Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Notre Dame's Turnaround: How Have The Irish Done It?

One last review of the A's 2008-2009 offseason moves

 

Well, you can’t say the offseason was boring this time around.

 

Good, bad or otherwise Billy Beane worked the winter of 2008-2009 differently from any other year he’s been the A’s GM. I mean, the guy actually went out and signed multiple free agents (Giambi, Garciaparra, Cabrera and Springer) while striking out on name players like Rafael Furcal and Randy Johnson! Oh yeah, Beane also went out and traded for one of the best hitters in baseball in Matt Holliday. Change may be the only constant in Oakland but this last winter was a storm of a different magnitude. There has been a lot of discussion on AN as to whether the moves Beane made were wise; in deed, some have argued that the acquisition of Matt Holliday was and is in direct opposition to the long term strength of the franchise.

 

Now that the offseason is all but over I wanted to look at where this team is and how we got here. I think a lot of the confusion over the direction Beane is taking the A’s stems from the fact that out beloved/embattled GM is working on (at best) Plan C. It’s really hard to have continuity when you have so many changes forced upon you. Sometimes no matter how good you are you end up having to muddle through.

 

Star-divide

 

Plan A was a doozy. Beane realized he had a unique opportunity presenting itself in 2009. The minor league system was brimming with talent that would (barring disaster) be ready to add significant talent to the Oakland roster no later than Opening Day, 2010. He had pared his 2009 payroll down to just over $40 million and ownership had said they’d be willing to kick in a sizeable boost to that figure. The Rockies were shopping Matt Holiday in the final year of his contract and there were several free agents-to-be who could be expected to look for short term deals that would help the A’s win in 2009 without blocking any of the upcoming talent in 2010.

 

Things were looking good early. The Rockies’ asking price for Holliday (Smith, Street and C. Gonzalez) was one Beane could afford to part with. The A’s preferred Ryan Sweeney in CF, Devine and Ziegler had already taken over the Closer’s job from Street and SP pitching was the strength of the Oakland farm system. Plus, while many baseball observers continued to predict that Randy Johnson was going to re-sign with the D’backs before free agency began I’m going to give Beane credit for being a baseball insider, I’m guessing he thought there was good chance that Arizona would have trouble finding the cash to keep the eventual HOF pitcher and the Big Unit would be looking for one last stop to reach 300 wins before retirement. Russ Springer, a bullpen arm the A’s have said they’ve liked for a few years now, was also planning on spending one last year in the sun. He could be signed to fill the middle relief slot that Street’s departure would create. Even better, the prodigal son himself, Jason Giambi, was almost certain to have his option year bought out by the Yankees and a reunion seemed highly possible.

 

The great thing about Plan A was the bulk of the cost would be limited to one year, 2009. The only targeted player that was certain to get a multi-year deal was Rafael Furcal. If the A’s were going to get Furcal to be their new SS they were going to have to give him a minimum 3 year guarantee. (Keep in mind; I’m still talking about pre-FA planning at this point.) That wouldn’t be much of a problem for the A’s (assuming his medical reports checked out… if they didn’t then Oakland wouldn’t have made an offer!) because they didn’t have a SS in the pipeline that was expected to be big league ready for another 2-3 years. Yes, the A’s would still be on the hook for Crosby’s $5.25 million 2009 salary but Beane had managed to trade both Jason Kendall and Mark Kotsay, plus oodles of cash, and gotten a couple decent bullpen arms in return. Surely he could manage another such trick with Crosby.

 

Beware of calling any man Shirley.

 

Plan A was centered on a trade for Holliday and pursuing Randy Johnson, Russ Springer, Jason Giambi and Rafael Furcal via free agency. Johnson and Springer would replace (and likely improve the quality of) the innings pitched by Smith and Street in 2008. Holliday, Giambi and Furcal would represent a massive upgrade over the wretched pile of poo that was the 2008 line-up for the Oakland A’s. Why do I think this course of action was Beane’s original vision? For one thing, it makes a lot of sense! For another, the total cost for such a roster make-over would have been approximately $75 million. That’s $4 million less than the A’s paid in big league salary in 2007. Thus there is precedent for an anxious ownership to spend the required cost in an attempt to win now.

 

No plan survives contact with the enemy, or in this case, the start of free agency. The economy went downhill fast and the free agent market went wonky as well. The superstars like Sabs and Tex were going to get their money, the question was would Furcal be treated the same? He was the premier free agent SS on the market but his 2007 back injury cast a large cloud of doubt. How much money would his injury history cost Furcal? This is where Beane misjudged the market. The Dodgers offered Furcal more money annually over 3 years (vs. the A’s eventual 4 year offer) with an option year that would push the total potential payout $4 million higher than anything the A’s offered. I’m not interested in re-hashing the old arguments as to whether or not Beane was right when he offered what he did to Furcal, just pointing out that the team that Furcal never wanted to leave made him an offer that could potentially pay him more money than he’d have made signing with the A’s.

 

After Furcal signed with the Dodgers, Randy Johnson decided he didn’t want to leave the NL and signed with the Giants. Would the A’s have had a better chance at convincing Johnson to come back and finish his career in the AL if they had managed to sign Furcal? Maybe, his addition certainly wouldn’t have hurt to sales pitch to Johnson. Holliday’s already in the fold and talks are progressing with Giambi but it’s fairly obvious that Plan A is well and truly frakked.

 

Plan B was only a slight variation on Plan A. Giambi signs to a 1 year deal plus team option and when Andrew Brown gets hurt Beane quickly went out and traded two guys destined for careers in the minors for Michael Wuertz. Springer gets signed and Beane goes shopping for another DiNardo or Saaloos, finding Edgar Gonzalez willing to sign a minor league deal. Beane hopes that the continually plunging economy will drive down Orlando Cabrera’s asking price because Wolff has had to reduce the funds available to the payroll and Bobby Crosby still sucks. A rotation of Duke, Gallagher, Eveland, plus 2 of Outman, Gio Gonzalez, Edgar Gonzalez or Braden would still be solid. Well, solid enough. Beane still has some extra cash so he resolves to strengthen his bench and maybe add another LHRP.

 

Here’s where I get a little confused. Cabrera’s price tag drops to the point where the A’s can have them selves a new SS. This could be a continuation of Plan B; then again, getting a new starter could merit an official Plan C rating. Whatever you want to call it (and I admit it’s a semantical issue but ‘tis one that’s bugging me) the realization that Duke and Devine are having elbow problems and that Gallagher and Gio Gonzalez seem to be regressing is a huge blow to the organization and most certainly kicks off the next level of planning, be it Plan C or Plan D. Whatever you want to label it, we’re essentially talking about the addition of Anderson and Cahill to the rotation.

 

There have been some who have argued since the start of Spring Training that Anderson and/or Cahill should be considered for the A’s 2009 Opening Day roster. Before anyone pats themselves on the back I think we should all acknowledge that no one wanted to see Cahill and Anderson in Oakland’s rotation at the expense of Duke and Gallagher. This borders on disaster for the A’s. Look, it’s not a question of talent… even people who have a vested interest in not liking the A’s admit that Cahill and Anderson are talented pitching prospects… it’s about their readiness to take on big league hitters every 5 days. Because with Duke out for a couple months and Gallagher pitching his way into the bullpen the A’s need Anderson and Cahill to do more than survive in the Show, they need dominance. I’m not sure they’re ready (although Anderson’s polish has surely shown in his last 2 ST starts). It’s harsh to compare MAC to the Big 3, but if you’re an A’s fan under 40 years old what else are you going to do?

 

Mulder, Hudson and Zito all pitched for Division 1 college programs. Hudson’s IP totals were 146.2 in ’97 (his draft year, College IP included) 172.1 in ’98 and 2003.1 in ’99 (including 136.1 IP for Oakland). Hudson was a few days short of his 24th birthday and had logged a total of 152.2 IP in AA and another 49 IP in AAA before making his big league debut in route to throwing 203.1 IP in ’99. Zito pitched 182 innings the year he was drafted, including 22.0 IP in AA and another 6 IP in AAA. He threw another 101.1 IP in AAA during the 2000 season before making his big league debut, ending up with 194.1 IP for the year. Mulder pitched 100 innings his draft year (98) then 128.2 IP in AAA in ’99. He made 1 start at AAA in 2000 before making the Show and ended up throwing 162.1 IP for the year.

 

Cahill and Anderson aren’t as far along on the path as the Big 3 were. They just aren’t. Cahill pitched a total of 132.1 innings last year, 37 IP at AA and another 8 IP in the Olympics. Anderson actually pitched fewer innings than Cahill, logging 129.2 total. That includes 31 IP at AA, 12.2 at the Olympics and 12 during the AAA playoffs. Most teams don’t like to bump a pitcher’s workload by more than 20% a year, which sets the recommended ceiling for both pitchers at around 160 IP for the season. That coupled with their relative lack of experience above High-A sticks a big warning flag over their use. I’m not saying they’re doomed, just that the A’s have to be extra special careful with their use… up to and including shutting them down in the middle of a pennant race once they hit a pre-determined inning limit.

 

So what does all this mean? Well, for one thing it means the A’s are nowhere near the starting position they hoped to be when the offseason began. They have been forced to make compromise after compromise to get to the starting line, and I think it’s fair to ask (especially when you look at the pitching staff) if maybe the season itself has already been compromised. I hope that I’ve shown that while Holliday trade makes little if any sense when judged against the end product, when you consider it as part of the original Plan A it actually makes a lot of sense. The price to acquire Holliday would have only gone up if Beane hadn’t said yes when he did. It sucks that the A’s weren’t able to land Furcal and/or Johnson to complete Plan A but that’s the way things go sometimes. Certain events can’t be predicted with absolute clarity.

 

Which is why this piece is an offseason review and not a 2009 preview.

 

Personally I think there’s some cause for optimism but a lot of things have to break right for the A’s. I think Oakland has a puncher’s chance in the weakened AL West, but things have deteriorated so much for both California teams that Seattle and Texas have legit shots as well. Texas in particular has some young arms on the verge of reaching the big leagues, that coupled with a farm system at least (if not more so) as deep as Oakland’s could position them to make a move at the All-Star break and go for the pennant. Whoever gets the better breaks is going to win the AL West, and the A’s are already starting in the hole.

 

Comment 72 comments  |  3 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Interesting and very thorough

Three additions or comments:

1) The economy changed pretty dramatically over the course of the off-season. While Beane took some bows for his prescience in having some money stockpiled, I also think Wolff and Fisher may— quite justiifably given the attendance forecast— have pulled the reins in a bit. “Win now… but do it as cheaply as you can”. Same as it ever was around here;

2. I don’t think the Randy Johnson thing was as critical as you do. Beane has assiduously avoided pitchers in the winter of their careers— I don’t think he was ever a big part of the planning;

3. I would argue that the injuries or regression you cite as a potential disaster were hardly a shock to Beane. Duchscherer could never have been projected beyond 20 or starts and maybe 150 innings— max. The fact that two of the youngest prospects outperformed two of the next youngest rotation candidates is part of the baseball carousel. Your warnings about innings pitched are duly noted— but I don’t think the A’s or Beane would have been so bullish about these guys this spring without already determining that they might be able to go deeper in terms of IP this year than you think. Anderson in particular.

But this is the most interesting off-season and anticipated regular season in quite some time— none of us really know how they will do— anything between 75 and 90 wins seems very possible.

by jasonthea on Apr 5, 2009 6:39 AM PDT reply actions  

I agree about RJ. If he were so critical, they'd have found some other veteran starter. They couldn't

have been that confident that they’d be able to woo him.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Johnson

The interest in Johnson came from the team, not me. And while I agree with you that Beane has tended to stay away from fading vets, let’s be honest, Randy Johnson isn’t you’re typical vet. He’s a lock for the HOF and he’s a media spectacle as he chases after his 300th win. He wants to play for one more year, making him highly attractive to an team interested in a one year stop-gap between their current roster and the new crop. And in terms of performance, the 194 IP he threw last year (I’m including 10 innings in the minors) were more than anyone on the current roster tossed. He K’d 8.5 per 9 last year and had a near 4:1 K:B ratio. I don’t think the man is done just yet.

As for the young’uns, Anderson has indeed pitched well, especially over his last couple starts. You cannot say the same about Cahill. Trevor Cahill is in Oakland because virtually everyone on the depth chart ahead of him fell apart, not because he pitched amazing.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

great post grover...

also, in regards to Randy Johnson:

He interviewed about a month ago on KNBR and said the main reason he signed with the Giants ( and he did confirm that the A’s were indeed one the teams he was strongly considering ) is because “the Giants were the most aggressive in gaining my services” and he was really impressed at “how the organization was structured and handled from ownership to management.” Also, the NL factor and the money was pretty decent.

Not to say that Billy didn’t give it a real shot but I think ultimately RJ was gonna have to be bowled over by an A’s offer and I just can’t see Beane going overboard for a 1 year deal on any pitcher. Just my two cents…

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

by mrod on Apr 5, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Before anyone pats themselves on the back I think we should all acknowledge that no one wanted to see Cahill and Anderson in Oakland’s rotation at the expense of Duke and Gallagher.

thank you. well put.

Save Rajai Davis

by oakinboston on Apr 5, 2009 8:02 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

for one thing...

there were some of us that weren’t all that confident Duke would be in the rotation. Sure, we hoped, but… when it became apparent that he wouldn’t be, we wanted one of Anderson or Cahill to take his place (as opposed to EGon or Williams). And, Outman in the rotation at the expense of Gallagher?

Those of us who pushed for Anderson and Cahill only wanted to see the 5 best (available) pitchers start the season in the rotation. I fairly confident that Gallagher will be in the starting 5 in short order, but I’m satisfied with what Billy’s put together.

Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...

by FoolshGame22 on Apr 5, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

oops...

should be… “And, isn’t Outman in the rotation….”

Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...

by FoolshGame22 on Apr 5, 2009 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

I thought Duke would be there in April

Not for a full season, but it’s bad timing that he didn’t start out in the rotation while Cahill took a shot at dominating 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

by Nico on Apr 5, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wasn't counting you among the two of us who thought Duke...

might not be in the rotation in April. LOL

And, honestly, I was certainly hoping he would be. And, if Duke were healthy and throwing well, I, too, would like to see Cahill in AAA. Well, honestly, if Gallagher is going to start in the pen, I’d prefer Cahill start over Outman in the rotation. So, it would have ended the same for me, even had Duke been healthy.

Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...

by FoolshGame22 on Apr 5, 2009 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Gallagher is out of the rotation because his mechanics are out of whack and he pitched poorly.

Anderson has made a case for his place in the rotation based on his last couple starts in ST. Cahill has been just the opposite. He may be 1 of the 5 best options but that’s only because everyone is either hurt or really, really sucked. That doesn’t mean that Cahill is actually a good option at this time.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is Outman a better option than Cahill?

Time will tell. Not much time, I expect.

Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...

by FoolshGame22 on Apr 5, 2009 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

It's not a question of talent, it's about readiness

I think Outman is more ready to face big league hitters than Cahill is. Michael Ynoa might be the most talented pitching prospect in the past decade but no way in Hell is he ready to face big league hitters.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm betting Cahill has a better April VORP than Outman.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

+1

Swisher on Ellis - "every day he does something that makes me say, 'Well, I'll be damned, look at that!'"

by Mantecan As Fan on Apr 5, 2009 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Excellent writeup

The only thing I’d add at the end is that the Angels are also starting in a big hole. The A’s should be fine until Lackey, Escobar, Santana return, which at least gives them time to get better, develop, etc. Then…eek.

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 5, 2009 8:11 AM PDT reply actions  

now, I'm no doctor

but it’s not a great stretch of the imagination to think that one of the three Angels pitchers won’t make a full and timely recovery this season. Perhaps that comes from watching A’s players come back, get hurt again, have more surgery, and so on, but all three of them return and pitch up to their previous talent levels? Seems like there’s a decent chance that at least one of them won’t.

Obviously I’d never wish a player injured.

It does stand to be a fascinating season, though – even leaving aside how the A’s actually perform on the field, will there be a coda to plan E(?) where Beane makes a midseason move to either bolster the rotation, or trade away a piece for next year (I’m looking at you, Mr Holiday)?

And will we see Cousin Vinny Mazzaro up to take up the slack if Cahill and Anderson tire?

Oh, and in an unrelated note, John Carew, I could kiss you

what have i got myself into this time... http://damiansthirtyyearchallenge.blogspot.com/

by alea iacta est on Apr 5, 2009 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

I totally agree - probably one of the three will have a setback

Unfortunately, two of three may return and leave the Angels a cut above the A’s unless the young ’uns are collectively above average from June-Sept.

I’ve never had a problem with Anderson making the rotation. Chronological age and minor league experience be damned, the guy is ready. He throws strikes, he knows how to pitch, and he has the stuff to get it done. Cahill is the one I’m worried about, simply because he doesn’t have that kind of command. But he likely only made it thanks to Duke’s injury. It’s too bad Duke’s (first) annual 6-week vacation didn’t occur mid-season instead of at the outset.

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 5, 2009 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

Cahill v. Anderson

Why do you think Cahill is the #2 Starter? Wouldn’t it be much better with Braden, Anderson, Cahill, Eveland, Outman? Do the A’s think higher of Cahill?

by Colorado Fan on Apr 5, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think he's the #2 starter because the A's want to split up the innings eaters -- Braden and

Eveland, and to get him starts against the Angels, Mariners and Blue Jays rather than the Red Sox and Yankees.

Right now the Red Sox get Eveland, Anderson and Outman, and the Yankees get Anderson, Outman and Braden.

Cahill does get Tampa Bay and Texas after that, but hopefully he’ll have his feet somewhat wet by then. He also gets an extra day of rest before each of those games.

You do want lefties against the Yankees with A-Rod out.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think at the outset the rotation is essentially, from 1-5,

Braden, Eveland, Anderson, Cahill, Outman.

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

by Nico on Apr 5, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is that because he's scored one and laid one on against Utd?

I wish nobody could win the title, all of the contenders are incredibly hard to root for.

by OldhamA on Apr 5, 2009 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

Like pulling for the Yankees or Red Sox.

The Wife: "I took one for the team and got you Extra Innings for your birthday."

by mmmike on Apr 5, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

Man U won anyway though.

I actually like all the contenders — except Chelsea, and that’s only because of their soap opera.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions  

yeah, i am now sad

i had to leave the game at half time to go play in our league – another win! we’re now top!

what have i got myself into this time... http://damiansthirtyyearchallenge.blogspot.com/

by alea iacta est on Apr 5, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yay!

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you're not brought up to support one of the four (though there's soon

to be six with Villa and City both having huge financial backing) you naturally despise them because there’s absolutely no way of competing with them – it’s not a level playing field and the FA has no intention of making it so.

by OldhamA on Apr 5, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldn't give up hope so fast. Blackburn had good teams pretty recently.

Leeds, Nottingham Forest, Newcastle, Spurs, Everton — they’ve all had their moments.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

no argument so far!

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 5, 2009 8:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

I didn't think I had posted that yet but...

What I was going to say is that…I have been waiting for you to write an article like this one. What took you so long?
If I hadn’t been here following this saga this would have been perfect to catch me up on the pre-season moves and thinking. I am going to send the link to this to all of my baseball friends in email. I know it’ll be read.

by IM4Oakgal on Apr 5, 2009 8:50 AM PDT reply actions  

Drinking took up a lot of my time

Honestly, I just had a lot of stuff going on and AN went psycho for a while and I needed a bit of a break.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

It did? I must have missed that

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 5, 2009 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

I acquired the togos party with a sandwich pick

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 5, 2009 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

Would you like that for here or togo?

"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."

by iglew on Apr 5, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

It wasn't AN

It was just Nico.
But I am glad you’re back … I like your everyman kind of way of writing and explaining things. It’s very readable.

by IM4Oakgal on Apr 5, 2009 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thank you

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ah man

Screw nostalgia. All this “review” stuff is so overrated.

But seriously, grover; exceptional reading as always (and to echo IM4Oakgal, easy on the eyes…er, brain).

Whatever your reasons not to make your presence felt of late, it’s nice to see you can still bring it- and with authority.

Stay awhile; AN can use a sense of normalcy. And I think we can agree that if nothing else, we are in for an interesting and entertaining season.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Apr 5, 2009 9:12 AM PDT reply actions  

2010

Can it be argued that the additions of Holliday, Giambi, Springer, and Cabrera… Cahill and Anderson in the 2009 Rotation. Bailey in the bullpen… speeds up the Re-Building process and makes the A’s a Legitimate Contender in 2010? Without these addditions, the 2010 roster is filled with rookies and 1st year starters who don’t know what it’s like to start a season w/ High Expectations (2009)… Now, 2010 will come w/ higher expectations than 2009.

2010:

1B: Barton, Doolittle, Carter
2B: Ellis, Cardenas
SS: Holliday Trade If Out of Contention in July 2009
3B: Chavez
LF: Cunningham, Cust
CF: Sweeney
RF: Buck
DH: Cust, Giambi (?)

Rotation: Cahill, Anderson, 3 of Mazzaro/Gallagher/Eveland/Braden/Simmons

I’m a believer that veterans can teach guys the right way to do things – So why not bring in guys like Holliday, Giambi, Cabrera, Springer, etc… – to show the young guys what being a Big Leaguer is all about. It was pretty obvious that the 2008 team had ZERO leadership.

At this point, I don’t really care if the A’s win the AL West or not. Of course i want them too, but I’d be much happier if I saw a couple of the young guys Step-Their-Game-Up. Buck, Sweeney, Cunningham and Barton are going to benefit the most from Holliday & Giambi. 2 of those guys need to start showing signs of wanting to Lead this team going forward.

(btw: Well Done. You know the season has begun after reading a Solid grover front page FanPost)

by Colorado Fan on Apr 5, 2009 9:30 AM PDT reply actions  

good point

but I think that if any combination of Giambi, Cust, or Buck get hurt Barton will be the first one called up.

More Rajai Davis & less mount Davis

by Athletics fan and runner on Apr 5, 2009 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

the play that Barton made to end the game on Friday was very impressive

As much as I don’t want to see anyone hurt, I am looking forward to watching him in the Majors this season. Fingers crossed for a bounce back!

At the very least, the A’s need him to raise his value so if they trade him to make room for Carter or The Good Doctor, they can get more for him than a bag of beans.

what have i got myself into this time... http://damiansthirtyyearchallenge.blogspot.com/

by alea iacta est on Apr 5, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wonder if they've got an eye on RF for Doolittle.

If both Barton and Doolittle pan out I’d like to keep them, assuming we continue to go over slot in the draft and bring in talent that way.

by OldhamA on Apr 5, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'd like to see them try Doolittle in RF in AA, and then AAA when Cunningham comes up

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

According to Scout

They list Doolittle as an OFer in Sacramento.

"Their Triple-A rotation, led by Trevor Cahill and Brett Anderson, could be better than some big-league rotations; Michael Ynoa is the best Latin American prospect of the decade; 2008 draftees Jemile Weeks and Rashun Dixon bring much-needed tools to an advanced group of hitters." - BaseballProspectus.com

by Syphon on Apr 5, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Makes sense with Barton at 1B

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 5, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

He played a lot of RF in the AFL

So makes sense.

"Their Triple-A rotation, led by Trevor Cahill and Brett Anderson, could be better than some big-league rotations; Michael Ynoa is the best Latin American prospect of the decade; 2008 draftees Jemile Weeks and Rashun Dixon bring much-needed tools to an advanced group of hitters." - BaseballProspectus.com

by Syphon on Apr 5, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

No, but he really needs to work on getting his mechanics back to what they were.

Whether he was injured or just trying to do too much last year his swing looked out of whack. I’d like to see him hit in AAA before being given another shot at the majors – let him face competent pitching without the pressure and see if he can re-find that swing.

by OldhamA on Apr 5, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thanks for the compliment, btw

I think it’s safe to say that the mentoring aspect can be covered by the vets in place but in terms of performance, Furcal+Johnson tops Cabrera+Wuertz.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well put

Basically if the A’s can replace Holliday with someone very good, the 2010 team looks strong with 2nd year pitchers who have already gone through their bumps and bruises.

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 5, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm thinking Magglio or Berkman

Pesky NTC!

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Grover, where did the $75M figure come from?

If you’re referring to the October 2008 economy, Furcal might have been a 4/$52M guy and RJ might stay with the Diamondbacks. If you’re referring to the December 2008 economy, the budget’s closer to $60M.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 10:19 AM PDT reply actions  

Money

Glad you asked the question.

The current payroll stands at approximately $61 million. We know the A’s had roughly another $2 million they tried to tempt Biemel with. (Pardon me if I didn’t spell his name right, he didn’t sign with Oakland therefore I don’t care enough to look it up.)

The $75 million mark came from the following:

$55 million for the roster sans Cabrera, Wuertz and Garciaparra.

Then round numbers $10 million a pop (actual 2009 contracts in pareenthesis) for Furcal (3/$30 + 1/$12) and Johnson ($8 million). There was probably a little more play in Beane’s original budget as necessary, perhaps up to $5 million to cover any addition cost in the contracts towards Furcal, Giambi or Springer.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

If that's all Beane budgeted for Furcal and Randy in October, he wasn't being realistic.

For that matter Giambi probably would have gotten $8M-$10M at that point.

You’re basically saying Beane screwed up his Plan A by bad budgeting. He was expecting to pay December prices with an October budget.

It may have been Wolff’s fault for underestimating the impact of the economic downturn on the A’s budget or both their faults for poor communications.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

No, I'm saying what I said

Remember, Beane was epecting the market to be slower than the norm. Once we saw how the FA market opened I figured Furcal could be had for $11 million annual. Johnson and Giambi were already seeing bonus money/buy-outs from their previous employers, Johnson was looking at $10 million tops IMO and Giambi was caught in an obvious numbers crunch as a DH. Even if we agreed that Giambi would get the low-end of your suggested retail price ($8 million) the A’s would still be under $80 million in salary.

So maybe in your scenario the A’s don’t trade for Wuertz, of course if the market was moving faster than it did perhaps Beane is able to move Crosby and free up a little cash as well.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Apr 5, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

That's some fancy footwork you're describing.

Would have been impressive to see though.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whatever happened to Fautino de los Santos?

It’s like he’s completely disappeared from the conversation.

I remember he got hurt, but that was a long time ago, and he must be coming back eventually, right?

"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers."

by iglew on Apr 5, 2009 11:35 AM PDT reply actions  

He's probably out of the 2010 conversation thanks to the TJ surgery

2011, though, he could be a factor if all goes well.

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 5, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

2011 would be awesome....even as a reliever.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think we tend to overlook Tex and Sea

but i also think we should have gotten a veteran SP knowing about dukes injuries.

If you had a lineup of 9 Jack Custs who hit(Cust career average) .239 AVG, .382 OBP, and .475 SLG, then your team would score 6.12 runs per game-totalling to 991runs a season.The 08 rangers lead the majors in runs score with 901.

by 9Custs on Apr 5, 2009 12:16 PM PDT reply actions  

Everyone will stay in contention for a while,

due to the lousitude of the division, but I think ultimately the Rangers’ pitching and the Mariners’ hitting will signal doom for each.

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 5, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

If the Rangers stick around they could be dangerous in the second half.

They could conceivably get Feliz and Holland into the rotation, and Borbon for CF defense. They could also get Sheets and/or trade for a veteran starter — like Oswalt, Bedard, Young, Guthrie, Halladay, etc.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

In theory, yes. In practice,

the Rangers wilt in the Summer heat. They should have seen the window of opportunity for 2009 and traded some of their deep farm system for a legitimate #2 starter. As is, they just look like the Rangers to me – Millwood and Padilla masquerading as front end starters and a bunch of “meh” behind 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

by Nico on Apr 5, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

They are in position to contend according to projections

So it wouldnt have been wise IMO to trade for an SP this season.

I miss Chad God

by ChadGod on Apr 5, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

{Insert non-funny, AN-banned, bestiality joke here}

"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 Apr 5, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm thinking this race might be decided by who brings in the biggest guns during the season

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Apr 5, 2009 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Then I'm gonna 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

by Nico on Apr 5, 2009 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

A free agent you left out on your list that missed out on......

Garret Anderson, this guy is a player and we totally blew it when we didn’t sign him.

LOL….sorry Grover I couldn’t help myself…I’m just messing with ya.

by bdemartin on Apr 6, 2009 7:36 AM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Aperture_logo_small
Community Prospect List #4
Img_2672_small
Long-Term Outlook

Recent FanPosts

Fubarcloud_small
Wolf being told to spend money
Small
The wRC+ Challenge
Pumpkin_small
Maybe this is a stupid stats question
Small
A's reportedly sign Cespedes
Unknown_small
Is It Really Worth It: Three Veterans Who May Be Playing Oakland Next Year, But Shouldn't Be
Small
Manny's Contract
Small
fantasy baseball league for A's fans!
Small
NYY Proposal
Small
Roy Oswalt = opportunity

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Front Page Writers

Maya_papi_small Tyler Bleszinski

08-_the_author_small 67MARQUEZ

Josefav2_small danmerqury

Baseball_small baseballgirl

Poochini-butt_in_box_2_small Nico

Img_0653_small dwishinsky

Front Page Writers

Smiley_face_small gigglingone

Venasfans_small OaklandSi

60-minutes-clock_small cuppingmaster

Patpicturebucky2_small YonYonson

Img_3830_small David Fung

Moderators

Photofunia-5c770b_small coffee roaster

Denver_small Colorado Fan

Ls_logo100_small LoneStranger

Thumbs_up_small LongTimeFan

Marty_profile_in_green_small mrod

Img_1877_small Billy Frijoles

Babycomputergeek_small paris7

Img_0115_small Tutu-late