Two Small Trades for the Present and the Future
by notsellingjeans on Jun 20, 2008 12:00 PM PDT
148 comments
Pondering the A's frequent offensive struggles and their lack of right-handed hitters...
What about trading some relief pitching depth for one or two right-handed hitting corner outfielders that aren't in their respective team's plans, but would represent an upgrade to Oakland?
Here are the two deals I'm envisioning:
a.) Trade Alan Embree to the Tigers for Ryan Raburn. On a team chock full of big-name, big money offensive players, Raburn, 27, hasn't been able to get regular playing time. Yet in his minor league stints the last three years, he's done very well against AAA International League pitching (stats). Raburn's a plus defender in the corners and has even played some CF for the Tigers in a pinch. My desire to acquire him is based on my belief (very debatable, I acknowledge) that he can be a .775 OPS guy playing for the A's for the rest of this season in a pennant chase.
b.) Trade Keith Foulke or the recently DFA'd Kiko Calero to the Yankees for Shelley Duncan. Duncan, 28, is a different type of player than Raburn, but they share a few things in common; Duncan is also a right-handed hitter behind a team full of big name, big money players, and hasn't had an opportunity to play every day in the majors. Last year he absolutely crushed minor league pitching (stats); he is arguably the best power hitter in the minor leagues. He plays first base and also has a very good arm in right field. Hard to discern much from his range figures here - maybe an ANer has seen him play - but I think he could be a passable corner outfielder and spell Barton at first against tough lefties, or DH if Cust is in left. I believe (very debatable, I acknowledge) that if a major league team gave Shelley Duncan an every job and tolerated his 170 strikeouts, he'd reward them with 30 homers and an .800 OPS, even if he did get on base at a mere .310 or .320 clip.
The names of those three relief pitchers - Foulke, Calero, and Embree - could be swapped into either deal, depending on the preference of the Tigers and Yankees, of course. Clearly Calero is valued less than the other two. What all three have in common, though, is that they aren't a part of the next wave of Oakland A's teams - "the future" that we are all so excited about. Foulke is a free agent after this year and will probably garner bigger money elsewhere after resuscitating his career; Embree, 38, has an option for next year but might be considering retirement after '09; Calero will be a free agent after '09, assuming he's regained his health and effectiveness and is still pitching in the league.
The point is, none of the three are in the long-term plans. And part of what Raburn and Duncan attractive is that they both entered this season with less than a full year of major league service time. That means the A's would have contractual control over them for this season and five years into the future, should they blossom into viable part-time or full-time major leaguers once they get a real opportunity. Both of them could help fill our greatest organizational need on the 40-man roster - a lack of right-handed hitters with pop, specifically corner outfielders. If even one of the two pans out long-term like Cust has, and like Hannahan has to a lesser extent, I'd consider it a success.
Wing and Marshall could take the place of Calero and Emil Brown on the 40-man roster in this hypothetical scenario. Behind them would be Dan Meyer and Jeff Gray.
What do you think?
0 recs |
148 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Calero already has been made available...
Teams have no desire to trade for what they can get for nothing. Calero already DFA. Your idea is okay if a team will go for a minor trade; but will they trade with Beane?
Charlie Brown GO A'S WIN
by Charlie Brown on Jun 20, 2008 12:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Shelley Duncan
I live out here on the East Coast, so I watch pretty much every Yankee game until the A’s game starts on the Package…Duncan is not a good fielder…Don’t get me wrong, he is loved by his teammates and his personality would fit in perfectly with the A’s…(well, until he broke off someones arm after he hit a homerun), but he isn’t the answer. There are too many players on this team that do the same thing he does on the Major League Level….the A’s need someone who can hit for some power, but also hit for average, ala Carlos Lee. But I’m realistic where the A’s would never take on his contract. But he’d be the perfect fit in this Oakland lineup.
by mills16 on Jun 20, 2008 12:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Johnny Gomes, please
How ‘bout "jackass"? Can I still say "jackass"? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jun 20, 2008 12:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe if the team is planning to instigate some bench-clearing brawls
Otherwise, I don’t think they really need an enforcer.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Career vs. Coco Crisp: 1.000
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is this supposed to be a rebuttle or an additional reason to get him?
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
by DMOAS on Jun 20, 2008 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well,
it was supposed to be an amusing bon mot.
Can’t say whether it succeeded at that or not.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it was a médiocre mot
How ‘bout "jackass"? Can I still say "jackass"? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jun 20, 2008 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's truly a bon mot is "rebuttle"
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jun 20, 2008 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I support this plan
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jun 20, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This makes no sense
He’s a sub .800 OPS DH.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
make sure you don't read any other responses to a post before responding yourself
How ‘bout "jackass"? Can I still say "jackass"? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jun 20, 2008 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reasons Gomes Doesn't Make Sense
1: He’s a Platoon DH
2: He’s a starter on a competitive team (and would therefore not be easily available)
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
true, he'd likely cost more than Raburn or Duncan
But Gomes has definitively proven he can kill MLB LHPs, while Duncan and Raburn are as yet only projected to possibly do so.
And so long as we have Rajai/Swooney/Patrol Craft avaialble as the late-inning OF, I wouldn’t even necessarily be worried about a Cust-[real OF in center]-Gomes OF w/Hurt at DH against righty starters.
How ‘bout "jackass"? Can I still say "jackass"? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jun 20, 2008 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd be willing to take a flyer on one of those guys, but not both
It would destroy our defense. I would hope that Embree would fetch more than a 27-year-old AAAA hitter.
Signatures? We don't need no stinking signatures.
by jubjub on Jun 20, 2008 12:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My suggested trade?
Cash for Val Pascucci. (And maybe one of the above, too. Although I think the Yankees would want Embree and the Tigers would prefer Foulke, not the other way around. I’d rather get Raburn, personally.)
The guy can still hit, and it’s not like the Mets are exactly likely to get rid of Delgado and replace him with a minor-league journeyman (even though they probably should).
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 12:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Delgado isn't the Mets biggest problem.
They need Pasccuci. But not to replace Delgado. To replace the crap that they are running out there in the 2 corner OF spots. Crap like Marlon Anderson.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 20, 2008 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also true
In any event, it appears unlikely that he is going to get a callup from them. Surely they’d have done it by now if he was.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that Foulke or Embree for Raburn makes sense.
I don’t think I’d give up more than Calero for Shelley Duncan though, if he can’t field and has a crappy OBP.
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i would love this
now THAT is a guy who never got a shot. he is jack cust sr. basically if one didn’t already exist
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jun 20, 2008 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you know what...
...I’d make these trades if I were playing a video game, but not in real life.
"You have to have a catcher or you'll have all passed balls."- Casey Stengel
by Gaijin_Suketto on Jun 20, 2008 12:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well analyzed - but I would just go for one
“LHP masher” – a Bobby Kielty type – to replace Emil Brown, and I think the A’s would be set. Just imagine this lineup aginst LHP for a moment, remembering that Kielty, vs. LHP is a career .296/.379/.503 (.881 OPS) hitter:
Ellis – 2B
R. Sweeney – RF
Cust – DH
“Kielty” – LF
Chavez – 3B
Crosby – SS
Gonzalez – CF
Barton – 1B
Suzuki – C
It’s not bad. When Thomas comes back you have one extra piece, which is fine. I think that’s enough right there to compete, since all we probably need to subtract is one key reliever, and we have quite a bit of depth there.
The question is, who is the best LHP masher available for a relatively minor deal? Shelley Duncan? Jonny Gomes? The Klown himself? Someone else?
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 Jun 20, 2008 12:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
B.L.B.
He can’t be much worse than Milton Bradley’s fireball personality…can he?
We've never been in that position. We wouldn't know how to operate, I mean, do we get him a corsage?-Billy Beane on signing a high profile FA
by DyeLongJustice on Jun 20, 2008 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and by B.L.B.
aka (he-who-shall-not-be-named), i mean the *all-time homerun hitter
We've never been in that position. We wouldn't know how to operate, I mean, do we get him a corsage?-Billy Beane on signing a high profile FA
by DyeLongJustice on Jun 20, 2008 7:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder how hard it would be to pry Kielty away from the Sox
Homeboy’s only played in 33 games this season.
President and CEO of the Ryan Sweeney Apologists Consortium
by Joey C. on Jun 20, 2008 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why the constant comparisons of Duncan to Cust?
They are not similar players. Duncan doesn’t have Cust’s K / BB rate. Duncan’s OPS in the minors is nowhere as good as Cust’s, even when adjusted for park and league.
I really don’t understand the fascination with Shelley Duncan, Look around AAA, Duncan isn’t all that special or different from a bunch of 1b slugging types who struggle with K’s.
Also, saying that he hasn’t had a chance to play because he’s on a team with big money players isn’t completely and necessarily true. The Yankees have shown a willingness to play young players, if they believe the young player is actually good.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 20, 2008 1:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Duncan
looks to me like a right-handed version of Dan Johnson. That would be a noticeable improvement against LHP over what we have now, but not something to get too excited about.
"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.
by andeux on Jun 20, 2008 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem the A's have (and have had since Giambi left)
Is that we don’t have a dramatically above-average bat (aka “stud”). We thought Chavez would be that guy, but injuries etc. prevented it. Maybe someday Barton, CarGon, Sweeney, or Buck will develop that way.
If we’re trading, we should not just replace slightly below average players with slightly above average ones. We should get a new Dye and hope this time there’s no freak broken leg. We have the money and we have the corner outfield spot to lock in a middle of the lineup bat.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 1:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So you'd do something like Cahill, Cunningham and Braden for Jason Bay?
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm hoping that by this you mean "that's not close to enough..."
which is correct, because it isn’t.
That’s a substantially weaker group than the Swisher package.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the real point is
I would be willing to give up some prospects (but not the farm) for a reliable #3 hitter who is not old/declining and we will lock up for years. This is why so many people like Corey Hart (26 years old).
Jason Bay and X Nady are also both under 30, but a long term deal would include decline years so they’re worse less to me than they’d otherwise be.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Travis Buck, Brett Anderson, and Chris Carter
for Jason Bay?
by Colorado Fan on Jun 20, 2008 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No! No! No!
That’s unrebuilding.
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 Jun 20, 2008 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bay as your "Building Block"
LF: Jason Bay
CF: CarGon
RF: Sweeney/Cunningham
The money is there.
by Colorado Fan on Jun 20, 2008 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's a pretty realistic scenario.
Bay replaces Buck if you can sign him long term. Carter is a longshot. Anderson might turn out to be anything from Mario Ramos to Barry Zito, so he’s the “hair” in this deal.
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
mario ramos
nice name-drop. +1
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jun 20, 2008 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rebuilding means targeting towards future seasons
If you’re getting a guy who will be great IN OAKLAND during those seasons you aren’t un-rebuilding.
This is why someone like Hart/Bay/Nady/Scott would be good but someone like Gary Sheffield or Todd Helton or Griffey Jr. would be bad. They may be good now, but they’re getting worse by the year.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You've got to be kidding me
Alright, I now understand why people are so willing to say “go get Jason Bay.” They have fantastically inaccurate notions of how much prospects are worth.
Take this package and add in Doolittle and Gio and maybe you’ve got enough to get Bay. Shit, you’d be lucky to land Nady for that group, and I don’t even think Nady is very good.
Pittsburgh’s management aren’t pushovers anymore. Huntington is not moving him without being convinced that he’s getting someone (or a combination of someones) who’ll be better in the long haul.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean Bay would require at least Buck, Anderson, Carter, Gio and Doolittle
and even that isn’t likely to be enough? And we’d be lucky to land Nady for that group?
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was not well phrased
I meant you’d be lucky to land Nady for Buck/Anderson/Carter.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pirates would be crazy not to take that
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jun 20, 2008 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look at it from their perspective
You’re giving up a pretty decent major league outfielder. In return, you’re getting a blue-chip but still very young pitching prospect (who’s had an injury this season) and two “tools players” who are having bad years hitting the ball, one of them with questionable defensive ability.
I’m not saying I wouldn’t take it if I was Pittsburg, just that it’s no slam dunk. There may be a better offer out there.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Horrid
As Pittsburgh GM, I’d take that deal w/o a second thought. None whatsover.
by Colorado Fan on Jun 20, 2008 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They aren't doing anything this year
Nady doesn’t have any value for them in the future, and it’s three good players. Carter isn’t really having a bad year. I would take Buck or Anderson individually for Nady if I were the Pirates.
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jun 20, 2008 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
7% line drive percentage, >25% strikeout rate
and an OPS that pretty much consists of home runs in an extreme hitters’ league?
I’m not saying the guy is a bust—he’s young, good prospects have bad years, and the tools that the A’s traded for haven’t vanished overnight—but he’s definitely having a bad year.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's plenty to dislike about what he's done
and he’s been somewhat disappointing, but he’s still top ten in the entire minors in HRs, and he’s getting a ton of BBs. The HRs and BBs aren’t going anywhere: if he can get his BA up to something reasonable in the future, he’ll be a very good hitter.ds
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jun 20, 2008 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Buck
Is a free swinging big lefty with no power who doesn’t get on base. Very attractive prospect for other teams.
by sggut95 on Jun 21, 2008 7:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just to defend C-Fan...
and this is one reason why you aren’t a professional baseball scout.
At least you got the lefty part correct.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jun 21, 2008 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last year doesn't count?
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 21, 2008 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lmfao
That’s comical. You’re off your rocker. The same Xavier Nady who was traded to the Pirates for Oliver Perez and Roberto Hernandez in 2006??? hahahahaha. Nady for Buck straight-up… maybe that’s a fair deal, but as an A’s fan, even I wouldn’t do that deal.
So, 8 months of Jason Bay is = to 3 years of Danny Haren (basically)?
by Colorado Fan on Jun 20, 2008 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I double-dog dare you to go over
to Bucs Dugout and suggest a straight-up trade of Travis Buck for Xavier Nady.
Actually, never mind. Thanks to the wonders of SBN 3.0, I can just do it myself.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let us know how that turns out.
Personally speaking, I’d be very tempted (as the Pirates) to do a Nady/Buck deal straight up IF my team docs could look over Buck’s file and gave the OK.
Of course, being the greedy bastard I am I’d ask for more then Buck from Oakland.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jun 20, 2008 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your overweighting the few good months Nady has had
Huntingdon not taking a Buck + Anderson + Carter package would be idiotic. Nady’s career OPS+ is 106. Defensively, he’s average, maybe slightly below, despite being fairly athletic: at least when he was with the Mets, he had a tendency to take strange routes.
A corner OF with OK D with a career OPS+ of 106 isn’t worth all that much.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 21, 2008 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I call B.S.
Bay is 29 years old. He has 1.5 seasons remaining on his contract. 3 Years of Swisher cost a team 3 solid prospects.
So if you wanted Jason Bay, it would take Buck, Gio, Anderson, Carter, and Sean Doolittle? Yeah, right. Next thing you’re going to tell me is that we’re going to draft Jemile Weeks 12th Overall !!!
by Colorado Fan on Jun 20, 2008 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nick Swisher's career OPS+ is like 115
Bay’s is over 130, and it’s closer to 140 if you toss out his clearly injury-damaged 2007.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
3 years of Swisher
vs. 1 year + 2 months (guaranteed) of Bay.
by Colorado Fan on Jun 20, 2008 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Teixeira deal is really a better model here
than the Swisher deal.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not much difference between them as hitters
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jun 20, 2008 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Teixeira v. Bay
Teixeira was 27 years / 3 months when he was traded, not to mention the multiple Gold Gloves @ 1B.
Bay turns 30 this September and plays a “mediocre” LF.
by Colorado Fan on Jun 20, 2008 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah Bay plays a mediocre LF
Teixeira cannot play even a mediocre LF. The only edge Teixeira has on Bay is being a couple years younger.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 21, 2008 1:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I go away for a couple weeks
and this is what I come back to?
Do you realize that Bay turns 30 in August, that he’ll be 31 when his current contract runs out? You’re then talking about signing a 31 year old Jason Bay to a minimum 4+1 year deal (more likely 5 years guaranteed) at somewhere between the $12 million annual Rowand got and the $18 million annual Hunter got.
Do you really want to invest that much money in a guy that has certainly hit his peak?
And if you don’t sign Bay to the extension you’ve lost two very good prospects for a 1.5 year rental.
Your proposal is a deal asking to come back and bite the A’s in the ass.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jun 20, 2008 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually led with that point
Quoting me:
Jason Bay and X Nady are also both under 30, but a long term deal would include decline years so they’re worth[sic] less to me than they’d otherwise be.
Hence the name Corey Hart popping up.
I would not trade 5 of our 10 best prospects for Bay. If the Pirates can get that sort of deal, then bless ‘em. My point is merely that it is not “unrebuilding” to trade several maybes for a definitely who will stick around. It seems to me that we’re targeting 2009/2010 for our rebuilding payoff, so a player we know can hit at the MLB level that we can have around those years would be a plus.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Here’s an additional concern:
Would anyone else be worried about the NL to AL switch for Bay, Nady, or Burrell (if he were available? Personally, I don’t think any of those guys would hit nearly as well against the superior pitching of the AL.
I fully and openly subscribe to the urban myth that the AL is a superior league. Even Miguel Cabrera has been humbled somewhat in the AL; Kotsay and Kendall have careers again by switching to the NL; I just think there’s something there, and it’s bigger than just a few anecdotes.
"Let’s just hope he’s not a complete turd out there." -thejd44, describing Crosby's best scenario.
by notsellingjeans on Jun 20, 2008 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with that
And, of course, hitting in our fair coliseum hurts results too (big foul territory, Mt. Davis, etc).
I think any NL player we get will see their stats go down a bit. I feel confident that any of those three can improve on the production we’re getting from our corner OF.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have you seen the A’s batting lineup lately? This lineup needs mouth to mouth.
by Colorado Fan on Jun 21, 2008 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bay only has 1.5 years left before free agency. Swisher had three.
Swisher is also more versatile than Bay. All that said, it’s easy to believe that this trio wouldn’t be enough.
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright, I'm going to capitulate here
I was overly pessimistic. I still don’t think you’d get Bay for either of the three-player packages, but the five-player laundry list is clearly too much.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So
If you’re the Pirates, do you keep Bay so you can reach .500 this season?
by Colorado Fan on Jun 21, 2008 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
{checks calendar}
{looks at thermometer}
{shakes head sadly}
How ‘bout "jackass"? Can I still say "jackass"? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jun 20, 2008 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Matt Murton
The Cubs seem to have passed on Matt Murton. Would they be interested in a trade? For whom?
by echerrst on Jun 20, 2008 1:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Three things support the idea of Murton:
1. Career vs. LHP: .315/.389/.494 (.883 OPS). Solid, and way better than the options we have (E. Brown, C. Denorfia, young lefties like Buck who aren’t hitting anyone).
2. Career .295/.365/.450 hitter at home, .294/.360/.450 on the road (eerily similar, actually), so unlike many hitters his overall numbers are not being deceptively inflated or deflated by where he plays.
3. He is 26.5 years old – we would have him for his prime year(s).
It’s not far fetched at all.
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 Jun 20, 2008 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
another good idea
His numbers are down in the minors this year, so it might not be too hard to get him.
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jun 20, 2008 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seems like one decent player,
such as Embree, A. Brown, Hannahan, etc. that filled a need, could fetch Murton right now – unless Soriano’s injury changed things.
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 Jun 20, 2008 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cubs might need a starter even if Zambrano is OK.
They can’t be that sure about Dempster (.224 BABIP) or Marquis.
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Harden
Dangle Harden for Murton/Rich Hill/AA prospect. Hill’s upside pretty much equals Harden’s value, Murton is definitely a Billy Beane type player. Piniella is tired of both players, and doesn’t have the patience to let them develop. (See: Pie, Felix.)
by sggut95 on Jun 21, 2008 7:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I could handle this one
Since this is basically what we wanted from Brown’s roster spot (and boy are we not getting it).
If we can get him cheap it’s certainly a significant upgrade
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm having trouble squaring this:
I think he could be a passable corner outfielder …
... or DH if Cust is in left
How passable can an outfielder be, if given the choice you’d rather put Cust out there?
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jun 20, 2008 1:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"Almost as good defensively as Cust!"
is not something agents pull out a lot at the arbitration table.
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 Jun 20, 2008 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say I'd rather put Cust out there
I was implying that the team would have the flexibility of using both as either corner OFs or DH. I believe Duncan would be a better OF than Cust, but there’s other considerations too:
a.) Cust may hit better when he’s playing a position than when he DHs, or feel more comfortable when he plays a position than when he DH’s. If one guy hits just as well DHing as he does playing the field, and other feels much more comfortable playing a position, then that must be taken into consideration.
b.) Even assuming Duncan is better defensively, Cust should still be in LF some times, because he needs to stay sharp for when he returns to left full time on Thomas’ return.
"Let’s just hope he’s not a complete turd out there." -thejd44, describing Crosby's best scenario.
by notsellingjeans on Jun 20, 2008 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This story made the Odds and Ends section on MLB Rumors
Congratulations notsellingjeans! Check out the link here:
by Hang Man on Jun 20, 2008 2:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'll pass.
If you want to get something of value, you have to give something of value. Either that, or take on money. The A’s are in a better position to do the latter than the former. That said, Foulke and (especially) Embree are worth more than those two guys.
I don’t see how Raburn or Duncan are going to help in any meaningful way. If the A’s want a successful offense, they need to stop thinking every 28-year-old with a good minor league track record is going to be Jack Cust (see Hannahan, Jack). Successful offenses have really good players, not a preponderance of bargain bin players they got lucky with.
So it goes.
by jeepers on Jun 20, 2008 2:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
But...but...paying retail for good players wouldn't prove Beane's genius.
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Beane doesn't need to prove any genius.
Although if you ask me, being able to take on an expensive contract that expires soon because of all the payroll space he created would be pretty genius.
So it goes.
by jeepers on Jun 20, 2008 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn you, Phillies
Why do you have to be in first place?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm serious
Pat Burrell would be an awesome rental for this team. High salary, contract’s about to expire (combination = relatively cheap price in prospects), not likely to resign with original team, could be resigned here, right-handed, hits for power, draws lots of walks…
The only way he’d be a better addition is if he wasn’t a crime against humanity in the outfield.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you, I just thought it was funny.
So it goes.
by jeepers on Jun 20, 2008 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bay isn't a bad rental, and his offense plus defense might be as good as Pat's
by WaddellCanseco on Jun 20, 2008 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bay's younger and much more reasonably priced
Thus, he would cost far more.
So it goes.
by jeepers on Jun 20, 2008 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
As always, you’re trading for a contract, not a person.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miguel Tejada fits the Burrell profile...at least financially.
As long as Houston could swallow their pride regarding the Orioles deal, and we can include Crosby in the trade. Tejada has caught a lot of crap about his defense, but his metrics this year have him as league average. I’d take his bat for league average defense.
Including Crosby makes a less attractive salary dump for them…but it still frees up nearly $8M next year. We could offer to take on Ty Wigginton’s salary, too—even if we dumped it. That would push it past $10M. The Astros have to think that Tejada is going to walk after next year, and could at least view Crosby as being a bargain if he hits the NL better. If we added a Big Sixer and something else, it could happen.
Tejada’s bat in place of Crosby’s would make a significant improvement to this team offensively.
So it goes.
by jeepers on Jun 20, 2008 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we're going to improve our middle infield
My pet deal is still Blanton + Ellis for Kelly Johnson as a starting point.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That deal has the rather basic and fundamental problem
that it’s not an improvement.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hurts the team both short term and long term
"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jun 20, 2008 6:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh?
You don’t think .281/.355/.462 from a 26 year old is better than .258/.346/.434 from a 31 year old in his walk year? Forgive me.
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not when it's a 40-run downgrade on defense
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The gap probably isn't around 40
It was around 20-25 last year.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 21, 2008 1:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Once you include D
Ellis is better than Kelly Johnson. Johnson is maybe 10 runs better than Ellis offensively. Ellis is maybe 20-25 runs better than Johnson defensively.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 21, 2008 1:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't vote because I want one more option
which is “only one of these trades”.
I like the general consensus of getting an LHP masher. Embree did some great things last season, but I’m not so thrilled with him or Foulke right now. Dealing both (and/or Calero) gets me worrying about the injury boogeyman this season, though.
Jay Marshall really got thrown to the wolves last season … it’s nice to hear that he’s doing well in AAA (where he probably should be right now).
by phastphill on Jun 20, 2008 2:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
a met fan living in san francisco
as a the title stats and the fact that there is a direct link on metsblog.com for this site, I must say that this site is really well done. I will always be a die hard mets fan, but the people, who write on metsblog, to put it in plain words, are meat heads.
Now to get to the article, I think those 2 moves would put the A’s in a really solid spot to win the division. I think the Angels are offense is nothing like years past. Losing O Cab on the top of the line really negatively affects there offense. They still have there big bats in the middle with hunter and Vald, but I don’t think it will last the whole season
The A’s, as a pure fan of the sport, are one of the best. I hate to say it but very like the New England Patriots without the spying and half the championships
If I would to add anything to the offense, it would be speed on the top of the line up. My least favorite player on the A’s is Ellis, and with a solid middle line up developing, I think could really gets some runs on the board.
So keep up the good work and since the mets are possibly falling about, I got to cheer for someone down the stretch
by jhroac02 on Jun 20, 2008 3:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Tonight's lineup has Rajai Davis in CF,
flanked by R. Sweeney and C. Gonzalez – great D! Suzuki is batting 6th (hmm…).
IIRC:
Ellis
Sweeney
Cust
Chavez
Crosby
Suzuki
Gonzalez
Barton
Davis
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 Jun 20, 2008 6:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well Suzuki is having a pretty good June.
"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jun 20, 2008 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blech
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kouzmanoff?
Looks like we’ve all cumulatively nailed down the TYPE of player we would all like to see in the Green and Gold:
1. Somewhat young (at least not over-the-hill)
2. Plays a corner position
3. Mashes left-handed pitching
4. Is relatively cheap, more in terms of prospects than money
5. Is available starting now
So I’ll throw one more name into the mix: Kevin Kouzmanoff. He’s certainly young and cheap and with the ascendancy of Chase Headley he is certainly available . So far this season, Kevin’s hit .321/.376/.526 versus left-handed pitching and for his career he’s at .342/.361/.563. That’s a pretty nice line. Kouz doesn’t play the outfield corners, but he can spell Chavez at 3rd at times and DH against lefties. He had a customary-slumpy April, but has picked it up in May and June, but his overall numbers this season, coupled with Headley’s rise and the Padres’ overall fall, could make him a nice bargain-ish pickup.
I’d prefer a corner outfielder just like everyone else, but Kouz satisfies every other prerequisite so I’d thought I’[d throw him in the mix.
by Taj Adib on Jun 20, 2008 6:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's an interesting idea
Especially because Chavez isn’t quite ready for 162 games. That said, we do have Chavy signed through 2010, and I don’t like the idea of having a DH platoon. I think other teams would get more value from Kouzmanoff (and would therefore be willing to pay more for him than we would).
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True.
I floated Kouz out there since it seems like everyone else is concentrating on a temporary solution to a temporary problem (hitting left-handed pitching). But I’m wondering if he could possibly spend some time if left field. I doubt that the Pads would want to “experiment” with him out there in the spacious confines of Petco Park, but he might be able to cut it at left field in Oakland. He might also be able to play some 1st. This is all pure speculation, but hey, in order to get a legit bat into the lineup against LHP it might come down due to an experiment of that sort.
by Taj Adib on Jun 20, 2008 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hard to believe he'd be worse than Cust
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 Jun 20, 2008 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i second that
We've never been in that position. We wouldn't know how to operate, I mean, do we get him a corsage?-Billy Beane on signing a high profile FA
by DyeLongJustice on Jun 20, 2008 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd much rather have Kouz than Hannahan.
So it goes.
by jeepers on Jun 21, 2008 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't want Duncan
If you’re looking for a passable left fielder that crushes major league balls (not minors) just sign Bonds.
Rayburn is kinda meh, I’ll have to look more into it later buy he sounds kinda like Ryan Sweeney to me and we already have him. If we’re looking for a right fielder who won’t be part of the teams future I’d just rather go get Brian Giles, he won’t cost anything and is Rayburn’s ceiling imo.
by iamawesomer on Jun 20, 2008 6:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I used to really really want Giles
And he would certainly help our offense this year (even though his power stroke left 5 years ago). I also like the $9M option for next year, so we could just let him go if Buck makes a comeback this year.
The biggest downside is that it would be nice to get our hands on someone who could hit at least 20-30 homers as we currently rank 24th in MLB in that category.
All told if he comes very cheap I’d say why not, but I can’t say I’d be too thrilled
by nevermoor on Jun 20, 2008 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't Brian Giles lefthanded?
Sorta defeats the purpose, dunnit?
Raburn looks a lot like Ryan Ludwick to me, which is kind of why I’m intrigued by him. He could be poised for a similar sort of breakout.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah but he's a career .775 OPS hitter against lefties
now he’s probably not gonna hit that high against them nowadays but I still think he’s a better bet than Raburn.
by iamawesomer on Jun 20, 2008 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the nice comments and feedback, and a great discussion here
Some interesting names mentioned. Factoring in each player’s contract, cost, availability, talent, and current performance…(I’m just spitballing here for discussion’s sake):
Basically free(?) option (cash only): Val Pascucci
Cheap options, in terms of what we give up: Murton, Kielty,
Mid-range option: Kouzmanoff, Jonny Gomes (I doubt he’d be available in their pennant chase, though).
Luxury models: Bay, Nady. (Burrell is also in a pennant chase).
Did I leave anyone out from the discussion?
"Let’s just hope he’s not a complete turd out there." -thejd44, describing Crosby's best scenario.
by notsellingjeans on Jun 20, 2008 6:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
murton all the way
he’s the best ratio of cost to production in my mind…kielty could be ok….i like the idea of kouz….if the A’s decided to go big, i’d def want bay, not nady
We've never been in that position. We wouldn't know how to operate, I mean, do we get him a corsage?-Billy Beane on signing a high profile FA
by DyeLongJustice on Jun 20, 2008 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why not throw in a guy like
Dallas McPherson into the AAA hitter pool? Sure he has his flaws, and his minor league numbers are pumped up by hitting in hitter’s environments, but the Marlins don’t seem to have a use for him, so he should be cheap to acquire.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 21, 2008 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shit, you could throw in most of the guys in that Yellowhorse post from yesterday
(At least I think that was the one. On 56K, you have to limit your page refreshes.)
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 21, 2008 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A couple or 3
of the guys on his list are in their 30s. Approaching 35. Even if they can actually contribute, it would only be for what, maybe a year or so.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jun 21, 2008 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, the A's only need it for a month or two
After that, there’s no roster room anyway.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 21, 2008 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As for the ideas that started this...
Lousy.
Horrible.
NSJ, you do yourself in from the get go. You compare these guys to Cust, hope to get less production from them and offer to pay way more then the A’s did to get Cust last year.
Why do you want to pay more for less?
Cust got traded for a PTBNL that became, as I recall, a cash settlement. Now you propose trading valuable bullpen arms for lesser talents?
That’s a bad deal from start to finish.
Now, if you could get one of these guys for Calero, saving the A’s some cash in the process then you’d have a mini Fucking-A trade. But that’s not what you propose.
Which is why I shoot you down.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jun 20, 2008 8:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Cust was a minor league free agent sign
Raburn and Duncan are 40-man roster players.
That ipso facto makes them more valuable commodities. Fair? Nope. But that’s the way the cookie crumbles. It’s also why I suggested Pascucci, who doesn’t have that problem.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ummm... huh?
None of what you just said makes sense. Could you drop a cypher to decode this?
Cust was not a FA when the A’s acquired him last year, he was playing in the Padres’ system. I’m not sure if he was on SD’s 40 man roster before coming over but that seems to be a inconsequential point.
Not interested in Duncan, so focusing on Raburn I assume it would take more then cash to pry him loose from Detroit. I don’t think the player the A’s would part with would come from the big league bullpen. (Calero doesn’t count because he’s been DFA’d.)
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jun 21, 2008 7:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cust was not on San Diego's 40-man roster last year
and unless they added him at the end of the year, he was going to become a free agent again. Since they had no real room for him, that was what was going to happen—and in consequence, he had very little value to them. (There was also the minor fact that he was about to up and split for Tokyo, but it’s not clear that Josh Towers knew this at the time. Then again, he may have.)
The same thing was true of Jack Hannahan—he was about to hit Minor League free agency, so the Tigers coughed him up cheaply because he had no future in their org.
The principle is the same for these guys as it is for any big-league star who gets traded as his contract is about to expire—a short rental of a player doesn’t have the same value as several years of him would.
I don’t know why you say this:
I don’t think the player the A’s would part with would come from the big league bullpen.
The A’s have too much bullpen pitching, the Tigers don’t have enough. It’s an obvious comparative-advantage situation.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 21, 2008 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That makes more sense
Why so eager to trade a set-up arm (Embree) for a guy buried on Detroit’s bench? I can see why Raburn has appeal but Embree (or even Foulke in my opinion) is too high a cost to pay. Raburn is essentially a AAA player, he’s on Detroit’s roster but he doesn’t play. The cost should be a minor league player from the Oakland chain.
The A’s have bullpen depth in the minor league system if that’s what Detroit is looking for.
Raburn is a band-aid, at best. I’d rather trade Foulke or Embree for someone (a prospect) with upside who could help, actually help the A’s down the road.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jun 21, 2008 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't trade Embree for Raburn
but Detroit doesn’t need Embree anyway, they have lefthanders. Foulke’s value is significantly lower than that of Embree, partly because of his clearly diminished stuff and partly because decent-ish righthanders are just easier to come by.
I think you’re selling Raburn’s upside short. I mean, I bet Ludwick looked like a Band-Aid before this season, too.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 22, 2008 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cuddyer for Blanton?
An above average, young pitcher under club control for a couple years for an above average in his prime outfielder signed to a reasonable contract.
both having relatively poor years.
both likely to rebound
Twins need a starting pitcher.
A’s need a rh corner outfielder with power.
Twins save a little $ in a year they aren’t really contending.
A’s have $ to spend in a year they are unexpectedly contending.
by connie mack on Jun 20, 2008 10:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Cuddyer sucks
In his peak years he’s been a league-average player. He only looks good by comparison to the even more pathetic hitters the Twins have surrounded him with. As an outfielder, he’s Vlad without the reputation—hot arm, but dismally bad range.
And his contract is not reasonable, it’s a gross overpayment given his value and service time.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 20, 2008 11:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not much of this makes sense...
If you’re the A’s, why would you try to go out and get average/below average players with a small upside to further clog a roster that already has several such players on it? I’m talking Cust, Rajai Davis, Buck, R. Sweeney, et al. These guys are basically retreads, projects, low overhead investments, whatever you want to call them. Guys other organizations gave up on. (Buck being the exception there.) A roster full of these guys isn’t going to win. IF the A’s want to build for the future, they need to get aggressive and shop their chips for the players they need. How ‘bout a Coco Crisp, who’s cheap, talented, and very much available? He’s a plus defender, fast, and can be had for a prospect or two. How about trying to get Josh Vitters from the Cubs to play third base in a year or two? Blanton or Harden for Vitters, Murton, and Gallagher? Let’s get creative! How about a three way deal with Texas and Philly? Harden goes to Philly, Philly sends Carrasco and Bastardo to Texas, Texas sends Chris Shelton, Max Ramirez and German Duran to Oakland. C’mon people, throw some grease on the fire!
by sggut95 on Jun 21, 2008 7:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not much of this post makes sense...
If you’re the A’s, why would you try to go out and get average/below average players with a small upside to further clog a roster that already has several such players on it?
Because the players you’re trading away are also average/below average players with a small upside, like Keith Foulke?
I’m talking Cust, Rajai Davis, Buck, R. Sweeney, et al.
You just compared Cust and Rajai Davis. Fail.
These guys are basically retreads, projects, low overhead investments, whatever you want to call them. Guys other organizations gave up on. (Buck being the exception there.) A roster full of these guys isn’t going to win.
Yeah, it’s not like Billy Beane has shown any ability to pick up useful retreads from other teams.
IF the A’s want to build for the future, they need to get aggressive and shop their chips for the players they need. How ‘bout a Coco Crisp, who’s cheap, talented, and very much available? He’s a plus defender, fast, and can be had for a prospect or two.
I can’t think of a player who better exemplifies the phrase “average/below average players with a small upside” than Coco Crisp—and speaking of retreads, he’s a guy who got bumped to fourth outfielder in the World Series by a 23-year-old.
How about trying to get Josh Vitters from the Cubs to play third base in a year or two?
Josh Vitters is currently playing for the Boise Hawks of the short-season Northwest League. He might not be the worst guy in the world to acquire—he’s certainly got a quality upside—but a year or two? More like 4 or 5 years. He’s not in anyone’s even medium-term plans.
Texas sends Chris Shelton, Max Ramirez and German Duran to Oakland.
So the A’s get… a sucky first baseman, a DH and a second baseman. I don’t know much about Duran, but unless his defense is good, he’s not an upgrade (even in the long-term) at the position, and the A’s already have a righty bat at second. I think I’ll pass.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 21, 2008 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Touche
I put together a long, well-researched reply to your critical reply, but unfortunately, it disappeared into cyberspace. I’m not so thin-skinned that I feel the need to duplicate the work, but I will boil down my rebuttal. (Note, not “rebuttle.”)
I’m not saying Cust and Raj Davis are the same player. But I do believe they both fit in the average/below average with little upside category. Cust’s value last year was that he was a three true outcomes kind of hitter who could mash. Well, this year he’s hitting .243/.402/.435. He’s not mashing, and he’s brutal on defense. I think he’s dramatically overrated, and there’s a reason other teams gave up on him.
Basically, I’m just saying the A’s would be better served making a bold move, either to contend this year, or to build for the next several years. No one in the outfield is an impact bat. C-Gon has the potential to be a very exciting player, but he’s not there yet. The’s A’s have the chips… go out and get somebody! Fine, forget Crisp. But if you’re going to contend this year, how bout a guy like Josh Willingham (.341/.406/.637) or Luke Scott (.269/.354/.505)? I think they can both be had for not too much, and they have… wait for it… some UPSIDE! If you’re not looking to contend this year, why not rob the Cubs farm system for Rich Harden? You mentioned Vitters, but you forgot about Murton and Gallagher, who would probably come back in the deal. Come on. Don’t be negative for the sake of being negative. Dare to dream!
by sggut95 on Jun 22, 2008 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You dramatically underrate how useful a .400 OBP is
Jack Cust’s EqA is .306. That’s All-Star caliber.
As for the rest… bleargh. Yeah, the A’s “have the chips”—because they just traded frigging Dan Haren and Nick Swisher to get them. Every transaction has costs, and if you trade away a good player and then try to trade to get another one, you will normally end up worse off than you were originally.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the term “upside.” Trading for a guy who is 29 and currently sports a small-sample-size-inflated 1000 OPS is not trading for “upside.” It’s trading for a player who is worth as much as he is ever going to be worth. “Upside” means the player has a chance to become significantly better than he is at present. I would classify the upside of both of those players, given their ages and track records, at zero. And that’s being generous. Players about to turn 30 tend to get worse, not better.
Why am I being negative? It’s because fanblog trade suggestions that are not vetted by neutral parties almost always follow two rules:
1. Buy high, sell low, and
2. the opposing GM is an idiot who can be snookered into giving up value for something worthless.
Someone’s gotta be the voice of reason.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 22, 2008 7:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is why when I propose a hypthetical trade for the A's,
and many people on AN think the A’s are getting screwed, I think to myself, “Then it probably is feasible.” Or, at least it isn’t lopsided in the A’s favor.
I’d rather err on that side, if for no other reason than the fact that most trade proposals on a team’s fan blog are usually lopsided on the side of their favorite team.
"Let’s just hope he’s not a complete turd out there." -thejd44, describing Crosby's best scenario.
by notsellingjeans on Jun 22, 2008 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
How do we know the Swisher trade was basically a fair one? Because both teams’ fans were complaining bitterly about it.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 23, 2008 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
....
who ever suggested that trade with the texas is just outa their mind. we dont need anymore DH type players with no defensive skills. Billy beane is looking for prospect that they can work up in the minor league system. not people in their late 2x stuck in the minors cuz they can only play one side of the ball.
Also why trade alan embree? he is eating up the innings. he comes in and throws strikes most of the time. he is a lefty, he provides the leadership the young and inexperienced A’s bullpen dont have.
by Wreckonized on Jun 21, 2008 10:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The premise of including Embree...
Calero, and Foulke in the trade discussion, is that they are the three major league relievers we have who are not here long term. It goes no deeper than that. Including them in a trade for players with very little service time allows the team to simultaneously trade from their area of (arguably) excess depth AND build for the future, by shoring up the team’s greatest area of weakness.
As for the argument that Raburn, Duncan et al are “no name” or crappy players, well, I agree that that’s how their perceived...I don’t agree that that’s their ceiling. People thought the same thing about Ludwick a year ago, or Cust. That’s why their available cheaply.
"Let’s just hope he’s not a complete turd out there." -thejd44, describing Crosby's best scenario.
by notsellingjeans on Jun 22, 2008 8:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Possible Trades
Keep rebuilding now and if they back their way into the playoffs this year great, but you could send Blanton, Harden or Street or even two of them to someone for another huge cache of prospects.
The Brewers are in a win now mode and they need another starter and a closer and might be willing to give up a ton for a Harden and Street deal (could replace Blanton for Harden). Ideally Matt LaPorta who has great minor league numbers and bats right handed, as well as another two decent prospects.
by shbutler on Jun 23, 2008 2:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
