Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: NHL Free Agency Coverage: NHL Rumors, NHL Signings & Trades

Beane's Challenge: HOW to Add A Hitter?

Poochini-butt_in_box_2_tiny by Nico on Comment 534 comments

It is no simple question. Everyone from Billy to opposing pitchers know that the A's need a middle-of-the-order bat added to the current configuration, before the A's are back in the "contention conversation," and I believe the A's need to avoid the Casey Blakes who are "ok but not special" and the Frank Thomases who are "not part of the 2010 conversation," and find a way to add a hitter who can anchor the team through at least the 2009-2012 seasons.

But when you look at the available "too legit to quit" hitters Oakland could target, they tend to have qualities that make them poor targets:

Past Their Prime: For Pat Burrell, on the free agent market you will pay too much for years in Burrell's mid-to-late 30s. That is almost never a good idea. I would love to add Troy Glaus and figure out where to play whom later, but again Glaus is 32 and exiting the years when players tend to be most productive and healthy.

Very Costly In Talent To Acquire: Jason Bay seems like the closest thing to an ideal fit, but if the Pirates are smart (and GMs aren't as dumb as you think as often as you think), they will not let their star player go without getting a return that includes players like Trevor Cahill, Brett Anderson, Henry Rodriguez, Kurt Suzuki, Ryan Sweeney - in other words, precisely the guys the A's are counting on to make the team special over these coming years. Trouble is, teams that aren't close to winning want Cahill and Anderson and Rodriguez, not Street and Ellis, and teams close to winning will not be eager to trade their cleanup hitter, now or this Winter, for Oakland's 4th and 5th best young pitching prospects.

So what is the right approach for Beane to take to try to secure a legitimate hitter who could be productive for the next four years? Personally, I think Cahill and Anderson should be untouchable, even in the tempting quest to finally upgrade this frustratingly inept offense. Starting pitching is the cornerstone of success, and those two seem like as close to "sure things" to develop into solid, if not front-end, major league starters. I tend to think the one trade chip Oakland might entertain is Henry Rodriguez, a guy whose tremendous upside makes him incredibly appealing to teams but with whom the A's, thanks to the depth of having Cahill and Anderson, could afford to part. Rodriguez, packaged with James Simmons or Vince Mazzaro, might help fetch you a worthy major league ready, or mid-to-late 20s, hitter for the middle of the lineup.

But who? Who is the right hitter and what team is the right trading partner, and does the right player happen to play for the right team? For some reason, the name that keeps popping back into my mind is Ryan Garko, a right-handed hitter who is 27, could bat 4th in the A's lineup, plays for a team (Cleveland) that is not going to win this season, and happens to be having a down year. He also happens to play 1B, not SS or 3B or LF - oh well - and acquiring a 1B for the long-term would put Daric Barton's future with Oakland in question.

But if Rodriguez, Simmons, Mazzaro, Street (great fit for Cleveland, IMO), and maybe Barton himself were put into the "let's find a deal" conversation for Garko, or for Garko plus __, I would have to think Cleveland would be all ears. Is there a deal there, maybe for the right two of those five A's, that might be good for both teams?

And if it's not Garko - and that's just one of a zillion hypothetical possibilities - how should the A's go about landing the right guy to bat 4th from 2009-2012, so that Oakland can get back to the business of rebuilding a team that can score enough to win more baseball games than the Angels do?

0 recs | Comment 534 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Whew!

Relief….I thought the headline read “How to add a HITLER”

"the A's need more quality preembreetive pitching" ~monkeyball

by OptimistPrime on Jul 24, 2008 10:14 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Crushing defeat at hands of foes, check

Fiscal crisis, check
Resentment at outside world, check
Radical restructuring of system, check
Emphasis on youth, check
Invasion of neighboring territories, check

Uh-oh …

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

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:45 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

Just wait

until the A’s start signing the 94 Scott Hatteberg clones from Brazil.

"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.

by andeux on Jul 24, 2008 10:56 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

QOTM

"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau

by King Richard on Jul 24, 2008 11:18 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

turns out we drafted this Austrian prospect named Schicklgruber ...

... but he used his friend’s birth certificate to claim he was two years younger …

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

by monkeyball on Jul 25, 2008 9:37 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think with all the money we aren't spending, a FA is the best bet

My problem with people like Garko is that they aren’t likely to ever truly dominate, and it’s hard to imagine winning a WS without one great hitter in there somewhere.

I’d love to see us make a real run at someone like Dunn (instead of Burrell) in Free Agency. If we’re trading, I agree with you that Bay is a great one to target. He may cost less in the off-season because he’ll only have 1 year left on his contract.

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

Garko?

I’d much rather try to get either an elite MLB bat, Holliday / Bay, or a young prospect who projects as an elite bat, Fernando Martinez for example, yes by giving up some young pitching depth, than giving up even mid tier prospects for Garko.

Garko’s career OPS+ is 105. His career high is 117. Jack Cust’s OPS+ this year is 122. Garko is not better than Cust offensively. Defensively, Garko is another 1b / DH type. Beane could have easily gotten a Garko type, if he had signed Russ Branyan, instead of Emil Brown. Or Josh Phelps instead of Emil Brown.

Why give up any worthwhile prospects, especially Henry Rodriguez for him? If you’re going to trade worthwhile prospects, you might as well go all in, and get back an elite hitter.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 10:30 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Holliday is sketchy

His stats away from Coors are far from elite.

The last three years:
Home:.370/.430/.676 HR:59
Road:.281/.343/.466 HR:30

He’s still an upgrade, but I wouldn’t move anything too valuable for him.

"If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked something."

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

I know his road stats

I just don’t put much emphasis on road stats. Also, while his D has nothing to do with whether he’s an elite bat, his D is very very good.

Regardless, the Rockies’ asking price for him is ridonkulous. They asked the Mets for Carlos Beltran and Fernando Martinez. They asked the Angels for Kendrick and Adenhart and either of Santana or Saunders.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:07 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well, the road stats are half his games and we all know what an aberration Coors Field is

The only other place I think even compares to that is Arlington.

If the Rockies are asking for stuff like that, though, they’re not going to get takers for Holliday.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:19 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I wonder if that's about where he'll top out or not.

Probably in the Coliseum, at least.

Still, Colorado’s asking price is enough for me to give a big “HELL NO!” to a deal for Holliday. With what they’re asking for, you’d think he was the next Pujols no matter where he played.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:25 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

True

I’d much rather have Bay, since Pittsburgh is a tough hitting situation too.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 11:26 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yes, the road stats are HALF his games.

By looking at only road stats, you are throwing out HALF the sample.

Why not just look at park adjusted numbers like EQA, OPS+, Batting Runs?

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:24 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

His road stats are going to be much more in line with what you can expect with him...

...when he’s playing for a team that doesn’t have half their games in Coors Field.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:26 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Most players, no most athletes

perform better at home. If you want to take away the homefield advantage from Holliday, then you need to take away the home field advantage from all the players you’re comparing him to.

At which point, you’ll have thrown away ridiculous amounts of data.

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

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

No, not really

What you seem to be missing is how great an impact Coors Field has on people who get to play half their seasons in that place. Even with the humidor, it is unlike any other ballpark in the Majors. That is a HUGE factor.

I wouldn’t say anyone who bats in the Coliseum has a big home field advantage by having half their games there, would you? That could almost be the reverse of the Holliday stuff.

I don’t know what the general standard of comparison is, but I would imagine most solid players are within roughly .100 OPS points of their home/away totals, just to throw a number out there. Since we’re talking about Jason Bay in here, let’s take a quick look at him:

2008 Home: .302/.373/.604/.977
2008 Away: .273/.393/.455/.848

2007 Home: .259/.334/.388/.722
2007 Away: .237/.321/.445/.766

2006 Home: .297/.426/.504/.930
2006 Away: .276/.367/.558/.925

2005 Home: .271/.395/.465/.860
2005 Away: .337/.408/.644/1.052

I don’t know what made him so much better on the road in 2005 but Bay’s overall numbers both home and away seem fairly close. That’s the mark of a good, consistent hitter. 2006 was especially close but he had better power numbers on the road. This year, it’s flipped a bit to better home numbers. Overall, that tells me that Bay is someone who can be counted on to give you solid production no matter where he’s playing. At the same time, you could probably expect some time to get used to the American League if he comes over here.

In the end, I’m not throwing out anything Holliday is doing because he performs better at home than on the road. I’m discounting some of what Holliday does at home because of where home is.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:42 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I get a little tired of hearing about how

“but so-and-so would only OPS .770 playing half their games in Oakland.” EVERY hitter on both teams will suffer drop-offs for this effect. So who cares? A better hitter is a better hitter anywhere – the exact numbers just change.

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 24, 2008 11:47 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

But if Holliday can OPS .950 at Coors,

and that’s “well above league average,” and he can OPS .800 at the Coliseum – and that’s well above league average – is it a bad use of money to pay him as a “well above league average” hitter?

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 24, 2008 11:52 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Good point - that's worth a lot to me

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

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

This is a very important point

and I’m glad you pointed it out.

Not that the A’s have a snowball’s chance in hell of acquiring Holliday, of course.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:16 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

but the .950 OPS has to be seen in the context of coors

Holliday’s value is based on however above average for coors Holliday is. So the problem is that the Rockies are demanding what a team would for a .950 OPS hitting player. That price isn’t ok for a coors hitter, but would be ok if that number was attained in a more neutral park. For example, I’d rather have someone who hit .825 OPS in Petco than Holliday. (not that such a person necessarily exists or is available)

by ohmangoAs on Jul 24, 2008 1:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Agreed - the problem is if the Rockies

ask ”.950 OPS” value for Holliday, not if he OPSs .800 with Oakland.

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 24, 2008 1:30 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The trade our MLB pitchers then

Our pitcher will get the bump for pitching in Oakland Coliseum, and we can sell them as 3.5 ERA guys instead 4.0 ERA guys, and even out the value bias

by asfansince1989 on Jul 24, 2008 2:08 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

We do. Constantly

And that’s why we got so much value for Blanton

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 2:23 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't believe that other teams are so ignorant

so as not to be able to factor in park effect when trading for a player. There is a large body of Blanton’s work – almost as large as his body – on the road for his career. And park adjusted stats are not hard to come by.

I’m thinking the Phillies knew exactly what they were trading for, and feel Blanton can win for them if he just reverts back to doing what he did, on average, for the first 3.4 seasons of his 3.6 year career.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 24, 2008 4:07 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Buzzkill

I think we got a ton for him (and part of my rationalization is that his ERA looks a lot better than his EqERA even though instinctively the Phillies should have looked at the latter)

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 4:10 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If you're "discounting" some of what Hollidy does at home

why not use a park adjustment? As opposed to just citing road stats.

And one player, Jason Bay, doesn’t prove anything.

The problem with trying to apply a “general” standard of comparison, or using a specific player like Bay, is that no one has any idea what are the factors that cause differences in home road performances. Furthermore, no one has any clue how much or little different factors affect different players. Some players might benefit more by sleeping on their own beds. Others, not at all.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:58 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It's not useful to discount home stats, even in Coors

because as rfloh is saying, you get a lot more certainty when you DOUBLE your sample size, even if the data is slightly skewed. Especially if you can quantify the amount that the the data would likely be skewed.

So even if Coors has a 10% impact on OPS, the fact that:

1) including Coors stats doubles your sample, and
2) We can quantify, in general, how much impact Coors would have

means that the best thing to do is to include his Coors stats and adjust them accordingly.

by sardonic on Jul 24, 2008 12:07 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

statistically speaking

your confidence bounds goes down as square root of your sample size. If you double your sample size, you reduce your uncertainty by 30%

by asfansince1989 on Jul 24, 2008 2:10 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

like, say, Mark Ellis?

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

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 11:49 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

As a group

players hit better at home (all parks) than on the road. In the case of a pitchers park like the Coliseum this effect may be masked by the park effect, and in the case of an extreme hitters park like in Colorado it will be enhanced. Also, 3 of the 4 other parks in the NL West are unfavorable to hitters. Using park-adjusted numbers (like OPS+ or EqA) gives a better estimate of how good a hitter is than simply throwing out home numbers and using only road numbers.

Incidentally, for his career, Ellis has hit .258/.336/.409 in the Coliseum and .275/.341/.410 on the road

"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.

by andeux on Jul 24, 2008 12:03 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That .001 in slugging has just KILLED us at home.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 24, 2008 12:37 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I want splits for pre-Briggs and post-Briggs

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

by iglew on Jul 24, 2008 1:50 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Historically, that' s not true

Players perform better than their Rockie road stats before and after they’re on that team. No one’s really sure why that is. My impression is that hitters make some sort of swing adjustment to play in Colorado and can’t turn it off when they’re on the road.

"[Greg] Vaughn is in a funk so deep, George Clinton wearing a miner's helmet couldn't find him."
- Jim Baker, ESPN.com, May 2002

by achiappanza on Jul 30, 2008 2:10 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

need to normalize

I’d believe the “shock value” (pun) of seeing Holiday’s reduced value due to his splits more if I saw this relative to all other players’ home/away splits, including that of just the Rockies’. Without such data, this is unfixed data, and you could just conclude that the guy doesn’t like traveling? (thus he’s in MLB, not the NBA…)

by rollierollieOxenfree on Jul 25, 2008 3:22 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't know

I don’t think we need to add 170 more K’s to the lineup. You certainly could not have Dunn and Cust in the same lineup.

I do like the mammoth blasts that he hits

by Trainman on Jul 24, 2008 10:31 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I see Cust as a ticking collapse candidate. How much longer do you see him being effective?

(expecting “he already sucks” responses)

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:18 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If The A's had an offense of all Custs and Dunns

It would set the major league record for runs scored by a large margin. I’d be thrille dto have them both in the same lineup.

by GusanoQuemador on Jul 24, 2008 11:34 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

One of the two is DH

and I’ll eat some strikeouts for a .900+ OPS guy any day of the week.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 11:44 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'd expect Dunn to last a lot longer than Cust as a productive player.

The Adam Jack LF – DH alternator would probably only last through next year. Maybe the year after.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:46 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

How do they compare when you park adjust?

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 24, 2008 11:48 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

THINGS MY FATHER DOES!!!!!!

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 24, 2008 11:52 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Dunn 131 Career OPS+, Cust 127

I guess park effects do matter

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:56 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

There's not a team out there

That wouldn’t love to have a Cust & Dunn combo in the middle of their lineup. If you put Dunn in front of Cust, all those solo shots that everyone complains about from Cust turn into 2 run home runs. I’m drooling

by GusanoQuemador on Jul 24, 2008 12:05 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What would it take to sign Dunn?

4 years $50MM? I don’t think I’d do that. I would do three years though.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:10 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

We don't need..

More guys that just walk or strikeout. I give you that he will hit 35 HR but that’s not exactly what we need. We need to sprinkle in a few High OBP guys with a couple of mashers that can bring them in with one or two speedy guys.

by MrAlex on Jul 24, 2008 12:18 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Dunn has a high OBP and a is a masher.

Our speedies of the future are Weeks, Cardenas, Patterson, and Buck. Dunn would be a great asset to the lineup, but he seems like someone who’d decline quickly.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Man on 3rd, Less than 2 outs

Dunn & Cust suck in those situations. I think Dunn went 2+ years w/o a Sacrafice Fly.

Cust & Dunn are terrible situation hitters. If you sign Dunn, you gotta get rid of Cust. Too many blackholes in the lineup. Baserunners will never be on the move w/ 2 strikes for fear of the strike ‘em out, throw ‘em out. Station to Station baseball sucks.

by Colorado Fan on Jul 24, 2008 2:06 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

OK, so assuming you're right (you aren't, BTW, but whatever)

Cust will suck when Dunn hits a triple.

I haven’t looked but I’m going to guess that Adam Dunn is not exactly a triples specialist.

Also, Cust has 9 sac flies in the last 2 seasons.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:30 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What does Dunn hitting a triple have to do with this?

Both of them can be up in situations Colorado Fan pointed out and they hardly require Dunn tripling to get to that point.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 2:35 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Point is,

they’re LESS likely to end up in that situation than your average hitter.

Put those two back to back and the most likely scenarios, by far, for the second guy are either “no one on” or “a guy on first.” Of course, that’s really true for everyone, which is one of the 902374 reasons why obsessing over someone’s performance in narrow situations is a recipe for misevaluating players.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:41 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Absofragginlutely

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:19 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That's assuming one or both don't strike out, which is probably more likely.

Not saying I wouldn’t take Dunn here but it’s silly to assume that they’ll both be mashing all the time.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 12:15 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

They don't need to mash all the time

Even mashing every 20 plate appearances would result in a ton of runs if you have a guy in front of you getting on base as much as Dunn does.

by GusanoQuemador on Jul 24, 2008 12:33 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why not?

The only real problem is that neither guy should play in the outfield ever.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:18 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Jason Bay is definitely my pick as well.

I think, however, that Bay may be gone if the A”s wait till the offseason. There are many teams in the race right now that need to add a bat and Bay’s name is right at the top of many team’s list.

If the A’s are truly interested in him then I think Beane and Littlefield can work something out since they have a past history of making trades.

I would absolutely love to have a Jason Bay in an Oakland A’s uniform. If they do pull off a deal for him then I would imagine it would be with the intention of signing him to a nice extension from his current contract. He’s 27, right handed corner outfielder, and and has plenty of pop in his bat. Always was a fan of his and he would be a perfect fit for the A’s. Billy, get this deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go A’s!!!!!

by mrod on Jul 24, 2008 10:31 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It would def. make me happy

Bay’s legit, about to peak, etc.

I think as long as we keep Cahill/Anderson I’d be hard to displease with a Bay deal.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 11:25 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Imagine the headlines too:

J. Bay to the East Bay

Say Hey to Bay’s Days playing in the Bay!

etc.

(insert yours here)

witty remark

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

Minor problem:

Littlefield isn’t the GM anymore.

Actually, that’s a major problem. If Littlefield was still the GM they could probably get him for like Richie Robnett and Santiago Casilla.

Also: Bay is 29.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:21 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

really?

I could havw sworn O read he was still only 27…..thanks for the info. I’d still love to have him here, though.

by mrod on Jul 24, 2008 4:37 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Littlefield traded Arthur Rhodes and Mark Redman for the right to pay

Mark Redman, Jonah Bayliss and Chad Blackwell about $8MM. Beane traded them for the right to pay Jason Kendall about $34M. I’d say Littlefield handled that a lot better than Beane.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 9:05 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Beane on Jason Kendall: "You're gonna love this guy."

Nico to Beane: “Actually, not so much.”

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 24, 2008 9:16 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

hold on there: only grover and I get to say that

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

by monkeyball on Jul 25, 2008 9:38 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That's not entirely accurate my friend

We’re the only ones who got to say that before Kendall proved his suckitude.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 10:21 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

that was how Nico's post seemed predicated to me

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

by monkeyball on Jul 25, 2008 10:27 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Nico wasn't going revisionist

Although it’s easy to interpret it that way. I read it as laced with hindsight.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 11:40 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yes, hindsight - I was initially pleased

with acquiring Kendall because I only knew him by his stats, which suggested a .300-.330 hitter with a high OBP. Then I saw him hit in Spring Training, 2005, and “didn’t love him” thereafter.

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 25, 2008 11:56 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The A's came out of that with an LCS appearance and Jerry Blevins

The Pirates came out of it with… more money in the owner’s pocket.

I’m thinking I like Beane on that one.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 10:38 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You're saying the $20MM extra spent on Kendall wouldn't be enough to

get someone better than him? Ramon, for example, would have been better and not nearly as expensive. Are you saying the Cubs wanted Kendall so badly that they would only trade Blevins for him and no one else?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 25, 2008 8:51 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Make me get rigorous, would you?

The A’s saved $8.75 million on the back side of Mark Redman’s contract. They saved $7.4 million on the back side of Rhodes’s contract.

Kendall cost $28.5 million. More than half of that money was saved off the other two contracts. The per-year cost of the Kendall trade was barely over $4 million.

Ramon Hernandez was not only substantially more expensive than that, his contract was longer… and he wasn’t a free agent in 2005.

Now, the obvious move here would have been not to sign Redman and Rhodes to those ridiculous deals in the first place, but you have to give a guy some credit for crawling out from under bad prior decisions.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 25, 2008 9:42 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Please, I'm almost begging here

Do not go down this path. You cannot justify the disaster that was Kendall by pointing to the bloated contracts of Rhodes and Redman.

Beane could have moved both pitchers without having to bring in Kendall, truly saving the A’s millions of dollars.

I wrote a diary on this a couple years back, before your time I believe. Take a gander but stop when you hit the Evil Laugh. Appearently I went a couple paragraphs too far.

Link.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 10:36 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I've already read it

It’s been linked before. Sorry, dude. I disagree. It would have required a chain of basically implausible events for the A’s to get out from under those contracts with anything more useful than “most of Jason Kendall.” On top of which, there was no way to predict that Kendall would go blind in his third year here and become utterly useless.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 25, 2008 12:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Implausible?

It would have been implausible to trade Rhodes for Lawton?

Link.

It would have been implausible to trade Lawton during the season?

Link.

Link.

Redman and Ishii were comparable SP. You’re telling me the Mets would have had a problem trading their 3rd string C for Mark Redman?

Implausible?

I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

As for not being able to predict Kendall’s downturn, catchers over the age of 30 who had caught as many innings as Kendall had often go downhill fast. There have been studies that have proven this, although I don’t have any of those links handy. Could anyone have foreseen the End of Days scenario we saw last year? Probably not, but the risk was so high that the attempt never should have been made.

And as I showed in my diary, it didn’t have to be made.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 12:51 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Your Ahab-like conviction on this subject

has already convinced me that it’s more or less pointless to argue the issue.

I have my opinion, you have yours, and on this subject, never the twain shall meet.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 25, 2008 1:05 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

does that me Starbuck?

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

by monkeyball on Jul 25, 2008 1:11 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm such a sci-fi geek

My mind went straight to Battlestar Galactica.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 1:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yes, everyone gets to have an opinion

Mine are based in fact while yours (on this subject) run completely contrary to the same facts.

That probably means your opinion on this matter is wrong and if you choose to express this particular opinion in a public forum I will respond by saying you’re wrong.

Now, you’re a smart guy Paul and I really have no interest in going the rounds with you over this topic. So, if you’ve got a logical explanation as to why the whole Rhodes for Lawton/Ship Lawton Elsewhere plan was not something Beane could have managed then now is the time to share it.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 1:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm just curious, grover,

in your scenario how you would have anticipated the A’s covering the catcher position had they dealt Rhodes for Lawton (and kept Redman, I guess) instead of acquiring Kendall. Is there a particular move you have in mind that the A’s could definitely have done?

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 25, 2008 2:26 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Redman gets traded to the NY Mets

in exchange for C Jason Phillips… who completely bombed in 2005. He played so poorly the Dodgers (to whom he was traded for Ishii) released him that December rather then go to arby with him.

And how much did he cost in 2005?

$339K

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 2:34 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Then what?

The Jeremy Brown era begins?

I’m genuinely curious about this one. Outbid the Orioles to get Ramon Hernandez back?

Keep in mind, the A’s were only about 10 runs better than the Angels that season. Even a modest downgrade would have presented the very real possibility of missing the playoffs.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 25, 2008 2:55 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Paul, the A'd DID miss the play-offs in 2005

But to answer your question… I don’t know. Maybe they go after Ramon, kinda like they re-signed Rickey in 1993 after trading him to Toronto that July. I floated that idea in the diary, mainly because at the time it was the easiest deal I could think of.

What other options were available at the time would require a bit of research. Since you haven’t taken back the “implausible” crack…

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Jul 25, 2008 3:10 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

grover and I told everyone at the time ...

... that Kendall shouldn’t have killed his father and unknowingly slept with his mother.

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

by monkeyball on Jul 25, 2008 12:54 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It's what happens when you answer

ads on Match.com.

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 25, 2008 2:22 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't recall him tearing his eyes out, though....

seems kinda unfair. The other guy had to…

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 25, 2008 11:58 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Littlefield is gone I believe

but Bay is the way to go.

Enjoy the game

by DCinWC on Jul 24, 2008 10:32 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Garko? Ryan Garko?

And you want to give up a bunch of top prospects for him?

The same Garko who is currently hitting .241/.317/.351/.668?

No thanks. I think you are blinded with Garko by something that affects a lot of teams and fans; the thought that Garko has always killed the A’s, therefore he must be a good hitter.

facepalm.jpg

by Zonis on Jul 24, 2008 10:34 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Let's get Garko, Polanco, Ibanez, and GA!

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

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:47 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yes, Zonis, that Garko

You just cited the numbers that make him a great acquisition – that’s the value you pay for him. His career numbers are what you get for him. He’s not Jason Bay, but he’s a good hitter. He won’t cost you Cahill or Anderson – which I fear Bay will. All the reasons you don’t like Garko are what make him a typical “Billy Beane acquisition” – you’re thinking Bay, he gets Garko.

I think if any team could make a “blockbuster” (multi player) deal with the A’s it might be Cleveland. Here’s a group of players that I think could potentially help the other team:

Street, Barton, H-Rodriguez, Simmons, Mazzaro, Crosby (fresh start, better defense than J. Peralta)
Garko, J. Peralta (better bat and health in exchange for defensive dropoff), a solid hitting prospect – I haven’t looked at Cleveland’s minor league system enough lately to give a name, but if the right hitting prospect is there I could see a deal happening with 2-3 players dealt from each side.

Maybe it’s Street, Crosby, Mazzaro for Garko, Peralta, and a legitimate hitting prospect. But honestly, with trade ideas I don’t have any idea what I’m talking about – I can come up with the first 70% and have to leave the real particulars to others.

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 24, 2008 10:56 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

All good points, but we're talking about a hitter that we theoretically want

To be the acnhor of our lineup for the next few years, right?

I think it’s worth to splurge a little more in the FA market or trade market to get somebody who has a better track record than Garko.

I know a Garko-type is more of a possibilty than a Bay-type, but that won’t solve the A’s offensive problems, will it?

witty remark

by dtownmbrown on Jul 24, 2008 11:01 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

This is true - maybe Garko is aiming too low,

in that Holliday is the low end of “real plus hitter” and Garko is a poor-man’s Holliday. Xavier Nady is intruiging in that he is just unreal this year, and pretty solid overall now for his career. Maybe he’s a better example than Garko.

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 24, 2008 11:03 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I still thin Jason Bay would be good

because he has similar career numbers as Holliday, but playing in Pittsburgh, not Colorado.

And I like your comment lower on the page avout H Rod and Street being the keys instead of Cahill/ Anderson

witty remark

by dtownmbrown on Jul 24, 2008 11:18 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, I think Nady is a better example than Garko

The fear with him is that this is a career year he’ll never come close to again. Of course, that’s why he’d be cheaper than Bay.

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

Simple questions:

What would it take to get Matt Holliday?

And is he that good outside of Coors field?

by oaktownmario on Jul 24, 2008 10:44 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

No, Holliday is not all that special away from Coors

Splits from 2005-2007 show an OPS at home of 1.106 and away it’s .809. SLG at home is .676, away it’s .466. His average and OBP are also nearly .100 points higher at home than on the road, and factoring in how brutal the Coliseum is to offenses I could see the Rockies demanding more than Holliday is really worth with the A’s being left with his road averages in the Coliseum.

So far this season his away splits are a bit higher than normal but still something I’d be very wary of when it comes to giving up too much for him. Any deal for a player like Holliday absolutely must take into account expected decline outside of Coors.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:50 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Holliday's road lines, 2004-2008

2004: 240 .287 .367 .654
2005: 256 .313 .416 .729
2006: 280 .333 .485 .819
2007: 301 .374 .485 .860
2008: 301 .400 .459 .859

His 2008 road numbers are not higher than his 2007 numbers. And his road numbers are dragged down by his really poor first 2 years, especially that first season.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:22 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Simple answers:

Too much, and

Not as good as the player they’d have to pay him like to have any hope of keeping him beyond 2009.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:23 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well there is one productive hitter FA who could be cheapish

Jason Giambi and his mustache are unlikely to be re-signed by the Yanks. He would be a good pickup for us and kinda cheap (meaning cheaper than Dunn/Burrell).

But one bat is not enough for us to compete, at least not next year. How about going after Giambi AND Burrell, and have them rotate at DH while the other plays the field. Barton could then become a trade chip to the Braves/the loser of the Teix sweepstakes. If no one gives us a good deal for the kid who still has a bright future, of course we keep him around.

As for Garko, I would target him but as a buy low candidate not as someone to trade HRod for. Barton may be able to outproduce Garko as soon as next year. I really think we should target a guy like Fernando Martinez or Colby Rasmus as well.

"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton

by vignette17 on Jul 24, 2008 10:45 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't have the magic answer for who that great cleanup hitter can be for the A's, but...

...I’m pretty sure it’s not going to be Ryan Garko. He’s just an average hitter with an OPS under .800 in his brief career, and his power numbers are entirely unimpressive overall.

2007 was a solid year for him but if the A’s could bring in someone like Jason Bay and keep him here, he’d be worth one of those top pitching prospects the A’s have in their system. Maybe not Cahill and/or Anderson, but there could be a combination of others – possibly.

But, counting on Ryan Garko as a cleanup hitter in the Coliseum is just asking for more failure.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:45 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1 mang!

I say no to Garko…....bleh!

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

I shouldn't have mentioned Garko specifically, I guess

The point of the post isn’t “Let’s go out and get Ryan Garko to solve all our hitting problems!!!” It’s that guys like Bay will cost you Cahill/Anderson level players and guys like Burrell just aren’t at the right stage of their career.

So I’m really posing the question – do you think we should let Cahill or Anderson go? (I don’t.) Should we sign an aging veteran? (Usually not a good strategy.) Or…what should we do?

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 24, 2008 11:02 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I would look at keeping Cahill and Anderson but make everyone else open for...

...discussion if the right player is involved.

That’s my gut feeling right now.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:03 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I was going to mention that - maybe the way to get a deal done

with Pittsburgh is to offer Henry Rodriguez and Huston Street. I could see the Pirates yielding on Cahill and Anderson if the conversation included Rodriguez and Street.

If the A’s do that, they NEED to sign Bay to an extension because the key is 2010-2013, not just next season. Might be worth it.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 24, 2008 11:05 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Age, for one thing

Usually cheaper to sign an extension than wait for FA bidding, for another.

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 24, 2008 11:17 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bay is one year younger. I'm unclear how much cheaper he'd be than Burrell

Is it really worth giving up top prospects for Bay when Burrell only costs a draft pick?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:21 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bay was born on

Sep 20, 1978. Pat the Bat was born on October 20, 1976.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:32 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Ooh I like it. 2011 PECOTA EqA and VORP

Bay - .286, 14.4
Burrell - .295, 10.5

So I guess they see Bay more durable and Burrell a better hitter in a few years. I’m not sure how making Pat a DH would affect this. Of course there’s still a defensive difference.

I’m really liking this free PECOTA. I might get hooked and re-subscribe.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:42 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That PECOTA surprises me

Bay is 2 years younger, and his career EQA is BETTER than Burrell’s: 306 to 294.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:49 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That projection is coming off Bay's ugly year last year,

so it would presumably be higher now, although so would Burrell’s, but probably to a lesser extent. The defensive difference is pretty big, I think.

The A's colors are green and gold.

by mikeA on Jul 24, 2008 11:52 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Very true.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:53 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

My position with the prospects is that the A's have a position of strength with all their...

...pitchers and they’re going to have to use that strength at some point in the next few years. They have enough pitching prospects to nearly fill out an entire pitching staff and not all of them are going to be in Oakland.

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

by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:21 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1 Nico!

I was thinking H-Rod, Barton. Street, and Buck/ or Crosby for Jason Bay. That seem like more than a fair deal to me. Maybe the Pirates would throw in Jack Wilson in the deal if it invilved Crosby…..hmmmm….........just a thought.

by mrod on Jul 24, 2008 4:42 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why does everyone want Bay so much?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 9:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

He's a very, very good hitter

who isn’t about to decline due to age or get overpaid on the FA market, or both. There just aren’t too many out there this applies to. A lot of Blake, Garko “slight upgrades” and Teixeira, Burrell “overpay if you want them” options.

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 24, 2008 9:43 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

do want to trade for him for 2009 exclusively?

The next contract he gets (after 2009) will include an overpayment for past performance.

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

by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 9:49 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

We'd have to re-sign to get enough value

But we’d be getting early-30s years instead of mid-late 30s years.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 9:50 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

is he magically not going to get a 7 year deal?

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

by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 9:51 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I would only trade for him if an extension

was planned that would avoid FA altogether. Then you’re basically paying for current performance and offering security as the trade-off for not testing the FA market.

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 24, 2008 9:53 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why would Bay sign less than a six year deal this offseason rather

than go for a five year deal at free agency? Those five years would be his age 31 to 35 seasons. Do the A’s really want to spend something like $80MM for that? If so, do they also want to trade something like Anderson, Mazzaro and Carter for the privilege of first rights to negotiate?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 25, 2008 8:56 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I disagree that he's not about to decline

High strikeout rate plus ages 33-35 (years 3-5 of his next contract) sounds like a likely decliner to me. I wouldn’t want him beyond next year.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 25, 2008 8:58 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Mark McGwire & Jose Canseco are available.....

I’m just saying.

Or we can reunite Tejada & Giambi.

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

Why can't we think big?

Our payroll in 2006 was a little over 75M and the team was still turning a profit. Yes our attendance is down, but my guess is that the A’s are receiving more money in revenue sharing and can therefore justify a payroll at around 80M.

Well guess what, after all of these trades, our payroll will probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of 30M going into this year. And we’re still talking about someone like GARKO?!!

Look at the Angels/Red Sox model of success.. they’ve mixed in great veteran players over the years with their homegrown product and have dominated.

We need to do the same. Fielding a team with just promising prospects will get us nowhere. Some will flourish (Sweeney, to an extent Suzuki) while others will not (Barton, Buck). And ownership has a lot of room to add a superstar or even two to make this a really deep team.

Also, if you want to market your product and attract fans you need to give the casual fan and kids a name to cheer for. We need a BIG TIME bopper for the next 4-5 years a la Vlad Guerrero when he signed with the Angels to lead a lineup filled with youth. I’m tired of hearing names like Blake, Garko, etc. When your payroll is 75M, then it’s ok to talk about them, but when your all the way at the bottom, and ownership still refuses to open up their checkbooks, then we have a problem.

by MrAlex on Jul 24, 2008 10:49 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

OK let's explore potential HOFs before or in their primes

Evan Longoria
Alex Rodriguez
Miguel Cabrera
Josh Hamilton
David Wright
Carlos Beltran
Chase Utley
Ryan Braun
Albert Pujols
Jay Bruce
Mark Teixeira (not a HOF for me)

How would we go about getting any of these guys?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:10 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yes, how could we ever get Josh Hamilton?

Gak.

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 24, 2008 11:17 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I actually believe Pujols might be possible in 2012 if he's limited to DH

and Beltran might be possible before that if Minaya gets fired.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:25 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

By 2012

We’ll have already traded Gonzalez, Sweeney, Smith, Eveland, and Suzuki..

Because they had about 1 or 2 years left on their contracts and they were going to get too expensive.. so we took on a bunch of prospects and started the rebuilding process and the cycle continues.

So even if Pujols were available, we’d pass.. unless he were DFAd and we picked him up for the prorated league minimum.

by MrAlex on Jul 24, 2008 11:31 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think Gonzalez has a chance to stay long term like Chavez, but I agree

on all those other guys. Fortunately we’ll trade them for three other guys each who will keep the team good. Also Pujols won’t come to Oakland if the team is still drawing 15K per game in a football stadium.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:36 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

This is not only silly, it's historically AND contractually inaccurate

In the 2011 season, Kurt Suzuki will be in his first arbitration year, so the same position as Street now. Same with Eveland and Sweeney. Smith will be a Super Two. Gonzalez will be making the league minimum.

As for the historically inaccurate part, the A’s did not trade Giambi, or Tejada, or Isringhausen because the team was highly competitive during their final few years. If the 2012 A’s are highly competitive the team will not be trading away players for “rebuilding”.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:32 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Gonzalez will be making league minimum in 2011?

Why wouldn’t he be a “super two” if Smith would? His offensive numbers should be great for a CFer and he’s already rating as a plus defender (if that matters in “super two” computing – does it?). Wouldn’t he be a “super two” if anyone would?

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 24, 2008 4:11 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Super Two is only about service time, not performance.
In addition, a player can be classified as a “Super Two” and be eligible for arbitration with less than three years of service. A player with at least two but less than three years of Major League service shall be eligible for salary arbitration if he has accumulated at least 86 days of service during the immediately preceding season and he ranks in the top 17 percent in total service in the class of Players who have at least two but less than three years of Major League service, however accumulated, but with at least 86 days of service accumulated during the immediately preceding season.

via MLB

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

by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 4:18 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Ah, thanks for the info

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 24, 2008 4:37 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

regarding Carlos Gonzalez specifically,

I don’t know, but i’m certain someone else knows better.

He was called up at the end of May, so he’s going to have more than 86 days of service time by the end of the season. I don’t know if he’ll be in the top 17 percent though.

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

by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 4:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The cutoff

tends to be around 2 years + 130-140 days of service. At least that’s what I few links I found said. Gonzalez will be around 120 days.

"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.

by andeux on Jul 24, 2008 4:35 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

that's good to know, thanks!

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

by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 4:43 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The cutoff is also something Jamie Kotsay often wears

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

by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 4:59 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

stop it

no 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 25, 2008 2:12 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well Lets See

The only one on that list that we can get is Teixeira as a FA but we would have to pay him big money which I also think is not worth it unless it’s something like 5/75 or even 6/90.. plug him at 1st Base, you have a switch hitter who hits for power, good average, excellent defender and is a switch hitter.

But the A’s wont pony up for him no matter what, even though their payroll will be under 30M.

But now imagine if they did sign him as a FA and traded for Bay (giving up 2 of their pitching prospects which we really can do because we have great depth).

You have a lineup of:

C Suzuki
1B Teixeira
2B Weeks/Cardenas/Patterson
SS Crosby (I’d take anyone else; shed his salary and put anyone else in there)
3B Chavez
OF Gonzalez
OF Sweeney
OF Bay
DH Cust/Thomas

With our pitching and that lineup = for sure division contender, borderline WS contender.

And our payroll would jump to say 60M.

Why Not? Any thoughts?

by MrAlex on Jul 24, 2008 11:22 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Next year the 2B would be Patterson

Weeks/Cardenas are not that close to MLB ready.

I also don’t think we’d keep Thomas around if we made those moves. He’d cost real money next year b/c the Jays wouldn’t be paying him.

Otherwise, this is a pretty lineup (no doubt about that). I doubt we’ll make a play for Teix, but if Barton doesn’t get his swing back in AAA then there’s a slim chance.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 11:37 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

In that scenario we could trade Buck and Barton as part of a Bay package and maybe

keep an extra pitching prospect.

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

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

Realistic?

The point is that that lineup and the payroll for fielding such a team is feasible even in Oakland. I kind of think we’re somewhat brainwashed as A’s fans and keep lowering our standards, but when your payroll is laughable at 20 – 30M, we have to expect something better.

And why not make a play for Teixeira – he’s everything and more you want from a 1B. Bay can be had for the right price. Or you can come up with another combination of two really really good hitters.

And all of this will have our payroll below 2006.

by MrAlex on Jul 24, 2008 12:12 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think it's realistic in that the A's can do it if they want to,, but I wouldn't

give Teixeira a mammoth contract, like 7 years $140 MM unless he could play 3B. He just isn’t an all-time great hitter. If it were Albert Pujols sure, but Teixeira seems more like Todd Helton.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If Teixeira were Todd Helton

$140M / 7 might be worth it. Helton, into his decline years has a career OPS+ of 141. Teixeira, in his prime, 131. Carlos Delgado, into his decline years, 138.

Teixeira is more like Adam Dunn or Jason Bay.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 12:45 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Wow. That puts it into perspective.

Although given that Teixeira doesn’t strike out as much as Dunn or Bay, he might have gentler descent.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 1:00 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

And would be illegal for any California team

In California, no personal services contract can extend past 7 years.

I have no idea about other states.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 2:26 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Quite so

From which I infer that he will not be signed by a California team.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:31 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If this situation were to arise

(I dunno, say the Dodgers wanted to sign A-Rod), there’s got to be a way around that, right? Like have the Frank McCourt start a corporation headquartered right on the Arizona side of Blythe or something? This wouldn’t seriously come into effect, would it?

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 4:47 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Unless the CBA can and does bargain out of it (which I doubt but am not sure of)

Unless McCourt moved the franchise to Arizona (or joined the Federal Government) there’s no way I know of to avoid CA labor laws for work done in CA.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 5:06 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Couldn't you make the argument that

a good chunk of their work is done outside the state?

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 5:20 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, but not their primary place of business

I think they might have to pay taxes in all the states they work (but my tax knowledge is VERY limited) but that doesn’t effect the rules governing their contract.

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 5:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If I recall correctly,

there was a recent ruling requiring players to pay state taxes based on where the game is actually being played. A player who plays for team in a state without a state tax still has an advantage, it’s now not what it use to be.

"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 25, 2008 8:37 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Assuming he also lives in that state, yes.

The requirement to pay state taxes for away games is not new, though states started cracking down on it much more in the 1990s. The “recent ruling” you have in mind is probably one of the many cases on the various details about determining how the source of state income is defined, but the general principle that a state can tax non-residents on work done in the state has been there all along.

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

by iglew on Jul 25, 2008 5:11 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I like it

But I don’t know if Billy Beane deals with Scot Boras’ clients…....otherwisw I”m all for it man!

by mrod on Jul 24, 2008 4:47 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Josh Hamilton?

Not going to make it into the HOF. I’d be surprised-ish if he even plays enough seasons.

Not that I wouldn’t like to have him as a hitter.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:27 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Ryan Braun is pretty iffy as well. A few of those guys are.

Hamilton is among the most talented of the guys on the list though. I wouldn’t be shocked if he made the HOF, or if he OD’ed tomorrow.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 9:09 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Or both

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 24, 2008 9:16 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I would be extremely surprised if any player who first entered MLB at the age of 26

has ever entered the Hall of Fame before.

Ichiro will break that, but it’s not like he was playing rookie ball until he came over.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 10:40 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

and Jackie

I’m pretty sure he was past 26, but he played pro ball prior to MLB as well, albeit for a shorter time than Ichiro in Japan. Would actually be interesting to see which HoF’er was the oldest in his rookie season, excluding those who had prior non-MLB pro ball experience.

But, yeah, Hamilton seems like a long-shot to me, unless his story stays as unicornish as it has been this year.

by Eric in Atlanta on Jul 25, 2008 11:23 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Dazzy Vance

He didn’t break in with Brooklyn until he was over 30.

by D O on Jul 25, 2008 1:53 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Outside the Box

Would the Rockies consider an big package for Troy Tulowitski

by HuskerFan on Jul 24, 2008 10:50 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Love that Idea

Tulowitzki is one of the best defenders in baseball.

RIVER CATS: AAA CHAMPS!

by niallmack on Jul 24, 2008 1:05 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'd do it via trades like the Twins and Tigers did last year. Candidates include:

Young players stuck behind a veteran:

Mat Gamel - I don’t think the Brewers would really move Hart to CF for him
Fernando Martinez - He’s the Met’s lone big time trading chip
Josh Willingham - He’s stuck behind Jacobs and Gonzalez for some reason
Jeff Clement - Stuck behind Johjima, might improve hitting at another position (3B?)
Reid Brignac - OK not a slugger but a good hitting SS, between Bartlett and Beckham
Chris Davis - OK not behind a veteran but he smells Smoak
Brandon Jones or Gorkys Hernandez - behind Francoeur, Heyward and Schafer (not veterans I know)
Kevin Kouzmanoff - Not that great, but better than what we got. Headley’s the future.

Young players having crappy years:

Lastings Milledge - I don’t think anyone wants him now
Austin Kearns - Was his previous goodness a mirage?
Andy LaRoche - I’ve seen him discussed on AN
Ian Stewart - They might trade Atkins instead. I would.
Brandon Wood - Lotsa K’s but power and decent SS defense
Jose Tabata - Having no power at 19 in AA isn’t a crime
Wladimir Balentien—Not sure what the Mariners are doing

Supplement these with veterans on their last legs—Giambi? Griffey?

Maybe sign a controversial FA—Dunn?

Supplement with Jermaine Dye 2001 types every year or two. It’s too early for Holliday or Bay this year. But next year, there’s:

Adrian Beltre
Jason Bay
Matt Holliday
Brian Giles
Vladimir Guerrero
Chipper Jones

OK those last two aren’t very likely. These guys should be cheaper to acquire next year than now.

There’s also minor league veterans like Saenz and Cust, but I don’t know anything about them.

They could also draft guys like Brett Wallace.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 10:56 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   1 recs

Good list...

But Willingham isnt stuck behind anyone, he has played almost every game since he came back from his injury. He definitely is a starter for them.

Bring back Hammer.

by OaktownPower on Jul 24, 2008 11:01 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Oops sorry about that.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:03 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Fernando Martinez isn't stuck behind a vet

He’s 19 years old at AA. Before anyone says Carlos Beltran and CF, FMart is a CF the way Ryan Garko is the elite middle of the order hitter the A’s want to build around.

Austins Kearns is no longer young. He’s 28 this season; nor is he cheap, $5M this season, $8M next. He’s an overrated bust.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:39 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Ya I didn't have a good category for Fernando.

It’s just that the Mets are impatient to win during the Wright – Reyes – Beltran – Santana years and he could be available earlier than he otherwise would be.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:14 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Minaya reportedly LOVES him

And has gone on the record saying that he wants to avoid making 4 for 1 trades, and also of giving up FMart.

I could see him giving him up for someone like Bay, a guy who will help now, and next season, and could be signed to a long term deal. I don’t see anyone on the A’s as that calibre of player.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 12:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I guess the Mets might consider Cahill or Anderson

if their non-Johan starters were crappy in a year or two.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:31 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Prospects are a different matter

Since you referenced the Mets desire to win now, I was just referring to the A’s MLB players.

As for the Mets future pitching, who knows? Perez and Martinez are both FAs after this season. OTOH, it’s not as if they have gotten much out of Pedro the past season and a half, and they will have his money off the books, and available to spend. This offseason, with CC, among others, available, is probably going to be one of the best recent offseasons to go FA pitcher buying. Also, Pelfrey is starting to show some progress, after pretty much everyone gave up on him.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 12:41 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The same has been said of me

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jul 24, 2008 1:21 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What about Ryan Zimmerman?

Other than the fact that he appears to be getting steadily worse every season? (Maybe that’s just the effect of playing for the Nationals every year?)

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 24, 2008 11:07 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

He's having a crappy year, but would you trade Cahill and Anderson plus for him?

I don’t think his trade value is all that much lower than a year ago.

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

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

Garko? Seriously?

The guy has a 688 ops this year and for that you want to trade a good young closer plus our fourth and fifth best arms (one who is an extremely good bet to be a solid mid rotation starter and one who has the potential to be either a front of the line starter if he can harness his controll or a dominating reliever) in the system. It would be interesting to examine a Laporta, Josh Rodriguez a AA shortstop package for some of our minor league talent.

Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom

by designatedforassignment on Jul 24, 2008 11:09 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That just plays into my thinking -

he’s only a .688 OPS guy this year. Buy low, sell high.

Theoretically, if the Indians would do it, would you trade Street, Crosby, Mazzaro for Garko, Peralta, Laporta? Or Street and Mazzaro for Garko and Laporta? Yes please, right? So it’s not that the trade idea is lopsided in the Indians’ favor, it’s that the last piece is critical. That’s the negotiation part.

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 24, 2008 11:21 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If we (being an AN poster makes me an A now) could have gotten LaPorta, why

not from the Brewers? Why would the Indians trade Sabathia for someone they didn’t really want? He would probably be really expensive—Shapiro would probably ask for the moon and not worry if he didn’t get it.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 11:33 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Street and Mazzaro for Garko and Laporta

I would probably do that deal with the desire to flip garko to a contender. Or screw it just Laporta for street would be much more ameniable to my desires

Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom

by designatedforassignment on Jul 24, 2008 12:30 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

But Street and Mazzaro or Simmons would be a good fit

for the Indians’ needs, in exchange for Laporta – a closer through at least 2010 and a good pitching prospect. Mazzaro gives more upside, but Simmons is closer and more polished. And if the A’s want to pick up a legit hitter or hitting prospect, and don’t want to part with Cahill/Anderson, then they have to be willing to part with Street and Mazzaro or Simmons.

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 24, 2008 12:41 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Id much rather gice up Mazzaro than Simmons

Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom

by designatedforassignment on Jul 24, 2008 12:51 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Same here - I think Simmons

will be anywhere from a “poor man’s Blanton” to a “good Blanton,” i.e., probably a solid #3 starter who gives you innings and generally gives you a chance to win.

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 24, 2008 12:57 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why would the Indians trade LaPorta for any man's Blanton?

Right now they see an offense anchored by Sizemore and LaPorta. How is getting Simmons or Mazzaro going to improve them? They’re pretty good at getting Paul Byrds and Kevin Millwoods for the middle of their rotation. They don’t need to give up LaPorta for that. I wouldn’t even do it for Cahill and Simmons. Maybe for Cahill and Anderson plus Donaldson or something.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 1:04 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

C'mon - how much are you gonna give up

for a guy whose name is “The Door”?

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 24, 2008 1:07 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

fair point

but is Mazzaro > Garko? I don’t think so. TINSTAPP. I didn’t propose the deal but I really doubt that that deal would be done from an Cle prospective.

Thats why i suggested a trade for Laporta and Rodriguez a masher and a shortstop and was hoping to see who we would need to pull that down.

Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom

by designatedforassignment on Jul 24, 2008 12:50 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Right

but to suggest a AA pitching prospect is more valuable than a servicable major leaguer who has some breakout potential is kinda silly.

Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom

by designatedforassignment on Jul 24, 2008 9:13 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Garko is not serviceable and does not have breakout potential.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 9:30 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Mazzaro isn't either

he is a AA prospect who may never make it to the majors and is having a year that far exceeds his production in previous minor league seasons

Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom

by designatedforassignment on Jul 24, 2008 9:34 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I just don't quite agree on Garko

He did have a breakout year last season at age 26, and this year he is part of a team-wide collapse. But he is still young, he has been good before, and whether he’ll bounce back to last year’s form or stay at this year’s form is unknown. But I wouldn’t be so sure it will be the latter and I think he is more than “serviceable,” personally – his OPS as a rookie was .829 and then he surpassed that his second year.

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 24, 2008 9:49 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

So neither one is likely to make an impact?

Sounds like a fair, but unimportant deal then.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 25, 2008 9:00 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sounds about right

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 25, 2008 9:37 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

But one that COULD work out great

for either team – great for the A’s if Garko reverts to 2007 production, great for the Indians if Mazzaro reaches his potential.

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 25, 2008 9:38 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Jason Bay would've been a lot easier to get before Huntington took over

Now, Beane will actually have to give up quality prospects, and I’m not sure that’s a great idea. He’ll be 30 next season, so even if you can give him a long extension, do you? As much as I like JayRayBay, I’m just not sure he’s worth the prospects and the contract extension he’d have to get.

http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:21 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Teixiera..

He just turned 28. He’s a “big time” bat that we need. He doesn’t break down.

Let’s sign him for 6 years, $110 million. Just do it. Now is the time to get that glue that holds the linup together. It’ll make the hitters before and after him much better.

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

by brenarlo on Jul 24, 2008 11:32 AM PDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Boras is asking for

a contract in the region of $200M / 10.

And he’s not a better hitter than Bay or Adam Dunn.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:41 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

He can't have 10 years

Labor laws prohibit a contract that long in most states.

I think the CA max is 6 or 7

by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 11:43 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

ARod says hi?

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 11:45 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well, Arod did sign a 10 year contract

in NY. So at the very least, Teixeira CAN have a 10 year contract in NY. Where there are 2 very rich teams possibly willing to sign him.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 12:26 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

imagine zito on a 10 yr contract

sometimes, you protect the teams from being too stupid to themselves. Imagine Zito on a 10 year contract… his fastball velocity might be down to 39 mph by the time all was said and done.

by rollierollieOxenfree on Jul 25, 2008 3:37 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Moyer has about 95th percentile command,

while Zito has about 30th percentile command. “Senator, you’re no Jamie Moyer.”

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 25, 2008 9:40 AM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Moyer only became a control artist at 30 years old

BB/BFP

Moyer Age 23-28 - 9.2%
Moyer Age 30 thru today (age 45) - 6.1%
Zito Career thru today (age 30)—9.6%

Moyer was not a good pitcher when I saw him with the Cubs. He went back to the minors at age 29, reinvented himself, and returned as a control artist at age 30.

Zito is durable and smart. Given a chance to reinvent himself he could reduce his walks. Of course he may not be able to do that, but he does have a “decent chance” to do it.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 25, 2008 12:31 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I guess - Moyer is kind of a "freak of nature"

in his late development, ability to thrive with really two pitches (one of which is a below-average fastball), and tremendous “staying power” into his mid-40s.

Whereas Zito is just kind of a freak.

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 25, 2008 12:37 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

No Way

There’s no way he gets $200 – not even close. I think he can be had for 6/108. Or in the A’s case, 7/126.

by MrAlex on Jul 24, 2008 12:22 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Carlos Lee signed

a 6 year $100M contract in 2007. Lee is worse player than Teixeira. Even if you disregard inflation, Lee was 31 at the time, Teixeira will be 29.

There are a whole bunch of teams that could be potentially looking for a 1b next season. Off the top of my head: Mets, Yanks, Mariners, Giants. All rich teams with money to spend.

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

by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 12:30 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I can easily see the Yankees or Mets signing him for 7/$140

or even 8/$160 like Manny got.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 12:33 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That's the problem with bidding for FAs -

It only takes one team to drive up the price. Boras is the agent and the Yankees want a 1Bman. You can do the Math from there.

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 24, 2008 12:42 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Teixeira isn't nearly as good a hitter as Manny,

but he’s the best available FA in a year when the Mets and Yankees both need a 1B. Maybe the Angels would be interested too. He’s almost certain to be a bad deal.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 1:06 PM PDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

dude!

Boras is out of his fucking mind!!!!!!!!! Guys like him are bad for baseball and I hope his “smart” clients fire him just like A-Rod did. That was the best thing Alex Rodriguez ever did for his career.

by mrod on Jul 24, 2008 4:57 PM PDT