Mortgaging the Future to Pay for the Past: Was It Worth It?
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 6:00 AM PDT
217 comments
From Blez's February 2006 interview with John Sickels:
Blez: What do you think of the A's losing Ethier? Is that one that fans will regret down the line?
Sickels: I think Ethier will be a fine player, but with guys like Putnam, Buck, Herrera, and Robnett still in the system, they had the depth available to deal Ethier. I wouldn't worry about it too much.
Opening with the caveat that it's rarely fair to judge past predictions (knowing that hindsight is 20/20), it's worth taking a look at this trade four years ago that sent the A's to the 2006 ALCS and Andre Ethier to the Dodgers.
Blez framed the question perfectly, as Ethier was not likely to be a regret in 2006. While he was starting his career for the Dodgers, we were too busy enjoying the A's first ALCS appearance in sixteen years to notice that Ethier's numbers as a rookie in 2006 bested Bradley's across the board.
It must be said that as someone who went to great lengths to travel to as many games as possible in 2006, including most of the stretch run and every home playoff game, I can't discount how perfect and exciting that season was as an A's fan, even three years removed.
I'd have a hard time trading 2006 for anything. That was a special, magical season of redemption, and the trade made sense at the time. It was a trade for a key starter for the 2006 and 2007 seasons (i.e. more than a mere rental); a good baseball player whose value was down because of on-and-off the field issues and personality conflicts.
Although it was a risk, I doubt the A's expected things to go as wrong with Bradley as they did during the 2007 season. Bradley played a total of 19 games for the A's in 07, was rumored to be involved in some clubhouse drama and was eventually dealt to the Padres for the oft-injured Andrew Brown. I also don't think anyone in their wildest predictions could have foreseen how good Ethier would actually be, pretty much from Day 1. The A's traded from depth and strength to make the 2006 run and it worked at the time, but there is the obviously emerging question of whether they may have traded the wrong player for the wrong player.
Like any trade that involves a prospect, the trade really can't be evaluated until years down the road, and here we are. And the conclusion is just bleak: The A's would have been better off--in the long run for sure, and perhaps even in 2006--if they had just called up Ethier and let him play.
We remember Milton Bradley for all of his dramatic moments during the season and the playoffs, and it has been widely accepted that he lead the A's to their postseason berth, but the numbers simply don't bear that out. Bradley only played in 96 games in 2006, hitting .276 with 14 home runs (one very dramatic one on AN Day), 52 RBIs, an OPS of .818, just ahead of his replacements; Jay Payton .743 and Bobby Kielty .743. In fact, Milton Bradley only once in his whole career played over 130 games in a season, only once hit over 20 home runs, and only once has had over 70 RBIs.
In contrast, Andre Ethier has been an absolute stud for the Dodgers the last four years; he is also the walk-off rival of Marco Scutaro, except with the career .294/.364/.495 line instead of Marco's .266/.337.385. In the very season he was traded, Ethier played twenty more games than Milton Bradley did, batted 30 points higher, with almost as many home runs, and a 30 percent higher slugging percentage. In his rookie year!
As an A's fan, who really questions the A's scouting system (Ethier is one of the rare offensive players from the A's system to be legitimately great, since Tejada? Chavez?), these numbers were painful to look up. As much as I enjoyed 2006, I don't want to think about what Ethier has done, or what he'll continue to do in his career. And somehow, looking at his 2006 numbers, and knowing that he could have had those numbers for us, it makes it worse. It's one thing if he was in Double-A during the playoff run. Instead, he was in the league, and actually outperformed his replacement. Ouch.
While researching Ethier a bit closer, I was surprised to see just how different a player he has been since Manny Ramirez donned the Dodger blue. The stats clearly show so far that Ethier goes from a good player to an elite one with Manny's big bat behind him. His numbers before and after Manny became a Dodger on August 1, 2008 are dramatically different. From the start of the season through the end of July, he played 95 games putting up a solid but unspectacular line of 274-11-46. After Manny arrived in Hollywood, Ethier played 45 games with amazing stats of .368-9-31 - try working out that pace over a full season! This season, in the 48 games he played while Manny was suspended for snacking in the woman's supplement aisle, he checked in at a Crosby-esque.222 with 9 HR and 25 RBI. With Manny in the lineup, Ethier has been far more productive, hitting over .300 with 21 bombs and 73 RBI in less than 100 games. So Andre is no doubt a a really good player, yes, but hard to dispute that he has benefited greatly from the superstar behind him as he has put up elite All Star level numbers when Manny is in the lineup.
If it's any consolation at all, we don't have a Manny, and we haven't since 2006. That doesn't make you feel better? Me either.
Cleveland again tonight; 7:05. A's rapidly running out of starting pitchers.
0 recs |
217 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
And I'd do it again
I mean, I wish we had Ethier in the outfield now, but like you said, I wouldn’t trade in 2006 for anything.
And even without the ALCS, we had a lot of fun with Milton while he was here.
No regrets.
Ellis for President
I agree
Bradley put us on his shoulders and carried us to the ALCS in ‘06. When you’ve got a chance to make it to the World Series, you have to go for it.
It’s about one thing in this game … did you win the whole thing? Nothing else matters. Say what you will about how the Marlins do things … they’ve got two rings. Tell me we’ll suck for 10 years, but we get a title in year 11? I’ll take it. That beats “being competitive” for 20 years without winning the championship all …. day …. long.
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
I agree with your first paragraph, but not the second.
Bradley was a primary piece that pushed us over the edge. And I do agree with the part in the second paragraph about winning the “whole thing”, but that relates to the first paragraph as well.
Totally disagree about sucking for ten years then getting a ring. First off, no one can tell you that. No one can plan to make it happen just like that. “Being competitive” every year will give you a chance at that every year, and depending on whether you buy into the “post-season crapshoot” theory, the more chances you get the more likely you are to get a ring. Everybody likes to point to the Marlins as their prime example, but seriously they are an anomaly.
Note that my definition of "being competitive is 90+-win seasons and playoff appearances more often than not… not just a winning season with 85 wins.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
about the Marlins
I totally agree that the Marlins are an outlier. Making the playoffs only twice but then winning the World Series both times is crazy.
But there is a very pessimistic argument that teams with Oakland-ish payrolls might have to adopt the Marlins build-up/tear-down strategy just in order to achieve those 90+ win seasons that you need to be fairly well assured of a playoff berth.
With teams like the Red Sox combining smart player evaluation and huge budgets and most of the small market teams smartening up, it might be true that the feat accomplished by the A’s from 1999-2006 just isn’t possible anymore.
I’m not saying that I necessarily think this is the case — I think that there are still opportunities for teams that can draft really well — but it would support the idea of going all in for select seasons. Also, this would be a total drag because it will result an increasing percentage of championships going to a few dominant teams.
Times do changed, indeed.
And team-building strategies need to adapt accordingly. But, other than everybody knowing what the A’s did from 1999-2006, and the competition thus being more intense, I’m not sure I see it as being impossible. I feel that the complete tear-down was done by choice… with the specific strategy of not having to do it again for several years… rather than the alternative which would have probably involved constant heavy tweaking from year-to-year.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
Of course, I understand that the two scenarios are completely unpredictable.
Let me try and explain it this way … if there were some magical machine that let us take one or the other, I’d take two championships in the last 20 years and 90-100 loss seasons for 18, over 20 years of 90 win teams with zero championships.
IMO, I think the rings are the only thing that matters. If you don’t win it all, you’ve got nothin’ to brag about.
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
I tend to agree with you on the ring part...
…that’s why you play. But I’m not so sure I’d take so many really crappy seasons to get one every now and then.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
This will be obvious to anyone who knows me,
but I would make the other choice with your magical machine. If the machine could guarantee a winning percentage of ~55% every year for 20 years but at the cost of never winning the World Series, I’d take that.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
How the heck did Bradley put us on his shoulders and carry us to the ALCS?
He was good in the regular season, but nowhere near worthy of that comment and he was horrible in the ALDS.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Sep 18, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Maybe it's selective memory
and I don’t have the time to go back and look through the stats … what were they, by the way? It just seems to me that he was our best hitter that year. He most certainly was the emotional leader on the team.
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
I just went and looked ...
You’re right Oaktown, Bradley isn’t “worthy of that comment.” Crap, Swish hit 35 bombs that season!! I had completely forgotten that … oh well, I’m a Bradley fan, what can I say? :-)
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
I did the same thing:
Did you know that Milton only played in 96 games, and Ethier played in more?! My whole post was going to be “We never would have had 2006 without Milton…” but that’s wrong!
I put his numbers in, but after the jump:
We remember Milton Bradley for all of his dramatic moments during the season and the playoffs, and it has been widely accepted that he lead the A’s to their postseason berth, but the numbers simply don’t bear that out. Bradley only played in 96 games in 2006, hitting .276 with 14 home runs (one very dramatic one on AN Day), 52 RBIs, an OPS of .818, just ahead of his replacements; Jay Payton .743 and Bobby Kielty .743. In fact, Milton Bradley only once in his whole career played over 130 games in a season, only once hit over 20 home runs, and only once has had over 70 RBIs.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
She didn't really succeed.
My reaction reading that was: Wow, that’s a huge upgrade from 743 to 818. So no, it didn’t seem small to me at all. In fact, it’s better than I remember Milton being.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
Ah, so then I'm agreeing with you.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
Yea, I was surprised by the numbers too...
I think we all remember how great he was in the ALCS…..but he was horrible in the ALDS and just good in the regular season.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Sep 18, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Much of this Bradley/Ethier/2006 debate...
…presumes that Ethier would have been brought up and produced the same with the A’s that he did with the Dodgers, and that’s not a given.
We got Bradley specifically to insert into the line-up. If we had not gotten Bradely, it’s not inconceivable that Ethier would have remained in the minors for most of the rest of the season and/or been a 4th OF had he been called up, simply because he was young and unproven at the MLB level and the team may not have wanted to risk their post-season berth on a rookie.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
I loved getting Bradley,
However, my only issue with the trade was giving up our best prospect to get a malcontent OF, who the Dodgers couldn’t wait to get rid of. Examining it from that perspective, Billy got taken to the cleaners.. back then, Bradley wasn’t worth a high profile #1 spec.
by sf drift king on Sep 18, 2009 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Sep 18, 2009 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Before the trade
I drafted Either in 1 of my baseball leagues since he had shown that he would be a consistent 300 hitter. The power came later which happens. You must tip your cap to the dodgers for having good scouts to trade a prime player for a prospect. They took a chance and it paid off. Either did not show any 30 homerun capability while in the minors. Its no use for A’s fans to beat themselves up over a Either being traded. Think how the cardnial fans beat themselves up over the Haren trade.
It Was Dodger Amateur Scouting Director...
…Logan White who advised Ned Colletti to ask the A’s for Ethier when Beane expressed interest in acquiring Bradley. White resides in Phoenix, and he watched a lot of the games played by the Arizona Fall League team that the Dodgers sent players to in fall 2005. That year the Dodgers AFL team just happened to also be the A’s AFL team, so White saw a lot of Ethier and he liked what he saw.
by CanuckDodger on Sep 18, 2009 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions
this incident
was immortalized in a horrible Bill Plaschke column that was immortalized in a hilarious Fire Joe Morgan post: link
Plaschke...
…made it sound like the old scout persuaded Colletti to get Ethier because that made for an interesting story, but it was noted elsewhere at the time (I can’t remember where) that it was White’s opinion of Ethier that Colletti took seriously.
by CanuckDodger on Sep 18, 2009 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions
That's my ALL TIME favorite FJM...
Said Ethier: “I thought he was just some crazy old man yelling at me from the stands.”
I don’t blame you, Andre.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions
LOL
that was awesome. perfect friday afternoon reading
BK: This guy is on fire, he is really smokin'.
KenKo: Oh yeah, Bill? What's he smokin'?
you just made me miss FJM.
thanks, colin.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Did you see the new FJM's on Deadspin!
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions
It was yesterday only, wasn't it?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Oh, I love you.
I’ve hurt myself laughing.
The Twins, meanwhile, have Joe Mauer and fourteen guys who either are Nick Punto or look and play exactly like Nick Punto.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions
it only gets better....
Through Sunday’s games, Mauer leads the AL with a .366 batting average. Jeter is fourth at .332, with 17 homers, 63 RBIs and 192 hits.
This is just dropped in, to the middle of this argument, with no explanation. It’s like writing a long, long essay about how Brazil is the largest country in the world, and then casually mentioning, thirty paragraphs in, that Russia is actually way bigger.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I miss those guys SO MUCH!
Seriously, I looked forward to new FJM posts like nothing else.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Yep.
I cried a little when they went away.
Or peed. One of those.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Seriously, I learned so much from that site
And laughed all the time. The Joe chats were just comedy gold…so awesome.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions
The Joe chats were wonderful.
oh my god, I miss the snark…
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Here's more:
http://deadspin.com/5360495/what+if-the-what+if
BRONX BOMBSHELL: DEREK JETER SAYS HE USED STEROIDS
Well, what would you do if ESPN interrupted your regularly scheduled programming for that one?
Would it be enough to make you shred your season tickets, douse your baseball cards with charcoal fluid and delete America’s pastime from your Facebook friends list?
I have several questions.
1. After A-Rod, Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro, Sosa, Clemens, Giambi, Manny, Ortiz, and like 8200 others, why would one more star player make me shred my season tickets?
2. Charcoal fluid? Do you mean “lighter fluid?” “Charcoal fluid” sounds like something that you spray on something else to make it smell like charcoal. (Which I call: Axe Body Spray.) (Boom! Take that, Axe Body Spray!)
3. The phrase “…delete America’s pastime from your Facebook friends list” is the textbook definition of an adult writing about something “the kids” do when they don’t really understand what that thing is. This isn’t a question so much as an exhortation: please, people who don’t really understand the internet – stop trying to use internet lingo. If you don’t, I will text message your MySpace vlog and lol cats to the bit torrent meme!
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed. Don't look back, something may be gaining on you...
I have been entertained by your writing for some time, baseballgirl. This is another intriguing bit of speculation and recrimination. It perfectly illustrates, however, why Beane does not do a lot of blogging. If he were to spend all his time speculating about what might have been, or recriminating about who is to blame, he would be running the Pittsburgh Pirates. Beane saw an opportunity to grab a transcendent player, and paid the price demanded. There are no mulligans in Beane’s business.
"There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact." - Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi
I cringed when I heard that we had given up Ethier...
for Milton “You-look-up-crazy-in-the-dictionary-and-there-is-a-picture-of-me” Bradley. But warmed quickly to Milton when he not only performed but entertained. 2006 was indeed a magical season. Then things fell apart… As we all know, predicting the future is a difficult game. But Beane and Co. do well at it more often than not.
I didn’t like the trade at the time. Then I liked the trade. And now I get a sickening feeling in my stomach everytime I see an Ethier highlight on Sportscenter. Oh, well…
"The only way I'm going to get a Gold Glove is with a can of spray paint." - Reggie Jackson
I hate trading young players away.
It always bothers me to see us do that, so I was unhappy at the time. But it seemed like Milton won me and a lot of other fans over pretty instantly. We just don’t see athletic, toolsy players that often, and Bradley was a thrill to watch.
I love trades. (Over FS signings)
Can you trade players away, get new ones in, and still improve your team? It’s like a chess game to me.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
FS signings was meant to be FA signings.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
I guess...
as an A’s fan, I’ve become totally addicted to trading established (declining) players for new ones!
Declining players? Sure.
Rising players or players at their ‘peak’ simply because their trade value is high? In the right circumstances, but don’t be so hasty.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
i think bradley was also intriguing to Oakland fans
because he was a wild-card. i know i liked the idea of bringing in this volatile dude who couldn’t be tamed anywhere else and then winning a WS with him as a catalyst. it was a fitting move for one of the bay area’s bands of misfits…
BK: This guy is on fire, he is really smokin'.
KenKo: Oh yeah, Bill? What's he smokin'?
end of an era
misfit > shiny new
:-(
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
If you do it with a specific goal in mind, and you do your due diligence, then you should never regret it.
Whether or not it works out is an entirely different matter.
When judging trades and FA signings I believe you have to go by the “at the time” criteria. In this specific case, I believe it was a good trade-off for what the team wanted to accomplish at the time, and there was not a wholly unreasonable expectation for the future in it as well. Just didn’t work out as hoped in the long run.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
I agree with this 100%.
Beane made the best of what he could have at the time. And it hurts to look back on, knowing what we know now, but it wasn’t a bad trade then. Far from it.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions
To What Other Areas Of Life Can Such a "Live In The Moment !" Philosphy Be Applied?
…and with what consequences? Having sex with a pretty girl you don’t know all that well without using any protection or birth control? Great idea — “at the time.” Buying a bunch a stuff that is really fun and cool with your credit card even though your credit card debt is already crushing you? Wonderful move — “at the time.”
by CanuckDodger on Sep 18, 2009 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Those aren't even in the same ballpark, so to speak
The trade wasn’t irresponsible nor was it impulsive. There were a lot of things to consider, that they did consider at the time. YThat’s like saying you should never date at all, because it might lead to sex and consequences. They made a trade that would have been AWESOME had it been Buck instead of Ethier. They picked wrong. It happens.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I Was Specifically Addressing...
… the “at the time” criterion Uncle Leo suggested as a way to determine what to do. My implied point was “Do try to use foresight to see what consequences will come from your actions.”
by CanuckDodger on Sep 18, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Ah...I see.
Ignore me. :-)
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
Of course certain scenarios would require differing levels of forethought...
…simply for the severity of potential consequences, but this is a baseball discussion in a baseball forum, and as such… “at the time”… I did not envision STDs or birth control being injected as a comparable subject matter. Probably because they’re not.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
How about lottery tickets? Are those comparable?
If some guy wins the mega-lottery, does he have to acknowledge that spending his money on the ticket was actually a poor choice by “at the time” criteria?
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
Was it a full count "at the time"?
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
you do your due diligence.
You reconnoiter the ridges—first place the Pinkertons’ll look. If the claim’s pinched out, you come back here, I give you your money back, no questions asked.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions
It's not one of those trades that will haunt me for years to come
But at some point you do sorta have to acknowledge that, given hindsight, the A’s, Beane’s, and most of our evaluations of Ethier were simply wrong. That happens.
It’s one thing to say hindsight is 20/20, but there were people out there that obviously saw in Ethier what we, as a fanbase (that mostly supported the trade) and an organization (that orchestrated it) failed to see. Failures in talent evaluation will happen, they’ll happen a lot, and unless they’re particularly egregious, there’s not much use in hand-wringing over a generally sound decision-making process.
But that doesn’t mean we need to sugar-coat it, either. The trade, pretty objectively, almost certainly was not worth it. But, like I said, the decision-making process was sound (deal from depth to make a contending team better) and that’s really all you can ask for.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
No, no they were not WRONG.
I’m not sure what the expectation in trades is, but it’s generally a SWAP of talent.
Not every trade is Nathan, Bonser, and Liriano for AJ Pierpanhgaoieuhtroiaesky.
Not every trade is Haren, Calero, and Barton for Mark Mulder.
You hvae to GIVE UP talent in order to acquire talent. Generally, and in the Bradley/Ethier case, it was giving up FUTURE talent (Ethier) in order to get talent RIGHT NOW (Bradley).
The thinking was not “Oh, hell, Ethier won’t amount to shit. Let’s trade him for MIlton Bradley so he can lead us to the playoffs!” because generally guys don’t get traded for shitty prospects.
The fact that Ethier was going to be a good player is what made Colletti accept him in return for Bradley and Antonio Perez.
The fact that Travis Buck was also rocketing through the system, and subsequently had a monster rookie season made the trade even more worth it, nevermind the fact that Buck has been essentially blacklisted by the organization for some reason and never given another extended chance to repeat his rookie year’s numbers.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I wish they had traded Buck...
..considering he’s now a person non grata here anyway.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
They were absolutely wrong.
If anyone in the A’s system legitimately thought Andre Ethier would be a career .294/.364/.495 hitter at this point, peaking at .283/.364/.529 (OPS+ of 132 and 130 last two seasons) and still traded him, then everyone in the front office should be fired.
Especially since Ethier basically equaled Bradley’s production in 2006.
But they, reasonably, I might add, did not think such a thing. But it was a failure of talent evaluation. And, again, that doesn’t mean we need to sugar-coat it in order to feel justified years later. The trade was justified at the time.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
by walk off bunt on Sep 18, 2009 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Except Ethier can't play CF.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Bradley played 94 games in right field for the A's in 2006, according to BB-ref
1 at DH. He did play 15 games in center in 2007, though, I guess.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
by walk off bunt on Sep 18, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
Hrm. I stand corrected.
Regardless of the position, though, Bradley was a well above average defender and Ethier was subpar.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
and if you believe UZR, he's a pretty bad defensive outfielder at the corners.
He’s about 2.5-3.0 WAR with the bat, but he’s giving back over 1WAR with his defense.
He’s a solid player, but he’s not ZOMG AWESOME like everybody thinks he is.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I really don't think you and I are on the same plane here
I’m not even saying Ethier is ZOMG AWESOME. I’m saying that time, and hindsight, have essentially proven that Ethier was better than most of us gave him credit for. There’s nothing wrong with that.
I’m also saying we don’t need to make ourselves feel better about the trade years down the line because there was nothing wrong with trade in the first place.
I just think the “I’d do it again no matter what” mentality is silly. I think there are pretty clear and obvious reasons not to do it again. But I would’ve done it at the time, and I don’t feel particularly bad about that now.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
by walk off bunt on Sep 18, 2009 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions
He's proven to be a 2.5-3.0 WAR hitter
and a -10 defender.
Overall he’s a good player, but he’s really not much better than Ryan Sweeney right now — again, this is only if you believe what Fangraphs UZR tells you. Sweeney has basically been so much better defensively that the offensive gap between the two is nearly made up for.
I’m not arguing that Ethier is NOT a good player. He’s a good player. He’s not a superstar like one would be led to believe after reading about how it was such a gigantic mistake to let go of him.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
See this is what I mean
I’m still not sure what you’re trying to convince me of with Ethier. I have no beef with that assessment.
But I’d still take his career over what Bradley gave us. And I still have no problem with that trade being made.
And I’m still not saying it was a mistake to let go of him. In fact, I’ve said quite the opposite. It was quite reasonable to let go of him given the circumstances.
But the “I’d do it all over again” mentality is still silly. We don’t need to justify a completely justifiable trade to ourselves by saying stuff like “No regrets, I’d do it all over again.”
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
by walk off bunt on Sep 18, 2009 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions
Right. This whole fanpost is kinda... I dunno,
not pointless, but I just don’t get it.
IF Etheir had flopped and been horrible, would we still be making posts about it and saying HAHAHA I CAN’T BELIVE HOW BAD WE FUCKING RIPPED OFF COLLETTI!!!!!
I doubt it.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I get it
This is what fanposts are about. She’s second-guessing the decision, and allowing others to do the same. I think it’s legitimate to go back to every free-agent signing or trade and see if it worked or not. Hindsight is something Billy Beane really can’t do without driving himself nuts, but I think AN has every right to do it, and if it’s on peoples’ minds, it’s cool.
I wasn’t overjoyed by the trade because, despite Bradley’s talent, he had two major red flags: Bradley himself, and his injury history. Ethier, on the other hand, was MLB ready at the time. But in the long run it didn’t matter because Ethier was not someone who was going to get the A’s back to the playoffs by himself, and by now, Beane would probably have traded him for prospects.
I'm hearing you
I don’t think anyone on either side of the deal saw 30 HR power in Ethier.
The monster at the end of this blog.
it is pointed out
(in the comments to that Fire Joe Morgan post I linked above) that Ethier fairly well crushed his PECOTA 90th percentile projections that rookie year. So it’s not surprising that the A’s talent evaluators didn’t see that coming. I’m sure that the Dodgers didn’t see it coming either. Like mikev points out, they probably saw the trade as a relatively even swap of right now talent for future talent. The fact that Ethier put up better number is 2006 than Bradley was either a fluke or due to something beyond anyone’s scouting ability (or the Dodgers front office are wizards).
If anyone thought that was Eithier's career path
from his AA numbers they should be fired too. the dodgers rushed him and it paid off. With the A’s kuck, if they keep eithier, he turns into danny putnam
Travis Buck
My memory of the trade is uncharacteristically good. I remember at the time that there was a nice feature in Athletics Magazine on Ethier and how he was storming the MLB gates with his minor league stats. Shortly thereafter was the trade, and I remember thinking, “WTF?!? I thought I would see this guy in green and gold this year.” The Chronicle did indeed report some quote from either Forst/Beane on the fact that “One reason we felt we could make this trade was because Travis Buck is a very similar player with a lot of upside” etc etc and that while the price was steep for Bradley (and A. Perez, what a waste of space), it didn’t hinder the organization.
That said, and with Buck toiling away in AAA obscurity, I still like the trade. Bradley became one of my favorite players here because his fire showed. Yeah he was a hot-head, blah blah, but to me he was like the anti-Chavez. No “quietly going about his business”, he would do it loud and proud, with his white fashion sunglasses on in the outfield.
Besides, maybe Ethier wouldnt have Dodger-like numbers with the A’s. Maybe he would have been platooned with Cust! Maybe he would have become disgruntled with the way A’s handled his call up (and down and up and down). Plus who would have hit behind him – Cust again?
I know this is sort of off-topic now, but I’m dying to see how the A’s brass handle Suzuki and Powell. I hope they pull a Hatteberg and move Powell to 1st base, just so the two of them can continue to play together. I really hope neither are traded, but experience tells me not to get my hopes up.
Bob Geren, on 8/2/07, on the success of Alan Embree as new interim closer: "What can I say,... he's been our Steady Tremendous Bullpen Man"
by popcornjames on Sep 18, 2009 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I was just about to mention that
With Bradley’s hasty departure, we picked up a lefty bat for a bag of balls who has happened to lead our team in HRs. He might be frustrating for some, but in some ways, you have to think of it as Bradley for Cust. When you think of it like that, it’s not so bad.
Like others, I too, double-taked when I heard about the trade. So much had been made about he’d be OF of the future blah blah blah and then he disappeared. It’s hard too seeing him in LA so much — there’s (legitimate) talk of MVP for him.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Sep 18, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
This:
But that doesn’t mean we need to sugar-coat it, either. The trade, pretty objectively, almost certainly was not worth it. But, like I said, the decision-making process was sound (deal from depth to make a contending team better) and that’s really all you can ask for.
Agree. It just didn’t work. It happens.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions
Just because Ethier
is hitting in LA doesn’t necessarily translate that he would do the same thing in the AL. One of BB’s weakness is that he thinks an NL .300 hitter will do that in the AL, thus the Kendall, Halliday, & Hairston trades. We got .300 hitters who turned into .240 hitters.
Also a good point.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
About Ethier, I mean.
Kendall was old, Holliday was a d-bag who didn’t try, and Hairston wasn’t that good to start with. I think Ethier still would have been worth it, but who knows.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
Kendall is 3 years older
and hitting .300 in Milwaukee, did he all of sudden get younger? Hairston was hitting .300 when we got him. Halladay is hitting almost .400 since leaving for the NL, I prefer to think the NL is a AAAA league, just imagine how well Hannahan would do there.
For some reason
I get the feeling Buck would be putting up great numbers in LA right now and we’d be lamenting trading him instead of Eithier. Being an A’s fan has turned me into a cynical mofo
by chipper1001 on Sep 18, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm certain of it...
…I wish we knew what the HELL happened to him or what he did!
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Never liked it myself....
But not because I loved Ethier (I wish I could claim that), but because I am extremely anti-Milton. Living in LA, I saw all his antics while on the Dodgers and had no interest in rooting for him.
Great piece BBG and very timely…the Manny line is especially funny, thanks for the laugh on a Friday AM.
Bring back Hammer.
2 mlb players: bradley and perez
for a solid, but not great OF prospect in Ethier at the time
I remember a good amount of fans thinking perez, was going to be a solid pickup maybe even a potential replacement for ellis/crosby etc
They still had guys like swisher, kotsay, payton, kielty, etc under contract during that time too. SO OF depth looked decent at least.
The biggest disappointment in all of this is Buck, at worst they projected him to be a similar player as Ethier. Dont forget Buck being around also went into the decision by later trading Bradley and/or Swisher.
Fast forward to now, that “great” OF depth: Hererra/Putnam/ROobnett have been traded/released in the past yr and Buck has fallen out favor.
I expected Antonio Perez to be a solid pickup.
I missed the boat on that one.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
Ethier: 2.8 WAR in 629 PA
Sweeney: 3.3 WAR in 497 PA
"if gio would of ptched,he would of pitched shoot outs." - MR.OAKLAND
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
Ya I'm not sure Ethier would be that valuable on this year's team. He's not all that much
different than the LF combo of Holliday and Hairston turned out to be. The
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Sep 18, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions
yeah but
UZR is very high on Sweeney’s defense this year, and it’s likely that this is a high water mark for him in that department. I’m not saying he’s not an above average defender, but just that we shouldn’t necessarily +2 WAR from his glove along going forward.
for 2008,
Ethier: 3.4 WAR in 596 PA
Sweeney: 1.8 WAR in 433 PA
(actually those aren’t far off from each other)
The innernettes do not lie!!
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
WAR for us, yeah, this year
Maybe Ethier’s WAR is 2.8 on the Dodgers, but I bet it’s better on the A’s. But he would be under contractual control for a few more years, too. I can’t honestly think of anyone who would rather have Ryan Sweeney than Andre Ethier in right tonight. The stats may tell us this, but it doesn’t pass the smell test
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Sep 18, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
How would it be better on the A's?
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
The Dodgers are a better team
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Sep 18, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
makes no sense, that's not how WAR works.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
the idea that Ryan Sweeney
is 3.3 WAR to Ethier’s 2.8 is suspect, and should cause consternation to those who follow such stats. Especially considering the non-linearity of wins and what the records of the A’s and Dodgers are today.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Sep 18, 2009 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I understand that, but to think that he would be a more productive player in Oakland is lunacy.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
That's not really the question though
it’s “Who would we rather have?” That’s the question I’m getting at. While his Manny-less stats are average at best, I’d still rather have him than Sweeney.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Sep 18, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I have a similar issue with WAR,
in that UZR is far from perfect, but fielding runs make up half the stat of WAR.
That being said, it’s possible that Ryan Sweeney is better than Ethier, as fielding is half the game. Well, kinda.
Founding member of the Eric Patterson fan club.
Uh, I'll take the stats.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I'm not big on WAR as a concept, or anything that uses an attempt to account for defensive rating
as a quantitative measure. wOBA I can live with, but stuff after that I’m too old school when it comes to stats. Constants of the universe are one thing, but such things don’t exist, IMHO, in baseball.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Sep 18, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Which is fair enough.
But you also cannot outright IGNORE defense, and the defensive gap between Sweeney and Ethier is significant.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
If you remember the intial bradley rumors
Saarloos was mentioned as one of the main players going to the dodgers. Who knows if its true or not, Saarloos was a very valuable back rotation SP at the time. Bradley obviously had his injuries and attitude issues.Not surprised that Beane somehow worked Perez in that deal and that forced them to give up a decent prospect instead.
Here's the thing:
No one knew that Ethier would be the only one of that group of 5 to really work out. Putnam, Robnett and Herrera have been uber-busts, but who was to say that in 2006?
He might have had the highest chance of working out, but, well, the Dodgers obviously wanted SOMETHING back for Bradley.
Ultimately? The A’s can’t win if 60% of their top prospects bust. In periods when that happens (and there will be periods when that happens, it’s the nature of prospecting), the team will not be competitive.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
by PaulThomas on Sep 18, 2009 10:35 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
That's the real problem here.
Andre Ethier could have been the second coming of Ted Williams and we’d be fine if just one of Herrera, Robnett, Putnam, or Buck had worked out. (I guess the juries still out on Buck, to be fair, but God knows with that one.)
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
by walk off bunt on Sep 18, 2009 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Well said.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Eh, Ethier would have just languished at AAA and on the DL if we kept him.
(Yes, that was tongue planted firmly in cheek.)
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
Haha, except it's a little too close to home
Seriously…what the HELL happened to Buck!?
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
I wish I knew.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Same here.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
it's almost like he's been banished to Florida to spend the rest of his miserable, god-forsaken life working in a sign shop.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Only he's not fat.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
give him a couple years here.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
So if I move to Florida I'm going to get fat again?
Damn I thought all the humidity would keep me thin.
it keeps you torpid.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Hey a fancy word from Bloom
I think I’m getting smarter just by reading your posts Bloom.
I’ve never been the sluggish type but I guess Florida could take my energy. I don’t know the idea of being able to play golf year round and being near the ocean sounds nice to me.
you cannot play golf if it's 95 with 90 percent humidity.
You can only lie there and sweat.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I've played in worse heat
in Sacramento. 110 out not a breeze to be found and I’d play 36 holes. We golf nuts will play no matter the weather.
no humidity there, brother.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions
I've played in Hawaii and in the South
with 90% plus humidity and trust me 110 in Sacramento can be as bad. Like I said if you’re a hard core duffer you’ll play no matter what.
One thing is for sure Florida shouldn’t hire you to do the tourism signs.
You do not experience humidity like I experience humidity, then.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I've lived in humidity for about 15 years
now and it doesn’t bother me. Of course I know that Florida has some of the most humid weather in the US.
and, um, why have we never golfed together?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I'll be hitting the links
tomorrow morning at 7am. I’ve got a new Odyssey putter that I’m dying to miss some 6 foot putts with.
I use a Taylormade Rossa
love it.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I had a TaylorMade putter
that I loved for nearly 20 years but it got stolen last month out of my Jeep.
I would have preferred that they stole my Jeep and left my putter to be honest.
With the magic of Wii
you can now play golf lying down.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
I play Tiger Woods 10 on my 360
it’s about the only game I’m playing right now. I bought Madden but I haven’t had the time to play it.
It sucks that real life takes away your time to play video games. If they would just make food and mortage payments free I could get more gaming in.
Just give up sleeping.
it’s what I do.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
torpid
I first encountered that word when a high school English teacher wrote on one of my papers: “The slow drift to mental torpor requires no guide.”
I’m not sure whether he was a good teacher, but that sure was a fuckin-A awesome line.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
That is an awesome line.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions
And OAH wants to ravish him.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
no, those are the same.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions
So if you weren't fat she would want to ravish you?
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
oh she does anyhow.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions
If they had kept Ethier he probably would have been traded after 2007 like Haren and
Swisher were. The return might have been similar to the Blanton return. Add to that the 2006 season and I’m not all that upset about losing him.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Sep 18, 2009 11:29 AM PDT reply actions
this thread is sort of funny
As far as I can tell, we are all agreeing with each other. That’s not the AN that I know!
That was not what I was expecting :-)
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I thought the trade was worth it
Just for the sunglasses
I'm a happy seal
by SwisherThresher on Sep 18, 2009 11:38 AM PDT reply actions
Didn't Coletti pretty much come out and say he got ripped off publicly?
Trades have to be win-win (or perceived that way, anyways). Billy won’t get talent without giving talent up.
Founding member of the Eric Patterson fan club.
What happened to Andrew Brown anyway?
At the time when we got him I thought he could be a fireballer out of the pen.
Oh well, I’ll just have to settle for Bailey ;-)
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
He was given his release after he had that shoulder surgery
or whatever it was. Shoulder, I think.
Was under the impression that there was a handshake agreement to give him a minor league deal after he was fully rehabbed.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
from what I heard
the Cubs are maybe gonna release Bradley, we should get him back LOL
I thought he was a marvelous player and he and the Hurt were why we won anything in ’06… my issue with Milton was always staying healthy and on the field and not his occasional tirades, which I like on a team that often reacts to events in the game like a lethargic beach volleyball team, with resounding cries of “Whatever, dude.”
That said, Ethier is becoming a superstar, so it’s highly debatable whther 2006 was worth the mortgage, but IMO it was because those ‘06 memories will last a while. Buck got doghoused so he hasn’t ever had the chance to really prove what he can do on a consistent basis, so it’s not like that trade didn’t end up leaving gaping holes we still have yet to fill sigh
Hey, I just bought the team from Lew Wolff... who wants to play third?
Okay, hold on right there.
An .860 OPS corner outfielder with shoddy defense is NOT a superstar.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
"Superstar" is as much popularity as it is ability.
Sometimes even more so. Read": Eric Byrnes.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
yes
he has a kind of intangible winner quality to me too, something about him says he will be successful and make substantive contributions to good and successful teams.
Hey, I just bought the team from Lew Wolff... who wants to play third?
by emperor nobody on Sep 18, 2009 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions
lots of grit.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah you right
statswise he isn’t there yet, but notice I said becoming one, in the process of ascendence to that level, IMO.
Ethier to me is also a smart player and someone who strikes me as a winner type, if there is such a thing.
Hey, I just bought the team from Lew Wolff... who wants to play third?
by emperor nobody on Sep 18, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Pretty much same here.
When we got him I was concerned about his attitude. That died off pretty quickly for me. I was always concerned about his ability to stay healthy and his being prone to minor nagging injuries, though.
That being said, personality-wise, Bradley is his own worst enemy, and always will be.
In 2008 I was watching a team that was rebuilding. In 2009 I feel like I'm watching a team that just sucks.
Two words:
Dead. Horse.
I get that it’s slow, and I understand the retrospective, kind of, but the Ethier trade has been one of the most discussed and most reviled trades here on AN since 2006. It’s been dissected every which way, from defending the great magnanimous BLB to tearing him down for one of his “worst trades ever”.
I mean. I guess I just don’t understand why.
I think a much more cogent and interesting point of conversation would be the contention that Billy had his a** handed to him in the Scott Hairston trade. Discuss?
mmmmm,
you can really taste the horse.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions
TWSS
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I like horse.
but glue kills too many brain cells.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions
When you have a chance to win you have to go for it.
I’m sure the A’s knew at the time that Milton Bradley was a short term guy. I mean he’s crazy as hell he’s a short term guy wherever he goes but he helped the A’s get to the ALCS and while Eithier has turned into a good player you can never tell with prospects.
I think the four names Sickles sites prove that you never know about minor league players. It’s the reason I crack up when I see the A’s 2011 roster predictions and it’s all prospects.
Billy Beane has always used minor league players to get established players when he thought the A’s were ready to make a run and I’m sure he’ll do the same in the future.
This is now discussed by Rob Neyer at ESPn
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/sweetspot/0-5-75/Revisiting-the-Bradley-Ethier-deal.html
congrats BBG
Oh, but if I catch a line drive by a girl, that’s girl-on-girl action, the twiceness is eliminated, and it just counts once - gigglingone
ask for royalties, BBG :-)
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Sep 18, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh boy!
Thanks!
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions
From the Neyer comments (username: gyaris)
Small market teams like the A’s can never make this kind of decision – short term gain and long term loss. Bradley had never been really good, and had never played a lot of games. Plus, he had burned off his cheap years, and was now approaching arbitration and free agency. So even if Bradley had played up to expectations, he would soon be too expensive for the A’s to keep anyway. Ethier may have been a bigger risk of success, but was going to be much cheaper for a much longer period of time. This kind of risk is just not one that small market teams should ever take.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, they NEVER do that.
Johnyy Damon and Jose Guillen never happened.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Wow -- and I thought Peralta spelled his name funny!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
The y is silent
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Eithier Did Not Become "Full Time" Until 2008
Eithier’s first 2 years with the Dodgers he was a platoon player almost exclusively against right handed pitchers. He put up very good numbers avoiding lefties.
Eithier’s defense the first 2 years appeared to be below average. I do not have the numbers but he looked like a statue.
There is no way that Eithier helps the A’s as much as Bradley in 2006.
It’s true that the if 1 or 2 of the other 4 had not been busts we wouldn’t care.
by Howzer on Sep 18, 2009 2:52 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Or if Buck hadn't um....done whatever he did to someone's pet/wife/daughter/pony...
…your guess is as good as mine.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions
You are correct.
2006 numbers were skewed, and he STILL played in more games than Bradley. But valid point.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions
The argument that Ethier outperformed Bradley overall in 2006 is flat out wrong.
That's still depressing...
…they were almost a wash. Ethier in his rookie season, and Milton in his prime. Ethier would have been a cheap option for a longer time; and he’s certainly outperformed Bradley every year since. 20/20 though…
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Except that Bradley is an awesome defender and Ethier is below average.
I mean really, why does everybody just want to ignore that?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I'm not ignoring that...it's absolutely true, from all accounts.
But since our #1 problem in the last five years has been offense, and it’s not even close, it is the bigger story. Ethier was not better in all areas than Milton, not even close. But career-wise, and what the A’s ended up getting out of Milton compared to what they could have had from Ethier…wow.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions
or what they could have had from Buck, but they don't play him.
The whole point in trading Ethier was to get Bradley for 2006-2007, and Buck was ready as well.
I mean, should we start a thread on how we should have kept Tejada and Teahen instead of Chavez and Crosby next? Dead horse is dead. Big time.
How come nobody is complaining about trading away Omar Quintanilla?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Let's start a new thread about how we traded Nelson Cruz too...
….I’m not saying that they should have done ANYthing differently. It was a good trade at the time, and it didn’t work. Partially because of whateverthehell Buck did to land him on the bench in AAA. It’s just pure speculation, there were 5 million threads going around at the time of Chavez/Tejada…there still are.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I know! Let's go back and gloat that Mark Ellis was the "throw in" from the KC trade!!!!
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
We need some meaningful baseball again...
….then we can start with the inner-AN fighting over what Geren should have done. No one really cares this month ;-)
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
We need a tailgate so that we can all get shitfaced
OH WAIT….
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
What are we talking about?
Runs. We’re not talking about the game, no, not the game. Runs. We’re talking about runs.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions
That's the Allen Iverson version
for the Jim Mora Sr. version….
Runs?….runs? you’re talking about runs? I mean c’mon, runs?
There's something seriously wrong with me.
I’m sitting here, reading my sigline and laughing and laughing.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions
If I'm still on the game threads when my girlfriend gets home
from work. She wonders what the hell I’m laughing about while listening to the A’s game.
I show her some of the posts and she usually gets the joke even though she doesn’t care at all about baseball.
Of course most of my posts have nothing to do with baseball like last night where most of my posts were about Courtney Love and Indiana Jones ringtones.
Garth, I think that was a Haiku.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
On that, Howzer's point on Ethier is quite relevant.
The Dodgers did limit Ethier’s PAs against southpaws in ’06.
You leave Doogie alone!
He was awesome in Harold and Kumar!
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, his numbers were probably a bit skewed from that.
Yet he STILL played in more games than Bradley. Awful.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
by baseballgirl on Sep 18, 2009 3:56 PM PDT up reply actions
forget Ethier, we got matt carson!
28 yr old, non prospect called up from AAA. he’s having a good yr, but very interesting they’d let him take mazzaro’s 40 man spot, than all up players already on the 40 man buck/denorfia/cunningham.Carson might be a minor league FA, so any easy DFa off the 40 man, otherwise the timing on this seems a bit odd.
You forget that Antonio Perez was once the 2nd best SS prospect in Baseball
a mere two seasons before the A’s traded for him. He had a a lot of value and I thought that he could end up better than Ethier regardless of the Bradley component.
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Sep 18, 2009 3:43 PM PDT reply actions
Flounder....
you fucked up. You trusted us.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I am really confused on this one.
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Sep 18, 2009 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions
You don't want to read what Bloom writes too closely DFA
if you start to understand him then you will get sucked into the vortex and you will come out of that with an addiction to Domino’s Pizza and cough syrup.
when I get to the bottom,
I go back to the top of the slide then I stop and I turn and I go for a ride when I get to the bottom and I see you again.
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions
sometimes I post the first thing that comes to my head.
Oftentimes, I have enough self-control and respect for the flow of dialogue that I censor such things. toward the end of a long day/week though, you often just get it.
I’m like this in real life, too. It’s part of my “charm.”
Al: We gotta form a government for the settlement.
Merrick: Who does?
Al: Us! You and me. Come to me in a vision! You stupid bastard
by Leopold Bloom on Sep 18, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions
All my posts are the first thing that comes to mind
that’s why some of them (or maybe most of them) are goofy. I’m just trying to have fun and I doubt anyone takes anything I write seriously.
he’s all about the classics. if you don’t get what he says, thumb through your compendia on lit (english), music (mid-century american), and lampoon (national).
don't care if i ever get back.
by AV on Sep 18, 2009 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions
OH NO!
“..Putnam, Buck, Herrera, and Robnett ..” …seeing Buck’s name in that group can only mean one thing: Buck will turn out to be another AAAA player, if he’s not already.
There was voting option for....
I kind of liked the trade but was leery of Bradley and thought, my gosh Andre should have been given more time.
alaska A residing in northern Idaho.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
