Let's Review the Rotation Bidding
by windyfelix on Mar 20, 2009 2:39 PM PDT
Email
PrintLots of deveopments in the past few days.
Jerome Williams and James Simmons were sent down-- Simmons had to make an emergency appearance today when Anderson got hurt (more in a sec on that) and got lit up, though one would tend to give him a break since it was obviously a rushed, unanticipated appearance.
The best overall performance this spring has been turned in by Trevor Cahill, Brett Anderson and Josh Outman. Dana Eveland has been uneven-- got lit up in a minor league game this week. Sean Gallagher had a poor beginning, and one horrid game while suffering from the flu, but then pitched very well his last time out. Gio Gonzalez is throwing well, Edgar is not. Dallas Braden is fine. Cahill had a shaky inning his last time out; Mazzaro was shaky the entire appearance. And now Anderson-- who has obviously exceeded his 150 inning limit (sorry, PT-- couldn't resist-- said in fun, OK??)-- has a strain or soreness in his forearm and was cut short after 2 innings today.
What does it all mean???
1) If Anderson has any lingering injury question, shut him down or dispatch him to AAA and be patient. I have been a big booster of his-- I think he's best able of MAC to make a difference now, but obviously they can't risk him. If this is a less siginficant situation, I would think he could still get two more starts in and have a shot at the rotation. But it seems doubtful to me now;
2) Mazzaro's shakiness and the sense that he hasn't yet got command of all his pitches tells me that AAA awaits. He is the classic power pitcher that needs some fine tuning-- yes, he's the oldest of the bunch, but no sense throwing him at patient major league hitters if command issues linger. He could, of course, have two brilliant appearances between now and the end of ST and change this view, but I tend to think not;
3) Braden and Eveland are in the rotation unless they are part of a trade. I'd favor Braden as Opening Day starter over Eveland, who I think will, whatever the actual opening rotation, wind up as the #4 or #5 starter eventually, assuming he stays with the club;
4) I think Gio deserves a shot-- and I think Edgar does not;
5) Gallagher appears recovered-- and he's also an outside contender for the opener;
6) I think Cahill is the final peg assuming that one bad inning isn't repeated the next two times. He's been very solid all spring, and the reviews suggest that he has the makeup necessary to succeed from the get-go.
7) I like Outman in the bullpen. If Anderson's injury lingers, and Cahill flames out the next couple of times, he could still be there-- but I think in his case, there's not enough of a track record beyond this spring to go on. His numbers from the Philly organization against AA hitters are OK, but not great; his K/W ratios are OK, but not great.
So to review-- if Anderson is OK, I still think both he and Cahill may be in-- then setting up a possible Gio vs. Eveland or Braden situation. If Anderson is not OK, I think it's probably Cahill and Gio joining the three other holdovers.
269 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
One thing to think about
If we were to send Cahill and Anderson to AAA to start the year, wait three weeks, then call them up to be the 4th and 5th Starters, we’d have control of them for another year.
Chicago. Where the Dead can Vote. Where the Voters of Tomorrow are found in the Obituaries of Today.
this is a curious thought
especially if the A’s are at all concerned with Anderson’s forearm tightness.
I could see going with the rotation below, but i don’t think it would last beyond mid-May because I agree that Anderson has shown he is ready for a MLB test—-and I hope Duke will find himself at the head of the rotation by then.
If not, I hope we score lots of runs.
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Mar 20, 2009 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions
yep...
super two…..Like the Rays did last year. Thats why I think Outman in the 5th spot with edgar the 6th man…..Plus, at the start of the year, most teams don’t need a 5th starter
Too bad the A's aren't "most teams"
They’ll need a 5th starter all but once through May 13th.
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
That's a really, really weird scheduling quirk
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Part of it is that the first off day happens to be after game #10,
and part of it is that two off days in a different week happen in the same turn through the rotation. Not very helpful!
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
I still say the rotation should be
Eveland
Gallagher
Braden
Gio
Outman
I actually have the opposite view as you seem to. I’d put Mazzaro and Anderson in the rotation WAY before Cahill. Cahill has not appeared in a AAA game yet. Just because I’m excited for his future doesn’t mean his ready now. The only support for bringing him up was his spring stats and now that argument doesn’t really hold merit (not that it ever should have) unless you deliberately ignore his last start.
Outman’s future may very well be in the pen. But he absolutely should be in a rotation (AAA or majors) to start the season.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
by vignette17 on Mar 20, 2009 2:50 PM PDT reply actions 5 recs
I agree with that rotation completely.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
+1
Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom
by designatedforassignment on Mar 20, 2009 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions
rec'd. I am a subscriber to your newsletter of knowledge.
Outman should have to pitch his way out of the rotation – if he’s ineffective as an SP, that’ll be what he eventually settles in at. He’s relatively stretched out right now, and he should start the year as the 5th starter throwing 85-100 pitch, 5-6 inning games.
Think about the worst-case scenario with Anderson: He’s kept on the big-league roster, has a season-ending injury right away because the team needs him to take the ball every fifth day…and he burns a year or more of big league service time on the DL. That’s a huge blow for a relatively low-budget team like the A’s – losing a $400K year of a very good pitcher.
I’d say go with exactly the rotation you suggested. It keeps the team from having to purchase the contracts of any of those four guys. Plus, it may well end up preserving an option year for Gio and Outman, if they can remain effective and stay with the big club all season.
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 Mar 20, 2009 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions
The option year is a good point.
Especially since Gio seems like a head case to a certain extent. The ability to send Gio down might come in handy more than with your usual pitcher. If later in his career Gio struggles, the ability to send him down a la Cliff Lee may be important for turning his head around.
Some of the most violent things I’ve ever seen were at Raiders games. And I’ve been to jail. - leopold bloom
by designatedforassignment on Mar 20, 2009 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I like that rotation
Those 5 guys deserve a shot, already have their clocks ticking, and are healthy. How everything shakes out will work itself out as guys come back from injury, and performance on the AAA and big league squad comes into focus.
RIVER CATS: AAA CHAMPS!
I like it. I rec'd it.
But I’m a little bit confused about why you’ve already given up on Harden for the season. It’s just a flu.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
I'm joining the group
I agree on this rotation, and I think the other Gonzalez still has a chance to claim one of the spots but I would put him at 6th right now maybe in the bullpen as long relief.
Service time is one good reason to let MAC ripen in AAA for a while but I also think it’s worth it to give the other guys a shot. Galagher, Gonzalez, and Outman were all pretty good SP prospects a year ago and while they have had some struggles I don’t think any of them have definitively shown they can’t hang as a starter in the majors. Even in “go for it” mode I think the A’s can afford to give them at least April to prove themselves.
I am as excited for MAC as everyone else but I think all three have shown there are parts of their games that need to be worked on. Might as well let them learn in AAA while we see what the prospects of last year have.
Unfortunately, Gio's shoulder doesn't appear to agree with it
:-(
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Yeah, not good news.
But it might be a blessing in disguise, in a way, as long as it’s not serious- because I don’t think he’s shown any real signs this spring that he’s ready for an ML rotation slot… yet. I really wouldn’t mind seeing him pitch out of the ’pen to start the season, assuming decent health, or at AAA to build up confidence and work on pitch selection, etc., prior to taking another crack at breaking the ML rotation.
by still bills kingdom on Mar 21, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I really don't understand that perspective
He’s walked one and K’d eight, and generally been very effective. How has he not shown signs of being ready? I understand feeling he’s not ready, but I don’t see how folks are concluding that Outman has looked better than Gio.
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
Oh, I'm not saying Gio hasn't shown some effectiveness
and I’m not an Outman booster, either, for that matter. I like Outman at AAA at this point, to start the season, and Gio to start the season in the bullpen (if healthy and ready.)
To be clear, I just haven’t seen Gio go long enough in a game and therefore demonstrate consistent success facing a line-up two or more times through yet this spring to feel confident in him being part of the rotation to open the season. And I don’t see where the A’s have been preparing him for a rotation slot with the way they’ve used him this spring, either, honestly. I think it’s in the plans down the road, surely- but not to open the season.
As for Outman, since you brought him up (I didn’t) and all, I see him at AAA proving he can be an effective starter or I see him working out of the ML ‘pen if Gio isn’t ready to go. I don’t see him being ready for the ML rotation yet, either.
Far as I can tell, the only pitchers we can reasonably expect to see in the rotation to start the season at this point are:
Eveland
Gallagher
Braden
With Duke hopefully ready to join the parade in the second turn, or third turn at latest.
In the meantime, that leaves two spots to fill.
If I had my druthers, I’d probably take Anderson to fill one of those spots, and I’d seriously consider Cahill for another. I think Anderson is generally ahead of Cahill at this point, just in terms of command/control, and I think he could probably stick in the rotation all year (with some ups and downs to be expected, and he’d have to weather those to prove he’s ready to stay up.)
I wouldn’t push Gio into one of those spots yet. And I wouldn’t put Outman in there either, honestly. It might be a little soon for Cahill as well.
Who they go with will very much depend on the next couple weeks, and health of course- I wouldn’t be surprised to see Anderson in there, and I also wouldn’t be surprised to see Edgar Gonzalez in the fifth spot for at least one turn until Duke is ready. As you pointed out yourself, he’s really only had one bad outing and that was pretty much one bad inning- and he has the experience necessary to bounce back from that. I kind of see him as the most likely placeholder for Duke in the rotation, and I see Anderson as the most likely/ready of the other candidates to take the 4th spot and potentially own it all year.
by still bills kingdom on Mar 21, 2009 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, at this point with Gio hurting
my inclination would be to go with
Braden
Gallagher
Eveland
Anderson
E. Gonzalez
with one of Outman and Gio at AAA and the other in the bullpen. Then when Duke is ready, if Anderson isn’t great you send him down and if he is you send Edgar down.
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
Honestly, that's exactly what I see happening as of now. But who knows?
There’s always tomorrow.
Or the next inning.
Or the next pitch…
(Or the next injury. Yikes.)
by still bills kingdom on Mar 21, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
No kidding. Sigh.
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
Experience, and Outman might benefit from
some AAA or bullpen time, as he keeps changing his mechanics. The major league rotation is not a good place to work these things out.
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
I'd have said Anderson before the injury
but if there’s any risk of the forearm being a problem, you can’t carry him. I do believe he is ready to pitch in the big leagues, though, and think he’d be at least as good as anyone in that rotation.
May as well start Cahill in AAA, because while there’s a chance he’ll take to the bigs like a fish to water, he doesn’t have the command that’s going to make Anderson a sure thing, at least not yet.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
Sounds to me as if Anderson's setback was more a case
of his new team not knowing him and also being (intelligently) conservative. Either Anderson can pitch or he can’t. If he can’t, he can’t pitch in AAA either; if he can, he may as well do it in Oakland.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
He can.
What I’m saying is if this is the kind of injury that could cost him several months (I don’t know the history, so I don’t have that answer), it should cost him several months in AAA.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
Sure - the history, apparently, is that
he had this “tight forearm” cramp before, pitched through it and struck out 12 that game, and came out of it none the worse for wear. It appears he won’t miss any time and feels he didn’t really need to come out of the game but understands the A’s being uber-cautious about it.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
some people seem to change their opinions after every spring training game
i’ll stick to what i thought on feb 22 (minus dennys reyes in the bullpen):
outman should be the #5 starter, rajai davis should be the backup OF, nomar and crosby should be the backup IFs.
the AAA rotation should be mazzaro, simmons, anderson, gio (once duke is back), and edgar gonzalez, with jerome williams the swing man (after gio is sent down). and cahill should start in AA.
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
"some people seem to change their opinions after every spring training game"
That’s not true. It’s every inning.
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
Or after a couple bad pitches.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
i change my opinion after every beer.
mmm
what have i got myself into this time... http://damiansthirtyyearchallenge.blogspot.com/
by alea iacta est on Mar 22, 2009 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Dear lord, a voice of reason-- thank you
Assuming Duke and Gio can’t go, use one of the filler players until they can or until one of the prospects actually masters AAA.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
I know - I get so tired of these idiots, like Billy Beane,
who seem to think that one of these guys could be ready! Snarrrrrrrrrk.
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
Looks Like Gio is out of the equation
they were leaning toward putting him in pen before his shoulder injury anyway.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/athletics/detail?&entry_id=37298
He's been wrong before and I think he's wrong now.
The odds are simply stacked against young pitchers making the jump to the majors from AA (and with little to no AAA experience), even ones as talented as MAC.
If one or all of them are starting the season, I’d be very surprised, even relieved if they put up league average numbers (~4.50 ERA). For some reason, I think all the people who are clamoring for them now are expecting Hudson/Zito esque debuts…and I think they’ll be vastly disappointed.
"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Mar 21, 2009 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Hudson/Zito esque debuts
Neither Hudson nor Zito began their major league careers in April. Hudson’s MLB debut — or as Tim used to say, “moldy butt” — was in June. Zito’s was in July.
If you want a Hudson/Zito esque debut, wait till summer.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."
"Wait till summer..."
Exactly. I’m hoping the A’s can exercise patience and not bring them up till summer.
"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Mar 22, 2009 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions
League average would be a lot better
than hoping Jerome Williams will come close to doing what he did four years ago, instead of posting an ERA north of 7.00, or Edgar Gonzalez’s career 5.97 ERA. Simply put, neither of those guys are even replacement level.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
I really don't see how anybody can be sure MAC are replacement level right now
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 7:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I suppose you're right.
I just think Anderson in particular stands a better chance of it than Williams or E-Gone.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
I really don't see how anybody can be sure about anything
It’s one of the great wonders of baseball. Pitchers don’t usually do well to debut at 21, or skip AAA, but Anderson and Cahill may be exceptions. Edgar Gonzalez’ track record suggests he has good stuff but will give up 2 runs every 3 innings – or he may put it together this year under new tutelage. Or they could all suck.
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
a little history lesson
a former AN member argued during spring 2005 that the a’s didn’t have a single major league caliber player on their roster and beane should be fired, and then in late summer 2005 that the a’s would continue to win 80% of their games for the rest of the season.
people around here get so enthusiastic or pessimistic based on the last six batters a pitcher has faced. it’s probably best to ignore them but unfortunately that would only encourage such ridiculous thinking.
as far as “what beane thinks”: obviously he isn’t going to say anything negative about any of the players, and he’s not going to close off any options when he doesn’t need to do so just yet. and obviously he wants to encourage the prospects while also making sure the “filler” candidates don’t get too comfortable.
any five of the candidates MAY start in the rotation, pitchers are inherently fragile (see duke, gio, anderson, gallagher just this spring). cargon ended up in the MLB outfield last year before he was ready because of injuries, hell mark kiger ended up playing in the 06 playoffs. what DOES happen is irrelevant to this discussion, as is how those pitchers actually end up performing. as for what SHOULD happen, i think most reasonable and intelligent people agree, including of course beane:
"In a perfect world,‘’ A’s GM Billy Beane says they’d send down Cahill and Anderson. But of course this isn’t a perfect world. The guess here is one or both make the team.
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
How do you remember that?
Spring 2005? I’m lucky to remember today’s date.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Kiger!
Sigh. Ellis’s injury really killed our playoff run that year.
Bob Geren and Ken Macha both enjoy jai lai.
by CarGon's Jock on Mar 23, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't agree with the fanpost's premises:
That Outman has turned in a very good Spring, that E. Gonzalez “has not,” that Braden has only been “fine”. Outman, prior to his very last appearance, has been quite shaky (8.2 IP, 12 hits, 5 BB). Edgar Gonzalez, outside of one horrible inning, has generally drawn very solid reviews. And from what I can tell, Braden has had the best Spring of any A’s pitcher in that he hasn’t really had a bad inning.
As for what I’d go with at the moment?
Braden
Gallagher
Eveland
Gio Gonzalez
Anderson (or if not physically ready, E. Gonzalez as filler for Duke)
Mazzaro and Cahill would benefit from a little more minor league time to sharpen their command, and Outman should, IMO, be in the bullpen or AAA (though I don’t mind if he takes the #5 spot; I’m just not sure if he’s mechanically sorted out).
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
Slightly Different Idea
Duchsherer won’t quite be ready to start the season in the rotation, but he could be ready second time through — so why not set up a rotation of
Braden
Gallagher
Eveland
Gio
Outman
first time through…then second time through, depending on the first week, move either Gio or Outman into long relief, and put Duke in the #5 slot. This means Duke starts the season on the active roster and not on the DL. In the end, it really doesn’t matter what position in the rotation any of the pitchers are.
Good point
Duke’s first outings will essentially be in relief anyway, in terms of pitch count, so whether it’s Outman / Duke or Duke / Outman, you’ll need Outman for a few starts anyway until Duke can go 80+ pitches.
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
I like Outman over Gio
even if he was not that good until his last outing he is still a better option than Gio.
Why? Gio is projected to be better, has more upside,
and has thrown well in the Cactus League – his main issue is throwing strikes and he’s walked one batter all Spring (8.1 IP, 1 BB, 8 K). I can’t really see a single reason why Outman would be ahead of Gio on the depth chart right now.
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
I just think the A’s would be better off with a confident Outman in the rotation than a scared G.Gonzalez.
"Lets Go Oakland"
I guess I'm just not sure
what about Outman has seemed confident and what about Gio has seemed scared. But it may be moot, given Gio’s shoulder issues…
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
I guess scared isn’t the right word, but havn’t you noticed that when he gives up a homerun or a couple of walks he kind of breaks down.
"Lets Go Oakland"
No, because he hasn't given up a lot of walks or hits or runs
Unless you mean his brief stint in Oakland last season, in which case I’d say, “Yes, Gio in 2008 is not a good choice for the major league rotation.”
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
Because...pitchers develop, mature, change.
A better question would be, “Why the heck would someone expect every year to be the same?”
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
If you were trapped in a time-space continuum,
There’s one.
AN: the new twitter of sportsblogs. -Dogfather
by Leopold Bloom on Mar 21, 2009 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions
we're all trapped in the space time continuum
what have i got myself into this time... http://damiansthirtyyearchallenge.blogspot.com/
by alea iacta est on Mar 22, 2009 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Whoa, that's for the breaking news that Gio is scared
Where’d you find that information?
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Should we value later appearances more?
Especially in the case of spring training where good pitchers sometimes need to feel out their pitches. If we just go by the entire body of work, then that doesn’t take into account if they just needed to get their mechanics down right and are fulfilling their potential.
Just my observation, but it seems like during the year, Beane sometimes promotes the guy with a sustained hot streak even if the whole year statistics haven’t been that great. I felt like Blanton was that way and maybe Pennington for two random examples.
-you people are talking about 8 total innings. 8 spring training innings. and you want to put more weight on a few of those 8 innings than on others.
-blanton was the a’s top pitching prospect, and he pitched just fine in AAA. i would say his ERA was irrelevant but 4.19 in sacto isn’t even that bad.
-pennington was probably promoted because he could back up multiple infield positions.
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
Add Gio to the list of starting pitchers who are ailing.....
Some kind of shoulder problem according to John Shea.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/20/SPCT16K9I3.DTL
And.......
it still won’t paste correctly. Anyways there’s the link.
That explains why he hasn't pitched for a week
Heaven forbid the A’s be generally healthy for a season.
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
Let's break the triple digits with the DL!!!
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
A Couple of Things
Let’s try to understand spring training, service time, and the A’s plans for 2009.
For a solid part of a rotation— like the Big 3 once were or even Haren, Blanton, et. al,— early spring training starts are utterly meaningless in terms of performance. They are building up arm strength, working on specific pitches- it is only until the last couple of starts that you’d like them to start dialing and going 5-6 innings, but even there, it’s not as if their job is on the line.
I would argue that this team really doesn’t have anyone like that, partic. once Duke is hurt. (He has started all of 1 year in the bigs) We have the young and somewhat tested and the very young and untested. So all these 10 or so guys that have been out there competing know it was an open competition— that while Eveland, Braden and Gallagher might have more rope, even their positions were never totally secure if one or more of the kids blew the roof of.
Now that we’re in the final two weeks I think that how the 6-7 guys who are not hurt finish is going to be pretty darn important. We have the 3 “veterans” from last year in Eveland-Braden-Gallagher, and we have two Gonzalezes with a mixed bag of skill and experience, and then Outman, and then MAC. Now we may find that both Gio and Anderson are removed from consideration due to injury.
Which gets me to service time and 2009. I simply do not believe that these three weeks (and if you can recall my earlier posts it will actually be as much as twice that or more given the way decision-making on a big league team actually takes place) are as vital as a lot of people around here do. Of the A’s gaggle of talented starting pitchers who arrived here since 1999, only one, Barry Zito, stayed all the way through his pre-free agency period. Now of course service time can help one’s trade position when it is advisable to unload a pitcher— but that extra year is pretty far down the pike even in that case.
As opposed to the here and now, and the myriad of reasons why Beane is gunning for the Angels this year. If Duke is out for any substantial length of time— let’s say a month for argument’s sake— is the team better off going with the “safe” route, as is argued here, but where "safe: means a batch of mediocrity with some small chance of being good, or are they conversely better off gambling that one or more of the youngest kids might replicate what a lot of other young pitchers have done for this franchise the last decade.
Which is why I still believe Cahill may yet leap into this quintet and Anderson was an even stronger bet to do so before today’s setback. To beat the Angels— this year— one might have to be bold, not play it safe.
the smart money seems to be on...
some combination of:
Braden
Gallagher
Eveland
Gio
Outman
Whether Eveland is #1 and Braden #3 is or vice versa, it seems to me that any combination of that rotation for any period longer than a month will put the A’s in such a deep, dark hole that they may not be able to climb out of it.
The front three are okay. I’d do the same (‘cept I’d have Gallagher #1, since he’ll be there eventually, anyway).
i’d go with Anderson and Cahill at #4 and #5 and see if they can hang with the big dogs, right from the git go. If they get hammered send ’em down and bring up Gio and Outman to be the hamburger for the grinder that will be April and May. The season will be over after that and we can concentrate on 2010.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 21, 2009 12:01 AM PDT up reply actions
You left out Duke
He’s the ace, the #1 guy…he won’t be ready to start on opening day…but he should be in the rotation within a week or two after that, barring setbacks.
Gio's gone, too.
So, in order to make the above rotation work you have to run either Edgar Gonebaseball or Jerome Threebilliams out there for an interdeterminate period of time.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
to make my rotation work, they wouldn't...
because my rotation would be:
Gallagher
Eveland
Braden
Anderson
Cahill
Until Duke comes back, of course… if he does. I’m not that confident that he will come back and be a #1. We’ll see.
And, what most of AN seems to have thought was a strong bullpen is looking more and more like a weak spot to me. Springer, Wuertz, Schroder, Blevins? Hey, I think the back end will be strong with Ziggy and Devine, but it looks like will get rocked hard with that middle relief.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 21, 2009 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions
I like your rotation
but I doubt they’ll let Anderson and Cahill both start in the rotation. I think they will probly have Edgar Gonzalez or Outman start until Duke is healthy. I think if Duke has to miss alot of time(which would suck) they should think about letting Cahill or Mazzaro take his spot.
"Lets Go Oakland"
I simply do not believe that these three weeks (and if you can recall my earlier posts it will actually be as much as twice that or more given the way decision-making on a big league team actually takes place) are as vital as a lot of people around here do. Of the A’s gaggle of talented starting pitchers who arrived here since 1999, only one, Barry Zito, stayed all the way through his pre-free agency period. Now of course service time can help one’s trade position when it is advisable to unload a pitcher— but that extra year is pretty far down the pike even in that case.
So, you concede it’s important if the team doesn’t trade one of those guys. You concede it’s important if the team DOES trade one of those guys. And yet you then state that it isn’t important. Is there some middle option, like one of them being arrested for heroin smuggling, that I’m not aware of?
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
by PaulThomas on Mar 21, 2009 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
No, we drafted Ryan Goleski instead.
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
Huh???
I’m sorry that in my Beanian or should I say idiotic state I don’t get on your wavelength enough. I said “(not) as vital as a lot of people around here do”, when it comes to control.
Why? let me repeat:
1) It’s probably not 3 weeks, but 4-6 at least and maybe more. Having a superior pitcher in the rotation for that length of time might have a pretty big impact on the A’s pennant chances this year;
2) The likelihood of any one of these guys lasting all the way through the A’s control period is not great;
3) The A’s generally avoid arbitration so the calendar, while NOT UNIMPORTANT, is not as crucial to them as it might be to the Brewers or Phillies who can’t strike a deal with Howard or Fielder. They can do a multi-year deal with one of them who starts this year in Year A, and wait until Year B to do the others who may be delayed in AAA for a while.
4) Beane does want to win this year, believes he can— and so do I. On both counts.
A middle option, FWIW, is having one of them in rotation first thing; another in May or June; and a third perhaps mid summer or for September. Is that so hard to grasp??
Now I've seen everything...
oaktoon=“Beanian”
"We've come a long way, and I'm not talking about Virginia Slims, either." - Art Howe
IF one of MAC were going to be a Cy Young candidate out of the gate
then I have no doubt Beane would put them in the rotation right here and now. The problem is these guys haven’t even proven themselves in AAA yet, let alone the Bigs. I don’t care what their make up is, they need that experience. On top of that, I doubt see any of them being a far and away an upgrade on the guys who’s clocks have already started and have proven themselves in AAA. You’re wasting clock time on a player who will likely be VERY good. You’re wasting clock time on a player who isn’t clearly an overwhelmingly better pitcher in April (and April alone) than the others. To say that negatively impacts our playoff hopes is an incredibly optimistic stretch at best and incredibly delusional at worst. Our best move NOW and in the future, is to send all of MAC to AAA to start the season and, assuming the starting 5 aren’t blowing people away at the MLB level and at least one of MAC has proven himself ready in real competition at AAA, in mid-May/early-June, we call them up.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
Paul does indeed grasp the issue
He was refuting your second point by saying that (paraphrasing), how long the player lasts on the A’s is not relevant to the service-time issue. Even if that player is traded, the attractiveness of his contract is diminished if he has fewer years of cost control when he’s traded.
Example: Let’s say Mulder was rushed up a year earlier. And at the time the A’s wished to trade him, he had one less year remaining on his contract. Knowing this, he would’ve returned a less significant trade package than the one he yielded.
And I tackled your third point later down in the thread.
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 Mar 21, 2009 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Irony of that is...
Mulder was “rushed up” by this definition— he began the 2000 season, unlike Hudson and Zito who were both midseason call-ups. I acknowledged this very point in the original discussion— and said, again, that it matters but not as much as you guys think else Beane wouldn’t be giving this thing so much consideration.
1. It will not have any significant impact on the A’s pennant chances. 1 run’s worth of ERA, spread out over 5 weeks’ worth of starts, is about 4 runs. That is not a significant factor in a pennant chase.
2. Define “great.” Most pitchers do not suffer career-ending injuries in their first 6 seasons. Some do, but even pitchers aren’t THAT injury prone.
3. This is irrelevant. Teams avoid arbitration by paying their players what they would have averaged in arbitration. Players with longer to go until free agency sign longer multi-year deals.
4. Personally, I favor the A’s winning more games, total, but I suppose expecting someone on the internet to actually think about the future is asking a little bit much.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Re #1
5 weeks x 7 days = 35 days, which is 7 starts. That’s 7 runs. Giving up a run a game is absolutely a big deal, especially giving up a run a game in 7 games.
Re #4, quit being such a jackass all the time.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
#1
Since when do teams play 35 straight games, and since when does every pitcher throw 9 innings? That’s the only way it’s actually 7 runs.
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Fair enough.
It’s really six starts, and it is less innings. It’s still giving yourself a significantly lesser chance of winning six or seven games (depending on whether you’re talking about your fourth or fifth starter), which is the point I’m trying to make.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
6 starts...
6 innings…
Yeah, I think I’ll keep “jackassedly” pointing out reality, actually.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
And like Edgar Gonzalez is really going to take six innings to give up his runs.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
You do realize that fewer IP HURTS your argument, right?
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
What, it doesn't matter that the bullpen is going to have to pick up those innings?
Yes, it hurts my argument mathematically, in terms of how many runs E-Gone is going to give up. It doesn’t help the bullpen at all, and makes us rely on its weakest links.
The fundamental math you’re doing wrong anyway is making it about four runs. It’s about giving yourself a lesser chance to win in six or seven games.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
A better assumption of how E-Gone's lines would look
is that he’d have maybe 2 pretty darn solid starts that would make you hopeful for him (7 IP, 2 ER) 4 starts in which he “gave you a chance to win” (6 IP, 3 ER) and 2 starts in which he got lit up and knocked out early (3 IP, 6 ER).
That adds up to a 5.72 ERA, but it’s also not a disaster.
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
Not a bad way of looking at it.
I’d say it means we’re giving away two ballgames if we have options that are far less likely that he gets lit up, although I’d say it’s more likely there will be three of them, based on his track record, and just one really good start.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
By the way
I realize it messes up the math for your ERA, maybe knock a run or two off one of the bad starts.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
They're just meant to be averages
In fact, maybe one is 3.2 IP, 5 ER, with two of the runs charged to him when Casilla takes over and gives up a two-run double before settling down, while the other is a total 2.1 IP, 7 ER flameout.
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
There could certainly be three of those, but
with ANY #5 starter you’d probably expect 1-2 over that time; certainly with Cahill or Mazzaro you would.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Agreed.
I’m pretty sold on Cahill and Mazzaro starting in the minors; in the former case, he’s just so damn inexperienced, and in the latter, he’s just not the elite talent that Anderson and Cahill are. I think Cahill could be a dominating groundball machine right out of the gate, but I’m very confident in how good Anderson will be.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
That's about where I am
Cahill could start strong in the bigs or he could tank, but he’s better served starting out in AAA so he can come up with better odds of starting strong.
Anderson will probably pitch the same wherever he is, and if he’s ready he’s ready. There are basically two aspects to pitching: physical and mental. If Anderson’s ready on both counts and you need a starter…?
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
Wait, now my math is wrong?
I thought you didn’t care about math. What happened to “I just know that the A’s will win if Anderson starts and lose if Gonzalez starts”?
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
I thought you were more precise with your language.
Isolating a comment from a different discussion and applying it to this one isn’t very sound logic. You’re right, though—the A’s will have a much better chance of winning six or seven starts by Anderson than they will Gonebaseball.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
So, your position has shifted once again?
It’s so hard to keep track of which particular howler you’re endorsing on a given thread.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
rec'd
i didn’t see that b/c of my killfile. thank you for quoting it, it made your response much more hilarious.
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
$$$
How important is three weeks in the grand scheme of things?
Ryan Howard won $10M in his first year of arbitration as a Super Two.
Had he been in the minors for a few more weeks, the Phillies could’ve paid him $400K.
With potentially great (re: expensive) players (Cahill, Anderson), being careful about such things is critical.
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 Mar 21, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
this presumes that...
the A’s couldn’t avoid arbitration with one or more of these guys. They have been very good at doing that. Listen, I’m not going to say it doesn’t matter— I just would be interested to see if any of you on the other side can argue that games started in April and May of this year might matter in terms of who wins the division. If you believe any of MAC are inferior to all other options for the rotation, fine— I don’t think many in the A’s front office agree, but that is your perogative. But if you believe one or more are superior options, and that the race this year is liable to be close, then you must at least balance out the need to win now vs. the need to control these players. Obviously BB is wondering quite a lot about that balance. But he’s an idiot, I forgot.
No, it doesn't assume that the A's couldn't avoid arbitration with those guys.
A great cost-controlled player can often get a raise of 800% or more when he reaches arbitration eligibility, whether his team settles with him prior to a case or not. And pre-arbitration awards continued to grow this offseason, despite the economy.
Nobody’s arguing that games in April don’t matter. But given the considerations listed above, it’s easy to see why MAC has to be demonstratively better - not merely “just as good” – as the alternatives in order to win a rotation spot.
MAC have to break down the door to earn the spot. If there’s no discernable difference in terms of projected performance between them and the alternatives (E-Gon, Outman, etc.), then the financial considerations dictate that the alternatives should (my opinion) and would (Beane’s track record) earn the spot.
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 Mar 21, 2009 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions
And why is Beane letting this go so far?
Because at least two of MAC— Anderson and Cahill— are breaking down the door and because the door ain;t that strong.
BTW— ordinarily Cahill would be on a Thursday, Tuesday, final Sunday schedule which leaves him as the 5th starter. But the A’s don’t play next Thursday or the final Sunday— next Thursday they can arrange for a minor league game. But not sure what their options are for the final Sunday. The other possibility is that is schedule will be Thursday (or Friday in a regular ST game), Tuesday/Wednesday— and then Opening Night. How’e them apples??
5 IP today, 1 run allowed— the simple fact is he’s been their best pitcher this spring.
Why is he letting them go this far?
Experience. He wants the players to have the experience around major league players. He wants the coaches to have experience around these kids (see over reaction to Anderson based on comments the staff made). Besides, keeping them in camp has absolutely no negative effect and the pitchers around here are dropping like flies. To suggestion any of those “facts” you used as evidence of anything else is absurd.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
"door ain't that strong"
Includes: 1) duke getting hurt; 2) Gio getting hurt; 3) edgar pitching poorly; 4) Williams and Simmons pitching poorly
Who’s left? 3 holdovers plus Outman. He may want all those things you mentioned— but he also wants to win.
He wants to win
but not at the cost of stupidity. One of those poor “Spring Training” performers is a better option than one of MAC at this point. A month of them isn’t likely to be much of a downgrade (if any) over one of MAC. That being the case, why kill the extra year of control? Besides, at this point, with all the injuries, there’s not much “winning” to be expected. With every injury, our chances of competing this year goes drastically downward and throwing MAC out without proving themselves won’t make things better.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
well, that's your opinion.
Again, in the Beane era, this franchise has a track record with young or first-time starters. 5 of 6 (Big 3, Harden, Lidle, Blanton) were better in their first year in the bigs than all of our 3 holdovers (Eveland, Braden, Gallagher) were last year.
Stupidity? really? Well get ready to brand Billy Beane stupid, for I would think cahill is close to punching his clock in the rotation and if Anderson is truly all right, so is he.
I predict Anderson yes, Cahill no
The ability to throw strikes is a big indicator of how ready a young pitcher is.
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
You know what all of those starters had in common when they came up?
Time in AAA. And yes, if Beane does do this, I think it would be one of the worst moves he’s ever made, even if they are able to prove themselves ready from day one.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
+1
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
+1
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Anderson and Cahill are really different cases to me
Anderson is polished – I’m not sure he has a ton to learn in AAA compared to just needing to get his feet wet in the bigs. Cahill is more rough; his delivery is not as consistent, his command comes and goes a bit – there is stuff for him to work on in AAA.
I have no problem with Anderson making the rotation if he’s one of the best five options. The sooner he hits his major league bumps in the road, the sooner he’ll get past them and reach his potential. What exactly does he need to work on in AAA?
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
He needs to work on "not being a free agent in 2014"
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
If it's all about service time, that's a different discussion
I think Billy realizes that pitchers are risks from year to year and that for all we know, one of MAC is destined to have an injury in 2012 (a la Mulder) or will peak and start declining in 2013 (a la Zito), so whenever they’re ready to blossom turn them loose and look at contract extensions as need be if you want to keep them.
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
Six years from now is a lot more important than this year.
Especially 1/25th of the 2014 roster.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
He might be that important come 2014-15
It’s just that so much can happen in six years. By then:
- Anderson may have flamed out
- He may not be healthy enough to invest in
- The A’s might look non-competitive in 2015 with or without Anderson
- You might want to trade Anderson in 2013 anyway
Or you can try to extend him, in 2010 or 2011, through “his arby years plus one” (through 2015).
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
The way our rotation/pitching staff is shaping up
We’re not looking very competitive this year. Hanging our hopes on one of MAC as though their contribution in the first month and a half will carry that much meaning, to me that’s a very scary thing to bank on. I’d rather save the extra year to something that’s too far away to predict than something that’s not looking overwhelmingly stable in the now.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
That's a better argument.
If we really have no chance, then it would indeed be worth not trying. I don’t agree with it, but it makes more sense.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
I think you and Billy have different hopes for 2009
Not saying you’re wrong, just saying I get the impression the A’s feel they can compete in 2009 with this rotation.
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
I still think they can compete this year
The Angels don’t appear to be that special themselves and the Rangers & the Mariners appear like, well, the Rangers & the Mariners. But for the sake of argument, let’s say the A’s were the clear cut favorites. I think the argument still stands. If a month without Anderson in the rotation and say Williams or EGonz in the rotation is going to make the difference between making the playoffs and not. Well, to me that’s crazy scary that we’re seriously putting the weight of the entire season on Anderson’s arm. That’s worse than putting the weight of the entire season on Harden’s health.
Meanwhile, let’s say we hold back Anderson until mid-May. Let’s say we reach that extra year that we saved because we held him back. Let’s say he made all my doubts of him seem incredibly foolish. I’d much rather put the weight of THAT season on Anderson’s shoulders than this one.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
I guess I don't see it as
“How much better or worse will Anderson or E. Gonzalez be over X starts?” – I see it more as, “Who are the A’s 5 best options for SP come April 6th?”
When you think you can compete and you’re tied for 1st place, you lead with your best and go from there. It’s kind of like the “marginal upgrade” from Crosby to Cabrera. Maybe it’s only a “one win upgrade” on paper, but in fact it’s getting a little better in a race that appears tight.
Sometimes you just try to put your best feet forward and figure that maximizes your chances for success.
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
In order:
1. Yes, he may have flamed out, which is why people discount the present value of prospects. This is already being taken into account.
2. For one year, on a non-guaranteed contract? I find that unlikely, to say the least. Look at Erik Bedard.
3. In which case, you can deal him and get value.
4. In which case, you can deal him and get MORE value, because the other team gets him for twice the time.
5. The extension will cost a LOT less money if it’s “his arby years” than if it’s “his arby years plus one”, thereby freeing up more to spend on the rest of the team. Plus… he may not sign. It takes two to tango.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
I'm not suggesting anyone can see this
in a crystal ball, but let’s just say that it is destined that Brett Anderson will be a really good major league pitcher, and that sadly wherever he pitches between now and then he is also destined to hurt his arm in June, 2012 because, well, pitching is really bad for you. When do you want him pitching in Oakland?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
You correctly identified a silly hypothetical at the bottom of the thread
Yet, you now proffer an even sillier one.
Given that, I’m going to seize on your failure to state what the arm injury is, assume it’s a harmless forearm cramp, and say they should send him to AAA.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Mid-May
And I’d want to him trade in May 2012 where upon, he’ll have more value to the team receiving him than he otherwise would if he starts the season with the A’s now. Not our fault if the new team has an extra year of an injured pitcher, but it would be our fault for not maximizing our value of that pitcher in trade pre-injury.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
Consistency for one
Yes, by all appearances, in Spring Training, against players more focused on preparing for the 162 season grind, he’s pitched very well. I’d like to see more than a month of this. I’d like to see him do this against readied competition. Come mid-May (yes the clock time thing) if he’s still tearing up the competition like he’s shown in Spring Training, then yes, call him up. To me, what he’s done this spring, means very little other than to show us he’s going to be very good. But it doesn’t suggest to me that he’s MLB-ready. I’m with PT on heavily weighting the Spring Training sample to next to zero. It’s too damn small a sample with too many variables that factor against giving it any real meaning. Last year he showed he’s ready for AAA. Now he needs AAA to show he’s ready for the Bigs.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
It's not just a small sample, it's actually a really crappy small sample
To the extent that he’s showing anything at all, it’s that he’s going to get lit up if they put him in the majors.
But he has a shiny luck-based ERA number, so ZOMGZORZ START HiM NOW1
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Right
that’s why i threw in the “too many variables that factor against giving it any real meaning”. Sure it holds value, but that value is sooo close to zero that a weight of 0.00000000000001 really could very well just be zero.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
Anderson is demonstrably better than Edgar Gonzalez and Jerome Williams.
Not even close, really.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
Better than Williams? Yeah, I agree.
I’m not so quick to say the same vs. Edgar.
The lack of strike outs from Anderson and Cahill concern me. These are two guys who averaged better than a K an inning in the minors last year and their distinct lack of K’s in ST is an issue. They’re getting by in ST, when the vets are on cruise control and the roster fill are getting significant at bats.
I want to see what happens when the opposition starts to ramp up the intensity at the end of ST.
The monster at the end of this blog.
The concern about the lack of Ks makes sense.
Especially with Cahill, because he’s going to get behind in counts, which will place a premium on missing bats.
In Anderson’s case, I don’t think he’s going to be a K an inning guy in the big leagues, but I don’t think it will matter much. I think he’s going to be successful because he throws tons of strikes. I think Gonzalez has shown what he can do in the bigs, which is post an ERA just shy of 6.00.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
ERA is such a bad way to judge a pitcher
I seem to be sensible today. (How that happened I have no idea.) Why not give it another go without resorting to ERA.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Well, there's ERA+.
That’s 78, not especially compelling. There’s WHIP, which is 1.55 (not good either), home runs allowed (a staggering 52 in 257 innings), and K/9, which is 5.86. That’s OK, I guess, although he compiled a lot of it coming out of the bullpen, where it’s easier. I’m struggling to find a measure by which Edgar Gonzalez isn’t a very bad pitcher.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
Gonzalez has 257 IP in the Show
Essentially, he’s got just over a season’s worth of big league experience. Just for reference, his career MLB H/9 (11.0) BB/9 (3.0) and K/9 (5.9) are all better than Mulder’s rookie season.
I’m not saying Gonzalez is a great, or even good pitcher. I’m saying we need to keep things in context. He’s 26 years old. He has relativelt limited big league experience. He’s going from the NL to the AL (bad) but he’s also going from a hitter’s park to one of the best pitcher’s parks in baseball (good) so the HR/9 should drop some. He going to a better defensive team.
I think there’s some potential here.
The monster at the end of this blog.
That's not a very fair comparison.
It makes a difference that all of Mulder’s suck happened in one year, and that Gonzalez’s has happened over six. If his minor league numbers were dominant over that time, there might be a case, but they just aren’t (6.3 K/9, 2.0 BB/9). I don’t think Gonzalez is going to get better anytime soon.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
Inconsistent playing time actually boosts the argument in favor of Gonzalez
His peripheral numbers are the key. His career K/9 is acceptable. His BB/9 isn’t that bad, especially when you consider that he pitched last year while hurt, skewing his numbers. The hits should drop as he moves to a more forgiving park and is supported by a better defense.
The monster at the end of this blog.
We'll just have to agree to disagree.
His playing time has been fairly consistent when you factor in the minor-league stints, and he’s given up more than a hit an inning for his entire (rather pedestrian) minor league career. I’ll be very surprised if he doesn’t get lit up in Oakland.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
How can you ignore the inconsistent big league playing time?
And Tucson is a good hitters park.
Just try to keep things in their proper context is all I’m asking.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I'm not ignoring it
I just think the body of work when you factor in both his minor and major league results suggests it’s unlikely he’ll be a good big-league pitcher.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
The thing about E. Gonzalez
is that he appears to have good stuff but he gives up a ton of HRs. Given that the changeup is his plus pitch, what that says to me is that he makes too many mistakes with the changeup.
That, unfortunately, is not all that park dependent. I’m guessing the bombs he gives up are HRs anywhere, and that he won’t benefit that much from changing parks – but that he could benefit a lot from a new pitching coach if Young can help find and solve a problem.
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
Homeruns are actually very park dependant
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
52 in 257 innings are very pitcher dependent.
It’s pretty hard to give up that many home runs.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
nevermoor just needs to re-read my comment
I didn’t say “homeruns are not park dependent.”
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
I agree with you
and it even if ERA isn’t a good way to judge pitchers a 6.00era still is not good enough to be a big league starter
"Lets Go Oakland"
And look at him now!
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
Why, did he pitch?
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
True
But to assume that a pitcher with the limited experience Gonzalez has is somehow set in his ways as a player is foolish. As I pointed out to jeepers there is still some potential for upside, for improvement, out of Edgar Gonzalez.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I didn't say he couldn't get better
but it’s not like he gonna change into an all star like Mulder did. I was just trying to say that bringing up Mark Mulders rookie year doesn’t really have anything to do with Edgar Gonzalez having a high 5.00 career ERA.
"Lets Go Oakland"
The A's don't need Gonzalez to change into an all-star
What they need is someone who can be an average big league starter so they don’t rush their top talent to the Show before they’re ready.
The monster at the end of this blog.
And Mulder. :)
Seriously, though, I wouldn’t terribly much mind either on a minor league deal… but it’s late in the spring now to be seeing about either as part of the opening day/month picture. As a potential game-changer a month or two into the season though- why the heck not? Aside from cluttered rotations and bullpens at AAA and on down through the system due to the ripple effect, perhaps…
by still bills kingdom on Mar 21, 2009 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Pedro wants to stay in the NL (specifically the Mets; if not maybe Dodgers)
Mulder I’m interested in, but he still hasn’t thrown for scouts and I wouldn’t sign him until he does.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Agreed on Mulder- we keep hearing he's going to throw and he's almost ready...
and we’re still hearing that. I think everybody is justifiably in “believe it when we see it” mode on that.
As for Pedro, your take on that matches what I’ve heard as well- plus he seems determined to get a major league deal for $5MM-$6MM or something and to stay in the NL. That’s not a big indicator of signability for the A’s, obviously. :)
by still bills kingdom on Mar 21, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions
This is what i think
Eveland
Galagher
Braden
Anderson
Outman
Then move Outman to AAA or the pen when Duke is healthy.
"Lets Go Oakland"
I think it will be that or Edgar instead of Outman
Which is pretty much the same thing, as your #5 starter isn’t a big deal unless he’s great – usually he’s another failed pitcher with a good arm, so Outman (hasn’t proven himself) and Edgar (unfortunately, has) don’t project much differently from each other or other teams’ options.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Honestly, i just dont want Edgar in the rotation. I would rather see Outman throw 94 from the left side and have a 4.50 ERA than EGON have a 5.50 ERA.
Hopefully it doesn’t matter though and Duke will be back before to long!
"Lets Go Oakland"
Really.
A 4.50 ERA is better than a 5.50 ERA?
I am shocked— shocked— to hear that.
If you’re just going to assume your own conclusion— that Outman is a better pitcher— what exactly was the point of posting?
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
But look at what you said
Don’t you think everybody here would rather Outman over Edgar Gonzalez if the 4.50/5.50 thing was guaranteed? That’s not even a debate. There’s really no argument against that.
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 7:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I'd rather be rich than stupid.
m*****f***ing c***s***ing peanut butter and jelly!! f*** f*** f***!!!
I'd rather be smart than ugly
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
I'm shooting for both.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
I'd rather be blind and ragged
than rich and dead.
AN: the new twitter of sportsblogs. -Dogfather
by Leopold Bloom on Mar 22, 2009 12:05 AM PDT up reply actions
But would you rather have Outman throw 94 from the left side
and have a 5.50 ERA than EGON have a 4.50 ERA? Because that could happen too.
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
My prediction:
A lot of this discussion is a moot point, because Duke is healthy enough to start on the 25-man roster.
I’m sure tomorrow he’ll have season-ending surgery.
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 7:50 PM PDT reply actions
It would appear that thanks to the magic of cortisone
(careful, Duke, it’s really not good for you), Duke will get on a timetable that returns him to the rotation around the end of April. I’ll bet we’re looking at 3 starts or so by a “#6” – which could be E. Gonzalez (no biggie – kind of like Seth Etherton or Brad Halsey) or Anderson (a nice “get your feet wet” trial, and if he’s great he can stay; if not it’s back to AAA to stop arby clock).
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
If the A's are pretty sure it's only 3ish starts
I say the journeyman is the way to go for sure.
Anderson, Cahill, and Mazzaro aren’t yet on the 40-man roster. You can send them to AAA without burning an option. You put one of them on the 40-man for 3 starts (when it’s possible you may not want them for any more than that in 2009), and you burn an option on one of those guys. And they’re not even guaranteed to be better than Gonzalez over 3 starts.
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 8:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Good points
If there’s one consistency with the A’s and young pitchers (and the A’s have said this publicly), it’s that they don’t like to promote young pitchers to the big leagues until they think the pitcher is ready to stay. So I’m thinking if Anderson makes the Opening Day roster, it’s not for 3 starts but rather for 30 – though obviously if he pitches like he’s in over his head, that could change.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Then why did they promote Gio last year?
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
Gio was promoted because..
he was going to have to be added to the 40-man roster this offseason anyway.
He was on the same flight path as Cunningham, who also needed to be added to the 40-man by the end of the season to protect both players from the Rule 5 draft.
The team had an opportunity to bring them up for the remainder of the year, not burn an option (because they weren’t sent down after they were brought up), and get them big league experience.
This year, the same thing might happen with Mazzaro, Lansford, and/or Bailey, who are all Rule 5 eligible after the year. So it would be logical to add them to the 40-man roster in August/September and get them some big-league innings without burning an option. (especially if the team wasn’t clawing for a playoff spot, which was the situation with Cunningham and Gio last year).
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 Mar 22, 2009 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Good piont
3 starts isnt really that bad for E. Gonzalez. I definantly would rather do that than let Anderson pitch for a little bit then have to send him down. I would rather him start in the rotation and be able to have a shot staying there
"Lets Go Oakland"
Although are options really a big issue?
Since these are guys we aren’t planning to bounce back and forth. I do accept that having an option is better than not having one, but when it comes to projected front line starters the difference seems pretty low.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Anderson just turned 21
Let’s say the team starts him on the big-league club and intentionally sends him down after 4 starts, when Duke is healthy again.
He only gets three option years, so we’re basically putting him on a path where he can’t get sent down again just after his 24th birthday. That’s still pretty young. Cliff Lee, Brett Myers – both pretty established big league pitchers whose teams benefited a great deal from being able to send them down in recent seasons.
All kinds of bad stuff could happen that could slow down Anderson’s path. What if he suffers a season-ending injury before/after being sent down? If that injury happens during his four starts on the team, the team just wasted a $400K season from a very good pitcher. If it happens after he gets sent down, it’s not burning ML service time, but, it’s still a lost option year, and you only get three.
There are a lot of good major league pitchers who weren’t ready to stick in the major leagues for good just after their 24th birthday. Anderson might be, but I’d rather the team not unnecessarily back themselves into that corner.
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 Mar 22, 2009 8:22 AM PDT up reply actions
Although we're on the same side of this debate,
you’re misrecalling how options work. Sending him down this year burns an option for this season, but it doesn’t force the team to spend options in 2010 or 2011. They might, of course, but there’s no reason why they would have to.
I’m not much worried about options; I’m much more concerned about what would happen if they DON’T send him down, and/or what would happen to his confidence if he got destroyed at the MLB level for several starts.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
you're right of course...
I wasn’t forgetting that rule though; I was just assuming that, in the “he struggles mightily and loses confidence” or season-ending injury hypothetical, he’d also have to use up an option in ’10 and maybe even ’11 too.
That’s being really pessimistic and perhaps overly cautious though, I know. I think part of where people stand on the “MAC now” or “MAC later” depends upon our personalities. The optimistic and excited crowd wants to open the shiny new present as soon as possible, and rightfully so; the cautious, (overly?) analytical and pessimistic(?) crowd – I’m putting myself here, because I know my own personality – is hesitant.
Because I used this terminology earlier, I want to define what I mean by “breaking the door down” before bringing up any of MAC: It isn’t 10-15 dominant innings of spring training; it’s 80+ dominant innings in AAA.
Another concern with bringing them up now to be in the rotation is that it’s setting them up for a 180-inning season. I’m not sure any of those guys should make that kind of inning jump at their age. Conversely, in AAA, they can throw 60-pitch, four inning games occasionally or skip starts to avoid overusing them at a tender age. You can’t do that with one of your starters on the big league club without wiping out your pen.
Look at what happened to Bonderman after throwing that many innings at 21. I realize that’s just one example, but it’s far easier to find guys who badly regressed over their careers after being put in the rotation at that age than it is to find guys who thrived from that point on.
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 Mar 22, 2009 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions
I'd rather see them
Trade Mazzaro and Outman to Houston for Roy Oswalt than see either Outman or EGon in the rotation….
I'm pretty sure if Houston offered Oswalt for Mazzaro and Outman, Oswalt would be pitching for the A's.
by thejd44 on Mar 21, 2009 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm thinking you're right
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Lets throw in Crosby for some Big League Chew
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Journeyman#6????
I think people are missing two salient points. Without Duke and with Gio down, there are two spots available right now— Are we conceding Outman for #4 and Edgar for #5?? Meaning that at least one of MAC, if they make the rotation, might not be destined for a quick stint and then Sacto when Duke is back. This could/should very well be a season-long decision.
And the next point is the other big gorilla in the room. For all the wisdom around here about replacement level and 4-6 ERs before the A’s get control, there is also the distinct possibility that at least one of MAC— let’s say Anderson for argument’s sake— is not only better than Outman and Edgar but is better than Eveland, Braden and Gallagher. Right Now. Hudson was. Zito was. Lidle was. Harden was. Blanton was. Why in God’s name would you hold back your best pitcher if you believe you have a shot at the pennant? or to put it another way, if you had told the Rays last year that they had a legit shot at the division title and a World Series— as opposed to improvement the might or might not put them into contention— do you think they would have held back Longoria?
funny that you use that example
because holding back Longoria is exactly what they did.
Longoria tore up their spring training camp last year. They still kept in down in AAA for three weeks to intentionally keep him from reaching free agency a year early.
The Rays are run intelligently, just like the A’s.
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 Mar 22, 2009 8:25 AM PDT up reply actions
And they immediately made it totally irrelevant
by locking him up with a long-term deal.
Just so everyone’s clear on the math, by the way, the cutoff for super two status usually falls somewhere between 2 years and 128 days, and 2 years and 140 days. There are 191 days in this season. If we take the mid-point, that means we need to hold Anderson down for 55 days, or exactly the end of May. A total of 50 games get played during that span. It’s more like nine starts we’ll be wasting on Edgar Gonzalez if we deliberately suppress Brett Anderson for the benefit of 2014.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
But those 55 days don't have to occur at the beginning
When do the A’s need Anderson most? When Duke and Gio are unavailable, Cahill and Mazzaro inexperienced at AAA. Why not have Anderson start in the bigs in April, and then if you want to save service time send him down when Duke is back or when Cahill/Mazzaro are ready.
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
Because by sending him down you burn an option year
if you bring him up at the beginning of June and he doesn’t get sent down, you don’t burn an option year.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
A full season is still counted at 180 days
And to anyone not familiar with Super-2, it’s not just the number of days a player has on the big league roster. Only a certain percentage of players with less than 3 years in the Show are made eligible for Super-2 arbitration. Furthermore, Super-2 simply means an extra year of arbitration. A player still needs to spend 6 full seasons in the Show before they become taste FA.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Thanks for the clarification on season length.
If we call it 44 days, then, we’re looking at 40 games. 7 starts, possibly eight if Anderson isn’t the guy you’re skipping.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
No, they did not make it totally irrelevant
They saved beaucoup bucks by keeping him down for three seasons. The impact of the extra pre-FA season is rather obvious if you actually look at the dollar values of the contract.
Super Two is not the same as an extra season of control. Once again, you insist on drawing conclusions without informing yourself as to what the actual rules are. 20 days in the minors is all that is required to give the A’s an extra season of control.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
My question is why do those 20-44 days have to occur in April?
The A’s are without Duke and Gio now, Cahill and Mazzaro aren’t ready now – why not send Anderson down in a month or two, rather than now?
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
I'm strongly inclined against this
If he’s pitching well, it may be politically impossible. If he’s pitching very poorly, as I expect him to if he starts the season in the bigs, it could lead to a Homer Bailey-like collapse of confidence.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
I'm trying to understand why people care so much about it, although I still can't.
Sorry for getting the details wrong. I still don’t want to see the A’s give themselves less than the best chance to win in 6-9 games, depending on whether it’s being done to gain an extra year of club control, to avoid super two status, or both.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
I think the only person thinking the same way as you is Billy Beane
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
I better change my mind, then.
When is that guy ever right?
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
First, with Duke, our rotation looks weak. Without, it looks really, really bad. Banking our season success on Anderson is ridiculous. Second, what do Hudson, Zito, Lidle, Harden & Blanton have in common that none of MAC have? AAA experience. To suggest they’ll be successful without that experience is a bit out there. To depend on them being successful is insanity. Let them all spend a month or two proving that this joke of a sample size in Spring Training isn’t a fluke and that they’re truly ready. You’re putting a hell of a lot of weight on a few weeks that mean nothing.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
Don't over-think the rotation
I learned a few things about the A’s plans while sharing a cigar with B.Beane at the Pink Pony last week. He says he didn’t sign all those vets to 1-year deals with intention of not putting the best 5 starters in the rotation. He wants to win now. All the journeyman average-talent starters in camp are there for insurance and depth. So expect Anderson, Cahill and Mazzaro all in the rotation. Billy says he’s rather have them working with Curt Young anyhow. Gallager, Eveland and Braden fighting for two spots. If they all perform well “Douche” is going to the pen. After a third peach margarita Billy shared that he’s growing tired of “Douche’s” bitchy, demanding attitude and the bullship injuries.
I'll be honest
I was willing to buy your story as plausible until you got to the part about Beane drinking peach margaritas. Although they are yummy and delicious.
The monster at the end of this blog.
One flaw in that argument, BlueMoon -
It’s almost a certainty that Duchscherer, in the rotation, would be one of the A’s top 3 options for a starter. And since he’s gone after 2009 anyway (so you don’t need to baby his arm, back, hip for the long-term), you really have no reason to keep him out of the rotation if he can go.
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
No, I really was replying to BlueMoon
I know my muppets from my 70s pitchers.
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
So you talk to him through me? Not my fault you can't speak blue.
The monster at the end of this blog.
this guy is a genious.
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
Yeah, but in his defense
that turned out to be a very fun diary/FanPost. Even if we were not laughing with him…..
Gallager, Eveland and Braden fighting for two spots.
yeah, i don’t buy this at all.
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
I think they're fighting for three spots
May the best three men win!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I don't buy the whole post at all.
"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Mar 22, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah what i meant was that is when the credibility dropped to zero
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
Response to windyfelix somewhere above
We really need to eliminate the argument that the way that Beane has brought up his other young pitchers is some sort of proof that he will be calling up 1 or 2 of the MAC pitchers. While you may be right that one or two of those guys are going to break camp with the A’s, the A’s track record with the Big 3 + Harden + Blanton has nothing to do with why it will happen. Actually, by pointing at those guys you actually hurt your case as almost all of those guys were WAY more experienced when they got the call from Billy. Just so you can see, here are the number of AAA innings pitched for each of those 5 pitchers:
Hudson – 49
Mulder – 128
Blanton – 176
Zito – 101
Harden – 88
(I have intentionally left off Lidle because he had about 180 MLB innings with the Mets and Rays before getting traded to Oakland in the Ben Grieve deal, so I really don’t know why he is in this conversation as Billy never had him in his minor league system).
Meanwhile, here is the amount of AAA experience for the MAC:
Mazzaro – 30
Anderson – 0 (and only 31 AA)
Cahill – 0 (and only 37 AA)
So Vin is approaching the innings of the guy that had the least AAA experience before getting the call (Hudson) but really these guys are, as a whole, way, way less experienced than these other pitchers you keep mentioning as some sort of proof that Billy will call up the youngsters and have them succeed right away.
Now before you reply, make sure to read what I wrote. I am not saying that Billy will not call up one or two of the MAC — actually with the injuries to Duke and Gio it almost seems hard to see one of them not getting a shot. All I am saying is that if Billy does this it will be different than what he has done in the past — a departure from his previous track record of letting his young pitchers get some AAA experience before bringing them to the majors.
by AsFanInLA on Mar 22, 2009 10:45 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Lidle was in
because he had never been given the ball as part of a rotation before. Just 11 starts the year before in TB— yes he was older, but BB saw something that paid off— he had the two best years of his career (RIP, Cory) while in Oakland.
And that is the guts of my basic point here. You are right about a deviation from AAA experience. But the other point that has been made around here is that first year starters— whatever their minor league experience— are a real crapshoot and often above replacement level. I agree with that, of course. Except here. Experiences like Lidle, the Big 3, Harden, Blanton (Danny Harden, for that matter) tell me that when the A’s decide a pitcher is ready, for whatever reason, he’s more ready than the vast majority of rookie pitchers in other organizations. Im not saying— and have never said, that MAC— whichever of MAC the A’s decide to go with, that is— will be the equal of HMZ right from the get-go— or at least Hudson and Zito since Mulder struggled for most of his first year— they could be. I am arguing they’re more likely to be close behind those performance levels than below replacements. In other words, more likely to be better than most of the A’s other rotation contenders than worse than most. And possibly better than all of them.
Danny Haren, not Harden.
I don’t work for ESPN
Lidle actually had 20 starts between AAA and MLB
the year before Billy got him, so it was not like it was a stretch to give him a job. He also had a total of 86 minor league starts so again, there were a lot of indications that other teams thought he might be ready to be a starter, just did not have an open slot. Billy did, so traded for him — more of an indication of talent evaluation, not “readiness” evaluation.
As to the other guys, I see what you are saying, but how is this different then what any other team in MLB does? A guy does great in AAA — you have an spot open up in your rotation — so you call up your good young AAA pitcher to see if he is ready for the show? To show me that Billy does this better then others, I would really need to see that it really is different then what most other teams do. I mean when Winsor and Komine got called up to fill in for injured starters the last couple years, they did not turn into aces or anything. Obviously neither of them had the upside of MAC, but my point is they were the best in AAA we had at the time, we had an injury, so they got the call. I think if MAC cracks the rotation this year it will be less because Billy thinks “they are ready” and more because Duke and Gio are not ready to start the season and the other options are just not palatable (in Billy’s opinion).
A lot of baseball people consider AA to be as challenging as AAA,
because often AAA rosters have considerable AAAA-filler while AA rosters have more of the up-and-coming studs. So perhaps the A’s are looking at AA and AAA more interchangeably than are some on this thread?
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
exactly
Billy does better than the others because he has the courage of his convictions. If he thinks one or more of MAC could be one of his best pitchers this year— not one of 5 but maybe one of 2 or 3, he wants them in the majors. And i disagree with your injury point— I don’t think Gio is ahead of them in the pecking order— and obviously there are serious doubts about Duke’s sustainability as a starter to the point that someone in the A’s herarchy is wondering if he would be better off in the pen.
My point about Duke is that if he's healthy enough
to make 20 starts, even at the possible expense of his long-term well being, the A’s are going to want to get 20 starts out of him rather than 60 bullpen appearances. They have Devine, Ziggy, Springer, Wuertz, and Casilla from the right side in the pen, and a clear need in the rotation for a solid veteran starter.
The A’s would have to believe that Duke would be really likely to stay healthy in the pen, but really unlikely to stay healthy in the rotation, over the next four months, in order to put him back in the pen all season.
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
I agree with Nico that if Duke is healthy, there would have to be
a LOT of evidence to suggest that he could only stay that way in the pen to move him there. He is just too valuable in the rotation (even if it is only for 1/2 to 2/3 of a season) to move him.
No one is questioning Billy’s courage or his convictions. All I am saying is that this would be a departure from his normal convictions. I also think that all things being equal Billy would prefer to leave MAC in AAA for at least part of the season (which he even said, see the quote that xbx blockquoted earlier in the FanPost). That is why I think Gio was ahead of them — not because he is seen as being better, but because at this point and time he has little to prove in AAA.
I get the feeling Anderson is more in Gio's category
than Cahill and Mazzaro are – that the A’s feel Anderson has little left to prove, or at least work on, in AAA.
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
before this comment
I’ve never seen anyone make this argument before. But just based on your principle it sounds flawed. AA-up and comers (usually not that many on any given team) generally are there because they lack the experience and/or the ability to perform well in AAA. AAA players and their AAAA-filler (which tend to look like super-AAAers) generally have proven their way through AA and have more experience/refinement.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
It depends on the organization
Many teams consider their AAA affiliate as a storing place for spare parts or for players who just don’t have a shot at making the big league squad because of an established veteran. The Marlins, for example, have no problem giving their top tier prospects a shot at a big league job after they’ve shown success at AA.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I am not sure I agree with the idea that AA is as challenging as AAA
but even if I did, only Mazzaro has enough AA time to be considered ready by normal standards. Cahill and Anderson have less then 40 IP at even AA. So not sure why that would be an argument in favor of anyone but Mazzaro starting the season in the rotation.
They're a lot better?
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
But this is a different argument then the one you made earlier.
I argued that MAC did not have enough AAA experience to be ready by normal progression standards (as used by the A’s in the past). You then responded by saying that maybe this was because the A’s (and other clubs) value AA time similar to AAA time. When I point out that Cahill and Anderson actually don’t even have much AA time, you respond with “They’re a lot better” which implies that you don’t really think the AA time even matters, that since they are good they are ready to pitch.
Which is it? Is it solely talent that decides or should they get some experience in AA/AAA first? (I anticipate your response will be that it is done on a case by case basis. My response would be that in the past the A’s response to that question has ALWAYS been — get them some time in AA/AAA before calling them up. Calling up Anderson or Cahill would be a major departure from what the A’s have always done in the past. Heck, that is the main point I am trying to make — that doing this would not be the A’s doing what they normally do, but rather them doing something they NEVER do, at least under Billy. Whether it is the right thing to do or not, is not even part of what I am arguing.)
They have a lot more AA experience than they have AAA experience,
which is why I brought up the AA/AAA comparison. But I’m not one who has ever been that concerned with how many minor league innings they have, or how old they are. I’m more interested in how ready they are to pitch in the major leagues.
And I completely agree it’s something the A’s have never done – they’ve also never had these particular pitchers, at this particular time in the organization’s history. In fact, they’ve rarely had high school draft picks as their pitching prospects.
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
Okay, well I suppose that anything is more then nothing
so they have a lot more AA then AAA experience. However, I don’t think you would argue that they have a lot of AA experience, right? So my point still stands (which you basically concede) that this would be a departure and in no way would the A’s consider that A/C have proven themselves at AA. They would be making this decision in spite of the fact that they have not established themselves at AA/AAA — they decided they liked what they saw and minor league experience be damned.
I am not agreeing or disagreeing if that is the right decision. I am not putting in an opinion of what is going to actually happen. My only claim (from the original post that started this thread) is that if this decision is made it would not be in a long tradition that Billy has with making decisions like this (as windyfelix said and used HZM, Harden, Blanton as examples) but rather it would be Billy going against everything he has done with pitchers in the past and doing something completely different.
If I read your above post correctly, then you agree with this premise?
Yes - the A's have never
promoted a 21-22 year old high school draft pick to the major leagues under Beane. The last one I can recall was Todd Van Poppel, who is hardly known for his tremendous early success or for living up to his hype.
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
True, but when have they promoted a college pitcher
w/o significant AAA (or at least AA) experience? I don’t think the reason Beane would be willing to do this is because it is a high school pitcher. It would be because he feels they are talented enough and ready for MLB — regardless of high school vs college.
Not sure why the emphasis on age/high school in your comment above. I don’t think it is relevant to Beane’s decision.
I mention them because they are among the salient facts
What characterizes these pitchers most, in terms of fitting into a category, would be:
1. Their age
2. Their being drafted out of high school
3. Their number of minor league innings
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
These comparisons with Hudson, Mulder and Zito
don’t give enough attention to the huge difference between drafting out of college and drafting out of high school. We compare minor league experience against minor league experience without even considering college experience at all.
Just as a reminder:
When Tim Hudson was the age Vin Mazzaro is now, he wasn’t pitching in AA or AAA; he was pitching at Auburn.
When Mark Mulder was the age Brett Anderson is now, he wasn’t pitching in AA or AAA; he was pitching at Michigan State.
When Barry Zito was the age Trevor Cahill is now, he wasn’t pitching in AA or AAA; he was pitching at USC.
Which is to say, when HMZ were the age that MAC are now, they hadn’t even been drafted yet.
Make of that what you will.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."
Beane is on record saying as much.
It may even be in Moneyball, but I know I’ve seen it in print.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
and cahill wasn't all that dominant in those 37 AA innings (19 walks)
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
There's a ton of good discussion in this thread so far about the different
options for the rotation as we head into the final two weeks of spring training.
So, just for fun, why not go on record with your predictions here for the season-opening rotation as things stand now- having weighed all the arguments made in this fanpost and comment thread?
How about proposing two alternative rotations if you like- one that you’d choose if it was up to you, and one that you think the A’s will actually go with in the end?
Here are mine…
What I’d go with:
Eveland
Gallagher
Braden
E. Gonzalez (as a placeholder for Duchscherer until he’s ready)
Anderson
What I think the A’s will actually do:
Eveland
Gallagher
Braden
E. Gonzalez (as a placeholder for Duchscherer ‘til he’s ready)
Anderson
I realize these are actually the same, and that’s just a coincidence- plus it’s just a guess anyway.
I’d like to put Cahill in there too, but I think both he and Mazzaro ought to start the season at AAA and be ready for a mid-season call-up at the first sign of serious injury to any of the starters, or if any of Eveland, Gallagher, Braden, or Anderson shows enough continual ineffectiveness that it seems a stint in the minors to retool and work out the kinks is in order.
There are plenty of reasonable arguments to be made for a different approach, or why you might believe the A’s will do something different- so, what would you choose, and what’s your prediction?
by still bills kingdom on Mar 22, 2009 2:00 PM PDT reply actions
I'm with you on all counts, sbk.
Outman to AAA along with Cahill and Mazzaro, to sort out his mechanics, Gio to the pen to build up his arm strength, and go from there.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
What i want
Eveland
gallagher
Braden
Anderson
Outman( until Duke is ready)
then move Outman to the pen or AAA rotation
what they will probobly do
Eveland
Gallagher
Braden
Anderson
E. Gonzalez (Duke)
Then move E Gonzalez to AAA
"Lets Go Oakland"
Braden, Eveland, Gallagher/Duke, Anderson, Cahill rotation
We have given 3 or 4 starts to all 5 guys in my projected rotation. All of them, except for Gallagher, has pitched well this Spring. When Duchscherer is ready, I think he’ll replace whoever is struggling in the rotation (I project that he’ll replace Gallagher):
Starting rotation:
- LH Braden
- LH Eveland
- RH Gallagher/Duchscherer
- LH Anderson, Spring: 1.54 ERA, 1.11 WHIP
- RH Cahill, Spring: 3.94 ERA, 0.94 WHIP
Bullpen:
RH Devine
RH Ziegler
RH Springer
RH Wuertz
RH Casilla
LH Outman, Spring: 2.13 ERA, but bad 1.58 WHIP
RH Bailey: Spring: 0.00 ERA, 0.75 WHIP; Tommy John surgery in ’05; 9.6 K/9 in minors
“Locks” W-L ERA G GS IP H R ER HR HB BB SO
Devine 0 0 0.00 2 0 2.0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
Ziegler 0 0 0.00 1 0 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Casilla 0 0 1.42 7 0 6.1 6 1 1 0 0 2 1
Eveland 0 2 2.61 4 4 10.1 8 5 3 1 0 3 6
Braden 1 0 3.14 3 3 14.1 13 5 5 3 0 2 10
Springer 1 0 5.87 8 0 7.2 9 5 5 2 0 2 6
Gallagher 1 1 6.23 4 3 8.2 13 6 6 1 0 5 4
Wuertz 0 1 9.72 8 0 8.1 12 9 9 2 1 2 11
“Bubble” W-L ERA G GS IP H R ER HR HB BB SO
Anderson 1 1 1.54 5 3 11.2 9 2 2 0 0 4 2
Outman 0 0 2.13 5 1 12.2 15 5 3 0 0 5 10
Cahill 2 0 3.94 5 4 16.0 11 7 7 1 1 3 10
GGonzalez 0 0 4.32 4 1 8.1 8 4 4 1 1 1 8
Mazzaro 1 0 7.30 6 2 12.1 17 10 10 1 0 7 12
EGonzalez 1 2 7.94 4 3 11.1 16 10 10 1 0 3 9
Blevins 0 0 11.74 8 0 7.2 19 10 10 1 0 3 3
“Outside” W-L ERA G GS IP H R ER HR HB BB SO
Bailey 0 0 0.00 7 0 6.2 3 0 0 0 1 2 6
Rodriguez 0 0 2.25 4 0 4.0 4 2 1 0 0 4 1
Carignan 0 0 8.53 6 0 6.1 7 6 6 1 2 3 5
Marshall 0 1 9.00 1 0 1.0 2 1 1 0 0 1 1
Schroder 2 1 9.00 8 0 9.0 11 9 9 0 0 4 10
by BillyWannabeane on Mar 22, 2009 4:16 PM PDT reply actions
Nice... and, I pretty much agree with it...
though, I don’t think it’ll be Gallagher that Duke replaces (if he replaces anyone, at all).
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 22, 2009 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I tend to agree with you...and disagree with me
Yeh, it will probably be Duke replacing Cahill or Anderson possibly to slow their arbitration process (and in reality, Gallagher is possibly a better pitcher right now).
Despite the blowout, Andrew Bailey pitched a shutout inning today to keep his scoreless Spring alive. He pitched after Eveland in the 5th, so he may have faced some real hitters. I know he probably has almost no chance of making the team, but he’s trying. Blevins (12.00 ERA now) didn’t help his cause giving up 4 base runners and 2 runs in 1.1 innings. Edgar Gonzalez (12.75 ERA now) pitched himself off the team giving up 7 runs in 0.2 innings.
Andrew Bailey’s minor league stats
by BillyWannabeane on Mar 23, 2009 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Kinda wish...
That Billy Beane had been trolling around, early in spring training, looking for potential one-year or half-year place holders. They make me gag in any other capacity, but Livan Hernandez or Freddy Garcia or Sidney Ponson would all have been acceptable, and all three did wind up with minor league contracts.
He tried for Randy Johnson, which was a good effort -
Unfortunately, he didn’t land him.
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
He's not a placeholder
But a rotation in April of Eveland, Gallagher, Braden, Livan Hernandez and Sidney Ponson - with Duchsherer within a couple of weeks, and Gio, MAC and Outman in the minors trying to earn a call-up - could very well keep the A’s in contention for at least part of the year.
Right now I think we could be looking at a 100-loss team unless the young ’uns grow up in a real hurry.
Really?
I’d give the A’s a much better chance of contending with Cahill and Anderson starting right now than having Livan Hernandez and Sidney Ponson – the former gives up 300 hits / year and the latter is so bad that “suck” won’t even sit next to him in the cafeteria.
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
Your joking right?
100 loss team, thats not happening. Cahill and Anderson give the A’s a way better chance at winning than Livan or sidney, Espeacially Livan Hernandez
"Lets Go Oakland"
Rivals to MAC?
At the risk of prompting a different sort of “political” argument, I can’t help wondering if any other team in the league has two top pitching prospects whose names begin with “P” and “C”.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
