Staturday: Does Jason Giambi help the A's?
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 9:00 PM PST
426 comments
A few months ago, I opined:
That means that signing Giambi and sticking Cust in the outfield will garner us, at most, an extra 2 wins (+25 - 15 - (-10) = 20 runs, 10 runs = 1win) - for which we'd have the pleasure of paying Jason Giambi about $10 MM.
I'm not opposed to paying $10 MM for an extra few wins, but only if a) we're at the cusp of contention, b) there are no better options, and c) the move has some upside. None of those three criteria are met here. We're not knocking at the door to the division, there are lots of low key upgrades we might make in the infield, and there is virtually zero upside to signing Jason Giambi beyond what I've outlined here.
In the light of Preparation G's "imminent" return to Oakland, let's revisit that conclusion. The price has dropped considerably since I wrote the above. Management believes that we are at the cusp of contention (whether or not you think so is, well, up to you). It's arguable whether or not there are better options, but I'm of the mind that this move doesn't necessarily preclude others, although space on the 25-man roster is becoming tight. I think we can mostly agree that there's not a lot of upside to this move, as Giambi is both a known quantity offensively and also an injury risk due (at least) to age.
Thanks to Chone Smith, we have projections for next season at our fingertips. For the purposes of this post, I'll just assume about 150 games of playing time for everyone - that obviously won't be true, but it will give us a starting point.
Prior to signing Giambi, I think we would have seen an outfield of Holliday, Sweeney, and Buck. With Giambi, there are two options.
First, send Buck to the bench (or the minors), run Cust into the outfield, and let Giambi DH. Cust versus Giambi at DH is a wash - both project to about 20 runs above average over 150 games. So the exchange here is Buck in a corner OF spot for Cust in a corner outfield spot.
Buck is projected to be a slightly above average hitter and if you assume above average defense (+7 runs), you're essentially talking about an average player. That's +2.5 wins above replacement for a full year. Cust is a far superior hitter, but if you consider his outfield defense to be very bad (-10 runs), he comes out to...+2.5 wins. No gain, although given Buck's injury history I would guess that Cust in the OF will be worth more than Buck+replacements in the OF over the millions of possible future trajectories.
Second option is to bench (or option) Barton and live with Giambi's awful defense at first base. Barton projects as Buck's equal with the bat. Throw in some slightly above average defense (+5 runs) and you've got yourself a +2 win player. Giambi, like Cust, is far superior with the bat but a butcher in the field (-10 runs). Put it together and you've got a +2.25 win player. Slight gain, although it's essentially a wash.
Prior to the Holliday trade, a Giambi signing might have made some sense, as pushing Cust to the outfield would have replaced a truly putrid hitter. But with Holliday in the fold, we're pushing out a guy like Buck. And replacing Barton with Giambi is also a wash. Defense counts for something in this game, and Giambi doesn't have it.
As for depth, Giambi (by proxy) adds injury insurance to 1B and corner OF. That's good, considering that Buck is never healthy and Barton's head might lose an battle with the bottom of a hotel swimming pool. The depth is nice, but this team's major injury concerns are at 3B and 2B, where the potential replacements for our projected starters are...well, let's just hope that Chavez and Ellis can play.
So, for $6 MM or whatever it is, this move doesn't really improve the team, doesn't add a missing skill, probably inhibits the development of either Barton or Buck, and results in the loss of a roster spot (the likely casualty is Rajai Davis). Thumbs down.
This is a team with a whole lot of "average" around the diamond, with premium players in LF and 2B. SS (and possibly 3B) will be the only sucking wound, and we need to fill it in a bad way. At this point, an overpay for Orlando Cabrera might actually be a good idea. Hey - does anybody know what David Eckstein's health situation is?
0 recs |
426 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Giambi Helps
We have gotten significantly better in the middle of the order with the addition of Giambi. Sure, he may not exactly help the team’s batting average, but he is a legitimate threat to go deep in every at-bat, even more so than Jack Cust.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jan 6, 2009 9:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
alas
“defense counts in this game”…so that defensive lineup invariably sucks more than one with barton.
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Jan 6, 2009 9:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The defense sucked in 2000, and the division was eminently winnable
and a mixture of rookie pitching and aging sluggers (I still love Matt Stairs and raise a glass to John Jaha) took care of business.
Nine years later, is it possible the formula is the same?
"I have more questions after these."-WaddellCanseco
by Gaijin_Suketto on Jan 6, 2009 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The 2009 rotation looks nothing like the 2000 staff
And Holliday + Giambi aren’t enough to make next year’s line-up look like the group from 2000.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jan 7, 2009 5:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It certainly does not
especially with Dallas Braden listed as our 3rd pitcher
by Athletic on Jan 7, 2009 12:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Giambi circa 2000 >>> Giambi circa 2009
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Jan 7, 2009 5:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and he is only costing 4.5 million
5 million at the most. You can’t beat it for the production Giambi’s gonna give ya. I think it’s a splendid move.
by mrod on Jan 6, 2009 10:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
A shortstop or a starting pitcher?
Assuming the A’s only have the budget for one more free agent, which position should they upgrade? I want Crosby wearing another uniform too, but wouldn’t Sheets over starter #5 be a bigger impact than Cabrera over Crosby?
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
by rebus on Jan 6, 2009 9:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
yes
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course it would
It would also be a much bigger price tag. You get what you pay for.
Hell, in an ideal world, the A’s would do both (after all, once you’ve signed one Type A the second gets even cheaper). I’m not holding my breath, however.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 9:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
people who say Giambi isn't an upgrade over Barton...
are off their rockers. I’m sorry, take you’re stathead glasses off for a moment and look at the game.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Okay -- I see a DH who pushes a shitty outfielder into the field.
I see a first baseman who is so awful on defense that even though he’s still a pretty good hitter, he’s such a liability that playing the field makes him an average player overall.
I see a 22 year old first baseman who was the #1 prospect in the organization 2 years ago blocked by a 38 year old on the downside of his career, and either being forced to not play full time or go back to the minors after playing in MLB all last year.
I see a 25 year old right fielder who had a spectacular rookie season before getting hurt, and now will get blocked if Cust has to play the field.
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 9:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Giambi will play 1B the majority of the season...
Cust will DH the majority of the season. Giambi will outhit Barton by several magnitude. Giambi’s defense will be serviceable and probably not cost us more than one or two games this year. His bat alone will, probably, by itself win us 10.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope you're right.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
by rebus on Jan 6, 2009 9:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he (Foolsh) is right (mostly)
and while the stathead stuff is mucho interesting (I mean that seriously), there’s more to the game than that. We could set aside the numbers/ projections for a moment (which do seem to be pointing to doom n gloom), and try to smell the salty bay breeze as it cuts thru the 880 smog. Shake off our worries about the starting rotation for the time being, and imagine/appreciate a lineup with Giambi, Holliday, Cust, Sweeney, Suzuki and Buck (and dare we think Chavy?). Think of a team (that in reality no matter what is still in a building phase) that can actually produce some runs this year. Think of the potential chemistry, the personalities, and how the young guys will learn from bigger-than-life hitters like G and Holliday. Think of Giambi with a lot to prove to A’s fans. He’s hungry, he owes us, and he can still rake. He needs to grow his beard back and catch some Cali rays. He’s coming off a 96 RBI season. The gulls circling over the coliseum are telling me he just might be the x-factor in a very interesting year.
by oaklidiot on Jan 6, 2009 10:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Um... no offense, but if you think Giambi is going to be worth 10 wins with the bat you're high.
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i'm gonna count the walkoffs in 2009...
lol
or, at the very least, the number of games that Giambi’s run(s) are the difference between winning and losing.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And subtract from that total
the number of games where Barton’s/Buck’s run(s) would have been the difference between winning and losing.
Oh wait, you can’t see those. So sure, let’s only count what we can see.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jan 6, 2009 9:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You then have to add back the number of games the A's win
because they were extra pumped by the slightly more fans Giambi’s presence brought to the home games.
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't underestimate the fans energy:
Ask any player and they’ll tell you that the fans do make a difference. The team is better when they play in the COLISEUM, not the Mausoleum.
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Buck will be in the outfield...
his runs will count. Barton’s runs? I can count last years’ on one hand. Okay, I embellish… okay, I exaggerate… okay, I lie. But, please…. really?
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, really.
You can’t judge the net change from replacing a player by only counting what the new guy does. You have to count what the replaced buy would have done, too.
Otherwise, any replacement is a net positive. For example, suppose in April we trade Matt Holliday for a bundle of prospects and Matt Murton replaces him for the rest of the season. Suppose Murton has one great game in July where he’s en fuego and his walk-off homer wins the game. By your logic, replacing Holliday with Murton made us one game better.
That’s stupid, you also have to account for what Holliday would have done if he were still there.
Yes, Giambi is better than Barton, but Barton is still good for something, and that something is what you have to subtract from Giambi’s accomplishments in order to properly judge. The problem, of course, is that you can only speculate about what the missing guy would have done, so you never really know.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jan 6, 2009 9:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Foolsh knows his arguments are foolsh
He’s just in “have fun messing with people” mode with this exchange, right Foolsh?
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Foolsh is out-Foolshing himself by several magnitude
au contra ire
by JediLeroy on Jan 6, 2009 10:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nico knows me too well
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 10:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Think about how his OBP will help the leverage on the pitcher:
Or how many more fastballs the hitter in front of him will see, as opposed to Barton or Buck…Like I said below, the line-up is a living breathing thing that is amde up of multiple parts that each have have an effect on eachother. It is not single action for single part and single part for single action.
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
All the evidence we have suggests that that effect is, at most, limited
to whether the pitcher is in the stretch or not. Hitters do not improve other hitters’ performance.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To prove a point I would point to Jef Kent's MVP Season:
He was sucking balls until they moved him to the 3 hole and put Barry Behind him, then he took off and won the MVP. I think that is SOME evidence.
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 1:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To further this point...
managers in the NL West routinely asked their pitchers to stay well within the strike zone against the Giant’s number 8 and 9 hitters late in the game in order to limit the possibility of facing Bonds again with the game on the line. Having an extra power hitter absolutely changes the way a manager, pitcher and catcher have to approach a game.
by JustinKase on Jan 7, 2009 2:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OK
That doesn’t prove the point.
Just thought you should know.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 3:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My point is that not ALL evidence points to it:
I think I proved THAT point
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 4:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's like saying a coin landing heads is evidence that the coin is biased toward heads
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 4:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Surely you understand how asinine that is, right?
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 9:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand adding Holliday and Giambi...
actually makes this team competitive (if not way more interesting).
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Again -- you're going to completely ignore what salb posted about Barton v Giambi?
Basically if the A’s were an 88 win team before, they’re now about an 88.5 win team with Giambi playing instead of Barton.
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 9:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yes, I'm going to completely igno Barre what salb posted...
because I don’t believe in “projected” wins. I believe in actual wins. And, I believe that Giambi’s bat gives a hell of a lot better chance at winning games than Barton’s bat (at this time). Call me Foolsh… but, we’ll see.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 10:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
wow... igno Barre...
and, I didn’t even realize I knew Latin.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 10:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Projections
I think we’re putting a little too much stock in these projections… Even the best projections are only 65-70% accurate (for hitters; for pitchers, they’re even worse). The idea that we can say, with precision, that the A’s are only .5 wins better with Giambi than they are with Barton is a little bit ludicrous. Players fluctuate from their projections; it’s possible we’ll be worse in 2009 with Giambi than we would have been with Barton starting from Day One; it’s also possible we’ll be much better with Giambi than we would have been with Barton. At the end of the day, when you’re presented with an opportunity to make your team more competitive, I think you take it (especially when it only costs $10M over two years… it’s not my $$$).
I’m not a fan of blocking Barton or Buck. I think both of those guys should be integral building blocks of our team over the next three to four years (and maybe longer), but the AL West could be there for the taking this year… I think that Beane sees a chance to win and he’s taking it.
by Uncle Charlie on Jan 7, 2009 6:20 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed with everything you've written here.
Nice job.
by jdub69 on Jan 7, 2009 9:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
good point about projections
they’re only projections. true, before the season starts they’re all we have to go by, but everybody who spits out projections as if they are guarantees needs to relax and admit that there is a margin of error.
and i know that stats show that hot and cold streaks and momentum and intangibles are fictitious, but giambi (for this team and city) is an energy guy. he will energize the crowd and the rest of the team without a doubt. he also does have something to prove by going back west, so can we project that little bit of extra motivation? he’s a great at-bat almost every time (where did he rank in pitches per plate appearance?) which will certainly rub off on the younger guys. if chavy is healthy, having holliday, giambi, and chavez around to share the job of teaching the young guys will be great for the team. there are definitely some holes in the lineup, but this will be a good team this year.
as far as the lineup concerns, barton is definitely the one who will miss out the most. given his play last year, don’t his projections for this year come out to jack sh!t? he looked like he could use a little low-pressure time to get himself back together. injuries are inevitable, so he’ll definitely get some playing time. realistically between rest and injuries, he’ll probably get 30-40 starts, and if he seems like he’s learned how to hit again maybe he’ll get some PH chances. watching giambi on the job will be beneficial to his development.
i don’t care what baseball reference says, there are intangibles to the game. sure the 2000-2004 teams had a ton of talent, but you can’t ignore the chemistry and say that didn’t contribute to them playing a little above their heads. giambi is going to be great for the A’s in 2009 (and maybe 2010).
by jlanning17 on Jan 7, 2009 9:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd go so far as to say
That the whole Sabermetric study of baseball is only about %65 – %70 percent accurate. I mean…that’s nothing to sneeze at don’t get me wrong. I consider myself “a stat guy” for the very reason that it’s even that accurate.. But there are so many intangibles in baseball (health, leadership, fan appreciation, even defense to a certain extent) that there is simply no way to say “this guy is not going to help this team.” Not that that’s what being said necessarily, but we just alway’s need to keep in mind that there’s a %30 chance that our sabermetric studies are wrong.
by GusanoQuemador on Jan 7, 2009 10:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Barton's biggest stat of 2008:
1 Dive into 1 shallow pool cost him enough playing time to make his 2008 season a lost one.
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 1:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree Foolsh
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 1:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Albert Pujols' bat, by itself, does not win 10 games.
I’ve written several posts explaining how performance translates to wins. Perhaps you should read those, then come back here and comment. If you can’t be bothered and would prefer to make both outlandish and belligerent statements, I prefer you stay out of Staturday threads.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 9:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that Albert Pujols' bat, by itself, doesn't win 10 games,
but what about his bat with Pujols holding it? Aha!
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
qotm
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 10:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you and I count them differently...
I count a Giambi “win” as one in which he gets the differential RBI whereas Barton would’ve wiffed at strike 3.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not just would have popped up to shallow left field, mind you -
whiffed.
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i knew it was whiffed...
i almost spell-checked it. LOL
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 10:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or you could just hope Giambi miraculously doubles Bonds' peak years numbers...
Miraculous… that’s what they’re injecting nowadays, right?
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
by rebus on Jan 6, 2009 9:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
maybe you should start your own fan site
and then you can ban non-sabermetricians from posting. it will probably be a fun site to read.
by jlanning17 on Jan 7, 2009 9:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If a team loses a majority of their games by one run:
ANd they add two players that hit 30 home runs and drive in 100 runs that replace hitter that were averaging 10 HRs and 50 RBI, what is the value of those two bats to THAT team as opposed to adding them to a team that loses a majority of their games by two runs? I ask this JUST offensively, NOT defensively too.
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If a team loses the majority of their games by one run,
it will improve the next season without bringing in ANY “bats,” because it was simply very unlucky to lose as many games as it did.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
or were they lucky that they lost those games by one run instead of by two?
"Sweeney's a white Andre Ethier."--a white, drunk Billy Beane
by Cutthemullet on Jan 7, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I see said the blind man:
So there is luck, but no effect of one hitter on another…I love the World of the Leprichauns!?!?
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 3:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
'We had a deal, Kyle!'
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jan 7, 2009 3:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say that.
I said he wasn’t much of an upgrade, and if you believe that Giambi is better defensively than -10 runs/150 games, then the gap widens. Still, there’s no way that replacing Barton with Giambi projects the A’s to more than one additional win next year.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 9:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
projection, projections...
what did Barton “project” at last year? How’d he perform in comparison?
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 9:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Giambi's presence also keeps Barton under A's control in 2014
That’s not insignificant, potentially (though in fact, 1B will likelier be patrolled by Doolittle or Carter that year, but who knows?).
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It makes him more valuable in a trade then
No matter which way you slice it, more years of team control is pretty much always a +.
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's
by iamawesomer on Jan 6, 2009 9:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Giambi is definitely worth at least +1 win imo
as salb mentions, for one he provides the depth we need, which despite losing a roster spot is probably worth at least half a win over the course of the season on average. Secondly, I disagree that Giambi inhibits Barton’s development. After all, it will be Barton that gets bumped unless Buck/Cunningham tank or get injured. Barton is DAMN young, more AAA will help him won’t it, and allow us to get more out of him? Its not like he tore up AAA when he was there. They should try to either a) convert him into a 3B or allow him to develop his hitting/power to play 1B.
Thirdly, even salb projects Giambi to be slightly better than Barton. ~1/8 of a win or so, and lets keep in mind these projections assume that a) giambi gets worse and b) Barton gets better.
Will Giambi get worse? I don’t really think so. I don’t claim to be a pro scout, but I did watch a shitload of giambi at bats (~80-100) last season for fantasy purposes and he looked the best I had seen in quite some time. And I can definitely tell the difference between luck outcomes and earned outcomes.
Will Barton get better? Well for one, offense aside, I’m not sold on his defense. Yes, he is at least average, but its not like he is the second coming. He could regress there. His offense could definitely come around, but even if he is better he would still have been maturing with the big-league club. Why waste our cheap control on him to watch him develop?
Giambi is a short-term improvement, a long-term improvement, and an insurance policy for now and 2010. I like it, but I still think we need a good pitcher or SS to contend.
Damn, we’d be looking good with Furcal right now…sigh
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 6, 2009 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why can't
Cust and Giambi just split DH/first base exclusively?
Then you can just use it as a rest day for someone else for the 30-40 games a year that they take off combined. No reason whatsoever that Cust should ever have to be in the Outfield.
" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico loose a ball in the Sun? "
by aaronb on Jan 7, 2009 2:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
First Base and LF are very, very different
Cust would very likely be the worst 1b in MLB, by far.
He’s never played the position in a major league game.
Batting 4th for the 2014 San Jose A's: 26-year-old RF Justin Upton, in the 1st season of a nine year, $250M deal.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 8, 2009 2:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Now that we've got Giambi in the fold
why aren’t we going for Orlando Cabrera? He only costs money and a pick that shouldn’t be a determining factor in a ‘go for it’ year. He’ll give us another win or two, and if the last two moves haven’t signaled to the fan base that Beane is serious this year, then an O Cab singing will. I think that if nothing else, it gives excitement to the fanbase (whether wolf cares about the fanbase or not is for your discussion) while ensuring that we at least contend with the angels/rangers. Plus, having BoCro at a backup is worth something, assuming we’re not dropping him.
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Jan 6, 2009 9:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Cabrera
Well, maybe management doesn’t want to give up that draft pick. I’m just speculating here, though.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jan 6, 2009 9:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
neither do I, for a shitty jerk of a player like Cabrera.
I’d rather play Crosby and keep the pick, knowing full well that Cabrera would increase the chances for playoffs this year. No upside, no plate discipline. Go away.
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 6, 2009 10:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
MARK GRUDZIELANEK
Is there any chance that Grudzielanek can play SS again? He’s out there looking for a job and he’s almost a lock for a 290/345/405 season…He’s an above average /gold glove 2B and was a SS for years…
by Olijerez77 on Jan 6, 2009 9:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he's a lock for a .750 OPS
He’s projected around .730, so I’d consider him a lock for at least .710ish.
But how many 38 (going on 39) year old guys are still playing, let alone shifting to a more difficult defensive position?
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
by rebus on Jan 6, 2009 9:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok...I'm just looking for options at SS
by Olijerez77 on Jan 6, 2009 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The player who comes to mind is Randy Velarde
But Velarde was kind of a physical specimen in his refusal to age.
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What I got to wondering - mostly not seriously -
was what would happen if you stuck Orlando Hudson at SS. How would his offense and defense compare to that of Crosby? O. Cabrera? Renteria?
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a good question.
My impression is that Hudson’s defense has declined over the past several years, so that his range is now only slightly above average at second. If true, that’s not going to translate well to short.
Still, the fan scouting report still likes him, ranking him higher than Brian Roberts, Placido Polanco, and Dustin Pedroia (but worse than Mark Ellis, Brandon Philips, and Asdrubal Cabrera). However, the fans agree that his arm isn’t strong at all, and I would guess that alone would preclude a move to SS.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 9:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was assuming he'd be Eckstein (circa 2005 or so) defensively,
but a nice lift offensively as a SS.
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I know. The pickens are slim...
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
by rebus on Jan 6, 2009 9:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It likely isn't much but...
I think Giambi probably adds more like half a win to a win over Barton. Plus, Barton’s not a sure thing defensively. He’s been good for a year and a month defensively. But defensive stats aren’t completely accurate until about three years in. If Barton came along with good scouting reports I’d be sure to believe he’s a good defensive player. He certainly passes the eye test. But, maybe his bad scouting reports are more accurate.
I do believe Barton is a plus defender, but the stats aren’t all we should look at right now defensively. And after all I just said, I’m going to contradict myself. Signing Giambi allows the A’s to send Barton to AAA to learn 3b.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
by vignette17 on Jan 6, 2009 9:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Barton's not a 2 win player at this point
Arguing that requires you to project him at something like a .775 OPS next season (in Oakland). I don’t see it, not from Marcel, not from any of the other projection systems. ZiPS has him at a .710. James, a .738.
Giambi is about a 2.5 win player, Barton about a 1.5 win player. This move not only makes the 2009 A’s better at a bargain price, it defers Barton’s 5 remaining years to his age 24-28 seasons (better than 23-27 for most players), adds depth to the team, and provides a contingency against the inevitable Travis Buck injury parade. And there’s a no-risk, inexpensive option on it as well. It’s a good deal for Oakland.
And as I’m piecing this together, I see someone else has brought up the Barton-to-3B option, which is also on the table here.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 9:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
See, now Barton to 3B makes signing Giambi totally worth it.
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 9:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OK, now I'm *definitely* in favor of the signing
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Barton: +4 offense, +5 defense, -12.5 position, + 25 replacement = 21.5 runs
The offense is a CHONE, and the projected OPS is .750.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 9:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
(Not to say that CHONE is the be-all, end-all)
Your argument certainly has merit, and goes to show how even slight uncertainties in projection can lead to large dollar decisions.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 9:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I see Barton as more like a -5 this season than a +5
Something else to chew on: I think Barton compares pretty well to Kevin Youkilis (similar hitting style, defensive ability, physique, track record, etc). I dunno about you, but keeping Kevin Youkilis through his age 28 and (if they use Giambi’s option and keep Barton from accruing more than 151 service days in the next 2 seasons) 29 seasons sounds pretty good to me.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 10:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with most of this...
well, if indeed, I saw in Barton what I saw in Youkilis early on. But, so far, I haven’t… and, similar physique? Really? Well, Youk is 6’1" and 220 lbs. and every inch and pound of it. Barton is smaller than I am and I’m 5’11" and oh… I don’t know… 190? LOL
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
oh, and I'll agree with it even more...
when Barton bats .312 with 29 bombs and 115 RBI. Until then, mark me down as “skeptical.”
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
At Barton's age for NEXT season, Kevin Youkilis was putting up a 310/420/420 line in A-ball
Of course he isn’t as physically developed as Youkilis. He’s 22.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 11:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
isn't that all the more reason...
to keep Barton in AAA. And, let Giambi handle the actual hitting MLB pitching? Or, hell, let Barton watch from the bench if there is room for him. Maybe he’ll learn something.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes... I thought that was what I was advocating...
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
this exactly what I tried to say above
only this is more concise and coming from a credible source.
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 6, 2009 10:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Preparation Sensation
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 9:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Barton goes to AAA - for sure
Holiday Sweeney and Buck if our OF to start the season with Giambi at first and Cust at DH. If Barton is doing well in AAA and one struggles then I could see a few things being shuffled around, but I doubt Barton is going to be on the MLB roster while sitting on the bench if he can start everyday for sacramento. If cust, sweeney or Buck struggles he comes up….and lets face it….Have we gone through a month, let alone a season without injuries? Giambi deserves a punch in the face from all of us, really! but he does improve us.
by ryanmoser on Jan 6, 2009 9:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Let's consider the possible Rivercats team for a second:
A rotation of Cahill, Anderson, Gio Gonzalez, Mazzaro, Simmons, with the lineup led by Cunningham in the OF and Barton at 1B. Yow!
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
With Carter and Doolittle on the way
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 9:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably not Carter in 2009
He should spend a full year at AA in 2009, IMO. But Doolittle, yes. That could be a pretty darn awesome team, for at least the stretch all those guys might all be there together.
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It is all exciting
It is good to be an Oakland A’s fan
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 9:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Even if the MLB team makes the majors
The AAA team might be more exciting
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 6, 2009 10:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
another Rivercats championship... yawn
god, I wish I were a ’cats fan, now.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
On a Side Note
Your story had the word “cusp” in it. That’s the third time I’ve read the word “cusp” in one day. That’s a new record for me.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jan 6, 2009 9:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The problem with the word "cusp" is that it strikes out too much
It should certainly NEVER be second in a sentence.
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The cusp of the issue is that....
dang, we’ll never know. Sentence killed by strickouts.
"When I was a kid, having someone correct your grammar was a sign that they cared and wanted you to present yourself in the best possible light. That being said, you should really learn the difference between plurals and possessives." -- RS
by oblique on Jan 6, 2009 10:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
is being on the cusp...
like being on the verge?
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If Gio is in sac then what is our Starting rotation ????
by ryanmoser on Jan 6, 2009 9:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Duchscherer, Gallagher, Eveland, Braden,
and either Outman or Sheets/Mulder/Wolf/Looper…
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope not Wolf...
I don’t think his away splits were too good last year. Maybe I’m wrong. But, I guess if there were an AL park for him to pitch in, the Coli would be it.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rotation
After Justin Duchscherer and Dana Eveland, it’s anybody’s guess. There are still multiple options if Gio Gonzalez isn’t included.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jan 6, 2009 9:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I appreciate your time on this Sal
But, I feel like you may be putting too much stock in Barton’s D. And his bat was fairly atrocious last year. I think he benefits from more time in Sac, and if we were going to compete this year we needed some more pop at the corner. This move makes me optimistic.
Now, Ben Sheets please?
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 9:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't know that too much stock is placed in Barton's D
It’s just that Giambi’s is so bad now that Barton doesn’t have to do a lot with the bat to be as good as Giambi overall next year.
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 9:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't trust the tools
I just haven’t read enough to believe that the tools we are using to evaluate defense are all that accurate. Not precise enough to make a distinction between 2.25 and 2.5 wins. It’s just too much extrapolation, in my opinion. And to then make some kind of projection? I don’t buy it.
As an aside, my opinion is based to some extent on the work that Sal has done.
Besides, what is the alternative? Dunn? Abreu? I just don’t see spending the money on those guys. Not for more than a year or two.
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 9:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
everybody told me defensive stats were bullshit...
when they showed Byrnes was better than Kotsay. Now, they’re the gospel and make Barton better than Giambi…. give me a fucking break.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
thank you, and also last time i checked, you need to score at least one run per game to win, which is something the a’s have a hard time doing
watching barton hit was as fun as getting kicked in the ball
by jhroac02 on Jan 6, 2009 11:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ummm... okay...
i’m not sure to whom you are responding… but, I think we agree.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I personally don't trust defensive stats, but by all accounts the metrics themselves have actually improved by leaps and bounds since you started that argument
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
jinx
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 11:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Beatcha by a minute
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I had to spellcheck luddite
ha
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
nice
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no they haven't...
prove it. LOL
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes they have! Prove they haven't!
Ha! This is fun!
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hmm, cocktails anyone?
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How would one go about "proving" that?
You can’t use a metric to prove its own truth.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Stephen Hawking could
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
... while taking a more direct route to a flyball than Byrnes
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Byrnes may not have always taken the direct route...
but, he always got it (more often than Kotsy would have).
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kotsay would have never, ever gotten to that foul ball...
off the third base line. Ever!
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hard to get to when you're a center fielder.
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 11:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
he wouldn't have gotten to it if he were...
standing on the bullpen mound where Byrnes caught it.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
aim your anti-Kotsay bile elsewhere -- I've got plenty of my own
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't remember you being especially supportive of...
my case for trading Kotsay. Grover, yes…. you… yes, in later years.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't recall the exact date I clambered onto that particular bandwagon
I do seem to recall having an initial positive thought in reaction to the prospect of extending Kotsay, then becoming convinced of the error of my ways by grover and yourself.
Once the extension was done, I was 100% in favor of shipping him to the Yankees.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, Foolsh
Well the “defensive stats” are better than ever and the breakthroughs keep coming. Really amazing actually with the incorporation of batted balls data.
You may have to mend your luddite ways : }
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 11:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
oh, well...
then, I look forward to comparing a healthy Byrnes to a healthy Kotsay next year, Buck. I can’t wait, actually.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
using all the most modern technology, of course
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Completely agree… Defensive projections and metrics are even less acurrate than offensive projections. The idea that we can say with precision that Barton is a +5 defensive player, and Giambi is a -10 defensive player, and that THEREFORE, Barton has a 1.5-win advantage over Giambi on defense is pretty absurd.
Those defensive metrics are the best thing we’ve got, but they need to be taken with a large handful of salt… many of them are totally subjective (based on how many balls a player “should have gotten to,” or the “typical range” for a player of that position).
by Uncle Charlie on Jan 7, 2009 6:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No, the non-stupid ones (i.e. not errors) aren't subjective
A ball is either in a zone, or it isn’t. If a ball is in a given zone, a player is expected to make a play on that ball.
I really don’t see how you can argue that a zone system is subjective. It might be inaccurate, but there’s a clear bright line between balls in zone and balls not in zone, just as there’s a clear bright line between hits and outs for batters.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Unless the zone system is electronically monitored, then, yes, it *is* subjective
As with umpires calling the strike zone.
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, the scorer has to distinguish between line drives and flyballs
which might be a problem, according to some.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 1:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The disagreement on the D is a reasonable one.
As has been noted, we have a hard time agreeing on how good or bad a player’s defense is, and if you don’t think he’s +5 with the glove (above average), that’s reasonable. If Barton is more like a +0 and Giambi a -5, then Giambi becomes a clear upgrade.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 9:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was about to say
I was surprised you were taking a strong opinion on this with the D metrics.
Thanks again for all the work. I eat it up.
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 10:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm reasonably confident that a smart guy like Chone Smith
knows what he’s doing. The best part is that he incorporates Tango’s Fan Scouting report into his defensive projections.
The problem, as with all defensive metrics, is that the error bars are going to significant, and there’s room for disagreement on the final numbers.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 10:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
people were "reasonably confident" that a smart guy like Bernie Madoff...
knew what he was doing. Of course, he knew… they didn’t.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bernie Madoff is a criminal con artist
So you’re suggesting that Sean Smith is actually paid by… I don’t know… Vegas to put out false information to confuse people?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 11:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if so that would be the first AN conspiracy theory that didn’t involve beane, wolff, or larry davis.
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 Jan 6, 2009 11:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
now, that’s funny. QOTM
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so, so not true
What about Chavvy, the Canadian gamblers, and the tainted sushi?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
or furcall, the teamsters, and an abandoned lot in the arizona desert?
when did we stop using adverbs proper?
by alea iacta est on Jan 7, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or the Professor with the lead pipe in the study?
"When I was a kid, having someone correct your grammar was a sign that they cared and wanted you to present yourself in the best possible light. That being said, you should really learn the difference between plurals and possessives." -- RS
by oblique on Jan 7, 2009 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
dreaming if you think sheets or wolf
wolf if cheap, but he won’t be
by ryanmoser on Jan 6, 2009 9:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Wolf wouldn't surprise me too much.
If Beane does go after one of the better SPs (as opposed to one of the cheap but questionable veterans, which I think more likely), I could see him picking Wolf as his target.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jan 6, 2009 9:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
First of all, Sheets IS within the A's projected budget
if they want to go that route and really go for being the favorites in the AL West in 2009. I think they’ll stay away from him more because of his health – they would have kept Harden if they wanted the “headache with great ability.”
The problem with Wolf is that he really isn’t that good. He’s ok, but if you look at his career as a whole, what stands out is a consistently high WHIP. Given that he isn’t a lock for 150-200 IP, I think he’s more of a good #4 starter than anything – not quite good enough to pay a fair amount for instead of just trying Gio or Outman.
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 Jan 6, 2009 9:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would like the A's to sign Sheets.
Because not only does he greatly improve the rotation, but we can basically swap Draft Picks. Instead of a 2nd Round Pick in 2009, we can get a First Round Pick in 2010.
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jan 6, 2009 10:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
True, whatever pick we lose by signing Sheets we will gain when he leaves and possibly double because we won't lose a 1st rounder but whomever signs him will to us (Hopefully)
I also like the idea of Cust, Giambi, Holliday and Chevaz in whatever batting order you put them. It also makes whomever is in front of them like Sweeney or Buck that much better because no one is going to want to walk these two to get to those four.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on Jan 6, 2009 10:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've been quiet on the Sheets talk here
But I don’t like it. As promising as Rich Harden was, his injuries were just so infuriating. Sheets is a less talented version of Harden. He’s awesome, for sure, but he’s just not worth the money because he will get hurt.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sheets may be less talented than Harden, but he's also less hurt
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 10:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Last year he had 31 starts
But before that, 22, 17, and 24. That’s still not very good. I’m all for another starter, but I just don’t like the idea of committing that much money (or the years) to a guy who’s lucky to give you 25 starts.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sheets missed a lot of time due to an inner ear problem
That affected him in either ‘05-’06 or ‘06-’07, can’t remember exactly which. Time missed it time missed but the nature of the problem doesn’t have the impact on his pitching ability that blowing out a knee or elbow does.
I’d be more worried about the ligament he tore in his elbow at the end of last year than the bulk of his previous missed time.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jan 7, 2009 5:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Inner ear problem?
Was he taking sitz baths with Scutaro and DJ?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm really glad Giambi's back
He’ll help the team!
by luvsmrZ on Jan 6, 2009 11:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The rotation is NOW our weak link for the 09 season
duch – hip problems like a 90 year old women
Gallagher – nasty stuff if he can learn how to throw a strike
Eveland – fat terd, but as long as he keeps the ball down be will be ok
Braden – yes he pitched well last year — and that shocked everyone, he is NO LOCK
Gio – I think he has to be given the chance if we don’t sign anyone
Outman – proabably not ready just yet.
I like wolf, but Sheet or wolf won’t sign until lowe gets his cash and the market value is set. Mulder on a minor league deal only
by ryanmoser on Jan 6, 2009 9:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Buck in RF
I better not see Cust out in the outfield missing every shallow fly ball.
by Arcman on Jan 6, 2009 9:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Cust actually wasn't as bad as people think
And a lot better than he was at the beginning of 2007.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I thought.
"When I was a kid, having someone correct your grammar was a sign that they cared and wanted you to present yourself in the best possible light. That being said, you should really learn the difference between plurals and possessives." -- RS
by oblique on Jan 6, 2009 10:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't want to be misunderstood
He wasn’t good by any means. He should, ideally, be a DH. But he’s not the worst defensive player out there, he just looks clumsy.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking of when the team called him "serviceable" in the field
which is much, much better than the “downright awful” many of us assume he is (and possibly once was). It sounds like that’s in line with what you meant..
"When I was a kid, having someone correct your grammar was a sign that they cared and wanted you to present yourself in the best possible light. That being said, you should really learn the difference between plurals and possessives." -- RS
by oblique on Jan 6, 2009 11:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cust isn't bad in left...
he’s not good, but he’s not bad. Crosby’s not bad at SS… (he won’t be there in 2009 because Beane will give him away for nothing and pay half or more of his salary), but he wouldn’t be bad… I shudder to think what we’ll have at short in 2009. Be careful what you ask for…. you may get it.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cust is horrible in the OF
Until we get past the notion that Jack Cust is a passable defensive OF, we’re going to be stuck in neutral. Jack Cust makes Ben Grieve look like Willie Fucking Mays in the OF. He’s slow; he looks disinterested; balls clang off his glove; he takes terrible routes to balls… please, let’s end the insane thinking that Cust is an option in LF or RF.
by Uncle Charlie on Jan 7, 2009 6:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In addition
(maybe SalB or Paul T can confirm)
Jack Cust’s D in LF (terrible) or RF (God help us) would have a larger negative impact in terms of run (non)prevention than Giambi’s D at 1B (not very good either). In other words, I assume a bad LF does more damage to a team’s defense than does a bad 1B…
by Uncle Charlie on Jan 7, 2009 7:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doubt it, actually
Giambi is projected at -8 in the infield. Cust, at -11 in the outfield. Once you adjust for position, Giambi is a bigger defensive liability.
The reason Giambi-at-first appears to make more sense is that the A’s outfield options are worse than their first base options. In a vacuum, it would be better to DH Giambi and put Cust in left.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops, I inverted that
The outfield options are better than the 1B options.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
REALLY?
Cust is only projected as a negative-11 in the OF? I cannot believe it. Does Cust get graded on some sort of curve? Is his “Zone” smaller than everyone else’s “Zone?”
I don’t doubt your numbers, I am simply shocked that any defensive metric would be so kind to Jack Cust’s defense…
by Uncle Charlie on Jan 7, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cust is bad, but he's no Grieve
Cust, at the very least, isn’t lazy and actually does work hard at his (poor but improving) D.
He’s also significantly faster than Grieve was.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You know, I was under the impression that Grieve was a smaller
guy than Cust. Turns out that’s not true. Huh.
One thing about Cust out there: he’s trying. Oh lord, is he trying.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 9:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting that those two have pretty much diametrically opposite public body type perceptions
Yeah, one thinks of Cust as Ruthian in his aspect (when GHR himself wasn’t really all that big) and Grieve as sort of more of a less-muscled Velarde body type.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Defense vs Offense
Let me ask you this.
As a fan, would you rather watch a team that has a good defensive 1B who can’t hit out of a wet paper bag, or would you rather see a good offensive 1B who’s a poor defender.
If you want to see All Defense, No Offense, then you must have liked the A’s the past couple years. The team that drove the rest of us crazy. The one to which we simply assumed that if the other team scored, we lost the game.
Remember this guys; Defense can prevent the other team scoring runs, but even if you prevent 99% of the runs they could have scored, it doesn’t mean crap if you can’t score at all.
Thats why I think that offense is more valuable than defense, and that defense might actually be overrated on AN now.
Besides, Offense is more fun to watch. Its more entertaining to watch a game going into the 7th, down by 3 Runs, and be able to think “ok! The heart of the order is coming up, we can still win this game!” than being down by 1 run and thinking “damn… we have to score two whole runs to win? We’re fucked!”
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jan 6, 2009 10:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
This
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 6, 2009 10:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The balance between offense and defense, when measured in runs,
is impossible to under- or overstate. 10 runs = 1 win, approximately, whether it’s a run saved or a run scored. No offense, but it doesn’t matter what you “think” is more valuable. The mathematics is well-understood, has been worked out from scratch, and has been an excellent match to empirical data.
As for your second point, I agree to some extent. Backing up even further, there’s a good argument to be made that the A’s need to be going for it this year, even if they can’t construct a team that, on paper, will compete with the Angels. Why? Because the owner is trying get a stadium built and will probably ask the public to chip in. That’s easier to do when you’re building a team rather than tearing it apart.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 6, 2009 10:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
salb918, where can I read more about this runs = wins model and the empirical support for it?
Is there an online primer available?
by Reg on Jan 6, 2009 10:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
check out FanGraphs
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/win-values-explained-part-five
snoop around their glossary and general site as well. good stuff.
they had a nice little article today that basically said:
Bobby Crosby : replacement level :: replacement level : 2001 Barry Bonds
or, put another way: Bobby Crosby + Bobby Crosby = Barry Bonds + papaya
Save Rajai Davis
by oakinboston on Jan 6, 2009 11:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
oops i did my analogy wrong
papaya : Bobby Crosby :: Bobby Crosby : 2001 Barry Bonds
Save Rajai Davis
by oakinboston on Jan 6, 2009 11:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"will probably ask the public to chip in"
Uh, on what do you base this? Except in the FSUian sense of development/zoning rights giveaways, and unless they’re asking for federal money, that’s an absolute nonstarter for the next 3-5 years.
My guess that Crywolffisher is in “sell” mode has a more solid foundation than this.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yes
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Except in the FSUian sense of development/zoning rights giveaways"
Bingo
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 6:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
given the tight RE/development credit markets, no one's going to be using those anyway
If the choice is the property sitting idle and generating nothing but property taxes for 5-10 years, and giving some sort of zoning clearance without financial penalty and generating revenue taxes as well within 3-5 years, where’s the “public chipping in” aspect?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough.
As of today, there may not be much opportunity cost incurred by the city.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 9:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ah, but *which* city ...
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I still contend that fans would rather watch a boring as hell winner
Than a really fun loser.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well what we've had has been a boring as hell loser
And we are talking about all things being equal here.
Which would you rather watch, assuming the team wins the same amount of games: a team with a good offense but bad defense, or a team with good defense but bad offense.
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jan 6, 2009 11:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
please...
Giambi’s defense at 1B is hardly going to be the deal breaker on a winning team in 2009. His bat may well be.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Unless of course, at age 38 he falls off a cliff
his body finally breaking down after stopping the use of steroids, finally finishing the decline that’s slowly been building momentum since 2005.
Oh, not that kind of deal breaker?
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 11:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
whose said he's stopped?
I’m kinda counting on the fact that he hasn’t. ;-)
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I apologize for a lotta shit...
for which I’m neither sorry, nor gonna stop.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How much of it that you admitted to a federal grand jury though?
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 11:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
take the 5th
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
sorta like Manny, then...
no team should sign or count on is bat this year, either, right?
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
we can agree on that...
but, they’re equally capable of showing age-related decline. And, besides, Manny would be WAY more expensive and a lot more disruptive. Whereas, Giambi’s a fucking bargain and a good fit.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 6, 2009 11:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This probably summarizes how most A's fans feel this year
— that it’s hard to argue the merits of D when your team is almost dead last in offense- in both leagues.
by oaklidiot on Jan 7, 2009 8:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
good thing I watch my A's games
on excel sheets!
Save Rajai Davis
by oakinboston on Jan 7, 2009 8:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
qotm
That’s for all the statheads. :)
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball." -- Connie Mack
by GreenSocks on Jan 7, 2009 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What I dont get is
how people can complain about giambi when every A’s fan has been complaining about the offense (or lack thereof) for the last 3 years. He would have led the team in HRs and RBIs last year. What he lacks in defense, he makes up in offense.
"Chlorophyll?! More like bore-ophyll!"
by SoCal As Fan on Jan 6, 2009 10:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ugh ugh ugh
Throwing out cliches doesn’t make it so! The entire point of salb’s post, which you clearly did not read, is that Giambi’s offense does not make up for his defense (with respect to the other players who will lose playing time).
And the only reason people have complained about the offense is because the team has been losing games.
And Giambi had 32 homers last year. Cust had 33. So there’s another place where you’re factually wrong. RBIs are lineup dependent and irrelevant.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
chicken or egg...
complaining about offense because the team has been losing games OR complaining about losing games because the team’s offense is abysmal?
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know its not your main point thejd44
But people dont only complain about the offense when a team is losing games. If a team never lost, then sure no one would complain, but a bad offense is aesthetically painful to watch. Of the three areas: pitching, hitting, and defense. Defense is clearly the least glorified and thus the least important to the average fan’s aesthetic of baseball. Id trade defense for offense, all things being equal.
When we think about why this is so, I would reason that unlike pitching and hitting, good defense is not as easily observed. Sure, a diving play is a good defense, but then again maybe not if you’re name is Derek Jeter or Raul Ibanez. Good defense is spread out into components like routes and range, as we have all come to understand. We fans are simply unable to observe all of this in quite the same capacity. If we watched an entire game in ultra-slow motion maybe Id be able to better observe, although I would despise baseball and its 36 hour long games.
In conclusion: How bout some DINGERS?!?!?
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 12:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
vote NO on Prep G?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 10:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Giambi official CONTRACT !!
" Before the home opener in the 2009 season, Mr Giambi must rec ONE punch in the face by every A’s fan he Fu*k in 2002 and then we can play ball" Count me getting line twice and I hope his brother comes along too – I owe him a kick in the balls for not knowing how and when to slide
by ryanmoser on Jan 6, 2009 10:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
one who holds grudge... eh?
I never burn bridges… with ex-girlfriends or ex-A’s players. They’re both welcomed back with open arms. (Most never come back, but the ones that do, are usually worth it.)
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd welcome back ex-girlfriends
except that I’ve only got room for one on my roster, and I don’t want to DFA my wife.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jan 7, 2009 3:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you should really look into platooning
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 4:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Barton = Trade Bait
Let Barton tear apart AAA Pitching and play everyday 1B for the Rivercats. Giambi can play 1B in 2009 and 1/2 of 2010. Doolittle or Carter will be ready to to take over by July 2010.
As for Giambi’s Defense, I’m hoping 2 Gold Glove infielders (Chavez & Ellis) can make up some of the difference. Giambi can’t do the splits like Staplehead can, but he can field grounders and scoop errant throws as well as Barton did last season.
by Colorado Fan on Jan 6, 2009 10:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Wait awhile to decide...
The A’s may just wait awhile to decide what to do with their roster? If Barton performs like how he did at the end of the 2007 season, the A’s could look to trade Cust and move Giambi to DH full-time.
by HI50 on Jan 6, 2009 10:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't think they trade Cust
He’s cheap, and he’s a good hitter. Thats something we haven’t had much of the past few years.
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jan 6, 2009 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
True, he is a good hitter
but he also strikesout a lot, and is a defensive liability. It all boils down to a game of tradeoffs. The only reason why fans are questioning Barton role is because of his poor offensive numbers in 2008. I don’t know why he had a down year. Maybe pitchers made adjustments. If he can find his stroke again, his offensive production will more than outweigh Cust’s +/-.
If Cust continues to hit the ball well, then that coupled with his salary would make him attractive.
by HI50 on Jan 6, 2009 10:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think theres that much of a market for Cust
I mean, look at what Giambi and Burrell just signed for, and there’s STILL Dunn on the market.
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jan 6, 2009 11:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
how many strike outs. what are his number with runner on. people the a’s need a bat and cust is not the right person. this is better, much better.
by jhroac02 on Jan 6, 2009 11:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
strikeouts are often the same as other outs
admittedly, other outs can move runners over and bring guys in. but they can also result in double plays. the point is, strikeouts are not that bad. and i can live with them when a guy like cust provides 33 hrs and 111 walks. and we dont necessarily need a bat at this point, a pitcher might be a more pressing need.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 6, 2009 11:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But Cust might actually end being more expensive than Giambi next year
via arbitration. If he has another solid year with the bat, and I suspect his numbers will actually improve this year, his contract for 2010 could feasibly be more than Giambi’s So, there might be a little bit of truth in “maybe Cust gets traded if Barton works things out” argument/opinion.
by mrod on Jan 6, 2009 11:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ok bottom of the 9th with 2 on and 2 outs, the a’s need 2 runs to win the game
who do you want up jason or cust or barton
by jhroac02 on Jan 6, 2009 11:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
why would barton or giambi be better?
they both have low averages as well, meaning they probably wont drive in a run. the difference is cust is more likely to get on base and also more likely to hit a hr.
also, you cant judge a player based on one situation.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 6, 2009 11:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Out of those 3
Giambi, Barton and then Cust. Cust only walks, strikes out or homers. He very rarely doubles and does not get than many singles so the chances of him homering are well, not very good. You do have like a 45 percent chance he whiffs.
If you want a walk to load the bases then fine.
by Trainman on Jan 7, 2009 9:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
a whiff is as good as any other out
especially in that situation. cust is more likely that giambi and barton to NOT end the game.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 9:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The scenario he presented was 2 on and 2 outs in bottom of 9th
a whiff in that situation would end the game unless MLB changes the rules for that inning. (LOL)
I am just guessing but IMO if Giambi and Cust where to come up in this situation 100 times, I am saying that Giambi would reach base about 20 times more than Cust. We have no way of knowing this but if we did, I would bet money on it myself.
by Trainman on Jan 7, 2009 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
which is exactly what i said....
you refer to a whiff in the bottom of the ninth with two on two out like its the worst thing ever. but in reality, its the same as any other out. so i have no idea why we’d talk about it in this scenario.
i guess in a random situation thats possible, but cust has the higher obp so it’s not supported by any statistical information
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on who is next in line after that.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jan 7, 2009 3:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This does a good job of putting into words what my disgust wouldn't allow
Though I think you’re too kind to Giambi’s defense. I think he’s -15 runs.
What salb did was explain very well why when I would say that Giambi for the league minimum wouldn’t be much of a good deal that I wasn’t really exaggerating. Overall, the deal just seems like a poor use of a limited budget. It’s not that Giambi is overpaid for the production he’ll provide. In a vacuum, he’s not. But with respect to the other players on the team who will be affected, it just doesn’t work out.
At this point, I have to assume that this is a precursor to another move. That’s the only way this really makes sense unless Beane Is prepping for some kind of big July firesale of Holliday and Giambi and a couple others that might further build the farm system.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm trying to imagine how bad a player would have to be to be -15 runs at FIRST BASE
He’d pretty much have to stand with his back to the plate and just hope the ball bounces off him to be that bad.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 10:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
At which point someone is bound to post a picture of a cat
with the caption “UR DOIN IT WRONG”
"When I was a kid, having someone correct your grammar was a sign that they cared and wanted you to present yourself in the best possible light. That being said, you should really learn the difference between plurals and possessives." -- RS
by oblique on Jan 6, 2009 10:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Does he do anything well?
Admittedly I don’t watch a ton of Yankees baseball, but I don’t see much difference between Giambi and what Frank Thomas looked like in his final days of playing first base.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He scored an 18 on the fan's scouting report
Noted butchers Prince Fielder (16), Ryan Howard (17), and Dmitri Young (12) are respectively projected at -8, -3 and -9 runs by CHONE. Giambi’s CHONE is -8 runs.
No one is 15 at first base. I mean that literally- no one. There isn’t a single player who is projected at worse than -10 (Richie Sexson). First base handles fewer fielding chances than any other player on the field other than catchers and pitchers, whose run prevention abilities stem from different parts of the game. On top of that, most of the other players are ALSO there because they suck at fielding, pulling the average down.
The statement that Giambi is a -15 at first base isn’t just inaccurate, it’s totally implausible. It’s the equivalent of projecting him, in advance, to be as bad with the glove as Tony Pena Jr. was with the bat this season (historically bad, in other words).
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 11:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
First Law of SBN:
Any sufficiently long post which uses correct grammar, punctuation, and paragraph structure will invariably trigger an autoformatting gaffe.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 11:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If only it was easier to get an em dash in a non-word processor environment
au contra ire
by JediLeroy on Jan 6, 2009 11:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it's really easy: space hyphen hyphen
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Gah! You make the typophile in me cry...
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
by rebus on Jan 7, 2009 4:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
actually, you made a grammatical error there
1. The autoformatting for strikethrough, while annoying, is pretty simple and clear: anything in between two hyphens gets struck
2. After “literally,” you used a hyphen (which closed off your strikethrough autoformat) when you should have used an em-dash — which can be effected by typing space hyphen hyphen, and would have kept the autoformat from triggering (-like so —)
3. Preview
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's dash-dash-space on every word processor I've ever used
and since I don’t actually expend mental energy on this idiocy, I’m going to default to that 90% of the time.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2009 11:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
For it being such idiocy, you have a lot of friggin posts on this blog.
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 11:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
friendly (I presume) smackdown of the month
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 6, 2009 11:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The idiocy in question is fussy typesetting, not my posts
At least, I hope that’s the case.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"noted butchers" LOL
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 12:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm probably -10 runs at 1B...
Giambi’s probaby better than me.
That’s all.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Props to Salb for writing the much unpopular "Beane made an ineffective move" post
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 6, 2009 10:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
And for doing it without the pissy anger that I would've had in making essentially the same points.
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2009 10:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And for using the Staturday title on Tuesday
au contra ire
by JediLeroy on Jan 6, 2009 11:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
something i've learned since losing my job
everyday is a weekend
when did we stop using adverbs proper?
by alea iacta est on Jan 7, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thoughts on Giambi I haven't seen mentioned
We all know that Giambi isn’t the dominant hitter he was in his steroid-fueled prime. But what we haven’t thought about as much is how he isn’t as good.
In his prime, Giambi hit to all fields and was remarkably consistent. He also, of course, walked a lot.
In recent years, Giambi blows hot and cold. He can be as imposing as ever, but also has gone through long slumps, not unlike Jack Cust, and has been more of a slugger than a great hitter.
What I do like about Giambi, even now, is that he remains a threat at the plate. Last season, we really only had Cust as a hitter who pitchers had much reason to fear – and then only when he was hot. It will be nice, hopefully, to feel like the game isn’t over if the A’s are down two runs in the fourth.
by bear88 on Jan 6, 2009 11:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
hot and cold = fiction
it has been said on this site. it is fact.
by jlanning17 on Jan 7, 2009 10:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
reading this made me sick
jason has power and maybe needs a new home to get his career going. cust is trash, doesnt add anything to a team and makes the a’s the same old a’s. the a’s need bats, home runs and power. he can play dh, which is tons bettter than any other option that the a’s had
please re think or just think before writing some bs posting. also is cust going to protect holliday. please give me a break.
by jhroac02 on Jan 6, 2009 11:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
you realize that cust also has power
and is very very similar to giambi, expect has a higher obp and more home runs in a pitcher friendly park.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, well shit -- you convinced me.
CUST SUCKS GIAMBI ROOLZ!
by mikev on Jan 6, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
jhroac02 for GM
How did the Mariners not go for him?
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 12:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
they were busy trying to sign andruw jones to a 8 year $130 mil contract
altho i guess we have to stop making seattle’s gm is a moron jokes now.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 12:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
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 Jan 7, 2009 12:26 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
OT: can someone please please please make a fanpost
explaining how valuable jack cust is. and can it permanently stay where everyone can see it
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 6, 2009 11:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I hate the move. I have no pathological hatred of Giambi, in fact, a few years ago I felt sort of sorry for the guy. My main problem is that at this moment, Beane is lacking in vision or creativity. The recent progression of aged DH types, from Thomas in ‘06 to Piazza the following year, to Sweeney and Thomas last year (with Cust seems slightly redundant) conjures eery simularities to the A’s of the late ‘90s, who would field lineups full of John Jaha clones. As for the specifics, I am certain that Giambi doesn’t hurt the team, and he probably improves it slightly, but you have to consider that he is directly or indirectly taking at bats from a young player. The man who introduced much needed innovation to the baseball establishment a mere decade ago, Billy Beane, is in danger of becoming a complacent and uninspiring gm, living off his past deeds. I welcome the Holliday trade and the rebuilding effort, but this latest aquisition of an over the hill, dh, gotten on the cheap, begs the question of why a team on the cusp of a newfound respectability and possessed with such young talent, needs to revert to this tired old formula.
by natethesnyde on Jan 6, 2009 11:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
he is taking MLB at bats from
barton, but giving him AAA at bats, which could help him immensely. in addition, he’ll help the team compete in 09.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 6, 2009 11:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This isn't atypical
Beane, in recent years, has a patterns of signing big-name veterans (think David Justice) near the end of their careers. Frank Thomas in 2006 was the only time it really worked. But I think you’re overrating the young talent on this team. Barton was horrible last season. The young outfielders can’t really be counted upon.
None of them deserve to be handed jobs and playing time. They need to earn it.
The other thing that everyone should remember is that it’s quite likely that some of these players, including Cust and Giambi, will get hurt at some point in the season. And if some of these youngsters are tearing it up in Sacramento, they will get their chance – regardless of injury.
by bear88 on Jan 6, 2009 11:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
slusser article says...
giambi dh
cust OF
barton 1b
so looks like buck or another OF will lose Ab’s at least
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/06/SP2J154R94.DTL
Giambi primarily will DH for the A’s, at least initially, with Daric Barton remaining at first base and Jack Cust playing in the outfield. Neither Cust nor Giambi is a premier defensive player, but the fact that Cust consistently has hit better when playing the field vs. appearing as the designated hitter tips the scales in that direction. Following his career trend, Cust hit .207 as the DH last year and .252 while playing the outfield.
by Asfan4ever723 on Jan 6, 2009 11:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
so, all that means is that Beane is still hoping...
(praying) that Barton can hit. I hope that’s true. I still think Giambi starts most games at 1B this year. And, Cust starts most games at DH.
Just me.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
interesting that Cust did better in the field
looks like it really will be all-out war between Buck, Sweeney, Cunningham, and Barton for 2 spots. Thankgod we dont need them to occupy 4 spots like we usually do.
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 12:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What has Barton done to deserve another 600 ABs? I was as high as anybody on Barton a year ago, but any player that looks that hopeless at the plate over that long a period of time most likely doesn’t cut it as a major league hitter. Barton certainly had the minor league track record, but they call it the big show for a reason; not every qualified prospect makes it. We can make all the excuses we want for Barton’s performance, such as age, but he showed a frightening lack of power for a corner infielder. Barton seems to possess old player’s skills, mainly plate discipline. Buck, on the other hand, has shown he can hit in the big leagues, he has pretty damn good excuses for his poor showing last year, and he keeps Cust out of the OF. Is there something I’m missing?
by natethesnyde on Jan 7, 2009 12:10 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
zactly... I was as high on Daric as anybody...
hell, he caught my first pitch at the Coli. I WANT him to do well so I can sell it on ebay. Alas… I’m just as happy to see him succeed at age 24.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the picture, that is...
on ebay. LOL
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Old player skills" tend to indicate a player will decline early
but early means 31-33, not 21-23. Don’t think the A’s are too worried about Barton declining in his early 30s. Having old player skills is a problem for free agents, not prospects.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Is it possible
that we’ve overcompensated for overrating defense by underrating defense? I feel like a bat of Giambi, at least 2007 version, is worth a fair amount. At the same time, I know a lot of defensive measures might indicate he’s not all that more valuable than, say Daric Barton. My point being that Daric Barton is clearly not yet a great hitter, and Giambi is very much a pretty great hitter. To which I ask, is defense really THAT valuable? I don’t know, because I can’t analyze statistics nearly as well as a lot of others. But I wouldn’t be surprised if, in the zeal to quantify defense, we might have gone a little overboard, in equating a glove/bat guy like Barton with a bat/glove guy like Giambi. And I want to stress that we’re talking an extreme GLOVE/bat guy with an extreme BAT/glove guy. My inclination is to think that, in a vacuum, the latter is more valuable than the former.
I do, though, acknowledge that I could be completely wrong,
RagingHarden: Yeah if you get 20 starts out of me I'll be shocked. Like, I'll wreck my drawers.
by walk off bunt on Jan 7, 2009 12:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
the answer is clearly "no"
to your question: “Is defense really THAT valuable.” Giambi will prove it in 2009.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Giambi isn't "an extreme BAT/glove guy"
Manny Ramirez is an example of that species, and he’s a lot more valuable than Giambi is (albeit still likely to be overpaid).
Giambi looks like a hitter who’s maybe 20-30 runs above average with the stick. If he was hitting like his prime, when he was 70 or 80 RAA, I can tell you no one would say a thing about his defense.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 12:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the long view
While blocking the progress of Buck or Barton is concerning, remember that this situation is likely a 4 month experiment at best. If Buck has an incredible spring and Barton, who is only 23, is still stuck in 2008, then Giambi will likely play lots of 1B with Cust DHing in the early part of the season. Likewise if Barton remembers how to hit, then Buck (who has all of 689 at bats in the minors) can start the season in Sacramento. If the A’s aren’t in the thick of things in July, Holliday will be gone for the best SS prospect they can get, along with a couple of pitchers, and both Buck and Barton are playing full-time. If they are in contention, then you live with it for the rest of the year, or still trade Holliday for an impact player who helps them right away. And remember, since we’re talking the A’s, the odds of someone (Sweeney, Buck, etc.) getting hurt is high, so the roster rounds itself out through attrition. My biggest worry — who is our defensive replacement at 1B if Barton is in AAA?
by jggsf on Jan 7, 2009 7:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Every defensive metric grades everyone differently. One year Crosby is a great defender. The next year (In his prime years), he’s the worst? Michael Young is horrid in 2007, and very good in 2008. How many balls get hit to a SS in a game (on average)? 2.9? Who is pitching? What are the other fielders doing? How are players positioned? How hard is the ball hit? Different speed everytime? Spin? It really seems like there are a lot of variables, thus, making Defensive Grading Systems subject to the Almighty SSS (Small Sample Size).
I am actually inclined to accept Fan Grading + Fielding % as my defensive metric. Then again, I’m a Stat novice, so I bow down to the Bill James clones.
by Colorado Fan on Jan 7, 2009 8:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
not to mention the fact that virtually all of the defensive stat edifice is built on subjective eyewitness "data"
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
FoolshGame22, admit it
You’re Jeremy Giambi
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 12:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
yes, i am
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
my icon gave it away, didn't it
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
actually
id say you look reasonably athletic and could make it to first base in under 62 seconds. both qualities jeremy lacked
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 12:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i would've slid...
really, I would have… unless, I thougt I would beat the throwl, which Jeremy did. But, that’s still no fucking excuse for not pinch-running for him. That was’t Jeremy’s fault.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 12:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it was the fifth inning tho...
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 1:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so?
that’s what a manager’s job is all about. Manage to a win. Even in the 5th.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 1:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
true
but i’d say that saying “we should have pinch ran” is completely hindsight bias. taking one of your best hitters out in the fifth inning is not good managing IMO.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 1:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
taking one of your best hitters out?
Jeremy Giambi? You’re not serious, are you? Please, tell me you’re not, to spare yourself the ridicule.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 1:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you wouldnt consider .283/.391/.450 for an ops of .841 to be pretty damn good?
i dunno how you could deny that he was a good hitter when he was here, and damn valuable in that lineup
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 1:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
damn, that fucking Billy Beane went and signed...
the lesser brother. Go figure… same ol’ story. We coulda had Jeremy for only a couple million more per year. Cheap-ass A’s.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 1:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
not sure how this has anything to do with what ive said
obviously, jason is still valuable and jeremy has fallen off the face of the earth. but on that 2001 team, jeremy was good. and i would argue one of the top hitters on the team.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 1:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it doesn't...
I lost the argument. Be a graceful winner.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 1:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
haha my apologies
i am/always will be a huge jeremy giambi supporter.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 1:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and, I still woulda pinch run for him...
in hindsight. LOL
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 2:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well...
in hindsight me too. or tripped his fat ass as he was approaching the plate.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 2:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't even an A's fan then
But that’s one of the worst calls in baseball history, and they show the play ALL THE TIME. Giambi was safe.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Random thoughts
1. I like having Giambi back because last year’s team was kind of boring.
2. I am also kind of excited to see what his hair style will become (I’m kind of weird I guess). I missed Swisher and his always changing beard/gotee last year. I kind of hope Buck is on the team also and keeps the flowing locks. Wow, I kind of sound like a chick talking about hair. I guess I like personality on the team.
3. Wouldn’t it be funny if Geren put Barton at DH, Giambi at 1st, and Cust in Right Field. Defense be d*#*@$!
4. What if Beane doesn’t think the team will compete in 09 and is just signing Jason hoping for a more exciting offense. Which would hopefully bring more fans in.
5. If Barton stays in AAA who would spell G at 1st? Hannahan?
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
by micdog2001 on Jan 7, 2009 1:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Why would it be funny if the A's tried to intentionally lose games?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 2:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The other day I was contemplating
a Holliday (CF), Cust (LF), Dunn/Abreau (RF) outfield. boy would that be an adventure.
Save Rajai Davis
by oakinboston on Jan 7, 2009 8:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
what if...
4. What if Beane doesn’t think the team will compete in 09 and is just signing Jason hoping for a more exciting offense. Which would hopefully bring more fans in.
I’d give him credit for being a pretty smart guy, then. Cuz, I’m actually thinkin’ about renewing my season tickets this year. Whereas, before signing Holliday and Giambi… well, hell, I could’ve walked up and gotten any dam seat I wanted.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 1:37 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
you'd think I'd learned how to use the "reply" button...
after all these years, but I haven’t yet. That’s what keeps me young.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 1:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank You somebody for mentioning marketing
I hate being the one who always brings this up, and trust me I love this blog for its statistical prowess and in depth real baseball knowledge, but the fact remains, it is a BUSINESS. And names, bring in fans, which brings in merch, which brings in ads, which brings in more money, and can help the team possibly get that stadium deal, which isn’t a forgone conclusion, and possibly keep the team in the Bay, which again is not a forgone conclusion.
I am stoked on buying tickets this year (I would have bought them anyway, but you know it is more fun now) and I think a lot of the casual fans that may have been on the fence will now go to the games, enhancing the experience as well…
"I was right and you were wrong." - Ray Fosse
by kbtoyz on Jan 7, 2009 6:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
regarding eckstein
he’s supposedly shopping himself as a 2B, because he is embarassed of his 7 hoppers from short. he did put up a line of .277/.354/.358 in 76 games in toronto last year, then proceeded to suck in arizona.
slightly OT here, the reds signed jerry hairston jr. to a 2 mill deal that could reach 4 mill with incentives to be their startin shortstop. he put up a line of .326/.384/.487 last year in limited time. any thoughts there?
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 2:51 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
He's not a shortstop, that's for sure.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 7:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
^ referring to Hairston
Thanks for the info on eckstein. His defensive projection at shorstop isn’t terrible, but it might not capture the complete lack of arm strength.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 8:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
not to mention the extra expense in cleaning the Coliseum after game ...
… sweeping up all the hair torn out by fans watching him throw.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
actually
there’ll be no expense there.
i’ll do it for free if i get to keep all the hair. yes, i know, that might sound a little creepy, but someday i’ll learn how to transplant it.
then we’ll see who’s laughing when i have a full head of hair again!
when did we stop using adverbs proper?
by alea iacta est on Jan 7, 2009 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
he put up a line of .326/.384/.487 last year in limited time. any thoughts there?
as a believer in multiple, nay… infinite universes, I truly believe that Bobby Crosby is capable of the same. I just hope it’s this universe, at this time. I know the odds are small, but they’re there!
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 3:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure I hit "reply" to travdog6....
and, I haven’t been drinking… so, this is surely an AN flaw. AN AN… is that a flaw, too? It’s all a matter of capitalization, isn’t it.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Jan 7, 2009 3:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agre with salb that Giambi
isn’t really an upgrade over Barton, and I hope he doesn’t siphon too much playing time away from him. However, there is a good probability that one of Cust, Holliday, Barton, or Buck will get hurt, and bringing back Giambi will help us weather those injuries much better. For ~$5 million, it’s not a completely terrible signing, although I don’t think he should be starting on opening day.
by Josh Deletchi on Jan 7, 2009 7:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm a bit more optimistic than salb
I’m willing to call Giambi’s signing a 1 Win upgrade over Barton. What I like most about the deal is it virtually guarantees better offensive production from 1B and by proxy RF. Giambi provides insurance should either Buck or Barton get hurt/suck. And the deal itself (I’ll go with 1/6.5 million guaranteed) is hardly detrimental to any future plans.
But I fully agree with salb’s more basic point, that this signing is more a complimentary addition and not a major difference maker. Adding Jason means the A’s still desperately need the young pitching to blossom right away and for Chavez to come back healthy if the A’s are going to have a real chance at winning the West.
Trading for Holliday helped the A’s climb up the hill. Adding Giambi buys them traction to keep them slipping but it doesn’t progress them forward.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jan 7, 2009 7:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
"keep them from slipping"
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jan 7, 2009 7:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
borderline lunacy
Defensive stats are inherently nebulous…for example, do they take into account “scooping ability?” Giambi is at least 2 inches taller and a bigger target. (Barton’s stretch is the most extreme in the league)
It would be foolish to deny statistical information, yet similarly, equally foolish to deny the factor of presence, which cannot be captured in stats.
I’ve played many team sports and there are singular players who can, through leadership, hustle, example, or demeanor change the complexion of the entire team. I believe Giambi is this type of player. Perhaps a stat could be ascertained, describing the bonus in team run total when a hitter is added to the heart of the line-up. Therefore, it seems prudent to understate the defensive detractions and overstate the team offensive total output.
Anyone remember the walk-off, two-run shot, off Mike Stanton, to sweep the homestand against the Sux and the Yankees? I do. I was there.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/13/SP143512.DTL
by greenpaddedgloves on Jan 7, 2009 7:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
"equally foolish to deny the factor of presence, "
Put it in numbers. Seriously, if you can’t even make a reasonable a priori guess as to how the factor of presence might affect the bottom line, it’s not worth discussing.
“Anyone remember the walk-off, two-run shot, off Mike Stanton, to sweep the homestand against the Sux and the Yankees? I do. I was there.”
Not a single member of the A’s team, except Chavez, was there. So maybe having Giambi’s presence might make you feel better. But for the majority of the palyers on the A’s, he’ll just another friendly dude.
“Perhaps a stat could be ascertained, describing the bonus in team run total when a hitter is added to the heart of the line-up.”
People have looked into this, and it makes little difference whether you add a hitter to the heart of a lineup than elsewhere.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 8:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Big points for use of the word "priori"
well done sir.
by mikev on Jan 7, 2009 9:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
re: a priori numbers
i’m betting that he kant
when did we stop using adverbs proper?
by alea iacta est on Jan 7, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
change the complexion of the entire team?
I think Beane should hire Robert Downey, Jr.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the major point about supernatural things like "presence"
We can, with great certainty, put a win value on most things. And those things add up to real runs and real wins and there isn’t much leftover room for presence or leadership or energy or voodoo. So, yeah, “presence” might have an effect. Maybe a couple runs. Maybe. But it’s not like there’s a huge missing link of information that’s baffling analysts. For the most part, we know what makes baseball teams win games. 98. 99. It’s a really high number. There’s just not that much room for the “intangible” thing that doesn’t actually take place on the field (here I don’t mean intangible as going first to third – that’s real, if hard to quantify. I mean a guy making another guy better just because he’s out there).
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So
why not Cabrera? Do we have to give up a draft pick for him? Is that why?
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by what_the_crap on Jan 7, 2009 8:28 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Better than Crosby and whatever dreck we run out there in 2010, that's for goddam sure.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 9:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Two months ago, when Cabrera’s price tag was in the $10mil range I was saying no. Now, with the SS market settling the way it has at this point and not many teams looking for an upgrade, thus not looking at Cabrera I think his annual salary might end up being closer to $6-8mil. At that price he’s worth losing the draft pick and upgrading over Crosby IMO. He’s not going to light the world on fire but he put up good defense and respectable offensive stats last season. Let’s also keep in mind that he’s one year removed from a .300 season and a GG. I’ve said this before, and i’m going to continue to say it. If he comes for 2/15 or better I think it’s a no brainer and would love to see him manning SS for 150+ games next year instead of watching Crosby. For the record, i’m a fan of the Giambi signing especially at the price we got him. I’m just one for letting the play, and season results do the talking. This team is going to score a lot more runs then last years, and at the very least will be a helluva lot more fun to watch.
by JPShark on Jan 7, 2009 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Jason will be great for this offense." E. Chavez 1/7/08
I’m trying to meet in the middle in this Statistical analysis vs. old-school scouting preference, and you are relying only on stats saying that:
A) The order of the hitters does not matter much. Are you serious?
B) A player’s stature and energy does not positively or negatively affect a team’s disposition.
Terrell Owens has great numbers, but wouldn’t you rather have Steve Smith?
AJ Pyrzynski or Kurt Suzuki?
Do defensive metrics measure Scooping ability at 1B?
by greenpaddedgloves on Jan 7, 2009 8:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Actually, the defensive projections are based partially on measurements,
partially on aggregated scouting reports, and partially on my own eye.
“Scooping ability” isn’t really captured here, and that’s worth noting, but I can’t write every disclaimer every time I make a post. So I rely on you folks to either ask, as you do here, or seek out the answer for yourself. I’m not sure what the difference in ability between the worst, best, and average scooper is, so I won’t hazard a guess. Does anybody else want to? Give your guess in runs.
A) “the order of hitters does not matter much.” I actually never said that. What I did say (or meant to) was that there’s no “bonus” for adding a hitter into the middle of the lineup, above and beyond the skill of the hitter, so long as you use a reasonable lineup.
B) The onus isn’t on me, it’s on you. I’ll repeat what I said earlier: “if you can’t even make a reasonable a priori guess as to how the factor of presence might affect the bottom line, it’s not worth discussing.” So you tell me – how many extra runs or wins will Giambi add due solely to his stature and energy.
Finally, there’s no “middle ground” when it comes to statistical analysis versus old-school scouting. The very opinion that they are mutually exclusive modes of thought that require some kind of compromise is a canard. When you make decisions, you use facts. Those facts can be in the form of subjective observations or objective measurements.
Putting a number to something doesn’t make it statistical analysis. Measuring things in “runs” and “wins” is not statistical analysis. You can take scouting data, chemistry, energy, and leadership and if you can convert those runs and wins, and nobody would call it statistical analysis. So, if you think that I’m not capturing something, don’t just tell me that I’m not capturing it. Give your opinion on how much of an error you think I’ve made, and talk in the language of runs and wins.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 8:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mark McGwire's Presence
The onus isn’t on me, it’s on you. I’ll repeat what I said earlier: "if you can’t even make a reasonable a priori guess as to how the factor of presence might affect the bottom line, it’s not worth discussing." So you tell me – how many extra runs or wins will Giambi add due solely to his stature and energy.
So if you can’t measure it, it doesn’t exist… Neener, Neener, Neener? All saberheads use the exact same argument. Yet, it seems like most succesful baseball organizations have “Stats Guys”, mixed in with “Baseball Guys”.
If you have ever listened to Jason Giambi speak about Mark McGwire in the late 90’s, he was always giving credit to Mark McGwire (save the Steroid/HGH jokes)… showing him how to become a Professional Hitter, a Professional Ballplayer, Learning the Game, What Pitchers will throw you in certain situations, etc. If you talk to any successful ballplayer, they can usually point to another teammate who has helped them become a better ballplayer, a better Professional. Does that factor into the Giambi signing at all? I think Giambi can help Travis Buck, Daric Barton, Ryan Sweeney, Jack Cust, and other players trying to become better professional baseball players. All the while, helping the 2009 Team be more succesful.
“So, for $6 MM or whatever it is, this move doesn’t really improve the team” – salb918
You’ve already said it improves the team by .25 Wins, right? And what does it do for the team from 2010-2014? Well, since you can’t measure it, it doesn’t exist. Fortunately for the A’s, baseball isn’t played by Robots. ‘Cuz if it were, then we’d really be screwed.
by Colorado Fan on Jan 7, 2009 9:54 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
"So if you can’t measure it, it doesn’t exist… "
I never said that.
I asked you to try to guess how important this stuff is. If you think that having Giambi on the team will improve Buck et. al., then tell me what you think they would do without his influence and with it. Guess whether the influence comes this year and disappears, or persists. Tell me by how much you think it will improve them this year and in the long run. Is it worth 1 win? 2? $10 MM? $50?
“You’ve already said it improves the team by .25 Wins, right?”
That’s not a lot, it could be by as much as 1 win depending on how you think their defense differs and how much you think Barton will or will not bounce back. Not to pick nits, but I said it doesn’t really improve the team. I should have said, “doesn’t substantially improve the team.”
I’m pretty tired of every “staturday” devolving into a “OMG teh STATS versus SCOUTS.” You know what I bring to the table. I’ve had this discussion a million times. If you like it, and don’t care to contribute to the dialogue, then hang out in some other thread.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
but, putting a number on a feeling kills it just as surely as spraying a delicate flower with Roundup
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 10:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
monkeyball
surely there’s a poetic interlude in there somewhere, right? STATS versus SCOUTS? Sharks versus Jets, perhaps, with the song “Tonight”? Should I not be admitting to watching “West Side Story”?
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Jan 7, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm actually working on another Dylan adaptation on precisely that theme
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome.
You that hide behind desks…or in your mother’s basement.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 10:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
back atcha with the awesome
I may have to violate scansion and use that line
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Its more than a feeling...
When I see that firstbaseman they used to play…
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have pretty much zero percent
to contribute to these stataurday posts, but the day you stop writing them will be a sad day indeed.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Jan 7, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jason Giambi / Mark McGwire Slang
taught how to:
“become a professional hitter” = inject steroids
“become a professional ballplayer” = how to buy my own steroids and help others get them.
“learning the game” = Learning about the different steroid options
“Learning what pitchers will throw situationally” = Learning to time my steroids injections to best matchup with the opposing pitching.
Damn! We need Giambi STAT!
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if Giambi uses his stature and energy to bash Crosby over the head
He will be adding at least +1 win with his energy and presence.
More seriously speaking, I would put stock into energy/stature etc, in amateur baseball for sure, but its anyone’s guess as to how major league baseball dynamics work.
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Baseball is one sport where "energy" and rah rah absolutely doesn't work
It’s not like football where you want an adrenaline boost before having a large man sit on your head. Baseball players need to be calm.
I really hate this BS “energy” talk.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Adding an MVP
Well I think I did. To rephrase: The contribution of Giambi’s defensive metric rating in terms of run/wins should be understated, since defensive metrics cannot fully evaluate a players strengths and weaknesses. Further, his offensive metrics should be emphasized because he has a career OPS of .942 hitting behind Holliday who is behind Cust, making his contribution to the team greater than just his individual stats.
by greenpaddedgloves on Jan 7, 2009 9:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
So because we don't have as much information defensively as we do offensively
We should ignore the fact that he’s bad at defense and exaggerate how good he is on offense? Weird.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, that's the first time I've heard this explained...
“Putting a number to something doesn’t make it statistical analysis. Measuring things in "runs" and "wins" is not statistical analysis”.
Exactly what is it then? I ask because Harold Reynolds made an interesting statement on the Hot Stove last night. He alluded to MLB becoming younger because of stats orientated GM’s and front offices throughout baseball. He seems to feel that “veteran experience” is being discarded in this brave new world.
I think he’s right.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jan 7, 2009 9:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
"Exactly what is it then?"
It’s just a way to measure things, like dollars or centimeters, or gallons. In baseball, the goal is to win (or make money), so that’s the language you use. Statistical analysis is digging into the statistics to find out how performance turns translates to wins or runs or what have you. Just speaking those terms isn’t.
Good question.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 9:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One factor not mentioned here is the possibility of a trade.
Maybe the A’s are looking to trade Buck for a SS. Since they told Slusser that Barton is still at 1B, and they don’t seem to have any interest in O. Cabrera, I can see them doing that.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 7, 2009 9:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Lies, damn lies, and
…….statistics. Put ‘em away. Giambi is yesterday’s fish wrap. If he does sign its because he’s a ‘name’. Strictly for butts-in-the-seats purposes. As a player he’s maybe worth the ML minimum. Maybe. Butt ………. the great unwashed love names. They buy tickets to watch names. The A’s badly need to sell tickets. Baseball is incidental.
by Smoky on Jan 7, 2009 9:51 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
as I always say when this canard quacks, please identify any roster move Beane has ever made that was driven by fan appeal
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rickey in '98?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 7, 2009 9:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Chron write-up today mentioned that Barton is going to keep 1B gig,
Giambi at DH, and Cust in OF. Everyone here sort of assumed that signing Giambi meant that Barton would be sent to AAA – apparently that was a wrong assumption.
by 33SwisherSweet on Jan 7, 2009 10:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I was wondering about that, though ...
Paging Ms. Slusser: you say that “Beane has yet to comment on” the matter, and you don’t attroibute this to any source:
Giambi primarily will be a designated hitter for the A’s, at least initially, with Daric Barton remaining at first base and Jack Cust playing in the outfield.
Is that from a team source, a player, Arn Tellem, or your own supposition?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Y'know what I just thought of?
We could really use Marco Scutaro right about now.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 10:10 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Godfrey and Bell
just aren’t doing it for ya?
holdin' it down for the bay from upper westside manhattan
by SamYam on Jan 7, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
for what, pray tell?
Are Beane and Wolff adding a pony track to their athletic empire, and in need of someone to sport the silks?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 10:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A question for sal, grover, et al.
Presuming that Slusser’s bit about Giamana DH’ing (with Barton remaining at 1B) is true, what does that do to the overall WARP picture? Seems like we’d all been presuming that Barton would be Sacto-bound, right?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 10:22 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
what does it mean for cust?
he and holliday can’t both play LF… and god help us if cust is in right.
holdin' it down for the bay from upper westside manhattan
by SamYam on Jan 7, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They would have to put Holliday in right in that scenario
Not really looking forward to see Cust on the field period even if he did improve.
If this article has any substance to it regarding Barton staying at 1st then Beane must think Barton is going to improve drastically which of course is a good thing if he does.
by Trainman on Jan 7, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Holliday in RF doesn't seem optimal, either
By all accounts, while he’s a decent LF, he has a relatively weak arm.
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 10:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cust in RF.
Might as well have average-to-good defense in both LF and CF, and just have RF be a black hole.
by mikev on Jan 7, 2009 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why does Cust in right hurt more than Cust in left?
Oakland’s outfield doesn’t play differently at the two positions as far as I know. Cust has a decent arm, probably better than Holliday’s. And it seems as though more balls would go to left than right since there are more right-handed hitters out there.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Cust in Left hurts more
Mostly because Holliday would be then in right, where he’s relatively unknown BUT supposedly doesn’t have the arm for it.
by mikev on Jan 7, 2009 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Playable fly balls tend to go the opposite way
Mentally visualize a round bat intersecting with a round ball and “getting under it” a bit, and you’ll see why. It’s the inverse of the fact that poorly struck ground balls tend to be pulled.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 1:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My opinion, as above,
is that it’s a wash to replace Cust with Buck on a rate basis – but given Buck’s uncertain health, it provides depth at the margins.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Beane is anywhere near done
He has to add a pitcher and I still think he will replace Crosby.
Even if the economy has affected how much he’s going to spend, I still think there is more money that he is willing to spend if he deems it necessary.
by Trainman on Jan 7, 2009 10:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Depth, depth, depth
While I think in this numbers are basically right (and agree that it’s not worth haggling over projections that have pretty large error bars to begin with), I completely disagree with the conclusion.
The key point is depth, which Sal says is “nice” but doesn’t seem to feel is very important. That’s a big mistake. While it may be true that Giambi is roughly as valuable overall (including both offense and defense), as Sweeney, or Buck, or Barton, that’s not really what we should be asking.
This gives the team six decent players for 5 positions. And when you take into account not only the likelihood of injuries, but also the facts that most players get occasional days off, and that Sweeney should probably sit most of the time against left-handers, most of Giambi’s playing time won’t be coming from Sweeney or Buck or Barton.
His playing time will be coming from Rajai Davis, or Denorfia, or Murton, or Cunningham (who I think needs more time in AAA), or some bargain basement free agent like Emil Brown or Shannon Stewart. And if you redo this exercise using projections for one of those players, I expect you’ll find that Giambi is a much more significant upgrade, and a huge bargain.
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
by andeux on Jan 7, 2009 10:59 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Great points.
If you do that, then Giambi is worth his wins above replacement minus, oh about 0.5-1 wins (the aggregate level of guys like Denorfia, Murton, et. al). Then you’ve got Giambi adding 1-1.5 wins for 5 MM, which is just about market rate.
As an aside, if Sweeney sits, who plays center? There’s no room for Rajai on the roster if I understand correctly, so Sweeney is the only real CF on the roster. Maybe Holliday or Buck could fake it out there if called upon.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jan 7, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I assume Buck
I think he’d be passable there on an occasional basis. Chone has him as +5 at a corner, -3 in CF, though that’s presumably based mostly on how skills translate in general.
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
by andeux on Jan 7, 2009 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd want Rajai on the team over Buck
1. He should be better than Buck as Sweeney’s platoon in CF.
2. There is a fair amount of cumulative value in having him as a defensive replacement.
3. There’s some value in having him as a good PR.
4. I don’t think the “normal days off” are as important as you say, and in this scenario they would be more forced than actually helping the team. If someone gets hurt, Buck/Barton can always immediately come up.
Ideally, they could go with Buck and Rajai, with Barton taking backup/starting 3B duties….
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
by mikeA on Jan 7, 2009 12:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Normal days off
also includes times when players are injured enough to lose some of their effectiveness for a few days, but not enough to warrant use of the DL. I think those are fairly significant. (Whether the A’s take that route more than they should, or more than other teams do, is a separate issue.)
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
by andeux on Jan 7, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's true
I don’t think it’s clear what they should do… I would say that cutting Rajai would give back some of the depth advantage that they gain from Giambi, though.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
by mikeA on Jan 7, 2009 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Also
This could improve all of the aforementioned’s numbers because it oculd allow us to have some actual good late-inning pinch hitting opportunities/matchup opportunities.
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Jan 7, 2009 11:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
or some bargain basement free agent like Emil Brown or Shannon Stewart ...
… or Garret Anderson.
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 11:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't gonna say it.
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
by andeux on Jan 7, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh Boy!!! Wins above replacement?
That is a guage, but is a off as it is on. Just look at the Angels last season and you will get a pretty good idea of why while numbers are important for guaging and negotiating contracts, it is a good thing that baseball men still put these teams together.
Adding Giambi will help the entire line-up and give Eric Chavez his baseball BFF back. He will also take the leadership role along and grow his hair out again.
Have you even weighed the Samson factor yet? :)
Giambi will play a lot of first base, or at least he should. I have not seen a first basemen in oakland that can pick the ball on throws in the dirt like he can, so for every ball that he misses by 6 inches he is sure to scoop a ball in the dirt. He will be just fine.
And by hitting behind Cust, which he should, Cust should see many more fastballs. What is the value of that?
A line-up is a living breathing thing made up of 9 parts, some of which are replaceable throuout the game and others interchangable over the season. VORP is too one dimensional when taking into account one persons effect on a line-up.
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 11:23 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I tend to agree
the passive benefits of having Giambi on the roster are very valuable. Depth will be an issue and I’d rather not watch the River Cats try to win the AL West.
by Ovale Fan on Jan 7, 2009 11:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So you didn't watch Barton at all last year, did you?
Because he might be the best in the league at picking a ball out of the dirt.
Somebody should keep track of throws in the dirt and the percentage of those throws that are turned into outs.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, You're Right I Didn't Watch Barton AT ALL Last Year:
Who is this Barton guy anyway?
On a serious note Barton was good at it. Giambi is just teh best that I’ve seen. And his offense dwarfs Bartons.
But when they start scheming us the way these guys did, and we weren't particularly ready for it, anything can happen."
by saint on Jan 7, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How recently have you seen Giambi picking throws in the dirt though?
I mean, Rickey is the best leadoff hitter I’ve ever seen, but I’m (reasonably) sure that he wouldn’t be that great right now.
by mikev on Jan 7, 2009 12:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bite your tongue
Oh, you said “(reasonably)”. Bite your cheek.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Jan 7, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well yeah -- I had to add in the caveat.
If there’s any 50 year old who could go out and have a .380 OBP and steal 30 bags, it’s Rickey.
by mikev on Jan 7, 2009 1:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and the "should see many more fastballs thing" does not happen
It just doesn’t. We can prove this, and it’s been proven to not happen.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i dont buy into the leadership thing either
does he guide the younger players to the plate and show them where to stand?
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 12:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
First Law of Sabermetrics
No matter how extensive the efforts you go to to prove that something is luck, people will continue to assert that it isn’t luck.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jan 7, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
aka God Wins! Law
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 1:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just look at the Mariners last season
for why building your team around intangibles and the opinions of “baseball men” (whatever that means) is a great thing.
by Josh Deletchi on Jan 8, 2009 9:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Good lord
What’s with the obsession with Giambi and his hair? With the way some fans talk on here, it’s like Giambi growing his hair out will automatically lead this team to the World Series or something.
"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 7, 2009 11:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Giambi & Holliday - a nice 1-2 punch...
One of the glaring issues with recent Oakland lineups has been lack of run production – how can you not like the addition of Giambi along with Holliday to help the team score more runs – and thereby – be in a better position to win more games?
by A's1973 on Jan 7, 2009 12:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
a run saved is as good as a run earned
so the argument is that giambi’s defense allows more runs than his offense provides. i personally am a fan of the move.
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"A run saved is as good as a run earned"
This is only true if you are thinking about winning and losing games. A run saved doesn’t add season ticket holders, but a run scored sure might. People want to see offense. Defense is nice, but it doesn’t pay the bills.
by JustinKase on Jan 7, 2009 12:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
winning pays the bills
and defense wins
by Josh Deletchi on Jan 8, 2009 9:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
And I expect to see Giambi at first base a fair amount. Barton 2008 fielding percentage: .988. Giambi 2008 fielding percentage: .990. Not much difference, although I’d say Barton has more range and can throw while Jason really struggles with throws.
by worldblee on Jan 7, 2009 12:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
fielding percentage isnt a good metric
for judging defense. altho there arent really any great metrics for defense. but out of all of them, fielding percentage is one of the least telling
"My group runs some frogloks down the hall to finish them off and POP! RASTER! If there was a way to scream louder than caps in EQ I was doing it. Man I am straight panicking because I know I have NO CHANCE soloing and the party has run off. I'm in my hotel room; it's like 5am, and I am straight hollering, in EQ and in real life. Bottom line is the group comes back, heals me, and kills Raster! WOOT!" -Curt Schilling on his favorite memories in the video game "EverQuest"
by travdog6 on Jan 7, 2009 12:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And Barton can pick the ball like nobody's business
Jack Hannahan probably would’ve set an all-time record for errors if not for Barton grabbing all his awful throws.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder if that's factored into defensive evaluation at all?
I mean, UZR/150 fucking loves Hannahan, to the tune of 11.1 last year.
That said, I’m curious — how much better does he look because he had a pretty damn good 1B picking his awful throws, as opposed to a guy like David Ortiz just standing there and watching the ball go by?
by mikev on Jan 7, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's the one area of defense that's not analyzed properly
If I had more time – or would get paid for it – I would take a look at all the video of last year to see how many balls Hannahan threw into the ground. It was those throws that primarily clouded my view of his defense, but the vast majority of them didn’t turn into errors because Barton saved the day.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tell you what -- you do that, and I'll give you a team in the GUBA!
HOW CAN YOU REFUSE THAT?!?!?
by mikev on Jan 7, 2009 12:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
People all too often forget that baseball is a business...
and that moves are not necessarily made to make a team better or worse on the field. Even if the Giambi signing creates ZERO change in the W column, it is still a win for the A’s organization. Giambi will sell jerseys, put butts in seats and create a buzz that the A’s are dying to have. The addition on Matt Holliday does the same thing. Neither move was made to make the A’s better for 2009. The Holliday move was made to prolong the rebuilding period long enough to have a team that will start winning when the new stadium is eventually built (probably in Las Vegas). Trade prospects for a guy that can give you more prospects, repeat until you are in a position to actually sign said prospects to long term deals. The A’s would not have been ready to sign CarGo, so they let him go now without risking an indeterminate future. Giambi is a signing that will lure casual fans and create some buzz within the media. The team needs to sell some tickets now, and be ready to sell lots more when a new stadium is built. The two moves are not about winning and losing, they are business decisions… and they are decidedly good ones.
by JustinKase on Jan 7, 2009 12:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ben Sheets would make a great addition
If Derek Lowe’s offer is an indication that the market is depressed, why not take a chance on Sheets? There must be more money to play with, considering what was alloted for Furcal and the fact that Giambi was inexpensive. What is Sheets looking for?
by deathby9 on Jan 7, 2009 12:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Sheets isn't worth the ~$15 he's going to want
At this point, you can probably get Jon Garland for half that. I’d be more inclined to do that.
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2009 12:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
(blink-blink)
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jan 7, 2009 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I see your point
And less risk of having the contract be a wash as Sheets’ arms have a tendency to come apart at the seams. What other viable starters are left? Please don’t say Randy Wolf. I think Sheets would be worth a shot if he would come around 12.
by deathby9 on Jan 7, 2009 12:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Have we ever thought about Cust at 1st base?
He was an all-american at 1st in High School, and I imagine he might even be league average if we put him at 1st.
rebuildingseason.blogspot.com
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 7, 2009 1:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Press Conference
Did you’all catch any of the presser, Salb, thedj44?
by greenpaddedgloves on Jan 7, 2009 2:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I tried to watch it...
But Comcast Sports is so terrible that they didnt cut in to the press conference until it was already started, and then immediately they had technical difficulties, tried to come back, but then I guess it was too hard for Comcast to figure out how to fix it so they said screw it, and didnt show anymore of the press conference. Thats how it went down on Direct TV anyways, but Comcast is terrible, ok my rant is over.
by pbra17 on Jan 7, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
At the press conference
Someone mentioned Mark Mulder and my computer cut out. Anyone hear what was said?
by HRH on Jan 7, 2009 2:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We traded Duke for him
straight up
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Jan 7, 2009 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He didn't say anything, per the policy of not talking about FAs.
And also, Tejada is on another team so he didn’t talk about him either.
But yea, when they say “We’re getting the band back together” I kinda imagine it’s more than one dude. Probably reading into it too much though.
by LoneStranger on Jan 7, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Are they signing Aretha?
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 3:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the shit fits, wear it!
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
by andeux on Jan 7, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We're on a mission from Beane.
This is hardball! This is where we overreact! @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jan 7, 2009 3:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
little off topic but who will hit in the 2 hole this year
please not ellis, he had his 1 good season, now it is all down hill
by jhroac02 on Jan 7, 2009 3:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Cust....no wait, forget I said anything! PLEASE DON'T HURT ME!
just kidding! Probably Sweeney or Buck? It’s been beat to death here http://www.athleticsnation.com/2009/1/5/709948/get-ready-for-the-giambi-s#comments
by LoneStranger on Jan 7, 2009 3:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
