Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Headlines: BC Beats BU 4-3 in 58th Beanpot Championship

Turn The Page? It May Be Time On Moneyball!

With yet another one run loss earlier today and another boatload of strikeouts, the 2008 version of the Athletics are not only a frustrating group, a good many of them are not even major leaguers! And the "Moneyball" theory is not playing out as all had hoped for!

This is course is no surprise to the many green and gold faithful who have in many cases called this group a AAAA quality team. It is now painfully clear that this group way overachieved in the first half of this campaign and things are now balancing out!

I give Bob Geren and his staff props for keeping things going in the first few months despite having questionable talent on the field! But the braintrust is not without fault! Far from it!, A few weeks back I made a post referring to the resting of key players such as Suzuki and Sweeney in key games that at the time mattered greatly! Well, as I stated then, they could rest in less important games down the road when things either looked rosier or bleaker! Well now they look very bleak and Geren can go ahead and rest those players as well as others all he wants! So the point is they should have fielded a full complement of their key players in games such as the final one in Anaheim and the final one against the White Sox a few weeks back! Both were very winnable games and games that would not just have mattered in the standings, but mattered from a confidence perspective as well. I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so! Rest up all you want now guys!, You're out of the race!

As mentioned, there are several major leaguers on the A's but there are also several minor leaguers as well as major leaguers that should be walking a beat  in the National League where they can be successful.  I will list a few here....

1. Jack Hannahan- Clearly no more than AAA American League and possibly pine rider in NL.

2.Jack Cust- Despite power, were it not for the DH he would be back in AAA. I would think he could excel in the NL, but without the DH he should be basically a pine rider in AL or playing in Sacramento.

3.Bobby Crosby- Starter in NL; Back up at best in AL. despite promising start to his career.

4.Daric Barton- Puzzling season... Should be continuing to make a mark at AAA to mature. Jury is still out!

5.Ryan Sweeney- Solid American League starter. Strong accurate swing; smart and swift baserunner; very good outfielder. Future Star?

6. Carlos Gonzalez- Basically should be in AAA still, however he has five tool potential and now that the A's are out of it, I am glad he is working in centerfield in Oakland.

7.Mark Ellis- Starter in AL or NL. However, he is a complementary player that relies on an excellent lineup to maximize his potential. And unfortunately he will not get that in Oakland consistently enough to be successful. Should leave after this season to raise the level of his game elsewhere.

8.Kurt Suzuki- Solid American League starter and potentially a future star. However, there is a concern from my vantage point that he wears down to quickly and needs some hand holding. I could be mistaken about that! So only time will tell, but either way he is great!

9.Matt Murton- Solid hitter in the National League; back up at best in the AL.

10.Emil Brown- Pinch hitter and back up in either league. Although something tells me if he was told that he would be in left field everyday he could produce and prove people wrong.

11. Rajai Davis- :Potential NL Starter; AA or AAA in American League.

The others not listed are either currently disabled or too young to make a fair assessment at this stage. As far as Thomas and Chavez are concerned, both are stars in either league when healthy, but both should hang up the cleats!

I will take a look at the pitchers in my next post, but looking at this meager lineup it is truly amazing that we are still over .500!  So we basically have three or four players that are quality starters in the AL and some that are backups and or should be playing in the National League. If it wasn't for the pitching where would we be???  But with the recent trades, that will now surely take a hit as well. 

The future clearly has some bright spots but it may be time to scrap some of the "moneyball" ideals of the past and move forward. Because the A's are not playing by the "moneyball" rules anyway. The theory is valid and has given us A's suppporters several winning years, but if we want to move forward and start scoring runs, Billy Beane may want to move away from plate discipline hitters and back to seeing if the wack and attack hitters of old can get us over the hump!  The sand in the "moneyball" hourglass could very well be down to it's final few grains!

3 recs  |  Comment 421 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I live for the day

when someone writes an article saying that the abject failure of the Mariners this year is proof positive that Moneyball was right all along.

It’s sort of unfortunate that most of the people who are smart enough to understand the point of the book are also too intellectually honest to write something as silly as that.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 4:43 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Sometimes, I really really like you.

Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox

by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

PT, WHAT?

Do you mind elaborating on your point!? Because the Mariners are a failure this year is not proof positive that Moneyball is the long term answer. I state that Moneyball has for the most part been a success, but would’nt you say that the Angels philosophy is as good if not currently better? Considering they have a title and are in the hunt for another, my point has validity. So calling it silly is just stirring up the pot once again!

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 23, 2008 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Of course it isn't

That’s my point. The success or failure of one given baseball team in one season is maybe—and I’m being generous here—10% related to the “philosophy” of the GM. I’d rate all of the following as more important:

Success or failure of the team’s talent evaluators
GM’s “general aptitude”, eg willingness to make good trades, promote players at the right time, etc
Payroll
Level of opposing competition
Luck

That’s not to say it’s unimportant—any horse handicapper would kill for a 10% edge—but it is to say that cherrypicking a few example teams and building an argument on them without controlling for other variables is rubbish.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wait a minute.

Your first two qualifiers are directly related to the GM. He’s the one who hires/fires the evaluators. He’s also the one who makes personnel decisions.

I’d say that factors into a lot more than a 10 percent edge. Beane also has the advantage of having a free hand throughout the organization. He can reach down and touch anyone at anytime for any reason. And everyone knows it. So yeah, I think he bears responsibility for the drek we have had to endure the last week or so, more so than most any other GM in baseball. Which is not to say I would want any other GM out there. I wouldn’t. The only thing restraining Beane is the only thing that usually matters. Money. Payroll. He has no control over that, if he did we would be the RS west. Only better.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 7:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You misunderstand me

Yes, the first two are part of the overall “rating” of the GM. They are not, however, part of the GM’s “philosophy,” unless you think some GMs have the philosophy of “sucking”, or of “liking to screw with prospects,” or something.

John Schuerholz was less “sabermetric” than JP Ricciardi. Nonetheless I don’t think there’s anyone on the planet who would argue that Ricciardi is a better GM than Schuerholz was. The fact that Schuerholz’s teams did better doesn’t prove that sabermetrics is wrong. Schuerholz was a shrewd dealer and a guy who surrounded himself with capable people, and Ricciardi is a hack who prefers sycophants and doesn’t maintain good relationships. That’s independent of their “philosophies” at GMing, which is more or less the only area in which I’d grade Ricciardi higher.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I kinda figured I did.

But the clarification was cool.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ricciardi's philosophy

includes acquiring way too many 3b in some years, and now way too many SS. It includes cutting Thomas after a very small sample of struggles.

I’ll take Schuerholtz’ philosophy over Ricciardi’s.

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on Jul 23, 2008 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hm

Part of it is luck. Part of it is maintaining and promoting a culture of good health practices. But I’d say that’s less important than a GM’s philosophy as an overall part of a team’s success. (Still important, though.)

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And the biggest part may be getting durable players

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Moneyball

you cant argue with the facts.

one playoff series win in ten years..

Trading away the best players.. even if Billy makes a good discovery in a player which he does a lot.. I’m starting to say what’s the point? if you’re going to trade them away when their at their best. Here’s a thought as well – Bobby Crosby is not good at all. Beane has stuck with him far too long. Does anyone on this site remember how the theme a few years ago was “rebuild for 2008” Obviously that did not happen. Here’s an another issue. How is this team going to be good in the near future? You cant’ win with no power.

Lets go Oakland! obvious.com

by bballfanr33 on Jul 24, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You also can't argue with this fact

5 playoff appearances since 2000 on a limited payroll.

Would you rather have that or what teams like Kansas City and Pittsburgh have?

I’d rather have the chance than no hope at all.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Trading players away before they hit free agency isn't "Moneyball"...

... it’s, “shit, we have no money.”

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Jul 24, 2008 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why do people all assume that that

the NL is so inferior to the AL.

I mean you’re saying players could be starters in the NL… or should be AAA starters in the AL.. I never really thought the talent level was THAT far apart.

by buddahead9 on Jul 23, 2008 4:51 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Well, probably because Interleague play over the past 3 seasons has yielded about 100 more wins for the AL

When the NL has the inherent advantage in those games.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:40 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Whaaaaa?

I do think that the AL is deeper (few horrible teams) and may even be stronger at the top. You’re 100% wrong that interleague is an inherent advantage for NL teams though. When they trot out crappy pinch hitters to DH against guys (Vidro excepted) who are far superior I don’t understand how you can even make this argument with a straight face.

by nevermoor on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's quite simple

The AL’s DH is typically one of the 2 or 3 best hitters on that team. The loss of offense caused by replacing that guy with a pitcher far, far, FAR outweighs the advantage they get in AL parks when the NL gets to put in a decent hitter in for the pitcher. You act like the guy DHing is always some Lenny Harris type. What usually happens is a bad defensive player like Adam Dunn gets bumped to DH, and a competent hitter/pretty good fielder gets 4 at bats instead of a pitcher.

The NL advantage really isn’t close.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I completely disagree

In NL parks, the AL team just has a far superior pinch hitter (or take a hit defensively by putting their DH in the field).

In AL parks, NL teams trot out the likes of Tony Clark and Greg Norton. It’s true that some teams DH a defensive liability, but they still have to put someone in that player’s position (and it’s not like that replacement player will hit like David Ortiz).

All told, it’s always better to have too many good hitters than too few. In NL parks, AL teams have too many good hitters. In AL parks, NL teams have too few.

The AL advantage really isn’t close.

by nevermoor on Jul 23, 2008 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You forget that the NL

teams will not have a player capable of playing the DH position. No NL team is going to carry around a DH for a dozen games or so.

The end result is you have 4th OFs, backup middle infielders DHing for the NL.

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on Jul 23, 2008 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Look at it this way

The negative difference between the AL losing the pitcher is greater than the positive difference in AL DH vs. NL DH. The AL loses one of their best hitters for games in which the NL plays just as they always do, and in games when the AL gets to have that hitter, the NL gets to play a hitter who is a competent major league hitter. And, most likely, that guy gets to play defense while a lesser player gets to DH for those games.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The problem here is that

the NL often does NOT have a guy who is a competent major league hitter. The guy DHing is usually a 4th OF type, a guy who hits like a CF but can’t play CF.

Even if they move their corner OF or 1b to DH, the guy who will fill in usually can’t hit. Which is why he’s sitting on the bench. If he could hit, he would be starting somewhere.

And the AL teams don’t lose their best hitter. They put him at 1b.

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nah

This just isn’t true. Pretty much every NL team has at least one guy who could pass as a regular. The Cubs have Daryle Ward, and he would be a regular DH on a lot of teams. I’d say there’s an equal number of truly crappy first-guy-off-the-bench NL players as there are AL DHs who really ought to not be a regular.

If Frank Thomas were healthy for all the NL games this year, he would have played exactly 0 of them at first base.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

but he would have been available to PH...

and the NL teams cannot afford to have someone of his presence on their roster if they cannot play in the field at all. Boston moves Ortiz to first, and sits Youkillis/Lowell until they need them for defense in the later innings.

Advantage AL.

by elhefe on Jul 24, 2008 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

padres did

with Tony Clark – dumped (“traded”) him to Arizona after interleague was finished.

Then again, it’s the Padres – not going to say they’re a shining example of how to have a great season.

by rollierollieOxenfree on Jul 25, 2008 4:05 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Tony Clark had a 91 OPS+ with San Diego this year

Not a bad example there. Is he great? No. But the difference between the typical AL DH and him is less of an advantage for the AL than iot is when the AL DH sits down for some games and the pitcher hits.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2008 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What?

The difference between AL pitchers and NL pitchers is zero.

The difference between AL DHs and NL DHs is not zero.

It’s almost tautological to say that the AL has an advantage here. It can’t not have an advantage.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 25, 2008 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Small sample size, I know

But CC Sabathia just mowing down the NL sure makes it look like the NL is fairly week. 4-0 with 3 CGs and 1.36 ERA? I’m guessing he grabs a couple beers in between innings knowing what he’ll be facing out on the hill.

Might as well Jump! - Van Halen

by sprtsnwyn on Jul 24, 2008 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Weak, damn it

Might as well Jump! - Van Halen

by sprtsnwyn on Jul 24, 2008 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, except his own team

which is fairly Weeks.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wish there was a post permantly on display

That explained just how valuable Jack Cust is to this team.

by GusanoQuemador on Jul 23, 2008 4:56 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Or we could hire somebody to travel all over the country and just punch people in the throat

It’s not like reading a well-argued defense of Cust would actually get through to people.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

does that come with dental?

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

it was in a post

a couple pages back

oh wait, that was you

"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 Jul 24, 2008 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

1. What does any of this have to do with Moneyball?

2. The NL is probably actually better than the AL this year.
3. You’ve wasted 2 minutes of my life that I will never get back.

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Jul 23, 2008 4:56 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

+1

Nothing really wrong with the post over all, except that it has nothing to do with “Moneyball” whatsoever.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

so by "nothing really wrong"

i hope you mean, “critically flawed”, yes?

by oakinboston on Jul 24, 2008 5:36 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It didn't convince you when the NL was left holding it's arse in interleague

for the nth straight time?

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 23, 2008 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, you're right ...

never mind … there were 3 NL teams that were better than .500 in interleague play!

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Jul 23, 2008 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

But....

I’m hard pressed to pick an Al team over either the Cubs or the Brewers in a 7 game series right now. Even the hated Sox or the Angels. And I suspect the Rays’ time is still ahead—not this year.

by windyfelix on Jul 23, 2008 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Perhaps

But I’d take about 11 AL teams over any team in the NL West

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

some of your assessments of the players are correct, however

until the rules of baseball change, not making outs and putting the ball in play are always going to be valuable attributes for a baseball player.

by emar24 on Jul 23, 2008 5:07 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

+1

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Daring Post Around Here.

I’m not sure if it has anything to do with “Moneyball,” but Beane and his associates have been absolutely inept at finding or developing any kind of young hitters. The offensive struggles are nothing new to this year, the offense has been anemic since 2004, when the steroid infused talent finally filtered out. Aside from this past offseason, Beane has not one time drafted for, or traded for a prospect that is anything but average(I’m not talking about established guys like Guillen or Dye). Browsing through the A’s amateur draft picks, since 1997 the only standout guys are Eric Byrnes, Bobby Crosby, and Nick Swisher. Thats not saying much in the ways of evaluation.

It’s nice and all that Beane is trading guys that have multiple years left with the team for minor leaguers now, but what has he been doing for the last 10 years to the farm system? What guys in there have any talent that didn’t come in this past off-season’s trades??? When Matt Watson, Dan Johnson, are Daric Barton are guys you look forward to seeing promoted to the MLB, there is a problem. WHEN MATT MURTON IS YOUR CLEANUP HITTER, THAT IS A PROBLEM.

Quiet simply, the A’s seem to be very good at evaluating/developing pitchers. Thats only half the battle though. When your offense is worse than the Kansas City Royals the only thing that pitching is going to do is prolong the inevitable. Obviously I’m a little down on Beane right now, but I think my reasons are justified. From an outside view it looks like Beane’s hard headiness and neglect of the farm system has set the franchise back 2-3 years. Not only that, but if his current prospects continue to improve at the rate of his past guys, there isn’t going to be much of a dynasty. Sooner or later Texas and Seattle are going to improve, and the Angels aren’t going anywhere. While I like how the A’s could look in 2010 or so, there is absolutely zero guarantee of success.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:11 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

I like this post and have recommended it

That is exactly the point. Now, it’s true that the A’s could draft and develop good hitters (average and/or power) without spending money they don’t have. I suppose the “they can’t draft good offensive players” argument has some merit. But it’s absolutely true that the A’s will never find some awesome hitter on the cheap.

They can, however, get guys who are flawed but productive on the cheap. Shannon Stewart and Mike Sweeney are good examples of that. To a lesser extent, Jay Payton fits (except he was all empty average and way too expensive).

It’s not like you’re ever gonna grab Albert Pujols out of the bargain bin unless he’s, well, a 38- (or 40-) year-old Frank Thomas.

If someone thinks BIlly Beane wants a bunch of guys who hit .240 with no power because that’s his “philosophy,” well, I’m actually quite amazed you have the ability to operate a keyboard with any level of competence.

Also, exclamation points rule!

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

or, y'know, they could draft Jemile Weeks

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 23, 2008 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

or sign a few free agents

I hear Emil Brown is available.

Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox

by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've been traveling and haven't had much access to the Internet

and as I read this post that was my first wonder. When is someone going to bring up the exclamation point excess? Elaine Benes would looooove this fanpost.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Jul 23, 2008 11:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

cindi thinks an "exclamation point" ...

... is when Mr Beane signs a washed-up California Raisin, and he crosses home base.

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Undervalued Hitting

It is in fact very difficult to find an undervalued guy who is just coming around. If they are in AAA, then it’s going to cost you, Hanley Ramirez comes to mind. Problem is, when Beane has traded away a top player he has failed to get anything worthwhile in regards to prospects. Thats where finding and drafting guys with high upsides comes into play. You don’t even need a high first round pick to land a potential star. .

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Carlos, Gio, Ryan, and Brett resent being called not worthwhile

Chris, Dana, Joey, JoshD, Adrian and Greg don’t think they’re chopped liver either. Fautino says “don’t you forget about me”.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And Dan Meyer is... oh... ok, I won't push it.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I clearly said:

“Aside from this past offseason.”

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dan Haren

Is one, among many, prospects we got in previous seasons who would consider themselves “worthwhile”

by nevermoor on Jul 23, 2008 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Please read more closely.

I was addressing the offense. I clearly pointed out Beane has been fully capable of finding pitchers.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 6:23 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ok, here we go again

Some successful offensive Draft Picks
Travis Buck
Andre Ethier
Nick Swisher
Eric Byrnes
Mark Teahen
Bobby Crosby

Some successful offensive Trade Acquisitions
Jeremy Giambi
Eric Hinske
Jermaine Dye
David Justice
Carlos Pena
John Mabry
Ray Durham
Erubiel Durazo
Bobby Kielty
Mark Kotsay
Michael Barrett
Jason Kendall
Daric Barton
Milton Bradley
Jack Cust

Some of the trades are for “established players” which you excluded, but certainly not all. All told, you’re wrong to say Beane has no eye for offensive players. It’s true he’s more interested in pitching (as he should be considering our park effects, and the proof that pitching wins supplied by the Rangers every year).

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What is your definition of success?

Mark Teahen is a successful offensive pick? Career OPS+ of 97. Year by year OPS+: 82, 122, 98, 87. Career EQA, 258, year by year, 240, 287, 260, 243 while playing corner OF. He would be a successful offensive pick, if he played 2b or CF. Even at 3b, he’s below average.

And I don’t see how you can count Crosby as a successful pick. His career EQA is 241. SS average is usually 250-255.

You are counting 2 guys who are comfortably below positional average over their careers, as “successful”?

If you want want to give Beane the benefit of the doubt on Crosby, fine, the pick is neither a bust, nor a success.

As for your successful acquisitions, you are also stretching there. Bobby Kielty is a “successful” acquisition? Even putting aside the idiocy of trading a young starting pitcher for him, Kielty put up numbers that were below average for a corner OF, even with him being platooned.

Michael Barrett didn’t play for the A’s. Why does he count? Damian Miller probably can be counted as successful.

Eric Hinske also didn’t play for the A’s.

Carlos Pena had a 92 OPS+ with the A’s while playing 1b.

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed

You’d think we’d come across ONE guy who hits .275/.380/.500.

by GusanoQuemador on Jul 24, 2008 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's a lot to ask for

Especially in the Coliseum. Most of the 36 players with >= .880 OPS this year wouldn’t have one if half their games were in the Coliseum.

Obviously it would be great to have Pujols, but every team in the league (including the Cardinals) passed on him a lot of times. All that shows is that lightning hasn’t struck us yet.

Also, it’s worth noting that last year Cust was that sort of hitter. .256/.408/.504

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If those guys are all successes...

Then why has the offense been consistently near the worst in the league the last four years? I’m not seeing anyone on there being anything but average. No Chase Utley, David Wright, Matt Holliday, Albert Pujols, Ryan Braun, Jose Reyes, Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau, Grady Sizemore, Josh Hamilton, Evan Longoria, Ian Kinsler, Conor Jackson, Mark Teixeira, or Xavier Nady.

Heck, even a guy like Brain McCann would be an upgrade over any prospect Billy Beane has ever signed. It’s time people stop blindly following Beane, and look at what much lesser GM’s have been able to achieve. As Gusano said, it would be nice to have one .275 hitter!

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 24, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Answers

1. Park Effect. To hit .275 for the A’s you have to have an EqA much higher than .275. Only Jason Giambi regularly hit above .280 with us. Johnny Damon is a prime example. He’s a very good player but just couldn’t hit in Oakland.

2. Bad Luck. Minus a broken leg, Dye would have been that type of player. Minus a ton of injuries, Chavez would have been that type of player.

3. “Heck, even a guy like Brain McCann” is crazy talk. McCann is one of the best players in baseball. Also, I’d argue that several players on your list (Holliday, Reyes, Mauer, Morneau, and Jackson) wouldn’t have superstar stats (just good stats) if they played for us.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

By the way

Sweeney is getting mad love around here

But i think his BABIP is near .350. I believe we may be in for a disappointment soon. Haha, as a means of protecting ourselves, we should avoid too much love for swooney (see Buck, T.).

by ohmangoAs on Jul 24, 2008 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not really sure I'd use that list as something to back up a point

Buck? Currently trying to find his stroke again in the minors.

Ethier? Decent hitter, nothing amazing.

Swisher? Low average, walks a lot, strikes out a lot, has average power.

Byrnes? Human crash test dummy, emphasis on dummy.

Teahen? LOL!

Crosby? LOL!

The rest?

Jeremy Giambi? When was he ever anything special?

Hinske? Traded before seeing the majors with the A’s. Career OPS+ of 101.

Dye? Could’ve been something here, but the injury killed his A’s career.

Justice? Here in the twilight of his career.

Pena? Attitude problems and poor performance was his ticket out of here.

Mabry? Are you serious?

Durham? Rent-a-player.

Durazo? Not much of a holy grail if you ask me.

Kielty? Gimmick.

Kotsay? Solid player who dropped off a lot because of injuries.

Barrett? Never played for the A’s.

Kendall? Solid career NL hitter for average that gave the A’s a couple nice moments but he never hit very well here.

Barton? I still like his upside but he’s struggled mightily his first full season.

Bradley? Now we’re getting somewhere, but injuries, attitude and pending contract status combined to see the A’s unload him for whatever they could.

Cust? Strikeout, walk, homer machine. Terrible hitter for average. When he’s your main offensive threat, you’ve got bigger problems.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Some of this is fair

I consider any draft pick who has a real major league career a success. I think that’s especially fair as these guys all started in MLB.

Buck has/had the talent to start, here’s hoping he gets going again. Ethier is a solid major leaguer. The White Sox certainly see Swisher as a lot more than that, they traded their entire farm system. Byrnes has had some pretty good years.

Obviously the stars of trades are Dye and Kotsay, but Mabry hit about .400 for us the month after we got him, we got value out of moving Hinske, Justice played well for us, Pena took longer to develop than we had patience, but it turns out he can hit, Durazo was a stud in 2004 (but didn’t stick to it), Kendall wasn’t what we expected, but ok for a catcher.

I’ll admit Barrett shouldn’t have been on the list. I was going too fast through the trade spreadsheet.

The point is that it’s crazy to say we can’t get offensive players here.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hardly Crazy.

The offense is terrible, and has been consistently awful for Beane’s time here. It’s really that simple.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 24, 2008 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

No. It really isn't

If we morphed the Oakland Coliseum into Wrigley Field (which would be pretty sweet), we’d have a lot more people with pretty offensive stats (and a lot fewer pitchers with sexy stats).

Tomorrow’s lineup, of course, is almost completely bereft of talent, but “for Beane’s time here” we’d have some pretty solid lineups in an offense-friendly park.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It sure was better in the earlier 2000s.

At least in 2000 and 2004 they had solid offenses, especially for the Coliseum. They scored 947 runs in 2000 (almost 6 a game), then went down to 884 in 2001, followed by 800 in 2002, 768 in 2003, 793 in 2004, 772 in 2005, 771 in 2006, 741 in 2007, and they’re on pace for 683 this year. Ouch.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay, I see a little more where you're coming from

Given the odds of players making it to the Majors in the first place, there’s something to be said to that. At the same time, how many haven’t?

Unfortunately the Coliseum is death to hitters. Get a new ballpark, get less foul territory, all that will change. You’ll also see pitching affected by it as well.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Amen

I’ll defer to grover on the draft success rate (but I think his conclusion is that we’re above average with hitters and way above average with pitchers, if that’s wrong disregard this).

I couldn’t agree more about park effects. People whine about not having .300 hitters but don’t seem to mind Duke’s 1.8 ERA.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I know you said that, but it seemed like an arbitrary exception to me

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Carlos Gonzalez isn't a worthwhile hitting prospect?

He’s 22 and doubles once every 10 at bats. He’s not perfect, but I’d say he’s a pretty freakin’ good hitting prospect.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Again.

I said aside from this past offseason twice in the first post.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

so you're cherrypicking

the years that we spent putting a good team on the field in the majors while (somewhat) neglecting prospects…but when we turn around and start getting prospects, you cherrypick the years when we weren’t necessarily focused on that? gee, that’s fair.

"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 Jul 23, 2008 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How is that cherry picking?

We weren’t trading good prospects to get those competitive teams. There has not been an impact bat in the farm system in years. The best player to come out of it during Beane’s tenure has probably been Swisher. That is not saying much. Thats why the team used to be affected so badly by injuries.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

maybe cherrypicking

was too strong, but it just feels like it’s easy to argue against something we weren’t “focusing” on, per se, at the time.

"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 Jul 23, 2008 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

hey – Steve Swisher is a very good position player.

And an undervalued one at that.

The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.

by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 1:21 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nah. He sucked. He gave the Pirates the 1973 division title

when he dropped a 3rd strike and let Bob Robertson reach 1st on the last out of the game. Pirates came back and won.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Lets see

Runs scored, hits, doubles, HRs, total bases, batting average, slugging, ops, stolen bases, and fewer SOs.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

but, but...

how about walks?

Foolsh, the most insane regular poster on AN since oaktoon left - salb

by FoolshGame22 on Jul 23, 2008 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Carlos Gonzalez may be pretty good. You have to credit Beane with that.

Ryan Sweeney could also turn out pretty well. I still have hope for Barton. So it’s just possible Beane’s learned from his past mistakes.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The A's cant seem to find

position players in the draft. Where is the fault to be laid in the A’s Org.? Is it the scouts? Is it Beane? Is it the Minors development system? Coaching? Im assuming that they already know that they have not developed a very good-great hitter in along time. I would just like to see them hire some scouts, coaching or whoever that know something about hitting. We all know that A’s are great at finding and developing pitching. Maybe its just time for two scouting departments in the A’s Org. One for hitting and one for pitching.

by asfaninpismobeach on Jul 23, 2008 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Browse a little more
Beane has not one time drafted for, or traded for a prospect that is anything but average(I’m not talking about established guys like Guillen or Dye). Browsing through the A’s amateur draft picks, since 1997 the only standout guys are Eric Byrnes, Bobby Crosby, and Nick Swisher.

Some prospects whom Beane traded for who are/were arguably better than average:

2000: Aaron Harang, Chad Bradford
2001: Eric Hinske
2002: Carlos Peña
2002: Justin Duchscherer
2004: Dan Haren
2004: Kiko Calero
2005: Chad Gaudin

Some players drafted by the A’s since 1997 who are/were arguably better than average:
1997: Tim Hudson
1998: Mark Mulder, Gerald Laird
1999: Barry Zito, Ryan Ludwick
2000: Rich Harden
2001: Jeremy Bonderman, Andre Ethier
2002: Joe Blanton
2004: Huston Street, Kurt Suzuki

(If you count guys we drafted but didn’t sign, you can add a couple more, like Jonathan Papelbon and Brad Ziegler.)

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

just so i can beat the rush

justin smoak

"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 Jul 23, 2008 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

we drafted him out of high school

"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 Jul 24, 2008 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm just posting

so I can finish a sentence with an exclamation point! I think I’m going to go get a soda!

"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico

by jeepers on Jul 23, 2008 5:14 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Oh yeah, and ...

this was a rebuilding year, remember? The team was supposed to suck. But, you’re right, BB needs to learn to suck better so that he can get better draft picks …

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Jul 23, 2008 5:24 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

No, because then people will kvetch that he didn't draft the best hitter in the country...

... never mind that they couldn’t meet his ridiculous signing bonus quote.

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Jul 23, 2008 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hey -- cut it out! I came here to say that.

Are you the one who planted the transceivers in my fillings?

The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus

by The Dogfather on Jul 23, 2008 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not a well articulated argument or well written post but

Beane does seem to come off the Jeremy Brown – Mark Teahen – Steve Stanley type and focused more on hitters with power and speed over the last couple of years. It may be that he’s turned the page two years ago.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 5:49 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I was selecting high picks from the 2002 draft that the Moneyball book

described as Beane’s discovered market inefficiency.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, ok

Because Brown was a slow, plodding, OBP guy. Stanley was a no-power, stolen base, high average guy. Well, he was supposed to be that. Only thing they really had in common was patience. I don’t think Beane has deviated from looking for that in young players.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Whereas now, we're taking more speedy, athletic guys like Weeks over Wallace

Nino Leyja (who BA didn’t like at all), Dixon, Carlos (who supposedly was a free swinger), etc. Beane seems to have changed to a philosophy more dependent on speed and power rather than OBP.

This makes sense in a low-scoring environment where maximizing your opportunities is more important than wearing down the opposing pitcher. It also may be that younger players are better at executing this than older players. This fits with the emphasis on pre-FA players for the limited budget, the emphasis on defense to lower the scoring environment and save pitchers, and the overall downward trend in scoring in MLB.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think it might be as much a response to the ridiculous injury problems

as anything else—ie the A’s are drafting guys with strong bodies because those are the only guys they can count on actually staying healthy.

I certainly don’t think they’ve gone away from emphasizing plate discipline as the #1 attribute in their hitters—I can’t think of a single high draftee in the past few years that I’d think of as a minus in that category, although obviously Gonzalez is. Sean Doolittle, Josh Horton, Petey Paramore, Matt Sulentic—those are “Moneyball” draftees, and no mistake. Last time I checked Leyja’s stats he was showing a great eye, and Dixon is too far from being a finished product for us to tell but at least seems to have the potential to walk 50+ times a year.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And then there's Emil Brown

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Guys at or near the MLB level are a different animal

If a guy has already proven he can succeed without a high walk rate, that’s one thing.

But having a bad walk rate at low levels is a good predictor that a guy is going to be a crummy hitter.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

So which one is Emil Brown?

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He's in the "near-replacement roster filler" category

Although he used to walk more than he does now.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm interested to see how Beane adapts to the (mostly) post-PED era

But I don’t think we’ll know until we see exactly how the game changes. It’s not a given that power numbers will continue to trend downward.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Excuse Me, Mark Twain!

Not a well articulated or well written comment, but….

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 23, 2008 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well it was hard to understand what you were trying to say.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed

There’s a difference between fielding a team that you think fits your mold and fielding a team that is essentially a “sub” team. Make no mistake, this isn’t Beane’s idea of a great lineup.

On the other hand, whose fault is it that the A’s have little in the hitting department? I think Beane and the A’s scouts have to take the blame for what the ball club is, because they failed to build the necessary depth to deal with this predictable situation.

by oaktownmario on Jul 23, 2008 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

make this one green

+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 Jul 23, 2008 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You have no concept of what "moneyball" is....

It’s not that Beane wants Murton bating cleanup… it’s that he’s the best cleanup hitter we can have for league minimum.

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

by brenarlo on Jul 23, 2008 6:26 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Your right

It’s not working, what was I thinking.
-signed Billy Beane

Enjoy the game

by DCinWC on Jul 23, 2008 6:27 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

those 6 or 7 years in the playoffs this decade weren't good enough i guess...

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

by brenarlo on Jul 23, 2008 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Five, actually.

This year will mark missing the playoffs for the fourth time in five tries.

"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico

by jeepers on Jul 23, 2008 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Pessimist

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

you spelled "you're" wrong

sorry to be a d-bag, but i can’t stand that

"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 Jul 23, 2008 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Are/were you, by chance, an English major?

Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox

by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Because you have to major in English

to notice a missing apostrophe…..

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

naw

i’m a kinesiology major/psychology minor, actually…it’s just a pet peeve of mine. how hard is it to determine whether replacing “your” with “you are” makes sense before you put the thought out for all to see? i just can’t stand that it’s so easy, but yet so many people get it wrong so often.

/rant

"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 Jul 23, 2008 11:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I support all English language-related rants

Next, can we please get one on why people who pluralize a word with an apostrophe should have a finger chopped off? Or why people who use “seen” as the past tense of “see” (instead of “saw,” as “seen” is actually the past participle) should be mocked for their insufficient education?

I think this should be an entire fanpost.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

or

the fact that you can’t loose a game? i hate that one too.

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:48 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh would you just be quite already

:)

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:50 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i think you mean

allready

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

there/their

Drive’s me fuking crazee

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

good one

this one goes a little deeper, but when i coached an 11U baseball team this summer, there was a team called TABU. this stood for “try and beat us”, which is grammatically incorrect. it should be “try to beat us”.

maybe i should be an Englishmajor. ;)

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe they're telling teams what will happen, and not offering a challenge

As in, “We’re not that good, so if you try, you will beat us.” In that sense, “Try, and beat us” (I’m not sure on if that comma actually belongs there, but I’m including it for effect) might work.

I suspect they did not think about it that much.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

they are actually

the #1 team in california for the age group

"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 Jul 24, 2008 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I seen that, like, three times today

I generally bemoan the profusion of Mr Sabermetric Sporks in the Scrabble ranks who don't know the meaning or usage of 50% of the words they use. -monkeyball

by JediLeroy on Jul 24, 2008 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Definitely an entire fanpost

if you’re going to bring up “I seen”. Do you realize where that leads?

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 24, 2008 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"I seen" is part of a grammar

which is completely developed and logically consistent, but differs from the dialect which is accepted as standard.

Many years ago, the City of Oakland tried to use this fact as a way to finagle more education funds from the state of California. This resulted in an enormous national controversy, largely based on ignorance of the facts of the case.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 25, 2008 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Depends on who is using it

I’m not actually some Miss Fidditch or anything. I actually am intrigued by different dialects and cultural tweaks to language; however, I see a difference between certain groups using certain “wrong” language (most of the time intentionally) and people using a word wrong just because they don’t know any better.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

wrongly

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 25, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

by the way

people who have just as many fAnPoStS as comments…yeah.

"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 Jul 23, 2008 6:39 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Christ alive.

God I hate humanity.

Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.

by salb918 on Jul 23, 2008 6:40 PM PDT reply actions   2 recs

Do like Nico does

Switch to goats.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 23, 2008 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

So that's why Nico challenged Chupacabra to a cage match...

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:46 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why would anyone new ever post here?

The cliquishness clubiness of this site has gotten sickening in the last year or so.

It’s completely predictable that given this guy’s well-intentioned, legitimate, and, yeah okay, somewhat inaccurate post, about ten or so of the self-inflated, self-important, imperious gasbags who rule this site would take him to task—either lecturing him about Moneyball, dismissing his evaluation of talent, or mocking his argument.

I’ve come to hate this place for the predictability of all that.

And the truth is the writer has a point. Beane has seemed to fail at bringing in or drafting offense. And part of that may be the philosophy of excessive focus on OBP and a commitment to not being aggressive.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 6:56 PM PDT reply actions   2 recs

+1

Except for the part about “hating this place” – why not love it for the people who don’t do what you’re describing (I think they’re called “females” but actually quite a few of us penisoids too)? Where’s the love, RLangford – where’s the love?

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 Jul 23, 2008 7:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

AGREED.

I swear, some people around here must be on the A’s PR staff’s payroll.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What! I can get paid for this?

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed with an !!

I still read the site daily but am no longer compelled to post. The site used to be so fun with funny takes on the A’s and outside the box comments, now it just seems like the rep has gotten out more people have joined over the last two years who truly believe their elitist opinion matters. Now its bust out your baseball prospectus, open excel and pick a random page in your thesaurus so you can do your best to try and make somebody else look/feel stupid. I think 1 in 3 posts are worth my time as I have become accustomed to living around the Mendoza line. That being said, much like heroin, I still chase the AN dragon.

The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis

by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I meant 1 in 5. I suck :(

The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis

by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Haha.

So true.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 24, 2008 2:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

im thinking

the culture cycles to a certain extent. read the posts during a time when there are many things to argue about (slump, trading top players, chasing first place) and you will find dissonance.
legend has it, however, that if you read during the middle of the off-season/spring training, and wit and hilarity abound.

by oakinboston on Jul 24, 2008 5:56 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

you may be right about it being clique-y

and i tend to agree a bit, but just think about if people were allowed to speak like those at LL, etc. it would be an absolute mess.

"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 Jul 23, 2008 7:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It wasn't all that bad.

The poster received a lot more support for his position than I would have thought, especially in light of the title of his post. Only one response seemed overly acerbic. Maybe two….one may have just been a casual pronouncement on all mankind, which I happen to agree with 22 out of 24 hours on any given day for a wide variety of reasons other than baseball.

I was thinking about your last point though. Has there been to much emphasis placed on working the pitcher for a walk? Or are the A’s just not good enough to capitilize on the one good pitch they’re going to see in a given AB? It does seem like the A’s philosophical approach to hitting should undergo a serious review and possible revision. Times….they are a changin….

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The A's just need some better players at doing what they do best

Jack Hannahan is a Billy Beane type player, but not a very good one. He’s a semi-serviceable replacement for injured players. It’s not like Beane thinks he’s sliced bread #2.

It’s possible to have better players who do what these guys do, but they don’t suck so much. And some of the guys on the current roster might actually be better players in the near future and it won’t really be an issue anymore.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sadly, the A's seem to have reverted to doing

what they do best. Stranding runners. I realize the strategy behind the philosophy, but it’s so frustrating when it fails to come to fruition time after time.

Sometimes I think you have to play the cards your dealt, injuries and all. At least if they went up there hacking my level of frustration would drop considerably.

But in the end, I know you’re right. I just hate it.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:52 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

The problem isn’t necessarily the one true Jack Hannahan – right now it’s a squad made up of about 8 Hannahan’s, a DFA and 3-Outcomes. In the years where the A’s offense actually worked, we still had a fair number of less-than-ideal “Billy Beane type player(s)”, but there was always at least one difference maker who symbiotically made everyone around him more dangerous. There were still an awful lot of times where runner’s would be left stranded in scoring position – but a few times a week, the odds would swing in our favor.

Most recently, “that guy” was Frank Thomas, benefitting Swish, Bradley, et al. I wouldn’t be shocked if DFA/3-Outcomes benefit similarly from his return in the second half.

by elhefe on Jul 24, 2008 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

When Chavez came back and was healthy for about 3 weeks

He was producing, and the entire lineup seemed to just be that much better. And Chavez really isn’t an impact bat anymore. Right now the lineup is basically Sweeney, Suzuki, Cust, and 6 guys. That’s just not going to cut it, and it’s not like Beane wants all 6 of those guys in the everyday lineup. There just isn’t much choice at this point.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That is a rather amusing comment,

given the acid vehemence with which you tend to express your opinions.

by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 7:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hypocrisy...

da da dee da dum…

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Predictable you'd chime in

Because you know that you’re one of the voices here that most tramples on those whose insights might be a little too simplistic.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

No doubt.

But that’s like saying we all have bellybuttons or eardrums.

Some blind spots are more stark than others, and your comment above struck me as an extreme example. I mean, you’ve got to be kidding, right? Like half your posts drip with dismissive disdain.

That doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy your contributions. I do. But you taking the community to task over tone is laughable.

by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comfort the afflicted, afflict the comfortable

And if you can point out the posters I ripped, go ahead. What you’re saying is nonsense. Nothing like half my posts drip with dismissive disdain. That’s just a something you’re throwing out there that has nothing to do with the truth.

But you’re not hypocritically disdainful, right?

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Posters I ripped

I meant in the alleged acidic history he’s claiming I have. I was pretty up front about who I was criticizing in this post.

Or would it be better for you if I’d written

“I don’t even understand what you’re saying but I’ll continue to write stuff in quotes under it.”

under your post in the brilliant style that you seem to have perfected.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

lol

now that was a good response. Like the initial post, it shall be rec’d.

"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.

RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.

by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wait ...

You did click on that link, right?

“I haven’t visited these game threads in a while. A lot of you are complete idiots.”

I’ll cop to the passive-aggressiveness. And the cheesy aphorisms. All true. But seriously: You really don’t see even a tiny kernel of hypocrisy in your original post?

by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay, truce

There’s a little hypocrisy, but it’s inevitable when you are angry about those in power (the insiders here) whacking on someone who has less power and is not such an insider. It’s inevitable that I’d do some-or try to do some-whacking myself. So, yeah, I cop to some unavoidable hypocrisy that I worsened by my choice of words.

As for the one comment you cherry pick. I know exactly when it was made. I’d pretty much stopped coming here because the game threads were so unbelievably reactionary. It was the game in which Cust dropped the can of corn flyball against the Angels. I came in to say that Duchscherer was a little responsible for the inning too. But what I saw was some unbelivable invective directed at Cust. And more. That’s what my comment was owed to. Another defense it turns out.

(And of course as it turned out, Cust was the star of the game in the end.)

But that post you linked doesn’t define me. Half my post don’t drip with dismissive disdan. Not even close.

So are we cool now. I hope so.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Could I get a list of those insiders in power, please?

I’m kinda curious to know if my name is on the list.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 23, 2008 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You're definitely one

But not lethal. Grover, you don’t know me, but like many here I anticipate all your posts and am very grateful for what you write.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Powerful yet non-lethal

Kinda like a Taser, maybe?

Here’s my problem with the whole “insider power” discussion. I’d agree I’m an insider, I’ve been on AN since nearly the beginning and Hell, I’m a front page writer! But I’ve got no more power over the citizens of AN then the newest newbie. I can flag comments that I think are a CGV.

That’s it.

Now it’s true that the site managers are folks who have been around for a long time but that seems fairly logical, Blez is going to ask for help from people who have shown a strong interest in AN. It’s not like he can recruit folks from other sites to come in and moderate! He can’t contact SmackMyAss7 over at Swirly.com and ask him (or her) to help moderate a site to which they have little interest.

A lot of people have said that I get a pass on borderline comments because of my tenure. Not so. I get a pass because I know exactly where the line is and I do my best not to cross it because when I do… I get nailed. I can be vicious in my attacks on the ideas presented but that’s OK. Lines are crossed when you attack the poster. I’ve seen a few comments that say the diary was crap. That’s allowed. I haven’t seen anything that I consider an attack against the poster himself.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 23, 2008 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I got a copy of the power rankings last week g,

you’ve gone down a few spots since fire season started-but I still have faith in you.

"Camelot sure fell apart, didn't it?"-Steve McCatty

by 5Aces on Jul 24, 2008 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sure, definitely

I didn’t go hunting through the AN archives for evidence of disdainful behavior on your part or anything – I just remembered that particular comment, and was freshly amused, given your original post here and the obvious contrast.

The “drip with dismissive disdain” comment was absolutely hyperbole, intended to be read as such, and honestly I used it mainly because I kind of liked its alliterative aspect.

I wish you would post more, actually … lots of new traffic here on AN, and while, you know, the more the merrier, sometimes I think the astute posters (of which you are clearly one) get drowned out a bit.

by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 11:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"comfort the afflicted, afflict the comfortable"

I’d make that my sigline before I’d dismiss it as a “cheesy aphorism.” I know I’d probably never be able to set foot into Istanbul if I did (see current one), but, well, the consequences there would be perefctly consistent with the aphorism I’m defending—I’d be a comfortable American being afflicted by a drowning in the Bosphorus (which would be inevitable given my swimming skills…in honor of Batman, I’ll invoke a line from Christian Blae’s best movie, The Machinist, as a defense for why I struggle so: “if you were any thinner, you wouldn’t exist.” And yes, believe it or not, that line was actually said to Bale’s character in that movie, not by him…he lost something like 80 lbs. to fill that role. Can’t knock the effectiveness of the coffee and apples diet.)Anyway, when all this comes to pass, my martyrdom for the saying, that is…hero to RLangford, pariah to 74mk. But you wouldn’t be able to knock me on the grounds of hypocrisy, now, would you?

"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.

RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.

by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 12:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And no it's not like saying we all have bellybuttons

What I’m saying is that your passive-aggressive acidity isn’t hidden very well behind cheesy aphorisms.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

heh

I now see my post was misguided. Hard to follow conversations after a certain amount of replies and interruptions by people like me. Goodbye, chronological order

"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.

RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.

by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"those whose insights might be a little too simplistic"

Such as, say, day-game-thread trolls who don’t understand Cust’s value and engage in relentless we’re-gonna-die negativity?

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You mean we're not going to die?

Huzzah!

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

can one engage in negativity?

People engage in actions. Negativity is a word used to describe a prevailing emotional state, or climate/atmosphere I suppose if we’re talking about a collective attitude as opposed to a personal one. Anyway, substitute, say, “self-pity” for “negativity” and it seems pretty clear that the answer to the question I asked in the title of the post is no.

And no, LeopoldBloom, I wasn’t an English major. I’m just trying to afflict the comfortable, heh.

"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.

RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.

by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 1:09 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What the hell are you talking about

I was trying to defend a poster many of you were all smugly dismissing.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Try reading what you wrote again

“I don’t like how some of the people here take posters to task. Gasbags!”

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

by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Take NEW or NAIVE posters to task

Do you get it now? I was asking “Why would anybody new ever post here?” That was the title of the post. I was saying that we’re a little harsh on fanposts like the one at the top. And, yeah, in the process it meant I was criticizing the people being harsh.

And in your mind, you get excited and think it’s an insight to point out that calling harsh people harsh in a harsh way is ironic or hypocritical.

And that was an insight to get excited about in 5th grade maybe, but now it’s something you should have moved beyond.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Except for it being the truth

You can easily make your own points without resorting to the same type of stuff you’re complaining about others doing, and I don’t need you telling me what should or shouldn’t be moved past by now just because you don’t like the response YOU’RE getting.

As it is, it seems this place has been getting a lot of people lately who make new accounts just to post stupid crap, and some people here are getting tired of it. I don’t think it’s out of line to be annoyed with stuff like that.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

True enough about the new posters

But I felt like goldzone took some time and had some real pride in what he had posted, which wasn’t all that bad. And then when I saw the, for me, predictable scorn directed his way, I reacted. You’d say overreacted. Fair enough. I probably did overreact a little. But still, instead of my hypocrisy, isn’t the larger problem here that there is a group of insiders that, as revealed in this thread, feel entitled to be dismissive and condescending when the better path would be to engage the writer in a conversation (which, I know, I should have done as well).

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks RLangford!

I really am surprised a simple post about player reviews would be trashed like it was. My reference to Moneyball was probably not appropriate to be coupled with a review of current players on the roster. I should’nt have tied it together, even though some of the players being reviewed are “moneyballers”. The anger in A’s fans right now is at an all-time high!

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

you seemed pretty angry

with all those exclamation points…it seemed like a rant at times almost. but yeah, i agree…i don’t see the “moneyball” connection with every single player listed

"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 Jul 24, 2008 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You haven't read many of his posts, have you

I think it’s safer to assume that he is speaking really, really mildly when he DOESN’T use an exclamation point, and normally when he does.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

well actually, i confess

that i stopped reading this one after about ten exclamation points to end a sentence in a row

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Anger displacement on AN

We all need some group therapy instead of taking out on others. It’s gonna be ok guys/girls… I BLAME BB for this….haha jk

by rightbackin on Jul 24, 2008 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

God, that second paragraph is so true

Look. It’s not that I, salb, Flashfire, etc etc are trying to scare away newbies. Far from it. If someone shows up and says “hi, I’m new around here but I like the A’s, what’s this site about” I (and most others) will try to be as helpful and polite as possible.

What I (and I gather others) find irksome is people who sign up and immediately launch into some incoherent, borderline illiterate rant about something or other—a phenomenon which has gotten totally out of control in the last few weeks or so (basically starting with the Harden trade). It’s the blog equivalent of just randomly starting to yell about some minor issue on a street corner. Illegal, no—impolite, annoying, worthy of being smacked down, yes.

Frankly, I think a lot of people’s patience is getting worn really thin—and posts like this one, which could really use a copy editor and expresses a position against the mainstream to some extent, but is at least long enough and contains enough content to be a legitimate FP, get caught in the backlash.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

A good example being that briandouglas guy...

...who came in the other day talking about “magic Beane” this, “drinking Kool-Aid” that, then he went into us being thin-skinned and compared himself to Bush at an ACLU rally.

Er, what?

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

by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

there you go passing judgment again.

I don’t ever remember voting for you to be a moderator. You may not be trying to scare away newbies, after all, how could you even see them from atop your soapbox? You are the hall monitor in jr. high.

The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis

by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

dude

you are missing the point.

all the “why aren’t we going for it this year” and “let’s trade for a hitter” and “fire beane” posts are getting SO OLD. most of them are not well-thought out, and frankly, i feel like 75% or more are from trolls (bluemoon, vegasgm, etc.).

that’s what paul is saying. it gets annoying to read a heart-on-sleeve fanpost every day, when it’s obvious to many that the move was for the better.

"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 Jul 24, 2008 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

and by

“a” heart-on-sleeve post, i mean about 129415795305 of them.

zonis, thanks again for your thread.

"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 Jul 24, 2008 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

OK

What part of “I do not give a s**t about your opinion” have you not grasped?

You can stop replying to my posts with this crap whenever you feel like it.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:35 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting bit in his profile

“I am in favor of wood bats in the majors and aluminium bats to knock Paul Thomas off of his high horse.”

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm glad you noted that

Normally I am not in favor of attempting to get people banned, but I will cheerfully do so for someone whose sole purpose on the site is to attack and denigrate me.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Relax Paul.

Your the one who got to him. Besides, it’s funny. It’s quite honorable to make someone’s profile in such a manner. At least according to me….but I’m sort of twisted.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Somehow,

I get the feeling Nico and company are going to start their morning off with a ball busting laugh. I hope he’s not drinking coffee when he reads the flag or you might end up owing him a monitor. There are worse ways to wake up.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 2:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not the sole purpose by any means

Just like you find people so irksome for their opinions, and make sure to belittle said persons, I find it irksome that you feel the need to judge people and denigrate them behind your keyboard. So now I can’t feel irksome? Typical. Look back a little bit PT. You are the only person in over four years that has literally made me want to stop reading a site that has become my morning coffee. Don’t flatter yourself, I have no purpose other than to read about the A’s from A’s fans. Problem is I can’t seem to read single posts without having YOU attack somebody and I am certain I am not the only one! Is Stanford really so boring that you have to act as if you created this site? Simply put, this site was infinitely more enjoyable before you came along / started posting or whatever.

The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis

by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 5:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

7 out of your last 10 comments

have been personal attacks on me.

Your sole purpose here is to attack me. That is undeniable fact. You have apparently decided to kamikaze your account against me in the hopes that both of us will be banned. So be it, but I will not bite on that.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I totally agree with the last sentence

"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.

RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.

by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

My apologies.

The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis

by norcalfan on Jul 25, 2008 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay.

That’s freaking funny! PT, apparently there’s some concern about shattering wooden bats again. How bout it?

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That is fucking hilarious

Come on, lighten up. The criticism is uncalled for, definitely so above where PaulThomas is self-effacing, honest, and apologetic—and then gets inexplicably bashed by norcalfan—but if that’s in his profile, he’s at least got his sense of humor to redeem him.

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:56 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

All this bitching is making me nostalgic

For the good old AN days when everyone would gang up on one person and ride them mercilessly until they left.

Ah…..teamwork

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

uh. wow.

Duly noted (and added to).

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Calling My Post Stupid Crap Is A Little Too Much!

Are you disagreeing with my player reviews? If you are that’s great,but another person’s opinion that differs from yours is not “stupid crap”. It reminds me of the late George Carlin’s line… “Move your crap over, so I can put my stuff down”.

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 12:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I didn't call your post "stupid crap."

I said there have been a lot of new people creating accounts to post stupid crap.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 1:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

vegasgm, bluemoon...etc

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:33 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I can dig a lot of your player reviews

but to use the small sample size of this season as the crux of your argument that Moneyball has failed, has justifiably ruffled some feathers. The back of the AN shirt even says, “In Billy We Trust.”

At the start of the season, many of us here did not expect much because we believed this would be a true rebuilding year. Because of that, I’ve thought it was unfair to Billy and the A’s brass to criticize so much when the A’s have been playing surprisingly good baseball for the limited cast of characters we are able to field. Shouldn’t that be indicative of how well the future A’s can play and not a damning of a whole team’s management policy?

Would it be better to trot out the A’s of the 90’s to play games for the team? Of course not.

People unduly crucify Beane for trading away great A’s talent just to stay fairly good in the future. The one thing you can say about the A’s is that you can see the moves the club makes and know they are being played with confidence. In full rebuilding more, most of us are confident that this will pay off in the close future and not far off into some unknown future decades from now.

So far, I’ve enjoyed how moneyball works because it is different and it has given us something different than the other team’s in the league. It is the sense that when the chips are down, the A’s are really just getting ready to strike hard when the timing is right.

Green Hulk Fists

by oaklandSMASH on Jul 24, 2008 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great that you could join in

after this portion of the thread had pretty much been resolved amicably.

Look, what are you saying exactly, that it wasn’t okay for me to say what I did? Did you bother to read what some of the other posters—not trolls, not serial diarists, just fans not blessed with your education and erudition—had to say? Don’t you think it is reasonable to defend the original diarist? Isn’t the issue I brought up a bit bigger than you tsk-tsking me about my name-calling?

I’m sorry you’re bothered by the phrase “self-inflated, self-important, imperious gasbags,” but I thought it needed to be said.

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

and it was the escalation from that name-calling ...

... that resulted in the situation that needed to be resolved.

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You flagged me for it?

Honestly, I could look it up, but I don’t even want to know what that means. You sound like the Reese Witherspoon character in Election, and with about as much credibility.

It’s great when you try to defend one of the have nots, and speak out a little to harshly against the haves, one of those haves makes sure to put you in your place.

What I’d like to say to you to end this I can’t because you’ll “flag” me again or something, so I’ll just give you the reference—you’ll know it. It’s what Ricky Roma says to the office manager Williamson at the end of Mamet’s Glengarry Glen Ross.

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Election

I hated that fucking movie

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:48 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This thread is getting good

I mention a movie and an f-bomb is dropped.

The director Alexander Payne’s barely hidden scorn for most of humanity bothers me. Didn’t really like About Schmidt, didn’t really like Sideways, but liked Election a lot.

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

agree with you 100% on Payne and the particulars

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It is a potential cause of receiving a "strike"

which, if you get three of them, results in getting banned from the site. I am somewhat familiar with this procedure, as my activity on the site was notably… um, more restrained (some would say “more boring”) for four months or so earlier this year when I had two of them.

Incidentally, mods, I just changed my email account to one I will probably be reading more regularly. So, uh, any additional strikes should go to the new one.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:16 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

uh, dude ...

Look, I like you. And you made a good argument. But including personal insults in the argument ain’t cool. And it’s very specifically against the rules of the site. If you feel that’s too heavy the Hand of the Man harshing your mellow, that’s too bad.

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i mean that really got out of hand

yeah, brick killed a guy

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:57 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I didn't think it was too bad...

...and the comment in 74mk’s link is pretty funny.

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 24, 2008 2:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I remember a night you went off in the same way

It was the crushing loss in Anaheim to the Angels about 3-4 weeks ago, when Geren gave Embree the 8th and GA took him deep. The site went ballistic and you said some things similar to my comment.

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 3:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is turning into one of those fights

I have w/ my girlfriend where I try and use the “I didn’t call you a bitch….I said you were acting bitchy”

God, I love AN fights.

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 1:22 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

True enough

But come on can’t you see we resolved it—and the make-up sex was great.

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, my fights don't usually end that way unfortunately

NIce resolution, bitches!!!

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 1:28 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Excessive focus on OBP

Yes, hallelujah!!

I think this is one of the reasons why we failed in the post season every year when we got there this decade.

We see better pitching in the post season and with that less walking and more outs due to lack of aggressiveness when it was warranted.

Same thing is going on now even though the hitters are sub par for the most part. They are so worried about getting on base and trying to drive the SP out of the game by way of pitch count instead of what the Angels (for example) do and that is get a pitch to hit and take advantage. It’s fine to get a lead off walk but not fine when they get left on base because we have little power to wait for the blast. You get a pitch to hit and hopefully you drive the runner in. I noticed Crosby was hitting .205 with the bases loaded for his career which is below his already career batting average.

There are others on the team like this and there have been many in the past.

IMO (and I emphasize my opinion), the organization has drilled this OBP thing so much into the players that they become almost trance like at the plate in key situations and fail to take advantage of the obligatory meatball that usually is thrown once every at bat the pitcher sees.

I look at stats but don’t spend as much time as some of the others here who are quite knowledgeable in this area but I have seen enough to feel that Beane needs to change tactics a little in this area.

It would work fine with three 15,000,000 per year sluggers who would actually drive some of the walks in.

by Trainman on Jul 23, 2008 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Everyone's hitting gets worse in the postseason

The Angels scored like 4 runs in three games last year, or something. They’ve had their own postseason follies in the post-2002 era.

The fact is, there’s no magic formula—the only way you can even slightly “beat the odds” is to have an elite top of your rotation, and both the 2001-2003 A’s and the 2004-2007 Angels have had that and lost anyway. The real way to win is to get there a lot and hope for the best.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with that

You do need luck. Look at St. Louis a few years ago. Detroit was rusty from all the days off and St. Louis was on a roll.

I am excited about the pitching prospects we have and with Sweeney and Carlos in the OF we have 2 very good defenders to help the pitching.

I find myself checking the minors more now so I can see how all our youngsters are progressing.

I know the more baserunners the better chance of scoring but I just wish we could be more aggressive in those situations even with the hitters we have now.

by Trainman on Jul 23, 2008 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"Hoping for the best"

I think there’s more to it than that. Though it might not have anything to do with aggresiveness, but rather more with preparation of momentum or metality or time of between series—matters not particularly discernible or quantifiable.

The reason I say this is that I felt both the ‘88 and ‘90 A’s teams under LaRussa were just woefully lifeless in both of the World Series they played. And, yes, I realize that were talking about one Gibson home run, one dominant pitcher, and Mickey Hatcher in ‘88. And I know we’re talking about another dominant pitcher, a ball on the foul line, and Billy Hatcher in ‘90. But it did seem like something collectively was just dead in those teams.

I’ve just never quite trusted the crapshoot theory as the sole answer to post-season.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Christ, I really need to preview before I post

“preparation or momentum or mentality”; “we’re”

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Someone recently calculated

that it would take a best-of-269 series to conclusively (95% likelihood) determine the better team between two teams, one of which wins 55% of the time (a large edge in baseball terms).

Best of two hundred and sixty nine.

It’s a crapshoot.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, someone calculated that

What I’m asking is that if we actually played the series would it turn out that way? Or are there other factors that such calculations don’t take into account.

In the main, I agree with you. But I wonder if we’re too quick to dismiss some of the human element that, in the extreme, many players and analysts attribute far too much to, but that still may play a part.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The crapshoot theory doesn't explain the large number of lopsided series

3-0, 4-0, 4-1 between relatively evenly matched teams. These apparently come up a lot more than random chance would predict. The lack of explanation for this phenomenon leads people to guess the reason—momentum, guts, clutchiness…

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Do they?

Among 2 evenly matched teams, 1 in 8 series should end in a 4-0 sweep.

1 in 4 should end 4-1. 1 in 4 5-game series should be sweeps.

That seems pretty consistent with reality to me. And since teams aren’t actually evenly matched, there should actually even be a few more sweeps than the above would suggest.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The 2005 White Sox won 3-0, 4-1, and 4-0

And I’m not convinced they were better than any of the three teams they beat. Despite some of those pitching performances, I don’t know if they even actually had the best pitching in all 3 of those series.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:55 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i have a stathead-like friend

who doesn’t believe in hot streaks. this is a great example of one.

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:56 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Of course there are hot streaks

What doesn’t exist is one pitcher’s performance “carrying over” to another’s. Also, streaks aren’t a predictor of future performance. I could go 10 for 10, that doesn’t make me any more likely to get a hit in my next at bat.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, of course, the WS, who had the best record in MLB

in 2005, and who rolled through the playoffs, were simply lucky.

When they’re good, it’s because they are lucky. When they are crappy, it’s because they put together a roster that was easily predictable as being crappy.

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Their pythag record was +8

They had 3 different closers, a piece of crap leadoff hitter, and career years from no fewer than 7 pitchers. They also had FOUR COMPLETE GAMES IN A ROW in the ALCS. That just doesn’t happen.

They were a decent team that was like 5000 times luckier than this year’s Angels team.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There is a "magic formula".

And you already nailed it. Get there as often as you can. Anything can happen after that.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I prefer to mark their name....

if they insult me. Then I’ll stalk their sorry ass at the coli and add them to a long list of other statistics. And put that shit out before the cops show up.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I prefer to

crush their heads.

by elhefe on Jul 24, 2008 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sorry, but

1. I’m kind of grumpy, and
2. a lot of that is nonsense

I’m fairly certain it wasn’t to create a hierarchy of ideas. IMO and experience, there is no need to rate ideas or thoughts or (especially) feelings.

So everything is relative? All opinions are magically imbued with equal value the moment they slip loose from our tongues or keyboards?

Look, I’m sure Goldzone is a great guy. He probably ladles soup at a homeless shelter after work, adopts stray puppies, conserves energy, stays faithful to his spouse, and runs four or five cub scout dens. Nevertheless, the moment the AN community loses it’s willingness to aggressively differentiate between his opinions and, say devo’s or sal’s … well, that’s precisely the moment AN becomes utterly uninteresting to me. I’m all for maintaining a dignified, respectful tone, but I think it is sophistry in the extreme to suggest that it’s not at all useful (or welcome) to knock down ill-informed or obtuse assertions. The best threads are the ones boiling with disagreement, where empty notions are discarded and sharp insights rewarded, such that what emerges for the reader is a smart, clear elucidation of all sides of the issue at hand.

Further, I consider it a grand gesture of condescension to pat people on the head and tell them that, gosh darnit, their opinions are just the same as all the others when that is plainly not the case. When you author a fanpost, you are inviting commentary. You are asking people to agree, disagree, argue, criticize, etc. If you prefer to remain innocuous, then by all means cede the center-of-attention high and restrict yourself to offering comments in existing threads.

And we got some people who are really "into" showing off how genuinely smart they are …

... I’m the other kind.

Well, sure. I guess.

Certainly, you maintain a light tone. But enough with the “look at me, I’m so modest” schtick. You are absolutely invested in making sure everyone knows how smart (culturally savvy, well-read, politically tuned-in, etc.) you are; you accomplish this differently than the arguers (via reference dropping, mostly), but you do it, and often. I’m not criticizing that, per se, and in fact I should stress that you’re no different than me or anyone else in this respect. However, your attempt to propound personal growth life lessons by way of back door self-aggrandizement is, well, unconvincing.

by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Ouch

Especially the last paragraph. You’re pretty good at evisceration, aren’t you. Damn funny post, though. You must have been proud as hell of his one.

Still, I think you’re creating a false dilemma. The choice shouldn’t be between patting people on the head or drilling them. There’s a whole range of other possibilities. But you know that.

I’d write more, show off what I know, counsel compassion, and beyond; but I don’t want to put myself out their with Leopold Bloom, the graduate student in English who made the mistake of revealing just enough of himself that someone as cool and self-aware as you could come along and hack him up.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh know, misspelled "there"

There’s likely plenty to deconstruct about that. Or even in this comment on that. Go to town, 74mk.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, fair enough.

Last paragraph was probably unnecessary.

It just aggravates me that posters such as PT get casually stained with this “show off” scarlet letter, while others who “show off” just as much get a pass because they do it more subtly (or not even subtly, just differently). And, actually, the “show offiness” doesn’t bother me at all (it’s not as though I don’t do it) – only the double standard.

If I appeared to set up that false dilemma, then I articulated my point poorly. My objection was/is to the rejection of all disagreement (eg “no need to rate ideas or thoughts”). As I said in the post, I heartily endorse a dignified tone, though I sometimes (perhaps often) fall short of that ideal .

by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay, you've hooked me

There’s an immense difference between saying “I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance,” and saying “I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance and I’m significantly better at it than you. Here, let me tell you why.”

There’s no such thing as better or worse arguments, just some are more refined and more difficult to attack. Simply because you’re more skilled at constructing (and that is the exact right word) arguments than another does not mean your point is more valid or intelligent. It just means you’re more skilled at defending and attacking. Those words are not mistakes. That’s the type of interaction you’re proposing to undertake here. And I’m not interested in any of that.

That said, there are plenty of people who I respect who feel that’s the only method by which we come to truth. I think it can be a good tool in furthering thought, but I also think it can be used in a way that proves nothing, other than who’s really good at verbal sparring.

And you’ve fallen short here of being civil. Between this post and the one above, you’ve succeeded in really hurting my feelings. So, missino accomplished there, Sparky. Good job.

Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox

by Leopold Bloom on Jul 24, 2008 7:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is going to be really long-winded
Between this post and the one above, you’ve succeeded in really hurting my feelings.

I am genuinely sorry to have hurt your feelings, but I’m somewhat confused: What in the post directly above was hurtful?

I expressed contrition for my overzealous conclusion to the prior post, and took pains to (again) reiterate that I don’t at all consider the behavior I described to be problematic. And while I’d agree that the final sentence of my original post was unnecessarily caustic, I’m not sure what makes the rest of it so terrible.

So while I am happy to apologize (mea culpa), I think you are perhaps plumbing depths of pain not really in proportion to the offense.

As to this:

There’s an immense difference between saying "I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance," and saying "I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance and I’m significantly better at it than you. Here, let me tell you why."

Sure. But a) that’s a different formulation than what you articulated above, and b) I think you overstate the distinction. My point is that the cliquism and exclusivity that result from the former are not much different in practice than the latter, and in fact there is a way of embodying the former that manifestly implies the latter, and – in my view – is every bit the “look at me” spectacle.

Again, to avoid misperception: I think all of that is just fine, and I don’t exempt myself from any of it. I simply think your distinction can be taken too far, and is often used (not by you, necessarily) to mendaciously conflate smart, well-informed, effectively argued perspectives with assholishness in order to evade, you know, the argument itself.

As to the rest of it:

I think you are saying that all opinions are equally correct/valid/worthwhile, that they are only differentiated out there in the universe of blog discourse and pub discussion by virtue of each person’s ability to articulate them. Therefore debate amounts to not much more than a empty rhetorical fencing match.

I don’t really know what to say about that. I really, really (really!) disagree.

You seem to be (consciously or not) misconstruing my original point, which addressed the relative value of opinions, not artful sentence construction or debate agility. Some contributors to this site know (a lot) more about baseball than others. Their opinions carry more weight, because they’ve thought them through, and are able to call upon a large reservoir of knowledge and context to support their arguments. As I said above, I’ve no doubt Goldzone is a good guy, and I endorse his right to submit this fanpost. But I’m not going to pretend his opinions are equivalent to andeux’s or PT’s or [pick your poster], because that would be silly, and quite obviously false. They’re not. No amount of verbal parrying acumen is going to make up for that. And you know, it’s not the end of the world! I sure as hell don’t know half as much about baseball as 40-50 regular AN posters. But I also try to make a point of reserving my stridency for areas where I feel I’m on solid ground.

The larger point concerning tone is certainly valid, and one I’ve expressed many times, but I think it is critical to avoid framing vigorous disagreement and respectfulness as mutually exclusive. We should be careful not to suggest that we can only respect each other by not ever telling anyone that they’re wrong.

I understand that a lot of people come here for game thread repartee, picture post reverie, and casual chats in the DLD, and I think that’s great. Please don’t misunderstand: I enjoy that stuff as well. However, AN would become instantly boring if no arguments ever broke out about anything. I don’t know about you, but I learn a lot when astute posters spar about prospects, stats, roster construction, game decisions, and so on. Those threads vet perspectives for me, as a comparatively un-schooled reader, such that (again, repeating myself from above) I gain a better understanding of the issue at hand. And I worry that if AN were to adopt your views regarding opinions and argumentation, much of what I really value about the site would be lost.

by 74mk on Jul 24, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I suppose the most "hurtful" aspects of it

have a lot more to do with you framing an argument with a complete misrepresentation of what I said, in particular your “fun” little misuse of ellipsis:

And we got some people who are really “into” showing off how genuinely smart they are …
... I’m the other kind.

There’s a WHOLE lot between point A and point B, and I wasn’t even ATTEMPTING to say I was not like that. I was saying that some people learn from constant critique and I was not one of them. And you pulled that shit, and you’re smart enough to be fully aware that you pulled that shit. And you did it against someone who has repeatedly told you, you, that he was not interested in engaging with you in that manner. You’ve pulled the equivalent of attacking the Swiss. Very brave. Mea culpa, indeed.

So, to recap, you’ve continued to try to engage me in argumentation with you when I’ve repeatedly told you that I have no interest in that, to the point where I feel (re-)traumatized. You’ve completely misrepresented me to a community I feel very significant connection to in order to make your point that I, too, like for other people to know how smart I am and that somehow makes my disdain for argumentation invalid, and now you’ve essentially made fun of me for having basic human emotions. Again, well done.

Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox

by Leopold Bloom on Jul 24, 2008 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Traumatized?

I know I traffic in hyperbole as much as anyone, but give me a break. Now you are just being ridiculous.

1. You really should refrain from forwarding opinions altogether if you are going to resort to the “I’m mortified that you dared use sarcasm to contest my argument” silliness.

2. Re: The ellipses. I don’t think they obscure either your point or mine, nor were they employed with that effect in mind.

3. I actually took quite a bit of time in an attempt to explain my perspective as thoroughly and reasonably as I could, so as to avoid the obfuscation you accuse me of fomenting. It aggravates the shit out of me that you skipped over all of that to persist in this immature self-victimization.

4. This is how it always goes:

Person A: “I think X.”

Person B: “X doesn’t make sense. You are wrong.”

Person A: “Stop criticizing me! Everyone has an opinion! Why can’t I express mine? I’m hurt. You’re mean.”

5. It gets even more rich when in the course of expressing X (which doesn’t really add up), Person A makes all sorts of oblique inferences that sure could be construed as criticisms (maybe even of real, flesh and blood people!), then, because he relied on vagueness and inference rather than assertion, feels not at all compelled to defend his position (which, you know, no one demanded he advance in the first place), and becomes righteous with hurt and suffering at the hands of Person B, who is, after all, an aggressive meanie.

6. Re: Misrepresenting you to the community. You take yourself too seriously. You make 50+ comments a day here (more, lately), and I very much doubt this single interaction (which is boring the crap out of everyone right now) will have even the slightest impact on the community’s assessment of your character, especially if my “misrepresentation” is so plain to see.

7. You’re a smart guy, but you do something that drives me bonkers: You are forever offering opinions (that is, arguing a point), then, when confronted with disagreement, you retreat behind the “I don’t really believe in arguing, it’s all the same” canard. You can’t have it both ways. It’s bs.

8. Okay, so #7 is basically #4. And #1. I don’t care. Worth repeating.

by 74mk on Jul 24, 2008 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

doesn't take much to bore the crap out of me

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You're absolutely right

I’m taking myself entirely too seriously. And I apologize for getting my feelings hurt.

Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox

by Leopold Bloom on Jul 24, 2008 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Generally speaking

And not with respect to you and PT, a person who spends a lot of time researching and developing and laying out sound arguments for their opinion likely will have a more valid opinion than somebody who gets frustrated and makes silly claims and doesn’t do research and misidentifies terms and whatnot. Even if the ultimate point the latter makes is more correct than the former, that person will be less likely to be taken seriously.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2008 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I Do Need To Spend More Time Assisting The Homeless

Good idea 74mk. Now that the A’s are unofficially out of it, I think I will devote more time to charitable causes. I promise to conserve energy, adopt stray puppies and run four or five cub scout dens. The faithful part to my spouse has already been adopted. I am inviting commentary when I author a fanpost and can take all that is dished out! Good or bad. I just think that some folks spend too much time analyzing posts that are many times created when little or no time is available. Should we be reading and re-reading our posts to the point where our own opinions become muddled? Perhaps, but then what is the point?

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wait a sec

The A’s are almost homeless and the offense bordering on destitute… does that mean you’re going to devote MORE time to them and AN?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 12:42 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Absolutely Grover!

I have turned over a new leaf! And I’ve seen the light! Also, your comment about the title of my post was right on the money. It seems I was making a poor attempt at coupling player reviews with some questions about Moneyball. I will make a better effort at Headline writing on my next post. If I survive this one! Ha! However I think PT went a little far with the incoherant and illiterate comment. He didn’t seem to have trouble reading it and then giving me his customary beatdown.

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 12:50 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Gaads...if you've turned over the same

leaf twice….where does that leave you?

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 12:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I like the play on words!

Gaads! ( I like that and have’nt used it in years, but would like to see it make a comeback).

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 1:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Spell my name properly

or I’ll make you wish it was PT beating you senseless. Lower case “g” unless you’re using my name at the start of a freakin’ sentence you newbie scum!

(Exhales)

All better now.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Say, why are you even here?

Shouldn’t you be out playing with matches or something this time of year?

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:09 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Waiting for better winds

Carries the fire better… which leads to more overtime.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I can provide some "better winds" if you need 'em

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 1:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ah, the proverbial...

Santa Ana cash cow. Burn Disney up again, I really enjoyed the discount last year.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I took the family to Knotts Berry Farm

Cost me about $12 to get in.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:34 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I made the rounds at Disney

and Knotts both. Less than a hundred for both parks with three kids. Not bad at all. I can only hope all the frigging arsonists aren’t locked up.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Didn't have time for both

My wife had to hit the outlet stores before going home.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I just threw up a little.

I would rather walk around Disney for another sixteen hours than suffer through outlet shopping with my wife.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wow! G...err, grover

Baptized by fire! So you were playing with matches.

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 1:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If I didn't make it sufficiently clear

this fanpost was not what I was referring to when I used that phrase.

I have my stylistic complaints, but it’s nothing compared to “Beened again” or some of the other recent epistolary marvels.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

worst fanpost ever

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:58 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

no don't

you’ll wish you didn’t

"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 Jul 24, 2008 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Tried to stay out of all this
I just think that some folks spend too much time analyzing posts that are many times created when little or no time is available.

This is what frustrates me. I wish people wouldn’t post FanPosts when they don’t have enough time to make them their best effort.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Seriously

if a fanpost takes less than 5 minutes, there’s a problem. The quality of posts here is (was?) pretty high, so people could try to put in time and match other people’s effort.

by ohmangoAs on Jul 24, 2008 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"back door self-aggrandizement"?

Chris, what an asshole!

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:55 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd like to hear Chris's opinion on this

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Jul 24, 2008 1:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Way to take a shot out of left field...!

"If you lived in the now, you'd be home by now."

by McFood on Jul 24, 2008 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

To be honest

I created the site as a place for all A’s fans to congregate and talk about the team. Naturally there are going to disagreements, even amongst the green and gold faithful, but my aim was to give everyone a voice. And I think that Goldzone is right in expressing his/her views just as others have a right to disagree. My only feeling is that it needs to be respectful. That’s the main thing.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Jul 24, 2008 1:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Original AN feels like 500 yrs ago....

When was that. ‘04?

I'll try not to swear.

by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm with you on that...

"All managers are losers, they are the most expendable pieces of furniture on the face of the Earth."- Ted Williams

by Gaijin_Suketto on Jul 24, 2008 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Blez, Much appreciated!

I’m a “his” by the way and am glad I have Thursday off so I can keep my head above the water here. Grover made a good point about my “moneyball” reference, so I gave him his props, but I should’nt have turned my back. Ha! Good dialogue though and when you post you need to accept what comes from it. I came in throwing elbows so if I get a bruise back so be it.

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

good attitude

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not worth it.

You may be right.

Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox

by Leopold Bloom on Jul 24, 2008 6:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree 100%

This site is about the A’s and us, the A’s fans.

We are family…..

"First Zito and now DJ? The Giants are like A's landfil." - a paraphrase of Since72.
Also, Todd Linden has a .231 lifetime average and a 66 career OPS+, chill Linden fans.

by Athletics fan and runner on Jul 23, 2008 9:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

lyrics

isn’t the lyric “all my brothers, sisters, and me.” ?

showing my age… recalling 70’s tunes.

by rollierollieOxenfree on Jul 25, 2008 4:35 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Theme song of the 1979 Pirates

linky

"There's m'fn sprinklers on the m'fn infield!'" - Ice Cream (AN), 6/13/08

by doctorK on Jul 25, 2008 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've been trying to escape my family my whole life

And now I find out I have two of them. Damn.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Let me tell you what Blez had in mind when he started AN

This is a bar.

Folks come in to kick back and talk about the A’s. Like any good neighborhood bar you have your regulars and if you pay attention to the drunken ramblings you discover that certain themes begin to emerge. And there are some topics that trigger automatic responses.

Getting the concepts behind Moneyball correct is one of those topics. Like it or not, Goldzone messed up when he attatched the term Moneyball to his roster evaluation. Now I’m not dismissing his review of certain players but I am struggling to see the connection between his evaluation and the title of his post.

You can walk into AN and challenge the establishment but you better have your crap stowed away real tight, ‘cause if you don’t, you’re gonna get smacked. I don’t care of you’re a newbie or a vet who has been around since there was a dirt floor… if you’re going to throw down a gauntlet you better be ready for a fight. Goldzone came in and said “I told you so!” and his stuff wasn’t as tight as it could have been so he got some loving attention. I’ve been on AN longer then most and I’ve thrown out stuff that wasn’t as strong as it should have been and I’ve been hammered for it by people I consider friends/allies. So if I don’t get a lot of slack, neither does a newbie like Goldzone.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 23, 2008 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

I don't drink

Which makes me very little fun at bars.

Oh, I see. This comparison works quite well.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:58 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

/self-roast

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:58 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I feel I may have been ejected

if this discussion were held in a bar. I need to stop drinking!

Save the thesaurus for when you are in front of the judge. When speaking of the A's, speak with your heart on...................your sleeve!

by norcalfan on Jul 25, 2008 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I kind of know what your talking about as a new member here

Its almost like why even bother anymore. I wasn’t a good student and grew up poor as hell, Stanford was never in my future. Sooo fuckin what? I have to be a college grad or some white collar guy to post here? I know I cant spell or write well, but I still love the A’s. I thought this sight was for die hard A’s fan’s? Everytime I write a comment here I have to check it three times so I dont feel like a total dumbass. I thought this was a place for opinions and our thoughts on the Team, Players and Org.? So what If think Barton or some other player sucks? Does this make me less of an A’s fan? I dont like how a few of them have played a GAME thus far, its not like I called their Mother whores, I just dont think they are very good at playing the game of Baseball to date. Hey I think this site has alot to offer a die hard A’s fan so maybe its best for guys like me to just lurk, read the Monday Minor Musings and keep my comments to myself.

by asfaninpismobeach on Jul 23, 2008 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Don't worry about it.

So what if your writing standards aren’t up to college level. It’s not that big of a deal, especially if you view the criticism with an eye towards improving your writing style. A lot of posters here have furthered my education….and it didn’t cost me a cent. Maybe a little pride, but that’s always in supply. Besides, I’ll nail the dirty bastards one of these days.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 11:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

the fact that you take the time to doublecheck things

is a great quality, and one that many need to learn to do as well. you’ve won more than half the battle right there

"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 Jul 24, 2008 1:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

I’ll take shots at vegasgm every day, but no one is expecting that every comment be NYT quality. The line on non-content whining for me is that if I actually can’t understand what someone is saying in a comment (which almost never happens) I’ll point it out. For a FanPost, the standard gets a lot higher because they can be edited (and I don’t think people – myself included – should make FanPosts unless they can spend the time to make them good).

I’ve made one FanPost I regret, and I’m glad people called me on it both because I was wrong and because it’ll keep me from reflexively posting another one without doing some basic poking around.

Comments, however, can/will/should be less well considered and executed.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

please identify those 10 by name

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:45 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

won't happen

but that would be interesting

"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 Jul 24, 2008 2:00 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, that would be really fun

Maybe there could be a threat with nominees. Wait, probably not.

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 2:08 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"thread" for "threat"

though the error makes sense if you change “could” to “would” and “with” to “from.”

by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 2:09 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I just thought you were talking about the Colbert Threat Down

“The AN Posters Who Are Ruining America!”

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Jul 24, 2008 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was going to rant about this

but I decided that the time would be better spent else where. Now if some of the writers of some of these fanpost would think of some way to follow suit. Just suffer through the bad year or two with the rest of us and get ready for the next long set of good years that are just around the bend.

by A'sfaninNC on Jul 23, 2008 7:03 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

+3 1/2

"All managers are losers, they are the most expendable pieces of furniture on the face of the Earth."- Ted Williams

by Gaijin_Suketto on Jul 24, 2008 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Where I do think the A's have failed

is in their first draft picks when they select a hitter. Granted, they can’t nab the Brauns and Longorias because they pick too low, but remember that every pick below the 1st round was available to everyone at some point. So a lot of future sluggers are available if you draft super-shrewdly, but recent decisions have gone to Landon Powell, Cliff Pennington, etc – where one really shrewd pick in the last few years might have made a huge difference.

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 Jul 23, 2008 7:04 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

A few guys.

I think Matt Holliday, Ryan Howard, and Albert Pujols have come in later rounds. Those are just off the top of my head.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 7:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

sure

but playing devil’s advocate, pujols wasn’t incredibly revered back then.

mike piazza if you wanna go back further a little bit too

"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 Jul 23, 2008 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thats the point.

There may be a little luck involved, but someone thought he had some talent. We need someone that can see that.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 7:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

no i was agreeing with you

"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 Jul 23, 2008 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It is true that the A's, on the whole, have not had a great draft record for hitters

I think it’s also important to emphasize that they haven’t had a BAD draft record. They’ve basically been average—probably a few more quality players than your typical team, but lacking in star power. Obviously they’ve done yeoman’s work drafting pitchers.

The fact is that when you’re losing talent at the rate the A’s do with their crummy payroll, and not getting high draft picks in losing seasons, you have to be a lot better than average to hold your talent level constant. What we saw during the period 2000-2006 was an A’s team that was able to stay competitive for 8 straight seasons by gradually draining the talent reserve in the farm system that was built up between 1993 and 1999. Eventually it ran dry because it wasn’t being replenished at the same rate.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Average???

The Moneyball Draft was 2002. From that draft onward, only four offensive players spent any real time in the major leagues (insofar as I know): Nick Swisher, Mark Teahen, Kurt Suzuki and Travis Buck. Swisher was projected to be a .260 hitter with some power, and that’s more or less what he’s been. Teahen has been below average, and the jury is still out on Buck, though it’s not looking good. So what we have here is one player, Kurt Suzuki, who not only panned out but went a couple extra steps.

That’s not average. it’s terrible.

by richwol1 on Jul 23, 2008 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think Justin Smoak's about to make it five.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Smoak

was drafted by the A’s but chose to go to college instead. The A’s get some credit for drafting him, but lose points because they couldn’t close the deal.

Also, if part of the problem is how the A’s organization develops hitters, Smoak’s name shouldn’t be included here.

by richwol1 on Jul 23, 2008 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not sure what you count as "any real time", but

Omar Quintanilla has played more games in the major leagues than Travis Buck has. Andre Ethier has played more game in the major leagues that Buck and Suzuki combined.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"Average"

When you say the A’s draft record since 2002 is terrible, not average, I wonder how you’re defining average. It seems like you’re comparing the A’s draft record against an ideal of what it ought to be, rather than against what other teams accomplish.

I really don’t know, so as an experiment I took a look at the 2002-2006 drafts of two other teams, which I plucked out of my head more or less at random. Counting all the offensive players who spent any real time in the major leagues, here’s what I find:

Chicago White Sox:
  • Jeremy Reed
  • Brian Anderson
  • Ryan Sweeney
  • Josh Fields
Baltimore Orioles:
  • Nick Markakis
  • Brandon Fahey

Seems to me that the White Sox did roughly as good as the A’s, and the Orioles did significantly worse.

Now that’s a very small sample size. Maybe by chance I happened to look at two teams that are also terrible. (I wasn’t deliberately cherry-picking, those are just two teams that happened to pop into my head, and I didn’t look at any others.) But it’s enough to make me wonder if we have an exaggerated idea of how good a draft ought to be. Anyone want to try it out for a few more teams?

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I did something like this a while back

I compared the A’s 1st round drafting ability vs the rest of baseball. The A’s had almost double the success rate the other 29 teams did in landing 1st round picks who produced in the Show.

The rules change after the 1st round (including the Supplimental Round) because signability comes into play. The ability to give over-slot bonuses has a huge impact in the later rounds and the A’s weren’t willing to play that game until this last draft. As such, the A’s steered away from high risk/high reward players in the 1st round because they didn’t feel that they could afford to miss. So going after the guys that projected to be nothing more then above-average allowed the A’s to achieve a high success rate in converting 1st round draft picks into big league regulars but it wasn’t condusive to developing stars.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 23, 2008 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I remember that post.

I was struck by the thought that if the A’s are drafting only, “signable” players, how is that affecting the overall quality of play through out the lower minors? It would seem that having a lower caliber of player to start with would allow mediocre talent to rocket through the system. Is it possible we are reaping those exact rewards today? Also, if that’s true, wouldn’t the problem be exacerbated if our top draft picks are stacked heavily to the pitching side?

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Pitchers vs hitters

One thing that was very noticeable as I was skimming through the 2002-2006 draft classes for half a dozen teams, is that all of them have seen more pitchers make it to the bigs than hitters.

I’ll let someone else speculate on why. Maybe pitchers develop sooner, or are typically drafted later. Maybe there’s just been a lousy class of hitters since 2002. Maybe all the hitters get grabbed by the NL. (I was looking only at AL teams.)

I don’t know why, but I definitely noticed that, out of players drafted since 2002, about three times as many pitchers as hitters have reached the bigs. And that’s true for all teams I looked at. The A’s are not an exception in this regard.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I suppose because the strain of pitching

is by far a younger persons game. It makes sense in a way, if you pitch you need only master the four pitches in your arsenal and then work towards preying on a given hitters weakness. In that regard you have help via your battery mate.

The hitters on the other hand have to master both the offensive and defensive aspects of the game.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe its partially because pitchers are injured more often? (I'm assuming here, haven't looked at data in a while)

And thus teams need cycle through pitchers more then they do position players?

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

by iamawesomer on Jul 24, 2008 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I strongly suspect that this is the reason

or most of the reason.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:04 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That, and teams use more pitchers than hitters regularly

8 position players see a ton of use. A backup catcher (on most teams) also gets a lot of playing time.

On the flip side, 5 pitchers get regular starts and most teams have at least 6 more in the pen.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have no problem with the emphasis being on pitching

Scouting and developing pitching is the strength of the organization. It was one of the things that swayed uber-prospect Inoa to sign with the A’s. And I’ve always believed that of you’ve got a bounty of young pitching you can trade for any hitter you want.

As for the hitting, I don’t consider a guy like Buck to be mediocre. Yeah, he’s had a rough 2008. But everything he did in 2006 and 2007 shouldn’t be discounted. Buck never had the ceiling of a star, but if he had continued to hit like he had prior to this season he would have been a solid outfielder and a guy you pencil into the line-up every day.

Once you quit drafting 1st rounders the numbers say you’ve got (at best) a 6% chance at landing a big league player via the draft. And how many of those success strories were guys with 1st round talent but carried bonus demands that dropped them down the draft? How many of those guys were draft and follows who would have been 1st rounders if they had re-entered the draft?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 23, 2008 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Everyone who wants to talk about the A's drafting record

needs to go back and read that diary, and also the linked philly stuff on SoSH.

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 12:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Link

You always remember your first time.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:14 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Crap, that didn't work

http://www.athleticsnation.com/2008/1/19/10578/2180

How the Hell do you convert links to text on new AN?!

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:16 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Highlight the text, then click the little link button.

Paste the link and you’re done.

I generally bemoan the profusion of Mr Sabermetric Sporks in the Scrabble ranks who don't know the meaning or usage of 50% of the words they use. -monkeyball

by JediLeroy on Jul 24, 2008 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Figures it was something easy

Thanks

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

A few more teams

Instead of pulling teams out of a hat, this time I made a point of looking at the teams we think of as our rivals. Once again, I’m listing all the offensive players I can find, drafted in 2002-2006, who have spent significant time in the majors:

Angels:
  • Howie Kendrick
  • Reggie Willits
  • Brandon Wood

Not bad, but I don’t think it’s noticeably better than our Swisher-Teahen-Ethier-Buck-Suzuki-Quintanilla. They may have an edge in quality but we’ve got them in quantity.

Yankees
  • None!

Seriously, I couldn’t find a single position player drafted by the Yankees since 2002 who has had even a cup of coffee in the bigs. (Plenty of pitchers, but no hitters.) Am I overlooking anyone?

Red Sox
  • Dustin Pedroia
  • David Murphy
  • Matt Murton
  • Brandon Moss
  • Jacoby Ellsbury

Yeah, OK. The Sox have us beat. That’s some pretty good drafting. Even so, I don’t think it’s so outrageously better as to render Oakland’s “terrible” in comparison.

Plus two more teams that (I thought) had a reputation for a good draft.

Minnesota:
  • None!

Surprised me. For some reason I thought they had a good farm.

Tampa Bay:
  • B.J. Upton
  • Elijah Dukes
  • Evan Longoria
  • Delmon Young

Yep, those are some damn fine young players. But hey, we already knew that about the Rays. It’s not like they define average.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And the reality is that the A's

could have the same list of hitting prospects had they had top 5 draft picks as often as the Rays did to get guys like Upton, Longoria, Young. I don’t think the Rays were necesarily brilliant, they were just so bad they got to take the “can’t miss” draft picks. There are no “can’t miss” guys left when it is the A’s turn to pick.

by AsFanInLA on Jul 23, 2008 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cherrypicking

Are these complete lists? Because a quick glance at the A’s would give us three names —Swisher, Buck and Suzuki -—and you have to start digging deeper to find any of the others because the rest were traded before they hit the big leagues.

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Methodology

I listed every non-pitcher that was drafted by the team who has since been in the major leagues and played more than a handful of games. I did not include draft picks who were not originally signed by the team; I did include draft picks who were traded while still in the minors and reached the bigs with another team. I didn’t set an exact bar for how many games count as a “handful”, but I think it was probably somewhere around 30. It was pretty easy to tell intuitively who was up to stay and who was just getting a cup of coffee.

I can’t guarantee I caught everyone, but I did not omit anyone intentionally. I posted my findings for every team I looked at (including my additions to the other poster’s list for Oakland), but I only looked at those eight AL teams and none in the NL.

My primary procedure was to skim through the draft lists on Baseball Cube, and then if I wasn’t familiar with a player I’d take a look at his numbers on Baseball Reference. Baseball Cube’s draft lists put a player’s name in bold if he’s reached the bigs, and I relied on that a lot to speed up the process. If they neglected to bold someone, that would make me likely to miss him. (Evan Longoria was not in bold, but that one I caught.)

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 24, 2008 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Very few players from the 2005-2007 drafts have entered the major leagues

and in fact, many players from the earlier drafts haven’t done so either but may nonetheless end up carving out solid careers.

Looking at 2002-2004, that’s a rate (assuming you toss out Buck but count Ethier, who was drafted earlier) that would produce 9-10 big leaguers (most of a starting lineup plus some reserves) over a 7-year cycle. 3-4 roster spots would be filled by free agents, likely including some at the top (the stars) and some at the bottom (the replacements). That sounds like the definition of an average team to me.

Most laymen radically overrate the success rates of MLB draft picks. The A’s have not had a single pick since 1999 in which the probabilities favored the team obtaining even an average MLB player. I encourage you to look through thebaseballcube’s draft archives at the first rounds of some of the drafts that have more or less come to full fruition by now (2000-2002, say). It’s a sobering experience to see just how many highly touted players did absolutely, utterly nothing in pro ball.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 11:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This seems to be especially true for pitchers (hence, TINSTAAPP)

Which makes the A’s success with pitching even more incredible.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Then a question...

Let’s say that the A’s were average or above average on draft picks. Then why has the offensive appeared to suck for so long? Is it just because management is stingy? Is it because the A’s were bad, before last year, at trading for hidden talent? Is it because the emphasis on pitching has led to a dearth of hitting? Is it an over-emphasis on OBP rather than focusing on the ability to hit? Is it that the system itself, the way the A’s train hitters, isn’t good?

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 7:50 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think it's true that our trading

tilts toward pitching and away from hitting. I suspect we sign free-agent hitters at a lower-than-average rate. The park is definitely a factor, too, but I don’t think it’s the only factor.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 24, 2008 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If the park is a factor

Then there’s nothing to worry about. But then the team splits would be excessive. But the A’s are batting .246 at home and .248 on the road. Not a huge difference. The team is pitching 3.94 ERA on the road and 3.01 at home, which is a significant difference.

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, that's this year when the A's are using a lot of guys who are either bad or not ready

The split, I think, is a lot greater in past years.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wouldn't know where to look

But we do have this year’s data, and it isn’t pretty.

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Batting average is rarely the right stat to use for anything

but it’s REALLY not the right stat to use when you’re comparing park effects. The single biggest park effect is usually on home run totals, which barely registers in batting average.

Weirdly, however, the A’s actually have a higher OPS at home (although it’s less OBP-centric). That is likely due to the fact that the team’s BABIP is 16 points higher at home. Maybe it’s genuine home field advantage. If so, it doesn’t bode well for the rest of the season.

Prior year OPS splits:
2007: 61 points better on road
2006: 14 points better on road
2005: 24 points better at home
2004: 27 points better at home
2003: 8 points better at home

A while back I worked out that playing a given game at home was worth about a half a run. If we assume that half of that effect is on your pitching staff, the offensive effect is worth about 1/4 of a run per game or 20 runs per year. As a rough rule of thumb, 5 OPS points in a player’s totals are worth about 1 run, so 5 OPS points in a team’s total would be worth 9 runs, and so we’d expect an average team to hit about 11 OPS points better at home. Again, these are all back of the envelope numbers here.

Over the six year period that I looked at, the A’s are almost exactly identical hitters at home and on the road, with a very slight edge to the road. They don’t show the expected better than average hitting at home. Just from looking at the A’s hitters, it would appear that they lose a little over 20 runs scored a season from playing in the Coliseum. While this isn’t rigorous it’s at least a start.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

My thought...

...was that the large foul area was the single most important difference between the Coliseum and other parks, and that would in fact be reflected in batting average. That’s why I used it.

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The original statement

...had been that it was the park that was depressing the A’s statistics. But if the batting average differential is only .002, and if (as we know now) OPS is pretty much the same at home as on the road, and neither is particularly good, then we can’t really look to the park as a clue to why the hitters seem to suck. On the other hand, the way that Curt Young, the other coaches, and the pitching staff take advantage of the Coliseum is pretty clear.

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This year's offense is objectively terrible

Partly because two guys who were expected to do a lot (Buck and Barton) didn’t, and partly because the team coming into the year had known mediocre-to-horrible hitters playing three field positions. Had Chavez come back healthy, Thomas provided an indirect upgrade to the outfield by moving Cust there, and Crosby… well, OK, I can’t think of any scenario in which the A’s would get decent offense out of the shortstop position this season.

Anyway, had that happened, the offense would have been good. But those were extreme longshots. And the struggles of Buck and Barton turned an average offense into an abysmal offense.

I don’t see how you can extrapolate that into anything other than “this year’s offense sucks”, though. We knew it was likely to be average or worse. Trading your best offensive player usually doesn’t help the run scoring. It wasn’t supposed to be good, because this year was viewed as a rebuilding year.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Which is exactly why you can't blame a "philosophy"

That point was implied, but not really stated in your post. You can’t blame the underlying philosophy for this year’s offense because this year’s offense is not a reflection of that philosophy. You can, I guess, use it as an indictment against the GM for other reasons. But this isn’t a matter of Billy’s shit not working. It’s Billy trying to work with shit.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Philosophy

One of the strengths of Curt Young’s system, from what I’ve heard in interviews, is that he doesn’t have a philosophy other than working from pitchers’ individual strengths. It could be, if the problem is systemic, that emphasis on a hitting philosophy (whatever it might be) rather than on individual strengths is hurting player development.

Or PT is correct, and this year is an anomaly and people are looking at problems that really don’t exist.

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 9:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The A's don't make players do things they don't like to do

Nobody forced Tejada to take more pitches.

The A’s find players who fit their already established ideas. A ton of players have said nobody ever told them they have to totally change their game (maybe tweaks or whatever, but nothing you suggest).

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2008 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd be interested to see why the dramatic change

Could it be that we had some player(s) in 04-05 who hit a ton better at home (just because it was home) and skewed the stats?

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

at what rate do you think prospects succeed?

The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.

by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 1:35 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, I love exclamation points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe I’m doing it just to piss some of you guys off!!!! Or maybe it’s grammatically accurate considering the eagerness or validity of the statement. Also, I state that Moneyball has been a success, however if you have’nt had a title in the Moneyball era it may be time to take a look at it’s long term effectiveness. Did the Bash brothers play Moneyball?? So before some of you get a serious rash reading my post, take a look at it again. Because I am reviewing players and assessing whether or not they are major leaguers and if they are, will the Moneyball by-product be a good team or a World Champion. So some of you need to stop being so stubborn on your points of view and see that there are other angles out there that have substance! Also, there should be no debate on this site or anywhere that the AL is a far superior league! Even the so called experts have agreed to that. So put that one to bed.

Shane F. Wray

by Goldzone on Jul 23, 2008 7:14 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Hang around long enough....

and you’ll see why this place reminds me of an old Yiddish proverb that says you can have 10 Jewish men in an argument which will invariably result in 11 opinions.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Jul 23, 2008 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Bash Brothers were walk and whack types.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 7:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

QOTM, unintentional irony division
some of you need to stop being so stubborn on your points of view and see that there are other angles out there that have substance! Also, there should be no debate on this site or anywhere that the AL is a far superior league!

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 1:01 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The problem for me...

... is how you are approaching your criticism of Moneyball—the “if X, then Y” approach. Like, “if the A’s won a title pre-Moneyball and they haven’t won a title post-Moneyball, then they should move on from Moneyball.” Now, granted, that’s paraphrasing what you wrote above, but I’ll stand by it as being pretty durn close to the impression some of us get when we read it. And a statement like that by itself isn’t reasonable on its face.

As for your breakdowns of some of the players, those are largely fine, and I agree with much of what you wrote. I also admire your enthusiasm (if not the constant use of exclamation points). But I hope you can see how some of what you have said in your FanPost is a little on the declaratory side without (in some parts) the sort of arguments that make that declaration convincing.

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Jul 24, 2008 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed!

However, I have admitted I fumbled the ball when mixing in Moneyball on a player evaluation post. I could have gone on endlessly on the Moneyball issue, but my main point on the post was the evaluation of the players and the fact that Moneyball brought us some of them.

All About The Exclamation Points!!!

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 2:43 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fair 'nuff

Welcome aboard.

Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.

by Joey C. on Jul 24, 2008 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Exclamation points

“You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose. If you have the knack of playing with exclaimers the way Tom Wolfe does, you can throw them in by the handful . . .” – Elmore Leonard

No offense, man, but you’re no Tom Wolfe.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:08 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The only thing I know about Tom Wolfe

is that I once, I think, inadvertently confused him with Tom Peters.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Better than confusing him with Randy Wolf

Tom Wolfe is one of the people credited with founding New Journalism (along with Norman Mailer and others). I’m not particularly familiar with his writing, but I’m pretty sure Goldzone isn’t him. Or even a guy with the same name, though that would be one helluva coincidence.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:14 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Whereas Tom Peters

was the target of a good deal of intellectual flaying at the hands of Thomas Frank in One Market Under God.

I love Thomas Frank. I wish he published more often.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not familiar with Thomas Frank

But I find it utterly hilarious that his wikipedia picture is blurry

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He's a caustic political columnist/satirist

of a generally leftward bent.

What’s the Matter With Kansas was by far the best book on politics that I have read in the last 3 or 4 years. He’s at least 3 levels of insight and intellectual rigor above your standard political fare.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:37 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

but what is is

isoRIGOR

"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 Jul 24, 2008 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

damn it

his*

"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 Jul 24, 2008 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not familiar with Thomas Frank?

Maybe you know him better by his nickname, “the Hurt Big”.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 25, 2008 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 24, 2008 2:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The way I see it

If you’re important enough to get on the cover of Time, you can wear whatever the bloody hell you want.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ahh!!!, My Hero!!!!

All About The Exclamation Points!!!

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 2:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

at least he doesn't wear bow ties ...

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 24, 2008 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I like to think you have a bizarre collection of Tom Wolfe pictures

and didn’t just google “Tom Wolfe bow tie.”

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

LOL

Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Didn't Prokofiev compose a piece about that confusion?

I generally bemoan the profusion of Mr Sabermetric Sporks in the Scrabble ranks who don't know the meaning or usage of 50% of the words they use. -monkeyball

by JediLeroy on Jul 24, 2008 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I thought that was the Temptations

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You can sign my book titled "Fun With Exclamation Points!!"

Forward by Tom Wolfe!!!!! (By the way, Elmore Leonard is no Tom Wolfe either. So who’s right, who’s wrong?

All About The Exclamation Points!!!

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 2:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Aspect of market I feel Beane's currently trying to exploit

Name recognition or established star. Hang with me.

I think that’s what he exploited in the Blanton trade and I think that’s what he’ll be trying to exploit in a Street trade. In both cases the player just isn’t as good as his history or reputation suggests. But the Phillies in fact overpaid for Joe Blanton despite all the evidence before them because they were getting “Joe Blanton, top of rotation starter for a successful team.” And I’m sure Beane was hoping—before the last two weekends, at least—that some team would overpay for Huston Street because they’d be getting “Huston Street, elite closer” rather than a guy who surrenders homers to lefties, who never inspires confidence that he will be dominant, and who, for those of us who see almost every game, just isn’t in any way special.

This doesn’t apply with Harden because in that case all the flaws were part of the package. But in the case of Blanton or Street the hope is to get some team to trade for that name, not the set of skills the name actually represents.

by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 7:31 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Sounds about right.

I think the Huston Street name may still have a little weight to it since there is obviously still some interest in them. It’s really unfortunate the Brewers used some foresight and sent some scouts to see if his pitching backed his rep though. I guess they learned their lesson with Gagne.

Too bad “Mark Ellis, A’s hero” and “Jack Cut, best hitter on the team” doesn’t have value anywhere else in the league. It sure would be nice for some contenders to conveniently take them off our hands. The sooner these young guys get a chance to prove they are capable of holding their own in the majors, the sooner this rebuilding gets moving.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 24, 2008 2:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How does Mark Ellis have no value anywhere else in the league?

On any team where an offense allows for an average 2B type hitter to fit in, his STELLAR defense, and IMO, the best in the league, would be a TREMENDOUS addition. Not to mention his hard nosed gamer attitude.

by BillMoresi on Jul 24, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've never heard anyone described as soft-nosed.

Why is it good to have a nose of stone, but not hands of stone?

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

agree to a bit

didn’t Beane mention in MB that he thought the league overvalued players who made ESPN highlight plays? Also, Haren (post-ASG start) got traded for a pretty high value. Duke (our only other all-star) was up for trade rumors as he’s quite possibly overvalued that all the press a league-leading ERA will get you. Harden was hyped up since he put up 5 consecutive starts (= “finally healthy”), and was up there with Duke for awhile in ERA leadership of the league.

And infamous name recognition is also an undervalued commodity (Bradley, Payton, Thomas; perhaps Bonds could be of this mold?). Too bad Loiza decided to become infamous after we acquired him.

by rollierollieOxenfree on Jul 25, 2008 4:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Speaking of which.

Isn’t he part owner of the team? If the A’s tank over the next 4-5 years or so I wonder if he’ll fire himself. The guy might actually have too much power in the organization. Likely, he will have probably bolted for a soccer or arena football team by then though.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Serious answer:

I think the majority owners could probably pressure him into a buyout, then a firing. Or they could “promote” him to some ficticious position above GM. There are ways to deal with a situation where he needs to be fired.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Win win situation.

Dang, it doesn’t sound like Beane has much to worry about in regards to job status.

What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.

by KMoAsFan on Jul 24, 2008 2:34 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Where's that poster..

With the witty recaps? I barely made it halfway through :(

A's Fan in Philly

by Duby on Jul 24, 2008 8:09 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

What I find comical

Is that in February, everyone was griping that the A’s ahd surrendered the season. In July, the same team is playing over 500 ball for the season and we have to read crap about how they are underperforming?

Which is it?

Meanwhile i have to read drivel about how Cain, Linncecum and Sanchez are comparable to Mulder, Zito and Hudson. Jesmo Crisisies.

by jeffro on Jul 24, 2008 8:14 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Kinda sad when you think about it

Shouldn’t Zito be in the SF mix for comping the Big 3? After all, he made the list on the A’s side!

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 24, 2008 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

that's been my position this whole way

and i agree

"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 Jul 24, 2008 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Goldzone for Rookie of the Year!

This blog didn’t look like it would get 30 posts. Now it’s recommended and has 300 more or less.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 8:45 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

"Moneyball"

It occurs to me that if we simply postulate “Moneyball” = Billy Beane, then the label makes a lot of sense in this context. Goldzone is essentially arguing: “Moneyball” was successful for a few years, now it isn’t, time to throw it overboard. Whether you agree or disagree with the conclusion, the argument is coherent.

"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk

by iglew on Jul 24, 2008 10:51 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

That's probably right

It’s just that for me it’s very frustrating to hear moneyball constantly mischaracterized. This isn’t about criticizing this post, but between idiots like Joe Morgan, random people in real life, etc. it’s an issue that comes up all the time (especially since I haven’t lived in the Bay Area for a long time).

Moneyball was NOT written by Beane (or at Beane’s direction). (Eff you Joe Morgan)
Moneyball is not an argument for OBP as a god-stat.
Moneyball is not an attack on the practice of scouting players.

It is, instead, about finding bargains. At the time it was written, OBP was a bargain because it contributes to the offense in valuable ways but wasn’t expensive. Now, however, people understand the value of OBP and Beane must find other economies. As GMs get smarter, there are fewer and fewer such undervalued areas, and the benefits of a Moneyball approach become smaller and smaller. As a result, we’re no longer quite as successful as we once were.

Anyway, there’s my rant. Here’s hoping we can re-expand the payroll next year with someone really really good (if not undervalued).

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Michael Lewis' argument

Eventually there will be no undervalued areas, and Beane’s advantage will disappear.

by richwol1 on Jul 24, 2008 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think this is true

Even in a non-capped league, there still is only so much money to go around. In a perfect world, I suppose it’s possible that everything will be exactly appropriately valued. Except every GM is not a robot who gives out an exact amount (and every player/agent is not a robot who accepts that amount).

Plus, as long as the 6-years of indentured servitude are around, there’s always going to be an inequity for these players compared to older free agents.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And this would explain

why the focus now appears to be more on rebuilding the minor league system, finding players who stay healthier, Latin America scouting, etc.

As it becomes harder to fleece a major league GM out of a player who was undervalued, you now have to find the talent earlier, so you can keep it longer, and hope that those you do find are healthy enough to play most games until you flip them or they hit FA.

"Camelot sure fell apart, didn't it?"-Steve McCatty

by 5Aces on Jul 24, 2008 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also as long as there's a bias in favor of major league veterans over

players with good minor league track records but little major league track record. Also as long as there’s a bias in favor of keeping fan favorites around.

When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Lewis' Argument

As I understand it, Lewis argued that there are other teams who are now using the same approach and have more money. The Red Sox was one he referenced. Not that there wouldn’t be inefficiencies, just that there would be teams finding them and having more resources to exploit them.

by jeffro on Jul 24, 2008 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes. moneyball means finding inefficiencies in the market and yes OBP was undervalued at the time.

But OBP is still considered the most important stat by sabermetricians. So it’s not like Beane has stopped looking for players with high OBP.

by emar24 on Jul 24, 2008 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Correct

He just won’t be able to find too many open-market OBP guys (except 16-year-old Latin American players, but I suspect these guys are a lot harder to scout). The A’s can still draft and develop these types of players. And they might even be able to acquire a few in trades (they did get Murton).

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 8:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Um

Might not want to emphasize Murton’s hitting ability.

Not yet, anyway.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good Point, PT!

All About The Exclamation Points!!!

by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was just referring to him as an OBP guy

But Jack Hannahan is that type of guy, too. Doesn’t mean either are good at it.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wow

I just NOW got a chance to read this thread. Hadn’t even opened it before about an hour ago. The things I miss when I can’t spend time on AN…..

There's no crying in baseball!

by gigglingone on Jul 24, 2008 11:29 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

A Little Love, A Little Hate!

The best of both worlds on AN!

All About The Exclamation Points!!!

by Goldzone on Jul 25, 2008 12:12 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

A little late, but it has to be said....

I could only trudge through two sentences through this fog of stupid before scrolling down here.

I don’t know exactly how you define “moneyball,” but it is simply a word made up by a writer used to convey the concept of economics as it applied to a baseball team. As such, your title would be just as meaningless as if I were to write a post entitled:

Economy Slumping? It May Be Time On Economics!

by okteds on Jul 25, 2008 8:38 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

One sentence of your comment and I was lost in a fog of stupid!

You’re late to the party…. I have stated that I used the “moneyball” reference to refer to some players in my review! Very simple for most to understand!

All About The Exclamation Points!!!

by Goldzone on Jul 26, 2008 12:14 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms
Start posting about the Athletics »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Eck_small
DLD 2/8/10: Statue of Bud Selig to be erected in Milwaukee
Maya_papi_small
Please Welcome Your 2030 Starting Oakland/San Jose/Fremont/Las Vegas Athletics Third Baseman Alexander Bleszinski
Oak_small
Ratto: Bill King *should* be in HoF!
Countdown_small
Tuesday Tidbits with Taj
Baseball_small
Ladies and Gentelmen, Meet Your 2010... Moshi Ants!

Recent FanPosts

Epic-fail-firemen-fail_1__small
Uh oh...
Small
Don't understand cutting Taveras
Oaklandathletics_small
Tavares update: I'm crushed.
3208444410_7f31090a14_small
How Adrian Gonzalez can become an Oakland A.
Small
A's Chances
Small
Billy Beane's Magic: Mark Mulder (Version 2)
39135485-59af19dbb26654095f910f34176af094_4ae8a81e-scaled_small
Predictions Group
Small
Blue Jays acquire Dana Eveland for player to be named.
Funny-pictures12_small
A's Agree To Terms With......

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS


Managers

Maya_papi_small Tyler Bleszinski

08-_the_author_small 67MARQUEZ

Baseball_small baseballgirl

Poochini-butt_in_box_2_small Nico

Authors

Jacoav200_small danmerqury

Paradeshot_small jeffro

A_s_pic_5 emperor nobody

Moderators

Countdown_small Taj Adib

Logo_small gigglingone

Img_1185_small notsellingjeans

Small vignette17

Venasfans_small OaklandSi

As_kings_cal_small louismg