Inside the Mind of an Angels' Fan (thoughts on the AL West)
A's fans this year are a bit schizophrenic, and it's understandable. On one hand, we are all hoping beyond hope that the A's are better than predicted, but we also get nervous about too much talk about them being 'underrated' and 'surprising'.
I know one thing holds true for me: I like these A's best when they are the underdogs. I don't want anyone to pick the A's to win a single series; I want it to be a surprise when they do. I want to enjoy a team with no expectations, although it wouldn't hurt if they could hit a little bit.
I am an A’s blogger. I spend a considerable amount of my time on the internet with other A’s fans. I know how A’s fans feel about the A’s this year. I know how A’s fans feel about the Angels’ injuries so far this season (Lackey, Escobar, Shields), and thanks to the amazing Staturday post by salb918, I also know how the stats feel about them.
What I didn't know (and was curious about, if for no other reason than to fire up a little bit of the Angels/A's rivalry that has been missing for a year) was how Angels fans are feeling about the season. Is there any merit to the whispering that the division is now open to Seattle and the A's?
I hand-picked an Angels' fan from an unlikely location; like me, he is a cross-California fan of his team. I live in Los Angeles and root for the A's, while Andy Bauer lives in Northern California and roots for the Angels. The irony is not lost on either of us; that we just happen to live in the other's season ticket market.
I asked him to describe (in blog-form, of course) how he, as a life-long Angels' fan, felt about the upcoming season and the threats to the Angels' apparent stranglehold on the AL West. As always, I thought I would share it with my fellow ANers; it's a different analysis that I'm use to as an A's fan, and I liked that it cemented my great wish to have the A's considered real underdogs.
Not a single regular season pitch was even thrown, and already I was in panic mode. The problem being that knowing who was going to be throwing that first pitch had been thrown (pun intended) into some serious doubt. We knew for some time that Kelvim Escobar was going to have plenty of time to update his Myspace page early in the season, but the disturbing news that he has a tear in his throwing shoulder that may end his season completely, and possibly his career, had cast an Ervin Santana shaped shadow over the Angels’ long-term season goals. Couple this with John Lackey’s triceps injury that will keep him from even picking up a baseball for two to three weeks and that shadow may turn into a full-blown eclipse. Oh, and just a little side note, Scot Shields will begin the season on the DL also. Awesome.
Like any clear thinking American sports fan, I reacted to this news by doing what comes naturally. I freaked out. When I came to three days later, I realized I needed to look at the situation a little more rationally. How are they going to weather this April storm and where will they be by the time we see those May flowers I’ve heard so much about? The Angels pride themselves on depth, a justified self-congratulations. But you don’t just pick up 18 game winners off the scrap heap. Fortunately for the Angels, their scrap heap is loaded with potential classics (is there a more frightening word in the American sports lexicon than “potential”?).
Ervin Santana. The mere mention of his name causes a torrent of conflicting emotions for this Angels fan. So much potential (there’s that word again), so much fear (for me). In light of the current situation I’d settle for ¾ of the 2006 Santana. Just give the lineup a chance to make things interesting. Let’s just start there. In the sage words of Dr. Leo Marvin, baby steps. He has the physical skills to be very good, even to something approaching great, the question is whether his head will be screwed on right to make that happen. Some have made the suggestion Ervin should only pitch at home given his ridiculous home/road splits (For his career - Home: ERA – 3.14, WHIP – 1.17, Away: ERA – 7.14, WHIP – 1.63), though Scioscia has, rightfully, nixed any such idea.
Dustin Moseley will be filling the final spot in the rotation, a role he filled rather ably at points last year. But last year he was filling holes left by far less talented pitchers than either Lackey or Escobar. So while he may perform courageously in the interim this season, no one’s expecting him to make us forget who we’re really missing. If Moseley does falter, the Angels have a potential ace waiting in the wings (OK, that pun was not intended) in Nick Adenhart. He was up and down this spring, but definitely showed flashes that make Angel fans smile to themselves in their sleep.
Now we know who will be carrying the torch in our 1-2’s absence, but that shadow still looms. Is it enough to still win the division? Only time will tell for sure—duh—but I submit that the division title is still very much the Angels’ to lose. Let’s take a look at the facts.
Texas doesn’t even enter this conversation. Let’s talk about that. They did nothing in the offseason to improve their perennial weakness: starting pitching. They did add Josh Hamilton to the OF, so I guess the old “we’ll bludgeon our way to a pennant” strategy still holds sway in the Ranger front office. Oh, those Texans. In a way it’s almost loveable.
Threat assessment: none.Oakland, on the other hand, did make some major moves. Unfortunately for the A’s faithful, they involved trading away all of their good players. As an Angels fan, I was obviously thrilled; at least for the short-term. I do not bow to the altar of Billy Beane and his sabermetrics mumbo-jumbo. (Before you Rob Neyer-reading Athletics enthusiasts dismiss me as a backward mystic who believes mathematics to be some sort of wicked sorcery spawned by Lucifer himself, let me assure you my tongue is planted firmly in my cheek. Everyone knows math is very useful for calculating batting average.) However, he does have an uncanny ability to occasionally turn what looks like a pile of nothing into something, which always makes me nervous. I mean any guy that can win a division title with Scott Hatteberg on the roster, let alone as a starter, must be doing something right, right? That said, it would take a wizard of Gandalf the Grey proportions to turn this year’s pile into anything significant. The only way they can remotely threaten the Halos this season is if Harden and Crosby can somehow remain healthy for the duration, which, as any self-respecting baseball fan worth a strained Harden oblique can attest, is a physical impossibility. Even if that were somehow possible, the odds would still be something akin to those of Jeremy Giambi teaching sliding practice at A’s camp next spring. If you want to hear me anxiously worry about Oakland as contender, come back in two years.
Threat assessment: minimal.Seattle looked like they were for real last year until a colossal late season collapse which, not coincidently, began with a sweep at the hands of the Halos at Safeco. If all the Angels were a picture of perfect health, I wouldn’t be worried much at all, but given the current state of affairs, I’m just a touch concerned. Just a skosh, a smidgen really. With the Bedard acquisition, the M’s have a solid rotation and a strong bullpen, and though their lineup is decent, the team is not without question marks. Can Miguel Batista really win 16 games again? Is King Felix finally ready to ascend the throne? Can Richie Sexson rebound, and by rebound I mean hit .230? And perhaps most importantly, how the crap is he making $3M more than Ichiro!? Top to bottom, the Angels’ lineup is much stronger and the fact that just about everyone coming off their bench could start for a fair amount of big league teams, including pretty much all of those in the National League, bodes well for when the injury bug bites. Tell me, who would you rather have coming off the pine Juan Rivera or Charlton Jimerson? Actually, now that I think about it, I may opt for Jimerson just so I can hear if the P.A. guy can say his name without snickering.
Threat assessment: moderate.Of course all of this depends on Lackey coming back by mid-May, Santana not completely imploding, Moseley/Adenhart being at least somewhere north of terrible, the rest of the rotation (Weaver, Saunders, and Garland) performing up to expectations, and Reggie Willits not putting banana peels and ball bearings in front of every other outfielders locker in an attempt to injure them thus increasing his playing time and removing the looming fear of being sent down to AAA and having to ride smelly buses and eat at Chick-Fil-A after getting a taste of the Big Show last season.
But what fun would baseball be, or team blogs for that matter, if everything was a done deal before the season started? Well, if it meant the Angels would always win the division, then I guess that would best be characterized as awesome.
And there it is: I have been so busy hating Boston that I have been terribly neglectful of my Angels' dislike, despite all of the billboards on my street that remind me that the Angels really really do play in Los Angeles (they don't). I almost forgot how much fun it was just to care. And on a side note, I realize that I read so much of the baseball world from the sabermetric/A's point of view, that it's a noticable difference to read anything written outside it. In an esoteric kind of way, it seems strange to be a fan of more than just a baseball team, but rather of an organization, a philosophy, a way of looking at the game itself.
I would be hard-pressed to disagree with any of Andy's comments on the A's; not only do Harden and Crosby have to stay healthy for the A's to compete, but Crosby has to somehow become good. And I'm not sure that's even enough. At least half of the A's rookies have to perform at a major league level, and the rest of the team has to have, at best, good years.
Yet despite all the evidence, I'm not entirely convinced that the West is going to line up: Angels, Mariners, A's, Rangers. I think the A's have more 'potential' than the Mariners, but how and when that is going to show itself remains to be seen. Is this division really the Angels to lose? And after the first four games, I still only have one certainty about the A's: underdogs. Again.
Which is exactly where I want them.
0 recs |
159
comments
Comments
I guess I like it both ways
Wait, that came out wrong :)
I do enjoy being the underdog and expecting the unexpected. Watching the boys grow up.
But...I also like the pressure of being the favorite. Of knowing you're going to win. I envied the Sox fans for that Tuesday. They are as sound a ball club as I've seen in a while. Power, speed, defense, pitching. They're managed well. And their fans- yes, the same fans who used to cover their faces for the world to see- have this newfound confidence. I remember those days from the late 80's. The players had a swagger, but the fans did too.
I think it's also important to remember that earlier this decade, some "experts" did put us in that elite group, some even picking us to win it all.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Apr 3, 2008 6:07 AM PDT 0 recs
As an A's fan I watch almost every Angels game with the hope that they lose.
The Angels loses are almost as sweet as an A's win for me. The problem is that the Angles do have that swagger, they do expect to win alot of close games. Im not sure how many one run games they won in 2007but I do know they won 10 games last year in the 9th inning.
by asfaninpismobeach on
Apr 3, 2008 9:09 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I do the same thing...
...I'm sure it's because it's really easy to find the Angels' games living in LA, but I watch the Angels sometimes like I watch the A's, except cheering-wise, I am rooting for the other team. Strange!
So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one
by baseballgirl on
Apr 3, 2008 9:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Everytime the Angels play
I root for the other team
by TimTimTimbo on
Apr 3, 2008 10:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Give me an "S"....
So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one
by baseballgirl on
Apr 3, 2008 11:07 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I thought no one was going to sign him this year
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 11:30 AM PDT
up
0 recs
*Disclaimer: I'm actually a Bonds fan. Jocularity using meme does not imply endorsement of idea of any truth behind meme.
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 1:29 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Meme people suck.
"God doesn't pay attention to your cute little hypotheticals." -- Jeff from LL
by oblique on
Apr 3, 2008 2:44 PM PDT
up
0 recs
When leading after the 8th inning
the Angels have a MLB best 160 game winning streak.
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....
by PhiSlamma on
Apr 4, 2008 12:32 AM PDT
up
0 recs
as for Andy
Great read, but thank you for reminding me how much I hate your team.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Apr 3, 2008 6:13 AM PDT 0 recs
yes, as for Andy...
/gathers torches, pitchforks and laptops, assembles villagers

The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus
by The Dogfather on
Apr 3, 2008 7:01 AM PDT
up
0 recs
What I find humorous
Is Andy's assumption that Angels vets will play as well as they did in the past, and their youngsters will live up to their potential, but that the A's youngsters will falter, and the Mariners vets are defined by one bad year.
by ozzman99 on Apr 3, 2008 7:04 AM PDT 0 recs
A look at the Angels from the perspective of an A's fan.
OF - Great depth, but GA shouldn't start. Any group with Vlad is a good hitting unit, but the defense is below average with GA and Vlad not good and Hunter in his decline years.
IF - Weakness. Kotchman is the best player, and he's not that much better than 2002 Hatteberg. Kendrick isn't likely to keep up his ridiculous BABIP.
Starters - Should be strength of team, but not without Lackey and Escobar at full strength.
Bullpen - Another strength of team, but not with Shields hurt.
Best players -- Guerrero, Lackey, Escobar, Weaver, Shields, Rodriguez, Kotchman
When three of your seven best players are hurt, it's not a good sign. A good, but not elite team at full strength. But a lot of downside with the injuries.
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 3, 2008 7:53 AM PDT 0 recs
Greetings A's fans
I'm ready to be accountable for my words!
Ozzman99, yes that is my assumption, but I hardly think its outlandish. The Angels start one player who wasn't a regular last year, while the majority of the A's lineup is relatively young and unproven. As far as Seattle goes, I simply think the Angels' lineup is better, even if all the M's perform at expected levels. Am I biased? Of course. But not so much so that its clouded my judgement too much.
Thanks for the comment and glad I could do my part to stoke the rivalry fires.
by Ando775 on Apr 3, 2008 7:54 AM PDT 0 recs
I agree that the Angels lineup is better than the Mariners, sure.
How about the rotation?
Miguel Batista's win totals in 2007 are meaningless. His performance in 2007, once you take into account the context of homepark and how the rest of the league did, was no different from his performances in 2006, 2004, ie league average, slightly above average, innings eater. His performance in 2007 was no fluke. His park adjusted ERA in 2007, relative to the rest of the league, was pretty much at his career averages.
If everyone in the Mariners rotation performs to basically their averages the last couple years, they will have among the best rotations in MLB.
Really the issue for your team is Lackey and Escobar. If they were both healthy, the Angels should have no problems.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Apr 3, 2008 8:14 AM PDT
up
0 recs
No question
the M's rotation is very strong. Maybe stronger than the Halos sans Lackey/Escobar. Like I said at the end of my post, I'm assuming Lackey is back in May and the other guys perform well. And we all know that assuming anything in baseball is a dangerous practice. Certainly no one assumed the Angels would be World Series champs in 2002.
I'll concede to your Batista analysis. However, if I was a M's fan that wouldn't exactly give me warm fuzzies.
by Ando775 on
Apr 3, 2008 9:40 AM PDT
up
0 recs
If Miguel Batista is your top starter or your number 2 starter
then yes, you have a problem. He's the Mariners 3-5 starter. What makes their rotation good, is the back end of their rotation. Quite a few teams have a 1-2 that is as good at least as the Mariners front 2. But very few teams have a #5 starter like Batista or Washburn, a #5 starter who is an average innings eater.
Look at what most teams in the league are sending out as their #5th starters, or even their #4th starters.
Without Escobar, I'd say that the Mariners have a slightly better rotation than the Angels. With Escobar, Angels would be slightly better.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Apr 3, 2008 11:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Inside the mind of a carjacker
[I'm broke... my feet hurt...]
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagines such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Apr 3, 2008 8:14 AM PDT 0 recs
inside the mind of an Angels' fan
not a place I want to go...
by OaklandSi on Apr 3, 2008 8:27 AM PDT 0 recs
There there. It's supposed to make you feel better about the 2008 A's. We may not win, but we're A's fans.
I'm just doing my part.
So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one
by baseballgirl on
Apr 3, 2008 8:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Why not?
It's a pretty small place.
I love you, k^2. -Poppy*
by kaweahkaweah on
Apr 3, 2008 8:55 AM PDT
up
1 recs

As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 9:59 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I want to know...
...who the four people are that voted for the Rangers to win it all. I think they should go to Vegas.
So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one
by baseballgirl on Apr 3, 2008 9:11 AM PDT 0 recs
That's common ground
I think A's and Angels fans (mostly) agree...the Rangers organization has no clue, although it would be nice for them to get one to help our friend Ron Washington see some success as manager.
"[Moneyball] is huge [in Japan], I guess, so I'm like a David Hasselhoff type or something..." -- Billy Beane
by FormerHuntsvilleStar on
Apr 3, 2008 9:43 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I think most Rangers fans agree with that too...
although apparently they don't agree with A's fans about Wash.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 10:07 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't think A's fans agree on Wash...
So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one
by baseballgirl on
Apr 3, 2008 10:14 AM PDT
up
0 recs
We never forget you guys. I would say that at least 90% of A's fans think that if the A's can't win, the M's should!
So, bring on Bonds! Or, not... then, bring back Langerhans!! -One won lost one
by baseballgirl on
Apr 3, 2008 11:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
We're safely
ensconced in the realm of endless mediocrity and upper office mismanagement, although not to the sorry extent of the Rangers.
by redwolf75 on
Apr 3, 2008 1:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I would be much more worried about the Angels
if they actually used their personnel intelligently. I.e. DFAed Anderson, exiled Aybar to A-ball, let Wood start at shortstop instead of making him change hotel rooms 18 times during the season, and gave Jeff Mathis "Russell Martin backup" numbers of games played. This lineup:
LF:Willits
CF: Hunter
RF: Rivera
DH: Vlad
3B: Figgins
SS: Wood
2B: Kendrick
1B: Kotchman
C: Napoli
is actually a good one. The thing is, it has $20M or so of outfield riding the pine.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Apr 3, 2008 9:16 AM PDT 0 recs
Yes, and also if they used their wallet strategically
The Stoneman era was characterized by adament refusal to ever make an in-season deal to plug a roster hole, whether with an eye towards the division chase or the post-season. I hope that remains the case, but one of these days d'Anaheim may figure out that Arte's money also has value in July, and not just in January.
There is an A in Whimsy.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on
Apr 3, 2008 9:36 AM PDT
up
0 recs
And if Angelos widraws from
and agreed upon deal at the last minute, that is Stoneman's fault?
The Angels and the Orioles had agreed to a Santana + Aybar for Tejada trade.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Apr 3, 2008 11:45 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Shhhh! Don't give them any ideas!
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 10:00 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Don't worry
They would have to be other than what they are to deploy that lineup on a regular basis.
I don't think anyone other than Beane could withstand the inevitable ridicule that would come from releasing Anderson and replacing him with Reggie Willits.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 10:12 AM PDT
up
0 recs
even Beane wouldn't do that
I have a baaaaaad feeling that the Angels will decline GA's '09 option ($14M!) and Beane will sign him on the cheap on a 1-year incentived contract.
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 10:55 AM PDT
up
0 recs
He's not exactly an A's type of player
The guy never saw a fastball, or any pitch really, that he didn't like.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 11:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Shannon Stewart? Emil Brown? Terrence Long? Marco Scutaro?
Bobby Crosby? Eric Byrnes? Mike Piazza?
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 11:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Don't forget your friend and mine, Jay Payton
The eternal optimism of "swing at the first pitch, no matter what it is!"
by Joey C. on
Apr 3, 2008 11:42 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I knew I was forgetting a datum
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 11:43 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I haven't looked this up,
but I'd be willing to bet that Anderson's career isolated OBP is lower than any of those guys.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 11:42 AM PDT
up
0 recs
than CROSBY's?
I'd guess, without looking it up, that GA's career isoOBP is higher than those of:
- Crosby
- Scutaro
- Stewart
- T-Long
My point being, that Beane doesn't stack the roster exclusively with stereotypical Moneyballers.
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 11:46 AM PDT
up
0 recs
OK, now to test this theory
Anderson .030
Stewart .063
Brown .067
Long .049
Scutaro .062
Crosby .070
Byrnes .063
Piazza .069
Payton .044
Bingo.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 11:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
great googly moogly!
Specific point conceded (but main point still contended). Jesus, that's ridiculous.
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 11:58 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I just looked up Pudge Rodriguez
.037.
I think you could make a legitimate case that Garret Anderson has the worst plate discipline in all of baseball.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 12:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
So, plate discipline is taking walks?
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Apr 3, 2008 12:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
...that is the more or less conventional definition of the term, yes
How would you define it, statistically?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 12:32 PM PDT
up
0 recs
To me it means "not swinging at bad pitches"
which may or may not translate to a lot of walks. Guys who make a lot of contact will have fewer walks, but that doesn't mean they have bad plate discipline. Kotsay is an example of that.
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on
Apr 3, 2008 12:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
as much as I H8ed on Kotsay ...
... I agree that he was/is "selectively selective."
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 1:24 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Conventional?
I've often seen plate discipline defined by scouty types as swinging at pitches that particular hitter can hit well.
In other words, a hitter who walks a lot, can have bad plate discipline too.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Apr 3, 2008 12:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
OK
That's not a stat.
I'm looking for a stat, or even a combination of stats, I suppose, that represents or indicates the presence of plate discipline, so that I can go look it up. If you know of a website that has "percentage of swings which are at pitches in a batter's hot zones", I'm all eyes. I'm not aware of anywhere that that info is compiled, however.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 1:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
just because it hasn't yet been measured doesn't mean that it can't be measured
And if it's possible that it could be measured, expert opinion (which, of course, can be wrong/biased) is one of the two most immediately profitable places to start looking for it (the other being, as you say, slicing and dicing other stats to arrive at it indirectly).
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 1:23 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Oh, I'm pretty sure that could be measured
It's probably doable using pitch F/x at this point.
I just don't think anyone's actually done it yet, which is why we're still using approximations like walk rate and pitches per plate appearance (another category GA scores atrociously in).
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 1:34 PM PDT
up
0 recs
to return to GA ...
Don't get me wrong: I think he's an extremely overrated (relative), and not really very good (absolute) player.
But he has had some value over the course of his career -- almost entirely on AVG and an age-28+ (and, FWIW, steroid-era) SLG surge.
I'm wondering how he might fit in with the Extremely Anomalous Polestar Twins with Ichiro Suzuki and Cust? GA seems like he might be what Suzuki would be were Suzuki to follow through on that mythical "he could hit 30 HR/y if he wanted" -- with the SLG increase, an attendant slight uptick in Ks and a commensurate downtick in BBs.
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 1:48 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Also, he's killed the A's over his career
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on
Apr 3, 2008 1:53 PM PDT
up
0 recs
yes he has
Oddly enough (or not), he has his highest OBP (by a huge margin) vs AL teams against us.
So: even though we pitch around him a lot (and that takes some doing), he still kills us.
I wonder if his anomalous approach is a key part of his success against the median-player-oriented A's?
(Ichiro, by way of contrast, doesn't do especially well against the A's.)
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 2:06 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Sure, he's had some value
but a lot of it was, as you say, batting average based, hence unpredictable.
He's also coming off an injury year. We'll see how healthy he is this season.
And he's just an awful, awful defender at this point. If he's not Jack Cust bad, he's pretty close. That's really what cinches it for me. He's a better hitter than Jay Payton, but he gives it all back and then some on the defensive end.
With the A's new-ish emphasis on defense, I don't see why Beane would settle for an average hitter who's a terrible defender when he could have an Emil Brown or a Shannon Stewart for far less money.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 2:09 PM PDT
up
0 recs
unpredictable?
What's unpredictable about this:
- .321
- .285
- .303
- .294
- .303
- .286
- .289
- .306
- .315
- .301
- .283
- .280
- .297
Yeah, I agree that he's really only a DH. And would be a relatively powerless DH, at that. I wasn't saying that it would be a good idea to sign him -- just that, as a potentially cheap player with an established, consistent, and predictable high AVG, he might be the sort of complementary bat Beane might pursue.
And Emil and Shannon are below-average hitters and poor defenders. Not sure what the advantage is there.
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 3:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Brown and Stewart aren't poor defenders
At least not by the benighted standards of left fielders.
Stewart may not have the arm to throw a ball through a plate-glass window, but he was basically second to Carl Crawford in range among LFs last year.
Brown, if the fielding stats are to be believed, looks much worse than he is-- kind of the outfield version of Robinson Cano.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 3:40 PM PDT
up
0 recs
but, since it is LF ...
... then why place a premium on D at all? Especially if the hitters you get ... suck?
Again, I'm not arguing for signing GA -- but I'd rather have him next year (presuming he doesn't stop hitting) for <$2M than Shannon last year or Emil this year.
As reassuring as Bud's words were, the dulcet tone of his voice and his dashing appearance really sealed the deal for me. ~ GreenNGoldSooner @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Apr 3, 2008 6:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
There is no way on earth,
short of an utter skills collapse (which would probably render him worse than either of those guys as a flyer candidate) that Anderson will be making under $2 million next season.
Someone, not the A's, will overpay for his past hitting and undervalue the negative effect of his stone-gloved fielding.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Apr 3, 2008 11:46 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Complimentary Bat
Call me the anti-Bill James (I believe batting order matters) but I liked having Jay


