Oakland 2008 offseason - What was missed?

by SwisherFan33 on Mar 4, 2009 1:02 PM PST Comment 67 comments

The goal of this is not to look at what Oakland did, but what they didn't do. Obviously most Oakland fans were very pleased at the activity of their GM, and are glad that his name doesn't end in Sabean. However, there seems to have been some opportunities missed and with my 20/20 hindsight I can pretend to be smarter then Beane, emphasis on "pretend".

Starting Rotation - How can you hope to contend against the Angels with such a terrible rotation? Not that it won't be there in another year or two, but going in with Duchscherer, Eveland, Gallagher, Braden, Pitcher X (Probably Gio); you have to realize how fragile that group is. I am not sure if Beane had wanted Sheets before he realized that he was damaged goods, but it appeared that starting pitching was not a concern. A small effort was made to acquire Randy Johnson, but at the price he signed for combined with the fact that he signed with a terrible offense suggested that Randy REALLY wanted to stay in the NL West or that the A's didn't try hard enough. While I don't believe the answer was in free-agency, I felt a trade for a reliable starter on a bad team (i.e. Gil Meche) was in the cards. Oakland has a great young staff, but it does need some guidance. Sometimes trading a prospect is the right answer.

Relief Pitching - I hate paying good $$$ for relief, although I understand its importance. Ziegler, Devine, and Casilla are all great options and adding Russ Springer was a solid move. The A's had the money to spend and I feel pretty good with our options once our starters get the pat and hand the ball over.

Outfield - Left field was given the biggest boost it could. Sweeney in center is great too. The problem is in right field. Bobby Abreu & Adam Dunn - Obviously both do not fit into the same Oakland roster together, but both came at amazing bargains and letting Abreu sign with the Angels might be enough in a close race to give them the edge they need to win the West. With the Giambi signing both would be slotted into RF (or maybe to DH with Cust), but your overall line-up would become:

Sweeney CF

Cust DH/RF

Holliday LF

Giambi 1st

Dunn/Abreu RF/DH

Chavez 3rd

Ellis 2nd

Suzuki C

OCab SS

Mmmmmm.....

Abreu or Dunn would provide anywhere from 10-25 more HR's and a much higher OBP than a full season of Buck, while providing worse overall defense (although sometimes Buck can be pretty bad).

Infield - No complaints. The organization did everything it could to sign Furcal. Meanwhile, although we did not know it we were being used as "the other woman". OCab is more than acceptable, while Nomar is a great back-up choice for his bat, glove, and experience. Ellis came cheap and is great in the clubhouse and Giambi is just what this club needed. If Chavez/Nomar prove to not be healthy and we are in need of a 3rd basemen to be competitive, Scott Rolen (if healthy) would not be a bad option in July.

Overall, the lack of a good, reliable starting pitcher and letting Dunn/Abreu slip by was really hard. With Duke already having problems a young rotation will need to really step up. Hoping the community can point out where I am wrong/right and help me understand the moves NOT made more.

0 recs | Comment 67 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

"and are glad that his name doesn't end in Sabean."

Don’t you mean, doesn’t begin with Sa?

Chicago. Where the Dead can Vote. Where the Voters of Tomorrow are found in the Obituaries of Today.

by Zonis on Mar 4, 2009 1:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

The extra "e" turns the trick.

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 4, 2009 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Clearly..

you are unfamiliar with Mark Barusabean.

by Eggman on Mar 4, 2009 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Argument for Buck over Abreu/Dunn would be Defense

Buck could be more valuable than Dunn or Abreu because the latter are horrible at Defense, which hurts what they do offensivly better than Buck.

I say, right now if we want another big bat and just play Cust in the OF with Buck or Sweeney in CF, just sign Bonds to DH.

Chicago. Where the Dead can Vote. Where the Voters of Tomorrow are found in the Obituaries of Today.

by Zonis on Mar 4, 2009 1:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Bonds in the clubhouse = No good

I would much rather have Dunn or Abreu who are neutral to positive influences then the media circus of Barry Bonds who contributes 0 to the team. I am not denying talent or ability but he has been out of the game for a year now and he is older then the head vampire in Underworld.

#1 Nick Swisher fan...but not in a stalker way.

by SwisherFan33 on Mar 4, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Any Publicity is Good Publicity

Chicago. Where the Dead can Vote. Where the Voters of Tomorrow are found in the Obituaries of Today.

by Zonis on Mar 4, 2009 6:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not getting starting pitching was disappointing to me

But to be fair, the market for starting pitching wasn’t that good. Most of the guys that were actually good (CC, Burnett, Lowe) were never going to be signed by the A’s and the rest (ie John Garland) weren’t really worth taking a flyer on anyways.

I’m still holding out hope for a healthy Mulder on a minor league contract though.

"We were s--, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."

by lenscrafters on Mar 4, 2009 1:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

that's my thought as well

but a trade might happen

by OaklandSi on Mar 4, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

My thoughts here

Other than Randy Johnson, there really weren’t a lot of signings that would have made a lot of sense. I only would have supported 1 year deals with so much SP coming up the pipeline. You have to give Duke and Gallagher starting spots because of Duke’s proven success and Gallagher just needing time in the bigs at this point. Braden earned himself a spot last year and will probably turn out to be a fine 3rd/4th starter. I’m not thrilled with Eveland but he’s an ok stopgap, and the 5th spot is a weakness. Really that’s the only weakness I see.

There wasn’t much of a market for IF as you said, and the A’s tried their best to sign Furcal. That said, we made a big upgrade in Giambi over Barton, and OCab over Crosby. MaEl is a great 2B and the 3rd base rotation should be fine eventually if Chavez stays healthy/Nomar fills in/etc. We still have Cardenas coming up in the middle, and he should be coming up in September at the latest.

The bullpen is great.

I didn’t really want Abreu to be honest. I’m not ready to give up on Buck, and Abreu is a rather poor OF defensively and only getting worse at 34. The Angels offense is arguably just as fragile, with Hunter being the only sure thing. Vlad and Abreu could break down soon, Gary Matthews is Hunter-lite, etc.

The Angels had a rather poor offseason to be honest, and I’m confident that this team at the very least has a reasonable chance at taking them down.

rebuildingseason.blogspot.com

by Rebuilding Season on Mar 4, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I really doubt that Adrian Cardenas will play a game in the bigs this season

He sucked in AA and the AFL last season, and he’s 21.

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 4, 2009 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You're right

I thought he was further along, like AAA ready at the beginning of the season. I guess we wont see him until 2010 at the earliest.

rebuildingseason.blogspot.com

by Rebuilding Season on Mar 4, 2009 8:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Starting Pitching

It’s too bad we couldn’t add anything significant (i.e. not Jerome Williams/Edgar Gonzalez) to what we have now and what’s coming up. I wouldn’t be opposed to a trade for Peavy even if it meant giving up ONE of MAC. If they’re asking for two, which I doubt it would take, then I hope Beane has the sense to laugh and hang up.

"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin

by Helloooo 1st on Mar 4, 2009 1:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Two ways to Look At It

If the current roster hangs in, BB will make a move to strengthen in July— that move is likely to be for a starting pitcher.

Whatever the result in the first statement, the combination of Gallagher-Gonzalez-Cahill-Mazzaro-Anderson— and 4-5 others with some potential as well— will make this question moot sometime in the next 12-18 months. They aren’t going to win a WS this year— but starting next year, they have a very good chance of once again being in the crapshoot for 3-5 years to come.

by windyfelix on Mar 4, 2009 1:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Well we might as well get ready for football season then right?

Have some faith, it’s barely March.

"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin

by Helloooo 1st on Mar 4, 2009 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

why is ruling out a WS not having faith??

They have won one WS in the past 34 years, with a team infinitely more talented than this one. Is it theoretically possible to sneak into the playoffs a la SL 2006 or Minnesota 1987 and win the thing? Of course, but I’d also be thrilled with 85 wins and a narrow defeat to the Angels so long as a lot of our young players progressed. We are partying like it’s 1999— with a chance at the Big Dance probably still 1-2 years more away. Let’s be happy with what we’ve got and not let expectations run amuck.

by windyfelix on Mar 4, 2009 2:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm worried that our current rotation won't keep us in contention until July...

at which point, we’d be looking to sell.

transfiguration When the woman puts mascara on, it means she’s leaving the house. When the man puts big boots on, it means the alley has been erased by snow. When the black cat has a white strip on its back, be careful! The world can change in an instant.

by Elvez on Mar 4, 2009 7:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Peavy

I think we should be all over this guy. The padres a freakin mess right now. New owner group or not, the organization is a mess and they probably want to clear some cash and get some prospects:
A’s get Peavy (under team control 2013 – but 2013 contract is team option 22 million)

Padres Get:
Vin Mazzaro
A. Cunningham
and even Landon Powell or Josh Outman

My guess is they don’t want Barton with AG at 1B, but I am sure they want a big time prospect + a major league ready pitcher (outman) and a hitting prospect = A. Cunningham.

If we actually landed Peavy – we could be taking about the world series.

by ryanmoser on Mar 4, 2009 1:56 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I agree that Peavy would be a huge contribution

I feel that coming up with a package would be easy and the Padres are begging to lower payroll. However, the hardest part might be Peavy and his no trade clause. However, if you can convince a pitcher that he will still stay in a pitchers park and get an upgraded offense that is a contender I would think he would welcome the change. The alternative is constantly being in trade rumors and taking hard losses & no decisions.

#1 Nick Swisher fan...but not in a stalker way.

by SwisherFan33 on Mar 4, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Trading for Peavy's contract would be a disastrously bad decision

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 4, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

For the suggested deal, I'd take his contract in a heartbeat

But like I say below, I don’t think it’s even sniffing the ballpark of what San Diego would demand.

Jeremy was safe. He jumped over the tag.

by mrrickyg on Mar 4, 2009 3:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't

You never, ever, ever take on a contract that you know that you will be unable to afford. The A’s cannot afford Peavy’s contract from 2011-2013.

Having contracts you can’t afford puts you in positions like… well, like where San Diego is right now.

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 4, 2009 3:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What if the deal offered back end financial support?

Say all of it for the first two years by Oakland. Then in 2011-2013, SD would pay a chunk of it, say 5 mil a year or something of that nature. Granted, that just ups what we’d have to give them in exchange, but it would benefit them now and would benefit us now and keep us from having the financial disaster you’re anticipating.

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

by DMOAS on Mar 4, 2009 5:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

A's couldn't afford Peavy's contract from 2011-2013?

Why not? I’d argue this is prime time for the A’s to go acquire a guy like Peavy… We have a ton of players in their pre-arb and arb years, many of whom will not be eligible for free agency until after 2013…

Suzuki/Donaldson/Powell at C
Barton/Carter/Doolittle at 1B
Cardenas/Weeks at 2B
Pennington/Petit at SS
Cunningham/Sweeney/Buck/Dixon/Davis in the OF
Plus… all of our young SPs and our outstanding bullpen prospects.

We have Ellis and Chavez signed through 2010 or 2011, coming off the books in 2011 or 2012, which would clear room for Peavy’s escalating contract…

Assuming our prospects work out (a big assumption), the only places we’ll need to spend money over the next few years are 3B (unless Cardenas shifts over to replace Chavez in 2011, which sounds likely), SS (to find someone other than Pennington or Petit), and possibly an OF or two… we’re basically set with cheap players into the foreseeable future at C, 1B, 2B, 3B, 2 OF spots, most of our rotation, and our pen.

So, why wouldn’t we be able to afford Peavy in 2011 and 2012? Yes, he makes $16M in 2011, $17M in 2012, and $22M in 2013 (with a $4M buyout), but we seem like the perfect team to absorb that kind of contract… with our young core.

In my mind, the biggest stumbling block is not our (in)ability to afford Peavy; the stumbling blocks to this proposal are: (1) Peavy’s willingness to waive his no-trade clause to come to an AL team (not likely) and (2) the Padres’ willingness to trade him; the Braves offer, which was supposedly Yunel Escobar, Gorkys Hernandez, Jo-Jo Reyes and Blaine Boyer, was a pretty damn good offer for a guy with Peavy’s relatively expensive and high-risk (in terms of length) contract; I don’t think Cahill, Cunningham, and Outman gets it done after they rejected the Braves’ offer; and if we had to start digging deeper into our prospects, I’m not sure I’d want Peavy that badly.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 4, 2009 11:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I've done the salary math

The A’s can’t afford to keep Holliday beyond 2010; Peavy is not sufficiently cheaper to change that. Barring a major upward revision of the team payroll, he is not an option.

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 5, 2009 12:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd be curious to see your math ...

given that the team does not have a single contractual obligation beyond 2010 (not counting $3.5m in option buyouts for 2011) …

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

by devo on Mar 5, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

In 2011, a roster with Jake Peavy would cost about $63M without signing a single additional free agent

and buying out both Chavez and Ellis. Math here.

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 5, 2009 2:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Which is totally affordable ...

I doubt Denorfia is still around at that point and odds are a couple of the arms will have earned their way out of town by then, too … there’s good chance that Barton is not arbi-eligible at that point, also …

Also, six guys, none of whom profile as superstars, averaging $3m in first year arbitration is VERY generous … I’d be surprised if any of them even top that figure.

All told, I’d say you’re about $10m over …

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

by devo on Mar 5, 2009 2:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Obviously, I disagree :p

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 5, 2009 5:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Have you accounted for the A's raising their payroll...

based on their increased revenue from winning he 2009 and 2010 WS? Because then Peavy is looking pretty affordable…

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

by vignette17 on Mar 5, 2009 6:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Your math is assuming

we keep all those players, no? History suggests there’s not a chance in hell that happens. Of course, that’s the same chance that we’d get Peavy, so the point is also moot.

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

by DMOAS on Mar 5, 2009 6:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

They could just as well trade the players to gain salary as lose it

If they can deal off salary in a productive fashion, fine. Putting your back up against a brick wall before doing so is not a good idea. I’ve talked about this in conjunction with some of the various unrealistic “Holliday extension” threads, too.

If they’re going to trade for a star, I’d much rather it be someone on a soon-expiring contract like Magglio Ordonez. I suppose Halladay would fit the bill, too, but the price for him would be staggering.

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 5, 2009 10:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

in the past the A's have increased payroll

after making the postseason. There are of course other reasons for doing so, particularly raises due to players. But Beane himself has said as much in the past.

Here are the Opening Day payrolls for the A’s beginning in 2000 (rounded off):

2000 32 million (made ALDS)
2001 33.8 million (made ALDS)
2002 40 million (made ALDS)
2003 50 million (made ALDS)
2004 59.4 million (missed postseason, in contention)

During the 2004-05 offseason Beane said in an interview that the payroll would not be increased for 2005 since they didn’t make the postseason. In his words “the product was flat.”

2005 55.4 million (missed postseason, in contention)
2006 62 million (made ALCS)
2007 79 million (missed postseason, not in contention)
2008 47.9 million (missed postseason, not in contention)

It seems that payroll increased for 2006 in part also because there appeared to be a chance to get into the postseason (offseason acquisitions of veterans helping to up the payroll)….and the Opening Day 2009 will also take a jump for the same reason.

All this said I don’t see the A’s making a Peavey trade…but they may well do some in-season trade for someone in his wallk year who can upgrade the team in an area of need, provided the A’s look like they can be in contention.

by OaklandSi on Mar 6, 2009 7:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

not even close yet i don't think

You’d need to add Cahill or Anderson to the above package to get the Padres interested. Still want Peavy?

Jeremy was safe. He jumped over the tag.

by mrrickyg on Mar 4, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox

by mrod on Mar 5, 2009 4:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I mean....no!

not for two of the big guns, no.

But I want Peavy, yes!

Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox

by mrod on Mar 5, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ellis vs Hudson

Which guy got the better contract now that we have 20/20 vision?

Hudson gets $3.4MM guaranteed with another $4.6MM in incentives (plus draft pick)

Ellis will receive a two-year deal that will guarantee him between $10 million to $11 million, with incentives and an option for 2011 that could bring the total value of the deal to something close to $18 million,

RIVER CATS: AAA CHAMPS!

by niallmack on Mar 4, 2009 2:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I'm perfectly happy about the Ellis deal

Sure, if the A’s had waited perhaps Ellie could have been had cheaper, but everyone in sabermetric circles acknowledged the deal as a steal to the highest degree. Plus the A’s don’t lose a pick (not that that would have been too big a deterrent). And it’s for 3 years as opposed to one. I’ll take it.

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

by vignette17 on Mar 4, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

SP is the obvious hole

Yet three aces in Halladay, Sheets, and Peavy could be available midseason. Still RJ would have been really nice. But hey, can’t ask for everything. I’m a little disappointed about the way Furcal turned out, but with the way the economy collapsed it’s probably best for the A’s long-term payroll situation. And it may have set up a return of Tejada next season…

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

by vignette17 on Mar 4, 2009 2:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

it wont, Tejada won't return

Chicago. Where the Dead can Vote. Where the Voters of Tomorrow are found in the Obituaries of Today.

by Zonis on Mar 4, 2009 6:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

For one thing, who knows how old he'll be in a year?

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

by Nico on Mar 4, 2009 6:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Why?

Tejada won’t be going to jail; his plea bargain all but assures that. Houston may very well be wanting to part ways with Tejada after the age thing then steroids plus Tejada’s declining stats and Houston unlikely to compete next year. As for the A’s they’re left without a SS after this season. They’ll likely offer arb to Cabrera but if he leaves, what then? Tejada is probably the next best option (assuming no trade for Hardy) and he could very well be the next Giambi-like “prodigal son.”

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

by vignette17 on Mar 4, 2009 6:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I am/was all for bringing Tejada back, but

with each passing year I am exponentially less enthused. His decline curve is/will be steep due to his age (I mean his real one) and the position he plays. I was all for upgrading from Crosby to Tejada in 2009 but I don’t think I’d want him for 2010.

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 4, 2009 6:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes...

… Tejada’s rapid decline scares me. My opinion may change during the course of this season, but as of right now, Tejada would not be my #1 choice for the A’s starting SS for the 2010 season. I’d prefer to see what Pennington and Petit could do… they’ll be 1/10th as expensive, and probably put up 70% of the production. Use the money you’d spend on an unproductive Tejada to go find a more productive player elsewhere…

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 4, 2009 11:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

it was a good offseason, the only real bummers are randy johnson choosing the giants and dennys reyes apparently choosing the cardinals.

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

by xbhaskarx on Mar 4, 2009 7:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

and Duke pulling up lame again.

by Elvez on Mar 4, 2009 7:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

furcal?

by ryanmoser on Mar 4, 2009 7:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

furcal may be better, but cabrera's a much better deal

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

by xbhaskarx on Mar 4, 2009 8:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

true

4 million compared to 36+

by ryanmoser on Mar 4, 2009 8:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand and agree that the rotation is "fragile"

But calling it “horrible” is an overstatement, IMO. I don’t think that Duchscherer is a legit number one YET, but he’s the best we have. Although he looks like he may miss some time at the beginning of the season.

I don’t like spending money on bullpen arms, but I’m figuring that Beane knew that Mazzaro and Anderson and Cahill and Simmons might all be needed at some point during the year. Obviously, they’re young and inexperienced, so if they’re going to start at all, they probably won’t be going deep in games. Five innings and they’re out, give the ball to a fantastic bullpen.

So I think the A’s rotation has the capability to do this…. A healthy Duke could be a number one, Gallagher and Eveland could both be legit twos this year, and Braden could pitch as well as a three. After that, it’s a crap shoot.

However, if Duke isn’t healthy, and Gallagher, Eveland and Gio can’t throw strikes, we’re pretty much screwed. I think we’ll be better than a lot of people think, though.

by NateHST on Mar 4, 2009 9:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Agree... and then a lot of disagree

A healthy Duke could be a #1. Yes.

Gallagher can only be a #2-caliber pitcher this year if he knocks about 1.0 BB/9 off his walk-rate.

Eveland doesn’t even sniff #2-caliber status in his wildest wet dreams… Eveland is like a slightly better version of Mark Redman, if Mark Redman ate Oreo Cookies and bacon non-stop for a year; he doesn’t strike nearly enough people out to be a dominant pitcher; I see Eveland as, at best, a #4-caliber pitcher, who could have some flashes of brilliance (a la Cory Lidle), but will mostly be consistently mediocre.

Braden, I like, but I’m not sure I’d throw him as high as a #3-caliber pitcher. He seems more likely to be a solid #4-caliber pitcher than Eveland (because he knows how to throw strikes consistently), but like Eveland, he lacks the dominance to be a top-of-the-rotation type guy.

I’d say what we really have is a solid #2 (Duke), a potential #2/#3 (Gallagher), a solid #4 (Braden), a potential #3/disaster (Gio), and two solid #5s (Eveland and Outman). Not great, but hopefully good enough to get us to a point where we’re comfortable calling up Simmons, then Mazzaro, then Cahill, then Anderson…

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 5, 2009 12:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Why are people so (*^&ing down on Gio?

40 crap innings at the end of a long season in the majors doesn’t erase the fact that the guy fricking led the minor leagues in strikeouts at age 21 in 2007. His curveball is probably the best pitch in the system.

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 5, 2009 12:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

He’s without a doubt the A’s third best pitching prospect.

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

by vignette17 on Mar 5, 2009 2:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not "down" on Gio...

… however, I do question his ability to “take the next step” in 2009.

Yes, Gio has an outstanding curveball. I agree.
Yes, Gio has put up great strikeout numbers at all minor league levels: 2006 (9.7 K/9 over 155 IP in AA); 2007 (11.1 K/9 over 150 IP in AA); 2008 (9.4 K/9 in 123 IP in AAA and 9.0 K/9 in 34 IP in MLB). He’s clearly got the stuff to fool all levels of hitters.

But, his control is not yet there. In 2006, he put up a 4.7 BB/9. In 2007, repeating at AA, he lowered his BB/9 to 3.4 BB/9. That’s good progress, but it took him a while to get comfortable at that level. In 2008, we bumped him up to AAA and his BB/9 increased to 4.5 BB/9, and then, in his admittedly short MLB stint, his BB/9 rocketed up to 6.6 BB/9.

Trust me, I’m hopeful that Gio can grow quickly at the MLB level and bring down his BB/9. But, my belief is that Gio will suffer from bouts of inconsistency until he finds his comfort zone at the MLB level. I don’t see that happening early THIS year, which is all I was talking about when I graded him out as a potential #3/disaster… Long-term, I see his upside as a #1/#2; this year, I wouldn’t put him in that class.

I actually see a lot of comparison between Gio Gonzalez and Oliver Perez. Both called up at a young age. Both totally dominant at every level. Both will succeed or fail based on BB/9. Oliver Perez’s best seasons (2004 and 2007) have been those in which he’s been able to keep his BB/9 under 4.0. When his BB/9 goes over 4.1, his lack of control counteracts his dominance. I think we’ll see the same pattern with Gio; if he can keep the dominance while gaining control, he’s a bona fide #1/#2. If not, he’s not a middle-of-the-rotation roll of the dice.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 5, 2009 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You just described the rest of the rotation too

Most of the rotation right now could be #2 starters if things roll great and could be #5 starters if they don’t.

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 5, 2009 5:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm predicting that Cahill will have the most success out of all

the SMAC Daddy’s.

Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox

by mrod on Mar 5, 2009 8:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

… at least I described Gallagher and Gio. Braden, Outman, and Eveland don’t have the stuff to be #2 starters (on a competitive team) even if their walk rates were down in the 3.0-4.0 BB/9 range (Braden’s walk rate is already down there, and I wouldn’t call him a legit #2 starter).

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 6, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Admittedly our rotation is weak this year

But the way you put it, it honestly seems ok. If our offense holds up its end of the bargain as well as our defense, then a 2/2/4/4/5 ain’t that shabby.

rebuildingseason.blogspot.com

by Rebuilding Season on Mar 5, 2009 2:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think that's right...

Two #2s, two #4s, and a #5 may actually be enough to get it done in the AL West this year (with the A’s offensive upgrades, as well as their always stout defense and dominant pen).

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 5, 2009 2:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll disagree with you on Eveland

I think his stuff is definitely there. His pitches move a lot. He hasn’t been dominant because he has had control issues. I think if he can harness his stuff, just like Gonzalez, then he could be a very good pitcher.

by NateHST on Mar 5, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd agree with that... (other than him being a "very good" pitcher)

Eveland hasn’t been as dominant as Gio (Eveland has a 9.0 K/9 in 411 career minor league innings and a 6.8 K/9 in 232 career major league innings; whereas, Gio has a 10.5 K/9 in 583 career minor league innings and a 9.0 K/9 in 34 career major league innings), but I do agree that IF Eveland can harness his control, he could be a GOOD major league pitcher.

Problem is, so far, he hasn’t been able to harness that control in 232 IP at the MLB level (4.5 BB/9). If his MLB K/9 (6.8) is an accurate representation of his dominance, I think he needs to bring that BB/9 down to the 3.5-4.0 level to be a reliable middle- to -back-of-the-rotation starter. At its current level (4.5), he’s nothing more than a decent #5 starter.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 5, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Slight revision

If Eveland can bring his BB/9 to the 3.5-4.0 level, I think he’s a reliable middle-of-the-rotation guy (#3/#4), not a back-of-the-rotation guy; if he can’t bring his BB/9 down to that level, I see him as a decent back-of-the-rotation guy, but someone who’s ready to be replaced as soon as Cahill, Anderson, or Mazzaro is ready for MLB.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 5, 2009 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Eveland's good control in the minors suggests that he is at least physically capable of reducing his walks significantly

If he can carry through whatever mechanical adjustment he made in AAA toward the end of last season, he should be fine. His pitch command looked much sharper after the brief AAA stint.

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 5, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

He is capable of bringing the walks down, now he just has to do it. Whether it’s a mechanical thing, or whether he just needs to gain confidence in his stuff, he needs to bring that BB/9-rate down to be a really effective middle-of-the-rotation starter.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to expect that amount of exactness which the nature of the particular subject admits." - The Not Big Aristotle

by Uncle Charlie on Mar 5, 2009 3:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That, and he needs to stop sweating so much!

Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox

by mrod on Mar 5, 2009 8:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Why not look at...

Pedro Martinez? Two very good innings w/the D.R. team yesterday. That may not be enough to say LETS SIGN HIM but It is a risk that may be worth it. There is a need for an experienced starter on the current staff.

Just a thought after I heard Buck Martinez talk about him this morning on XM radio since he seen him pitch in yesterdays game.

Billy Beane plays with the A's like Legos.

by OakFaninFL on Mar 5, 2009 8:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

He's openly said that he doesn't want to pitch in the AL.

"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 5, 2009 8:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Pitching.

I still think that we need a veteran to mentor the young staff. I don’t know if Giambi’s tips will cut it or not, though I heard he was quick to calm GGon.

by fruitattack on Mar 5, 2009 9:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs