Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Check out our NFL Scoreboard: scores, schedule and blogs Bar-right-arrows



How would you rate Billy Beane's trades for 2008 and how have the A's market their product to the fans & general public?

It seems to me that as a very general causal A's fan, who had the 20 game packet for years( not anymore) and really does not like the other b- ball team across the bay, we have lost our way.  Problems-obtaining guys who are ready to play in the major leagues now, not hyping everyone who is coming to the majors as the second coming of the savor of the franchise;  not getting a power hitter- who can drive the ball & not strike out too much. And giving up Harden for some guys that may, may develop we hope , who should be in AA ball. We gave up too much talent  ( pass trades) for what, the major league version of the River cats.  God help me, can we bring the Hass family back, please. At least they understood the needs of  the fans and the team. I know Billy thinks this will work, but so far, not sure for 2009 maybe in 2011. Can we wait that long? It makes the general fans look across the Bay to spend their $$ & that is not a joke.

2008 trades- he did great & I like where the team is going

                        he did ok

                       god help us

                       and he's working for the Giants (ok, bad joke).

                        You pick!

0 recs | Comment 82 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

The Hass family is essential if you want to market to avocados!

Anyway, I’d rate the trades as follows:

Haren deal: A+ It’s going to end up a terrific, terrific deal for Oakland, one that significantly elevates the organization both in on-field help and farm depth.

Swisher deal: A-: It was a great trade at the time, given Fautino’s ceiling, but one that will likely not produce a full-fledged star (5-tool player or #1-#2 starter) as Gio and Sweeney appear to have their limitations. Still a very good move in that Swisher actually isn’t that good – Sweeney could even end up being better and you get Gio and a rehabbing DLS for free.

Blanton trade: A-: Getting Cardenas was the key and the other pieces were pretty smart risks for add-ins.

Harden trade: B+: I think it will turn out better than 90% of AN thinks, but it is the least sure of all the hauls and Harden is certainly a unique talent. But following his next injury and Gallagher’s progress, that alone will probably vindicate Beane’s thinking – and if thinks truly break right, Donaldson could be the surprise of the bunch.

The A’s marketing is a joke: I’d give it a D- for complete ineptitiude. “Hey, Kurt Suzuki went into a crouch to catch the morning paper – let’s go to an A’s game!!!!” Said the casual fan, and he checked the ticket prices and decided he could afford a third deck seat.

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 Sep 28, 2008 11:06 AM PDT   1 recs

Still a very good move in that Swisher actually isn’t that good

Do you just, like, not believe in the concept of luck at all?

Swisher’s numbers look quite good (his usual mid-800s OPS with good defense) once you account for the fact that his BABIP is like 50 points below where it should be (given his LD rate). He’s so much better than Ryan Sweeney, it’s not even funny.

This is the exact same situation as the Angels record, except reversed. You’re saying “The Angels are awesome/Swisher sucks,” when what you really should be saying is “The Angels had an awesome season/Swisher had a sucky season.” There’s very little reason to believe either of those will continue.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 28, 2008 11:54 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I didn't think Swisher was that good when he was with Oakland

I think he’s a .250 hitting 20-25 HR guy whose OF defense is “ok”. I’m not a big fan of Ryan Sweeney, but given that he’s 23 he DOES have a chance to become a .280 hitter with the “developing power” I hear so much about, with more contact than Swisher and better corner OF defense – which would be…better than Swisher. Personally I don’t see it, but I’m willing to concede that it’s still very possible.

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 Sep 28, 2008 4:07 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

The 90 walks per year help the .250 avg.

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 28, 2008 4:39 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He's a good OBP guy - .350 give or take

I just don’t think that a .250/.350, 22-24 HR guy is “that good”. Decent, for sure, but you should aim for more from a corner position and Swish ain’t a CFer. If he were a decent defensive SS I’d be singing his praises, though.

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 Sep 28, 2008 5:57 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

A "decent defensive SS" with those numbers is a frickin' All Star

You’re basically describing Miguel Tejada with a slightly different (more walks, less singles) distribution of offensive production.

As a corner OF, that guy is basically playoff level (roughly 1 win above average), more or less, depending on exactly how far above or below average he is with the glove and how many doubles and triples he hits.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 28, 2008 6:12 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

And I did sing Tejada's praises -

Schott and Hofmann weren’t moved, but I kept singing.

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 Sep 28, 2008 6:29 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe it was the song

Or, you know, your goat-like singing voice

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Sep 28, 2008 10:21 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Swisher's last two EqA with the A's were .296 and .299, leading to 105 and 106 EqR

Four RF had more than 105 EqR this year — Ludwick, Giles, Markakis, Suzuki

Three LF had more — Ramirez, Bay, Ibanez.

How would 2006-7 Swisher not have been one of the best corner OF this year? And with better BABIP luck, why shouldn’t he return to goodness next year?

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 29, 2008 2:07 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

One thing interesting with swisher this year

is his away OPS is .596 while his home one is .878. Pretty strange if you ask me

"It's like déjà vu all over again." -yogi berra

by Cheezombie on Sep 29, 2008 9:36 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Fire Beane now!!!

Really though, if we would have kept Gaudin/Blanton/Harden… we’d probably be in 2nd 16 GB place instead of 3rd and 23.5 GB… The rebuild/reload is going to take a little bit longer than three months to show whether or not they were worth it.

It was funny though. Watching the presidential debate was pretty much like watching two sports fans. Instead of “As General Manger I’d do this, this and this to fix this team.” it was two hours of “As President I’ll fix this this and this”

When both jobs are probably a bit harder than that.

by buddahead9 on Sep 28, 2008 11:07 AM PDT   0 recs

It would be pretty cool to have a debate among prospective GMs

#1, what would you do about Bobby Crosby?

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 28, 2008 4:41 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

STRICKOUTS!!!!!!1111111111one

NOOOOOOOOOOoooooOooOOoooOoOOoOOooooo…

"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball

by flipgatey3 on Sep 28, 2008 11:29 AM PDT   0 recs

Would you rather be a Tigers fan?

A team whose GM didn’t see the writing on the wall, spent a big chunk of their future talent to compete this year and still suck?

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

by devo on Sep 28, 2008 11:39 AM PDT   0 recs

At least Miguel and Dontrelle are locked up.

Miguel Cabrera’s locked up for a while and he is arguably the Tigers’ best player. He was worth everything they traded for him. However, putting Dontrelle Willis into that deal (although he is under contract for a while), and raising the prospect price, was the bad part.

The Renteria for Jair Jurrjens + Gorkys Hernandez deal was amazing for the Braves, horrid for the Tigers though. Jair is a stud and already a frontline starter at the age of 22.

Now with 100% more Canuck.

by Blicks on Sep 28, 2008 11:55 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

It's a good thing that Dontrelle is locked up?

They could have also just waited until Cabrera or another young-ish, talented player hit free agency and saved the prospects and a couple of years of high salaries on non-competetive teams.

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

by devo on Sep 28, 2008 12:00 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Oops---not really

Dontrelle- not really. However, if they were getting the good, former ROY D-Train, it would have been. Nobody expected Dontrelle to implode like this.

Miguel- Yeah, you’re right. Cabrera, if he hadn’t signed that 8yr/152MM contract with the Tigers, would have been an FA after the ‘09 season. The Marlins weren’t going to give him that kind of contract because they’re the Marlins. So yeah.

Now with 100% more Canuck.

by Blicks on Sep 28, 2008 12:12 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

That's not really true ...

While the level of his implosion was unpredictable, many, myself included, suggested something similar, though less extreme, was likely to happen — which may have actually been worse for the Tigers. At least Dontrelle has been so bad that they can safely more or less give up on him, killing all hope and not giving them reason to run him out there and hurt the team every five days …

There’s a reasonable chance that the Marlins would have moved him to someone else last off season, this July or over the coming off season and they would have likely then extended him, so there’s a pretty good chance he never becomes a free agent. Regardless, it’s practically guaranteed that someone who would likely be just as productive once they are good again would have been available at a more opportune time.

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

by devo on Sep 28, 2008 12:49 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I think what he meant is that Willis SHOULD be locked up,

and you should throw away Jimmy Key.

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 Sep 28, 2008 4:08 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Players likely to be as productive as Cabrera aren't available that often.

That trade wasn’t terrible. They can trade Cabrera and Granderson for 14 prospects if they want to rebuild. The downside to going for it all in 2008 wasn’t that large.

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 28, 2008 4:44 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

They could have traded Granderson for 9 of those prospects anyway ...

his contract makes him a much more valuable trade piece. He doesn’t factor into the equation.

I doubt Cabrera, a year old and coming off of a somewhat disappointing season returns more than 3/4 of what they paid for him. I also doubt that the culture that caused them to acquire him in the first place would allow them to rebuild that quickly and thoroughly.

Players with Cabrera’s long term value don’t come available very often. Players with his short term value do. There is generally a couple to a handful each season.

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

by devo on Sep 28, 2008 5:43 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm not sure how terrible the Cabrera trade was for Detroit

I’m not sold on Maybin or Miller, and the 3 minor league pitchers aren’t the most impressive. There might be some good players in there, but I absolutely believe the Tigers got the best player in that trade.

The Renteria deal, on the other hand, was terrible.

by thejd44 on Sep 29, 2008 10:26 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm not saying that deal, in a vacuum was a bad deal ...

I’m saying the strategy, in the real world, was a bad strategy.

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

by devo on Sep 29, 2008 11:11 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

My grades.

Haren- A Haren is amazing. However, two BOR starters in Eveland/Smith. One frontline SP prospect in Anderson, and great prospects in Cargon, Cunningham, and Carter. Cargon didn’t show much in the bigs this year, but he’s 22. Cunningham did well in what little time he had up in the bigs along with absolutely mashing in the minors. Carter absolutely mashed in the minors. Too early to give the deal an A+, but if all six guys pan out, this deal will be an A+, although it did end up even on both sides (DBacks extended Haren, have a top starter locked up for a while. If they lock up Webb, things will be looking awesome in the Snakepit).

Swisher- B+ Sweeney’s OPS is .010 less than that of Swisher and Sweeney was the White Sox’ #1 position prospect. Of course, Swisher’s having a down year and could easily rebound next year. I’ll miss Swish, but this deal probably will end up in the A’s favor in the long run. Worst case scenario is that Gio is a LOOGY, but I see him developing into a competent starter.

Blanton- A- Cardenas is the big dealbreaker. Blanton has given the Phillies 5 quality starts in 13 overall starts (well, 12, since one of them was cut short by rain). He has kept the Phillies in the games which he has pitched. I just don’t see him as a major improvement over what Happ would have done(but then, I might be misled by the gem Happ pitched v. the Cardinals). But I should stop ranting about the Phillies. Outman has converted well into a starter; he has a ways to go, but he’s done decently so far. If Outman ends up equaling Blanton, then the deal will be good regardless of Cardenas.

Harden- C+. I have to see more from Gallagher and Donaldson. If Beane were trading both Harden and Gaudin, he could/should have targetted Vitters. I LOVE Gallagher and think he’ll do well, but sorry Sean, Vitters is so much more useful in the A’s organization.

Marketing- Do we even need to go there?

Now with 100% more Canuck.

by Blicks on Sep 28, 2008 11:52 AM PDT   0 recs

Saying Vitters is better

does nothing to evaluate the trade.

We have no idea if vitters was offered (and I doubt he was)

by ohmangoAs on Sep 28, 2008 1:14 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Cubs wanted an ace-type pitcher to counter CC

No way any of the other “ace-types” on the market at the time(Burnett, Bedard although he got hurt right before the deadline) would’ve been moved without Vitters in the package, since no way in hell Cubs give up Soto.

The A’s gave the Cubs an ace(Harden) AND an insurance plan on the ace (Gaudin).

Now with 100% more Canuck.

by Blicks on Sep 28, 2008 6:06 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

again, still no evidence he was offered

Assumptions you make:
1. Harden (accounting for injury risk) + Gaudin = Ace
2. Cubs willing to offer Vitters (no. 3 picks don’t get moved).
3. Cubs won’t give up Soto, but will give up Vitters.
4. Beane said no to vitters (since your premise can’t be true unless beane declined vitters in favor of Gallagher)

Again, these 4 may be true, but it seems unlikely they are (you really think Beane would choose another SP over a top 3B prospect?)

by ohmangoAs on Sep 28, 2008 9:22 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Only the first assumption is made ...

he’s saying Beane should have insisted on Vitters, not that Beane should have preferred Vitters.

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

by devo on Sep 29, 2008 1:37 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Right, but reread his original argument. It argues Beane should have

targeted vitters. (ie preferred a trade for vitters) The word “insist” is yours alone, Devo.

I’m arguing that this “what if” scenario is only a meaningful line of criticism of the trade if Harden had ace value (assumption 1, which he makes when he refers to bedard etc.), and if Vitters could even theoretically be available (assumption 2). If assumption 2 weren’t true, his criticism would be akin to saying “Harden should be traded for ARod”. In other words, criticism based on saying Beane should have made an impossible demand. The argument assumes that it’s even possible to have a conversation on a #3 pick a year after he was drafted.

I’ll agree that the #3 assumption wasn’t made, now that I reread it.

Assumption 4 is badly worded. The assumption is really that Beane didn’t ask about vitters. If he did, then Blick’s argument is moot, because we know that the Cubs said no.

by ohmangoAs on Sep 30, 2008 9:08 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm just interpreting it to try to help you understand his post ...

it’s generally not terribly helpful to interpret things by using the exact same words.

I interpreted #2 as a precursor to #4, not as “it would be possible to talk Cubs into parting with Vitters”, which, of course, would be a necessary assumption.

Your assumption re #4 isn’t necessarily true. BB may have preferred Gallagher plus Patterson, Donaldson and Murton to Vitters on his own or perhaps the Cubs demanded more in return …who knows?

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

by devo on Sep 30, 2008 10:11 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

fair enough

I may have overdone this whole thing… I just react strongly to “Deal X was flawed because Deal Y would have been better.”

It strikes me as pretty meaningless, since there’s always a potential deal that appears superior, but there’s a reason why it didn’t happen.

by ohmangoAs on Sep 30, 2008 11:09 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I think what people (like, say, me) are saying

is not that Beane could have gotten Vitters, which we have no knowledge of, it’s that if he couldn’t get Vitters there was no justification for trading Harden to the Cubs at all. Now, this probably isn’t literally true, but let’s face it— the A’s didn’t even get one of the top FOUR prospects in a system that wasn’t good to begin with.

In a farm system where “something worthwhile” basically means “Vitters,” the statements “The A’s should have held out for something worthwhile” and “The A’s should have held out for Vitters” are indistinguishable.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 30, 2008 12:17 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't know....

holding out risks another injury, which risks getting nothing, or at least, a lot less.

Making the deal ensures some return, and, I think, a not too shabby return. I get your point though, PT. I’m really more objecting to the less nuanced position on this.

Also, holding on assumes you forecast the market to get better. We don’t know what the offers are like, but Beane’s history is not impatient—look how long he held out on Blanton. I’d think that the offers were all considerably less than AN would expect.

by ohmangoAs on Sep 30, 2008 5:48 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I see no reason why rebuilding teams should look for more risk

because they have plenty to lose.

In fact, mediocre teams (say the Cards) should be looking for risk- because luck is what will make them title-worthy. That’s what made Harden to the Cards make sense.

I’d argue low risk is best for top and bottom, with the most risk tolerance when you’re mediocre.

by ohmangoAs on Oct 1, 2008 6:32 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I think a healthy Harden is the best right-handed pitcher in the entire sport

So, yeah, I’d say he’s an Ace.

The Harden who throws 89 and is only fastball/change is still a #2 starter at worst.

by thejd44 on Sep 29, 2008 10:30 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

this misses the point

I’m saying that valuation of Harden has to account for injury risk. Actually, I like to think of Harden’s trade value as being that of a stud SP prospect. His upside is Ace-worthy, but he may not attain it consistently.

If Harden had never been injured, this would be a bad trade.

by ohmangoAs on Sep 30, 2008 9:10 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Harden + Gaudin = Ace

1. Gaudin has enough upside to make up for Harden’s injury risk. And, Harden healthy is an ace.
3. Soto is a frontrunner for ROY and one of the best hitting catchers in the game. Of course they don’t give him up.
4. I never said or assumed that Beane said no to Vitters. Most likely, Vitters wasn’t offered. Vitters is not worth more than a season and a half of an “ace” for a World Series contender. Harden + Gauden = ace. Vitters could easily not pan out.

Remember, 100 years. Desperation sets in.

Now with 100% more Canuck.

by Blicks on Sep 29, 2008 7:30 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

No. 1: We wayyy overrate Gaudin

The friendly McAfee phenomenon makes Beane look like a genius, but Gaudin isn’t some unbelieveable stud. Gaudin has posted an ERA over 6 in Chicago. That’s AFTER a switch to the NL. He’s never posted an ERA under 4.4. Now, he’s been a little unlucky (FIP = 4.5 this season), but that makes him Dallas Braden, not some SP stud. Seriously, he’s 25 with a 4.5 FIP. Braden is 5 months younger with the same performance.

I’ll concede no. 3- you’re right.

On no. 4, we have to assume Beane didn’t ask for Vitters for this conversation (and your argument) to make sense. if he did ask, and got shut down, that proves my number 1 argument, that you overvalue Harden + Gaudin.

by ohmangoAs on Sep 30, 2008 9:19 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't know where you're getting that his FIP is 4.5

Fangraphs has it at 4.15 this year. Most of the reason his ERA is inflated is that he has a low LOB%— and this is particularly true of his time in Chicago, where most of the damage was inflicted in 2 outings (6 runs in 2 innings and 4 runs in 1/3 of an inning).

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 30, 2008 12:10 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Marketing has obviously been horrible

We (the people of AN) could put together some sort of a “guerilla marketing” campaign that would be better.

by uci anteater on Sep 28, 2008 1:20 PM PDT   0 recs

Yay for gorillas!!!!!!!!

-Cindi

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 Sep 28, 2008 4:09 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

They're seeking power over overall tools

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Sep 28, 2008 10:25 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

did you just call monkeyball a tool?

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Sep 28, 2008 10:31 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

We could have used Gorillaz marketing this year

“I’m useless, but not for long. The future is coming on.”

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

by 5Aces on Sep 29, 2008 9:24 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Kotsay for Joey Devine

Also looks like a good trade.

by JoeyO on Sep 28, 2008 3:25 PM PDT   0 recs

Slightly. And Kendall for Blevins.

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 Sep 28, 2008 4:10 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

And Rob Bowen. He's awesome somehow.

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 28, 2008 4:46 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Kotsay for Joey Devine was pure awesome

Kotsay wouldn’t have made the A’s a contending team, he wouldn’t have even made the A’s a .500 team. He probably would have kept DFA off the team, but I’d rather have DFA and Devine than Kotsay and no Devine.

No way you trade Kotsay at the deadline and get a player with Devine’s upside. Not with the amount of time Kotsay missed in 2007 and 2008 with injuries.

But then I really like Joey. But I loved, and still do, Kotsay (and his wife) as well.

Now with 100% more Canuck.

by Blicks on Sep 28, 2008 6:02 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah, Mark Kotsay really isn't that good.

He was ok with Atlanta, but once he got back into the American League he was bad.

In some ways, this was Beane’s best deal. A guy like Haren should bring in a nice haul. Swisher should, too. But to get an “ace reliever” (does that term exist?) for half a season of Mark freaking Kotsay is incredible.

by thejd44 on Sep 29, 2008 10:34 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Kotsay for Devine was a steal in my opinion.

Now that Kotsay’s salary is off the books, we shuold all start to see the bebnefits for the next several years+…..

by mrod on Oct 1, 2008 10:52 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Trades good. Marketing bad.

Haren (A) — I don’t see how Beane could have done any better

Swisher (B) — I liked it at the time, and still think Gio and Fautino should produce at least one, if not two, rotation members. Sweeney as a 4th OF is useful.

Kotsay (A) — Devine’s really good, and I didn’t think Kotsay would fetch much of anything

Harden (B-) — I wouldn’t have minded getting this package if it was at the deadline. Doing it weeks before was only defensible if they thought Harden was about to fall apart, and even then I’d have taken the chance to wait two weeks and see what was available. Patterson and Murton are a lot worse than I thought they’d be.

Blanton (A-) — Cardenas is really highly regarded (although I don’t see the power yet), and Outman looks like he’ll be a decent starter. That’s a lot for someone like Blanton. Not sure whether even more could have been had in the offseason. It sounded like their demands were too high then.

Marketing has been about the worst it could possibly be till now, but if Wolff and Crowley can swing the CSN West thing and get it on stations throughout the SF Bay Area, Central Valley, Central Coast, and Nevada that would be a coup. That would help them become more attractive to radio stations everywhere in their mlb region. A new stadium on top of that would make Wolff’s tenure a rousing success….which it so far has not been.

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 28, 2008 4:56 PM PDT   0 recs

I sure hope they get on CSN West and Comcast starts carrying it

because right now I’m inexplicably missing Cal football games which are not being shown on any of the base channels…

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 28, 2008 5:01 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

What you two are talking about

Is called broadcasting, not marketing.

by GusanoQuemador on Sep 29, 2008 9:43 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

How is something designed to increase the number of customers not marketing?

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 29, 2008 3:16 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Is playing succesful baseball marketing?

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

by devo on Sep 29, 2008 6:31 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

In Oakland? Apparently not.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 29, 2008 7:43 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes. Remember the 4 Ps -- Playing, Price, Promotion and Place

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 29, 2008 8:36 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

My grades (keep in mind, I'm a tough grader)

Scutaro: B-. Marco had a little bit of value, but not much.

Haren: A. It’s really hard to argue with the package they got back; my biggest quibble is that the fact that the team got 3 lefties back kind of unbalanced the pitching depth chart a bit. The A’s got both upside and certainty out of this deal.

Swisher: B-. I like Gio, but the A’s may not have done due diligence on De Los Santos and I’m not high on Sweeney. The A’s will probably end up getting more out of this group than the White Sox, but it’s not a certainty by any means.

Kotsay: A. Getting any value out of Kotsay was amazing; getting an ace reliever for him is far better than amazing.

Harden: C. Murton is already useless to the A’s at this point, Patterson hasn’t hit, and I’m still not drinking the Josh Donaldson kool-aid, though he was fine as a low-risk throw in. Gallagher has #1 starter potential but hasn’t put it together yet. I’d give this a B if it was for just Harden, but including Gaudin as well really irked me.

Blanton: B+. Getting Cardenas addressed an organizational weakness with a high-potential prospect. Outman looks like no worse than a good reliever with some potential to be a quality starter. Spencer will probably be the next Richie Robnett but could be the guy the A’s thought they were getting when they drafted Robnett.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 28, 2008 5:17 PM PDT   0 recs

I'd like to write one,

but to be honest I agree with everything PT said, except for the Spencer part. I just see Spencer more as the “Robnett the A’s actually got” kind of player.

So instead of taking 4 minutes and writing my own, I’m going to be lazy and just +1 everything PT wrote except for the Spencer part.

Sometimes life will strike you out on a curve ball and the only choice you have is to flip off the umpire and walk to first base anyway.

by Threepwood XX on Sep 28, 2008 5:55 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Wow you are a bit harsh on the Harden trade aren't you PT?

I would think you would give Patterson, Murton, Donaldson and even Gallagher a chance to prove themselves instead of using the small sample size each has had. Mind you Gallagher has has a longer time with the big league club but I think they all need time to grow. In face everyone for all the trades do.

When BB traded Harden he had no promise that Harden would be able to continue pitching the rest of the year. With Harden’s history everyone wanted him traded, they didn’t care what they got. I think we got alot of potential and that is more than we have had.

I agree pretty much with the rest of your grades, maybe I would put the Swisher trade a little higher.

"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"

by Eastbayjim on Sep 28, 2008 10:26 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't think the Harden trade GOT the A's a lot of potential

I don’t think Murton or Patterson has the potential to be better than average. Gallagher and Donaldson have fairly good potential, but Gaudin and Harden were good in actuality, and I think Gaudin has similar potential to Gallagher in prospect terms. Donaldson isn’t that likely to make it to the majors.

The best case scenario for the A’s is that they end up with players who are similarly good in value terms, but are with the club for a longer/more cost-controlled period. That’s not a great scenario. I’m pretty certain the team could have gotten more for the two of them if Beane hadn’t panicked when Harden started showing signs of dead-arm (which turned out to be a non-issue).

I give the trade a C because I think it’s about equally likely that the team would have gotten more value from keeping the two of them as from making the deal. Or to put it another way, if the trade had never happened, I think the A’s roster would be about as good. That’s not a good trade; trades should make both teams’ rosters better. Hence, C.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 28, 2008 10:41 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I think Gaudin has similar potential to Gallagher in prospect terms.

i’m a big gaudin fan, but why do you think gaudin and gallagher have similar potential?
that seems like a pessimistic assessment of gallagher’s potential.

Gallagher has #1 starter potential

or is it that you think gaudin also has #1 starter potential?
as someone who has always believed gaudin should be starting, i don’t see it.

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Sep 28, 2008 11:03 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

The A's stated on several occasions that Gaudin had the best stuff on the team other than Harden

Combine that with the vastly improved command he showed this year. His K and BB numbers from 2008 aren’t far off what Haren showed in 2007.

At different points in his career, he’s flashed the K rate, the GB rate, and the BB rate of an ace pitcher. He hasn’t put them together yet, but if he does he could be very, very good.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 29, 2008 1:12 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

but his FIP is identical to Dallas Braden's

and both are 25. Gaudin’s actually 5 months older.

At some point, people need to realize that Gaudin was a great pickup for the cost, but we’re way overrating him.

by ohmangoAs on Sep 30, 2008 9:24 AM PDT