

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Konerko is owed $24 million over the next 2 years

I don’t know if he can be a 2.5 WAR player anymore, but for a team that has a little extra money he’s not a bad option (especially if he’s replacing a guy who is at replacement).

by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2008 8:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't see how he's any better than Dunn, Giambi or Burrell, defense included.

They should be gettable on 2 year deals now and hit a lot better. They’re certainly healthier — even Giambi amazingly.

The teams that actually field replacement level guys at 1B now are Oakland!, Kansas City, Washington (if no Johnson), San Francisco, Anaheim, Florida, Seattle and Baltimore. KC likes Jacobs for some reason and Seattle probably wants to give Clement ABs and Florida’s too stingy and smart, so that leaves 5 teams for 3 FA. I guess someone could take him, but he’d not be much of an improvement for a very high price.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Dec 31, 2008 9:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

We don't hear about Nick Johnson anymore

but I’m still interested, since Barton is at the ready whenever Johnson may falter physically. And Johnson is a kick-ass good player, the kind who could vault the A’s into “next level” status as an offense/defense.

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 Dec 31, 2008 10:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ya the A's must not have liked what they saw in the medical reports.

Or the Nats could be waiting for all the FA’s to sign so that Nick’s value is boosted.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Jan 1, 2009 4:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Johnson has missed most of the last two seasons and is still rehabbing his latest boo-boo

Last I heard not even his agent was sure he’d be 100% by ST.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jan 1, 2009 11:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

So get him cheap, stash him away,

spend April checking out how Barton is circa 2009, and play it Chris Denorfia style!

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 Jan 1, 2009 12:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The difference there is that Denorfia had long-term value as a 4th outfielder

even if he wasn’t ready to take the field early in 2008, and wasn’t getting paid significant money.

Johnson is only under contract for one season and is getting over $5 million for it.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jan 1, 2009 2:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Boo!!!

:-(

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 Jan 1, 2009 2:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a pretty good deal fiscally. I'm surprised at the price, actually.

It definitely improves their bullpen, and is a decent short-term move. Like you indicated, though, they’ve still got offense issues to figure out if they plan on making a run at the whole thing, never mind the AL West, this year.

by still bills kingdom on Dec 31, 2008 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems to me that right now, as the two rosters stand,

if either the A’s or Angels signed Dunn they would become division favorites for having done so.

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 Dec 31, 2008 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Couldnt agree more

www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.

by ChadGod on Dec 31, 2008 1:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sold on the A's SP....

I still thinh the Angels SP is significantly better than the A’s. I’m not sure Dunn would bridge that gap

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

by athleticsBB4life on Dec 31, 2008 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Possibly true -

But the A’s might be in better position to win games 5-4 than the Angels were to win games 4-3, so to speak. In other words, the A’s offense might be enough compared to their pitching deficiencies when put alongside the Angels’ pitching and their hitting deficiencies.

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 Dec 31, 2008 1:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Dunn would weaken the A's defensively to detract from...

his offensive production – either he or Cust would have to play D and that’s a killer. Same goes for any of Abreu, Giambi or GA. Angels would have the luxury of DHing Dunn, if Vlad is able to return to the OF. If not Hunter & Matthews cover a lot of ground to make up for Dunn. I’m not sure the A’s have that luxury.

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

by athleticsBB4life on Dec 31, 2008 2:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

More accurately, both teams will be winning games 4-3

but the A’s will be doing it because of the park and the defense, while the Angels will be doing it because of the pitching.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Dec 31, 2008 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ya, but the A's do play half their games on the road

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 Dec 31, 2008 4:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

OK, so they'll win 5-4 on the road and 3-2 at home...

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Dec 31, 2008 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Or, given the pattern of young pitching,

lose 7-5 on the road and win 3-2 at home.

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 Dec 31, 2008 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

How are you defining a mid-level?

Does it include taking a flyer on a 1 year deal for Abreu or Giambi?

I agree with you that signing Fuentes helps the Angels win more games by strengthening the bullpen and preventing the other team from scoring runs. Their offense needs work, but if they had the cash to be serious about bidding for Tex then they should still have enough money to pursue a hitter, either in the FA market or via trade.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Dec 31, 2008 3:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

They just seem to have indicated, post Tex negotiations,

that they don’t plan to pursue another hitter. Why that would be, I have no idea.

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 Dec 31, 2008 4:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm kind of surprised that the Angels never showed interest in Furcal

It seems to me like SS is an area they could improve and clearly Furcal favored So Cal. Interesting that the A’s were seriously interested but the Angels never were.

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 Dec 31, 2008 12:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

They have a woody for Erick Aybar

which is odd, since he’s basically Crosby Jr., but I’m not arguing.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Dec 31, 2008 1:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's more of a log jam,

with Aybar (Who has a great glove when he’s focused) but doesn’t seem to have the bat, Izturis who has been pretty clutch but forgettable, and Barndon Wood who’s a natural SS and with Figgy at third with his improving glove, looks like SS is the only place for Wood to see real time. Not to mention Sean Rodriguez who is MLB part time ready and is also a SS.

by MidwayCityLivestock on Dec 31, 2008 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's quantity, not quality, and I'm not complaining!

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 Dec 31, 2008 1:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ugh,,,

Yeah, that seems to be the consensus our discussion
Especially the proposition of having essentially 3 slappers in our lineup (figgins, aybar/izturis, Mathis)

by MidwayCityLivestock on Dec 31, 2008 1:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Sadly the consensus of your discussion appears to be

“the moderator and the users bickering over the moderator’s conduct.” :-(

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 Dec 31, 2008 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

lol, no no no,

after that part, you’ve gotta scroll down.

I shuddered while linking that thread.

by MidwayCityLivestock on Dec 31, 2008 2:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What's your take on the two rotations?

Given the possible regression, or not, of Saunders/Santana, and the possible emergence, or not, of Gallagher, Eveland, Braden, it’s hard to tell whether the Angels’ rotation will be a lot better or a little better. What’s your analysis?

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 Dec 31, 2008 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm far from the right guy to ask for any REAL insight:

only thing I can offer is perspective: There’s still no #5 down here. Interesting to see what happens with Escobar. When will he be ready? What role will he assume? can he return to his 07 self?
Saunders came back down to earth end of last year (something like 8 starts between decisions) and I imagine him to be ~15w this year
Santana is exciting. He’s got the stuff to be 18 game winner for a few more years but will need a little run support.

I really liked the Gallagher move. I’d bet on him if healthy as a 15 game winner if given the run support (which should be less of a problem for A’s). Sadly, I don’t have much real perspective on Braden or Eveland as I haven’t REALLY seen them pitch aside from the game I saw Eveland lose to Santana
Either way, I’m of the opinion that the gap has closed and I’m excited to see what typically is a very competitive battle for the division. Especially if the rosters stay the way they are.

by MidwayCityLivestock on Dec 31, 2008 3:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It figures to be more interesting than last year

with any luck (from the A’s fan’s POV). I do still think the A’s are a player short, though, be it a hitter or a starting pitcher.

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 Dec 31, 2008 4:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ha, I think you are just about to sign him

Looks like the ole’ Giambino’s coming home!

by MidwayCityLivestock on Jan 6, 2009 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's not a good thing...

because Fuentes is pretty solid and I am sorry he has become a Halo.

by IM4Oakgal on Dec 31, 2008 2:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

He will definitely improve their bullpen

to where it now about matches the A’s pen, I’d say. But the Angels are not likely getting his best years and if LAA doesn’t add a hitter I still like the A’s chances to compete better than if the Angels had signed Dunn, Burrell, etc.

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 Dec 31, 2008 2:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by alox on Dec 31, 2008 3:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The moment should be more awkward

for the guy who has his hand up your furry a—

Hang on, the phone just rang…

I’m back, but I forgot what I was saying.

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 Dec 31, 2008 4:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs