Roster Headaches Coming Soon?
At this point, with Duchscerer on the shelf for the foreseeable future, Gio and Devine battling injuries and no one else really available either on this team, on other teams or on the free agent market, it's becoming obvious that the A's best strategy to put a winning team on the field to begin 2009 is to roll the dice and open the season with Brett Anderson and Trevor Cahill in the rotation and Andrew "Throwin' Zeroes" Bailey in the bullpen. I think the decision to get those guys up to the big leagues is a fairly easy one at this point and probably has already been made by A's brass.
But what's not easy, or what's not going to be easy, is finding a way to fit them all on the 40-man roster, since all three are currently non-roster players. The A's have done some 40-man roster trimming in the past few months, but the list is currently at 39 and, by glancing on the names on it, there doesn't seem to be any more obvious name(s) to cut.
In the short-term, I'm guessing the team could get around the logjam by placing Duchscherer on the 15-day or 60-day DL, thus opening up one 40-man roster temporarily. The same could be said for Devine if he were to need surgery or more rest and rehab after this latest elbow fiasco. However, the DL-route is clearly a stop-gap/temporary solution at best, and if any of these guys (Anderson/Cahill/Bailey) prove that they can open the season and last in the majors from here on out, a more permanent spot would need to be opened up sooner rather than later anyways.
All of the pitchers currently on the A's 40-man seem fairly youthful and useful to the major league team at this point, so I don't really see anybody that could be sacrificed from that area (possibly Jeff Gray, but he's reportedly looked pretty good this Spring). On the positional side of the equation, the list opens up a few possibilies to me:
2B Eric Patterson: Eric seems like a fantastic 5-tool Triple-A player, but kind of a man without a real niche at the major league level. I'm sure given 500 at-bats in a season he could put up decent numbers for 2nd basemen...however, he's not nearly good enough defensively at 2nd base to make it worth a team's while to give him that many at-bats and he's certainly not powerful enough to handle left-field full time. He may need a change of scenery (San Diego perhaps?) to get those at-bats and the opportunity. With Crosby, Pennington and Petit all ahead of him on the 2nd base depth chart in Oakland, he's not going to get that opportunity here.
OF Javier Herrera: I'm sure Javy still has some "tools" and "projection" left, but let's face it, he's not going to be up in Oakland any time soon and he's lost a LOT of the luster that once made him a top prospect. His hamstring issues have likely sapped him of the speed that once made center field a possibility for him and his once cannon-like arm has been somewhat mitigated in its effectiveness after he succumbed to Tommy John surgery a bit ago. So, at this point, he's a 24-year old left-field prospect without a lot of refinement to his game and only 12 at-bats above Double-A to his credit. With Denorfia, Davis and Cunningham already on the 40-man roster, I don't think the team will really miss Javy that much...
OF Ben Copeland: Copeland's case is interesting. He was having a nice spring as a Rule V draftee, but really didn't have any chance of sticking with the A's past Spring Training. Then, he got pretty banged up on an outfield play and now he's having all sorts of medical trouble. At this point, one of three things can happen with him: a) he gets offered back to the Giants and they take him back, b) the A's work out a trade/arrangement with Giants to keep him in the Oakland system while he rehabs his injury(s) or c) the A's put him on the DL right now and he sticks with A's. In any case, a spot will open on the 40-man, at least temporarily.
Others will probably say, "Just trade Crosby to open a spot" or "DFA Hannahan." I would discourage that line of thinking since the big league team has a fairly brittle infield and both Hannahan and Crosby bring a little versatilty, semblance of health and nominal defensive value to the table at least; while, in my opinion, neither Patterson nor Herrera can claim to do so at this time.
The A's need to make moves, that much is sure, just to simply get these guys on the roster so that they can even pitch in the big leagues. However, with an injury-filled veteran corps, the team can't sacrifice that much depth in order to open up these roster spots. I wouldn't recommend that the A's do the work around "DL Duke, Devine and/or Copeland" and see what Cahill, Anderson and Bailey can do with a few weeks or 60 days and then make more permanent roster cuts once those DL-ed guys are healthy. I'm thinking a few guys might be on the chopping block real soon...what do you all think?
3 recs |
136 comments
|
Comments
copeland and Herrera are gone
Copeland is injured so getting him through waivers is easy the hard part is if the giants want him back. Herrera has been a prospect for a long time given that the A’s have 6 outfielders ahead major league ready and a ciouple in the minors its a easy decision. Patterson is a tough one who would not get through waivers so keeping him unless a trade works out.
by Arcman on Mar 30, 2009 7:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Could the A's put Copeland on the 60 day DL
even if he’s really only injured to the tune of 3 weeks, just to keep him in the organization longer (to see if he’s needed by then)?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 30, 2009 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Slusser says he's going on the DL to start the season, so his spot may not be available
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plenty of guys who could be DFA
Gray, Schroder , Patterson, Petit, Copeland, Baisley…don’t think the A’s would be happy to lose any of them, particularly the pitchers, but I don’t think they’d sweat it too much either. Aren’t Davis and Denorfia out of options? The loser to that battle is gone. Don’t think they’d consider cutting Herrera. Reports were his spring was impressive.
by AgitationStation on Mar 30, 2009 8:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Denorfia's out of options
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 30, 2009 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Order I would start releasing guys
Coleman
Schroder
Gray
Baisley
Patterson
Webb
Herrera
I think Coleman is either gone or DL-bound in the next couple days which means one more guy has to go if Bailey gets added. I think either Gray or Schroder gives up his spot to add another RH reliever. Although, after Duke gets his surgery he could go 60-day DL which would give Gray or Schroder a reprieve for 2 months.
by DiegoAsFan on Mar 30, 2009 8:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Copeland, not Coleman
I mention it because the A’s actually have a Coleman, but he’s a 21-year old SS (Dusty).
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 30, 2009 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops
I think my brain can only work for so long on a monday. Meant Copeland.
by DiegoAsFan on Mar 30, 2009 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with that list
Except I’d drop Schroder down below Webb.
Schroder’s K rate (11/9IP in the minors, over 9/9IP in the majors) is excellent, his HR rate has been excellent in the minors, and his BB rate is bad but non-terrible. He projects well enough that he’s a decent option if called up. The same cannot really be said of Gray, Baisley, or Webb.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He (Schroder) also has a guaranteed major league contract, from what I remember.
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
By definition, so does everyone who is on the 40 man roster.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really? I thought some of the guys had split contracts btw majors and minors.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From my understanding...
A split contract is a major league contract (i.e. the player is on the 40 man roster) just pays out differently whether the player is in the majors or minors.
The 40 man roster is more formally known as the Major League Roster.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
not exactly
I believe on the 40-man roster there are two types of contracts, major league only (can’t be sent down) and major/minor (can be sent down).
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't anyone with options and fewer than 5 years be sent down?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 7:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like pre-schoolers, for example?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As long as they have options, yes
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does the 15-day DL free up a 40-man spot?
The post implies that it does, but I thought only the 60-day did; so anyone going on the 15-day doesn’t change the roster crunch situation. Though perhaps I’m wrong?
by train80 on Mar 30, 2009 9:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think you're right on that.
In which case, the only way to open a spot for Cahill in the rotation is to put Duke on the 60-day DL…but then what happens when/if he can come back in mid/late May? The team is still going to need to make a cut now to get Cahill and Bailey on the team.
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They can make it retroactive
They can put Duke on the DL up to 10 days retroactively, which would make him eligible for a mid/late May return.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which would still necessitate that a 40-man roster spot opens up for HIM when/if he's healthy.
It doesn’t matter when Duke or Devine come back, unless they are both done for the year, the 60-day DL route is still just prolonging the inevitable of roster reorganization.
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As is petit, schroder, and copeland
IMO
by Asfan4ever723 on Mar 30, 2009 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Petit shouldn't be.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on Mar 30, 2009 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
they made their choice already
going back to last season with favoritism to pennington, not that i agree with it
by Asfan4ever723 on Mar 30, 2009 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hannahan is not expendable
If Chavez is hurt, Hannahan is easily the team’s best option at 3B against RHP.
Chavez is likely to get hurt, and about two-thirds of all innings are thrown by RHP—thus Hannahan’s non-expendability .
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But that's exactly why we have Nomar on the team.
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
by mrod on Mar 31, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really
Nomar is supposed to be the right handed bat to spell Giambi at 1B and Chavez at 3B. Hannahan projects to hit about as well against RHP as Nomar, and he’s a much better defender than Nomar. If Chavez gets hurt, Hannahan and Nomar should platoon at 3B.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Having Hannahan in the batting order is a detriment.
With Crosby & Nomar as potential 3Bs Hannhan’s value is nearing nil.
I admit he can field well enough to keep the defense stable but I’d rather see the pitcher hit than Hannahan.
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Mar 31, 2009 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Preferring Crosby to Hannahan is a low blow
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
indeed.
but adding the fact that we have a cash investment in Crosby I’d rather him be out there proving he is at least trade worthy than Hannahan reasserting the fact that he isn’t.
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Mar 31, 2009 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
by micdog2001 on Mar 31, 2009 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hannahan is totally
worthless in the hitting department and has many throwing errors in his resume.
Jut my opinion but he is a waste of roster space. Nomar makes him done and gone.
by Trainman on Mar 31, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That makes a lot of sense
If you only look at 2008 and think a guy with excellent range and an above average fielding percentage is a poor defender…
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He still cannot hit and 3rd base needs offense
by Trainman on Mar 31, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Cannot hit" is relative
He can hit a lot better than Baisley, Petit, and Pennington. And he can hit RHP about as well as Nomar, while playing much better defense.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cardenas isn't out of the question later in the year
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And he ran over your dog, and pissed in your cornflakes,
and, dang it, he just smells bad.
...then Pennington takes over.
by Poppy on Mar 31, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with this.
Hannahan’s sole value is his defense, which is an overrated quantity given his weak arm. I’m fine with Pennington if that role needs to be filled—he’s just as good, if not better, defensively, and Hannahan’s bat simply has nothing to offer.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Mar 31, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is Pennington a better answer?
First, check out their projections:
System Pennington Hannahan
PECOTA .218/.306/.304 .224/.318/.374
ZIPS .227/.309/.293 .247/.340/.373
CHONE .233/.326/.308 .237/.333/.367
As for defense, every metric rates Hannahan as an elite fielder at 3B. UZR has him at 11 runs above average per 150 games for his career, Dewan’s +/- had him as the 2nd best defensive 3B in baseball last year, and he had the best RZR in baseball in 2008. Additionally, BP and BA always raved about his defense when he was in the minors.
I doubt Pennington is that good at 3B, despite being a minor league SS. It’s a tiny sample, but FWIW Pennington was pretty terrible defensively in the majors last year. UZR has him at 4 runs below average at SS in just 56 innings (about a negative 100 run pace for a season). He lost 2 runs due to his 4 errors, and another 2 runs due to lack of range. UZR also had him as a run below average at 2B in just 136 innings (-18 per 150 games). Dewan’s +/- had him as even worse: -6 plays at SS, -6 plays at 2B, -2 plays at 3B.
I understand that Hannahan was terrible with the bat last year. But he projects to bounce back a good bit with the bat, and his defense is excellent.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Part of it is what metrics can't tell you.
I know, simply by watching him, that Hannahan has a well below average arm. How many extra runners reach first safely, and how many double plays don’t get turned because of it?
On the offensive side, it appears we can conclude from the projections that Hannahan and Pennington are nearly identical hitters, with the exception of Hannahan’s added pop (such as it is, which is to say, not much). The key for me, though, is that Pennington is still young enough to get better, and Hannahan isn’t, so I’m skeptical there would be much difference when it plays out in real life.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Mar 31, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
...
I know, simply by watching him, that Hannahan has a well below average arm. How many extra runners reach first safely, and how many double plays don’t get turned because of it?
Those are precisely the things the metrics measure.
On the offensive side, it appears we can conclude from the projections that Hannahan and Pennington are nearly identical hitters, with the exception of Hannahan’s added pop (such as it is, which is to say, not much).
Better OBP; much more power.
The key for me, though, is that Pennington is still young enough to get better, and Hannahan isn’t, so I’m skeptical there would be much difference when it plays out in real life.
I’m not saying they should DFA Pennington. I’m just saying Hannahan is clearly a better option at 3B for 2009, and that there are a bunch of guys on the 40 man roster who should be DFA ahead of him. A 60-70 point edge in SLG is a pretty big deal.
And if you want to cut a 3B, Baisley is a much better choice.
by Danny on Mar 31, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Perhaps a good rebuttal to jeepers' concern
is to note that Mark Ellis has a really weak arm. 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
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is why he isn't playing SS or 3B
I don’t think that rebuts anything.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."
by iglew on Mar 31, 2009 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What it rebuts is the notion that
a weak arm necessarily excludes a fielder from being proficient. It doesn’t help, and the position certainly matters greatly, but so many other factors come into play, such as range, efficiency, quick/slow release, and so on.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The relevant notion here is that
a weak arm excludes a fielder from being proficient at third base.
I don’t know if jeepers is right or wrong, but strictly as a matter of logic, he’s questioning weak-armed Hannahan’s ability to defend the 3B position, not 2B.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."
by iglew on Apr 1, 2009 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
thing is
hannahan has shown he is proficient at 3b. he’ll need help from giambi like he got from barton last year. but if giambi can pickit, hannahan will be far superior to pennington defensively
"True fact: In a global thermonuclear war, the only human who would survive would be David Eckstein" -PT
by travdog6 on Apr 1, 2009 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't think so.
If we get down to needing Hannahan in 2009 that means Nomar and Crosby are down.
Going that deep into reserves for us in my opinion makes Hannahan a poor choice.
If we get to that point in the season we would be better served by playing/developing a younger player than sticking in Hannahan who is at best a stop gap. With Hannahan at 3B I don’t see us being able to compete. So why pretend? Why not use it as an opportunity to give new blood a test?
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Mar 31, 2009 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Weird
I feel the same way about Duke.
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 8:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was resigned to Duke being down.
Great pitcher, but longevity hasn’t been his forte.
You absolutely cannot be a #1 pitcher without being a consistent reliable horse for your team to ride in tough times.
Duke’s body, for whatever reasons, has got in the way of this.
Personally, I was hoping we’d bring in one vet to usher the young guys along.
They have skill but they need a guy they can fall back on when they are having rough times; and I’m not sure who that guy in the rotation is and unfortunately I think that is because he doesn’t exist.
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Mar 31, 2009 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What "new blood?"
Nomar certainly isn’t new blood, Pennington’s future isn’t at third because he can’t slug anywhere near enough to carry the position, so that means Baisley, who isn’t all that young himself, or Chris Carter, who’s never played above High-A. I’m a huge Carter fan, but I don’t think he’s ready yet.
I miss Brooks Conrad.
by nomorequada on Apr 1, 2009 1:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
my assumption was
the only way Hannahan plays is if Nomar is down, and Crosby is down (or traded).
and if Hannahan is playing we are out of contention.
If that is the case…we’ll have plenty of guys to trade—-in which case we can find some “new blood” for the position.
You are right I don’t think we currently have “new blood” for the position; which is weird since Chavvy has such a storied injury history…you’d think by now we’d have gone out a found a future 3B.
(remember the basis for this argument is Hannahan at 3B equals a failed season—as far as contention goes.)
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Apr 1, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd call Cardenas new blood....and he might end up the 3B in September.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 1, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has a long way to go
And here’s a complete list of players to get an AB with the A’s in their age 21 season over the past 20 years: Chavez, Barton, Grieve.
by Danny on Apr 1, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmmm
an injury prone 6 time gold glove winner
a guy who hit well at 21 but struggled in the follow-up season
and a ROTY than was only average thereafter.
I will say this: if Cardenas is the 3B in September then Matt Holiday will have already been traded.
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Apr 1, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We'll be able to add Cahill and Anderson to that list
I just don’t see Chavez, Nomar, Hannahan, Pennington, Baisley, Petit and Dillon as much of an obstacle if he plays well in AA.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 1, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Only if they're still going when interleague starts.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Apr 1, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know, I forgot about Dillon...
Don’t you think he could do Nomar’s job? I just realized how redundant that signing is.
by nomorequada on Apr 2, 2009 5:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Minor addition
Tejada was thought to be 21 when he came up.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Apr 1, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How do defensive metrics measure arm strength?
It’s an honest question, I have no idea how one would do that. I do know that many defensive metrics leave a lot to be desired.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Apr 1, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They don't really look at arm strength
Basically, they start by dividing the field up into little zones. When a ball is put into play, they look at what the historical results are of balls hit into that zone at that trajectory: what percent are turned into outs, what percent are turned into singles, etc. The historical data tells them what an average fielder would do with this ball in play (it would result in X number of runs).
So the metrics look at all the balls hit toward 3B while Hannahan is playing, and judge what he does with those balls versus what an average defensive 3B would have done (by looking at the historical data as explained above).
Let’s say there’s a smash down the line, and the historical data says this ball in play usually results in an out 40% of the time, a single 30% of the time, and a double 30% of the time for an expected run value of 0.4 (all numbers pulled out of my butt for demonstration purposes only). If Hannahan converts that ball into an out (which has a run value of zero), then he’s rated as being 0.4 runs better than the average 3B on that play. If it becomes a single (which is, say, a 0.6 run value) then he gets rated 0.2 runs below average on that play.
Using that methodology, UZR sez Hannahan has been 11 runs better than the average 3B per 150 over his career. That’s about 1 win better than average, which makes up for most of his inept hitting.
by Danny on Apr 1, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant to add...
So the metrics don’t really separate out arm strength versus quickness/range. Rather, they just look at how effective the fielder is overall.
Like in batting metrics, we don’t really care how fast the bat speed is—we just care how effective the batter is.
by Danny on Apr 1, 2009 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unless bat speed is a better leading indicator of future effectiveness, which it
might be compared to past effectiveness.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 1, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, that helps.
I understand Hannahan’s defensive value much better, or it put it more simply, I understand why Hannahan’s weak arm should be tolerated. To accomplish those things, he must surely have better range and positioning (probably the most important factor, IMO) than other fielders. If we cut him, we will lose a plus defensive corner infield option. That has value.
I guess the question is really a) how good are Crosby, Garciaparra, and Pennington going to be manning third, and b) how will Pennington be offensively in comparison to Hannahan? I understand why the projections are what they are, but Pennington is a better investment for the A’s than Hannahan, so Hannahan need to be much better than Pennington to get the spot (which is the first spot up from the minors). Pennington is having a good spring, and the A’s could use another Scutaro.
I think all of them will do a fine job defensively, if demonstrably less so than Hannahan. I’m not sold on the projected optimism about his bat, and think his luckiness the first time around is skewing his numbers. He just can’t catch up to a good fastball, and is old. There was nothing about last year that suggests we aren’t to believe those results.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Apr 1, 2009 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From what I've seen:
- Crosby is really not comfortable at 3B and would take a while to become proficient; he also doesn’t hit any better than Hannahan does.
- Pennington can handle 3B pretty well, but would be neither as good a hitter nor as good a 3Bman as Hannahan.
- Nomar can outhit Hannahan and plays a solid 3B but can’t be counted on to stay healthy for a stretch of consistent playing time.
In that context, Hannahan looks a little 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
by Nico on Apr 1, 2009 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or else 3B looks like a problem
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 1, 2009 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's been a problem since forever. Beane hasn't addressed
it for some reason.
by OldhamA on Apr 2, 2009 6:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd call Cardenas addressing it
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 2, 2009 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Pennington can hit a fastball he's a better hitter than
Hannahan. It’s absurd how often he strikes out on heat that’s down the middle of the plate.
by OldhamA on Apr 2, 2009 6:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yet realistically, if both played every day
Hannahan would likely sport the higher BA, higher OBP, and higher SLG.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Apr 2, 2009 6:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gonna disagree on the average and obp...
But Hannahan’s ISO is just SO much better…and you really can’t say that about him relative to many guys. Part of me wonders what he would do defensively up the middle. I know he was a decent 2B in Toledo back in ‘06-’07, but if he can handle short too, that’s a big plus. Those positions would lower the offensive bar while making the throws shorter (if his arm actually is weak, which I don’t think it is, but I could be wrong).
by nomorequada on Apr 2, 2009 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm thinking that over a full major league season,
Pennington would hit around .225/.320/.330, while Hannahan would hit around .240/.340/.380.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Apr 2, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Projections, smections
Defensive metrics are also suspect.
Hannahan is a below average Major League player, he isn’t going to be the difference between the A’s winning the division and not this season. Why keep him around to not suck as bad as someone else?
myspace music
by jeffro on Mar 31, 2009 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cut all below average players?
Is it even legal to play with a 12 man roster?
by Danny on Apr 1, 2009 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about we cut all below average players who irritate us?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 1, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
offensively i think hannahanahanhan
is below average. also, i think that he was never intended to be a starting 3B by the powers that be. finally, i think that people forget that his line in 07 was .278, .369, .424. not awesome, but certainly not terrible. with a regression to part-time playing status, i think hitting somewhere along that line again isn’t entirely impossible.
by mr. pickles on Apr 1, 2009 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
finally, i think that people forget that his line in 07 was .278, .369, .424. not awesome, but certainly not terrible. with a regression to part-time playing status, i think hitting somewhere along that line again isn’t entirely impossible.
Amen. I’m not the only one that remembers.
by nomorequada on Apr 1, 2009 1:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
strange...
Crosby in 2005 before injury (.276, .346, .456, .802) and never again.
Same for Hannahan—never again, and he can’t even blame injury.
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Apr 1, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My list of x ables
Copeland
Gray
Schroder
Patterson
Also putting someone on the 60 day DL like Duke will likely go will allow you to shuttle people onto the roster w/o cutting someone and there is likely to be someone on 60 day for much of the year.
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 31, 2009 12:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Copeland, Herrera, Schroder, Can-O-Spam....then Patterson
I think it’s a good idea to keep Petit and Gray around for a bit because they still have some value to the A"s, even if just in a backup to the backup plan.
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
by mrod on Mar 31, 2009 12:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sadly, I'm afraid this is useless
speculation. Why? Because it’s the A’s were discussing, one or more of them will surely land on the 60 day DL before Duke returns.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Mar 31, 2009 5:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ha. Fair enough.
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The other guy who made a strong case this spring
is Denorfia. he may be the odd man out, but in case anyone of the following gets hurt: Cust, Sweeney, Buck, Holliday, davis— he’ll be up in a heartbeat. In fact he and Barton make for a pretty good reserve.
by jasonthea on Mar 31, 2009 10:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Taj, thanks for the informative and well thought out
fan post. Much appreciated, contra the two other fan posts made today re: sheffield and chavez.
by 33SwisherSweet on Mar 31, 2009 10:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
unfortunately, Duke may not be the only 60-day DL candidate
Joey Devine will be seeing Dr. Andrews — one of the two most known surgeons regarding operations on pitchers — to see about his elbow.
speculation from Jeff Fletcher:
PURE SPECULATION ALERT: I’m guessing Devine is going to end up having surgery, since he said he’s had this problem for a while and nothing has made it go away. At a minimum, it seems like this is the kind of thing that the doctors might want to do a ’scope and see what’s in there
I really hope not…but it sounds all too plausible.
by OaklandSi on Mar 31, 2009 11:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Can us A's fans ever have a season that doesn't feature half of the team on an episode of "ER" ?!!!
For f^%*$ sake!…………
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
by mrod on Mar 31, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm realizing how smart Beane is to get
9 starting pitchers and 12 relievers just to field a team of 5 SP and 7 relievers on April 6th.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is why I laugh
when my girlfriend (a Red Sox fan) talks about how Boston has too many starting pitchers.
by colin on Mar 31, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we really need to discuss your taste in women.
"If I told you once, I told you a thousand times: get yourself a hacksaw and a roll of duck tape, and attach your ankle-bracelet monitor to the leg of a gator." -lemurspoker
by Leopold Bloom on Mar 31, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need a thread on the rooting interests of our SOs
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I almost dated a Red Sox fan once.
but her team of choice was the breaking point.
"If I told you once, I told you a thousand times: get yourself a hacksaw and a roll of duck tape, and attach your ankle-bracelet monitor to the leg of a gator." -lemurspoker
by Leopold Bloom on Mar 31, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I almost dated a Nationals fan once
But I couldn’t find one.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
qotm
hahaha
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Joe Morgan's going to think Beane wrote the movie too..." -whitshoes40
"What am I going to do, seriously? Maybe be a bouncer at strip joints. That's about all I'm qualified to do." -Giambi
by ST on Mar 31, 2009 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My wife's...
…avorite player is Jack Cust, because “he looks like a nice farm guy.” (we’re both from North Dakota originally)
I’ve hid from her the fact that his name appeared in the Mitchell Report, as it’s the adult, caring-about-baseball-just-to-be-nice-to-your-husband equivalent of revealing the secret of Santa Claus.
by rageon on Mar 31, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is a stupid question...
but why is it that rehab is timed perfectly so that when Spring Training comes around guys discover rehab didn’t work?
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Mar 31, 2009 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most rehab from serious injuries
can take between 3 months to a year depending on the severity. You rest the injury from October to November/December, try to restrengthen it from January to March… April, crap, it didn’t work. Most doctors do NOT want to go the surgery route until everything else has been exhausted.
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
totally understand.
it is just painful to see guys leave a season early with an injury & rehab it & then back to where they started.
How many guys do we need to hear say “i felt great in rehab, but as soon as i went to game speed……”
"Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising."--Cyril Connolly, Enemies of Promise
by WhiteElephant on Mar 31, 2009 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another roster problem: Landon Powell.
At this point, the only two catchers on the A’s 40-man are Suzuki and Powell. We all know Suzuki is an iron-man and all, but he still needs a healthy back-up in case of emergency and Powell is not the picture of health these days and will likely never be 100% healthy for long stretches of time due to his myriad of health issues. Therefore, a 2nd capable, strong-limbed backup is going to be needed on 40-man before long.
Curtis Thigpen could be that 3rd catcher, but, alas, he is also NOT on the current 40-man roster. How the hell do the A’s get HIM on the roster, too?
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 12:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
they will wait it out
if they need him on the roster because of an injury, then they can decide is it a 60 day injury. i doubt they make any move at catcher until they are forced to.
by RayJEdd on Mar 31, 2009 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's kind of a dangerous game to play.
Powell is liable to be unavailable at any game at any time, without a DL-stint being necessitated. If Suzuki were to get hurt on the 1st inning of one of those games where Powell is simply out with a “strain” for a few days, then the team would have no viable option for the rest of that game or possibly the next game as well, depending on how quickly the team brass can open up another 40-man spot for THigpen or another catcher. That’s a pretty dangerous scenario…
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hear Crosby has a catcher's mitt in his locker...
by OldhamA on Mar 31, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He should try swinging 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
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
even with a catcher on the 40 man, but not on the 25 man, the team is stuck without a catcher for the duration of the game. Having Thigpen, or anyone else, on the 40 man doesn’t change that. Does any team carry more than 2 catchers at a time?
As to dealing with the next day’s game, I can’t remember a time when the A’s didn’t have someone expendable at the bottom of the 40 man, so it’s not really a problem I worry about.
by rageon on Mar 31, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see Powell getting that banged up
while playing 20-40 games this year. If he is playing more than that, it means Suzuki is probably on the DL and a catcher will be added to the 40-man.
by RayJEdd on Mar 31, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Powell played in 88 games last year...
So handling even 50 isn’t all that much of an injury gamble…oh wait, it’s the A’s…never mind.
by nomorequada on Mar 31, 2009 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No need to do anything...
‘I wouldn’t recommend that the A’s do the work around “DL Duke, Devine and/or Copeland” and see what Cahill, Anderson and Bailey can do with a few weeks or 60 days and then make more permanent roster cuts once those DL-ed guys are healthy. ’
Why not? This sounds great. We only need one spot right now, for Cahill, which is Dukes spot, I have given Anderson the open 40th spot, and I don’t see Bailey coming up until someone (I am talking to you Wuertz/Schroder.) flames out or gets hurt (please don’t let me be talking about you Chavy)….I also agree on waiting on a catcher until the day landon is needed and can’t go….
"No offense, Nico, but starcitygames.com used to be the AN of Magic sites "
by tresselfan on Mar 31, 2009 1:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the 60-day DL route is just prolonging the inetivable roster reorganization that could just as well happen now.
But if both Duke and Devine are going to be on the shelf all year, that solves the problem in itself in a less than ideal way.
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah but that also gives plenty of time for two *other* guys to get put on the 60 day DL in place of Duke and Devine.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on Mar 31, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or Crosby or any one of the "meh we don't really have a use for them" guys to get traded.
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Copeland, Gray, Herrera
Give Copeland back to SF. Or if he gets through waivers, negotiate with SF about maybe trading something to keep him in the system.
Gray is tradable. He won’t get a lot, but he can get something. Maybe one or two low-end prospects. Better than DFA’ing him.
I’m ready to give up on Herrera, though it sounds like others here still see something in him. I you can get something for him in trade, great, but I wouldn’t mind if he were released outright.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."
by iglew on Mar 31, 2009 2:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It didn't sound like they wanted to give Copeland back without DL'ing him first, rehabbing him and
then seeing whether they wanted him. It also sounded like they were impressed with what they saw of Herrera in the spring. Gray was the first 40-man guy cut, so that can’t be good for him.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still don't get why everyone loves Bailey...
There’s so much antagonism to Cahill and Anderson on AN, but it seems like everyone just wants to put Bailey, who had a 4.32 ERA and 1.40 WHIP, basically dead-average numbers, in Double-A last year, in the major league bullpen. Let Wuertz and Schroder, who have excellent MLB K-rates to their credit, have a shot while we see if Bailey’s success carries over to AAA once the games actually count.
by nomorequada on Mar 31, 2009 5:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Answer: Short memories?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, the hype with Bailey is based on the fact that...
last year, after becoming a full-time reliever sometime in the middle of the season, he posted some ridiculous numbers out of the bullpen…something Ziggy or Devine-like…sub 1.00 ERA in the 22 games in which he relieved. And right now, he’s dominating major league hitters. I agree with you about Wuertz, I’d go track record with him, but Chris Schroeder has already been demoted to minor league camp while Bailey remains with the big league right now, so obviously A’s brass is pretty impressed with him.
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
by Taj Adib on Mar 31, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly the point
after becoming a full-time reliever sometime in the middle of the season, he posted some ridiculous numbers out of the bullpen…something Ziggy or Devine-like…sub 1.00 ERA in the 22 games in which he relieved.
The sample size is small, but if he’s a good reliever and a bad starter just averaging the numbers doesn’t get you very far.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Mar 31, 2009 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It sounds like when it comes to acquiring a player, statistical track records matter a lot, but when it
comes to deciding who pitches or who stays in the bigs, they seem to go with the hot hand and who looks good more than anything. I doubt they kept Bailey over Schroder because of his projections, it had to have been how he looked. Same with Ziegler and Devine over Street last year.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's more that
Bailey’s much less likely to get a roster spot in the majors than Cahill/Anderson so there’s less to discuss. But I see Bailey the same as those two in that he needs to be sent to AAA.
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except that he's pretty likely to get a roster spot now with Devine's injury.
He’s certainly in the discussion, and probably the favorite if Gio isn’t ready.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why wouldn't you just give it to Gray or Schroder?
Who have nothing left to prove in the minors. I’m not saying Bailey isn’t ready; I just want to see that relief success carry over to Triple-A.
by nomorequada on Apr 1, 2009 2:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think they're more impressed with how Bailey's pitching now than the other two.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 1, 2009 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Certainly debatable
And now that the question may be relevant, if someone were to push that in a fan post, you might find people against the idea.
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 8:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Reply = FAIL
That was meant for WaddellCanseco above.
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
by DMOAS on Mar 31, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, that'd be great.
Shoot, sorry – that was supposed to be a reply to, “So do you want to create an AN account?”
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trying to start over with another alternate username?
I have been waiting for this since your nom de plume PaulThomas was put on hiatus. Are you going to go with reztips again?
"No offense, Nico, but starcitygames.com used to be the AN of Magic sites "
by tresselfan on Apr 1, 2009 5:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are only 15 pitchers in camp. 2 are Duke and Devine. If Gio isn't ready that leaves 12
guys standing. That includes Bailey. He pretty much has to make it now.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would be horrifying. 13 would be better than 11.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 1, 2009 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm normally for 11, even 10-man staffs...
And yes, I know that’s pretty radical.
However, this team is so strangely designed that I’m going to have to agree; I’d rather see 13 than 11, at least until we have some idea of what to expect from the starters.
by nomorequada on Apr 2, 2009 5:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
11 is fine for a team with 900 IP in their rotation.
That’s not this team.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Apr 2, 2009 8:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 






















