BP's Most Recent Look at the AL West and the Intangible Angels
by baseballgirl on Feb 24, 2010 8:00 AM PST
Email
PrintUPDATE: We'll discuss the implications of this more in detail on Friday, but Susan Slusser reports this morning that Jake Fox IS out of options, which means that if Fox doesn't make the club out of Spring Training, he has to clear waivers in order to return to the team.
I checked with Fox this morning, however, because I'd heard from so many people who'd said he's out of options, and he insisted that he was out and was horrified to think otherwise. He said his agents also had confirmed that.
So I asked the A's yet again, and - yes, Jake Fox is right. He's out of options. "Brain cramp" on the A's part, I was told.
UPDATE 2: Our very own grover has reported that to use an option, a player must be in AAA for 20 days. The 2007 numbers have Fox only at 19 (grover and oaktownpower) Is he really out of options?
UPDATE 3: It's possible that the A's think Fox is out of options because of one of the following: 1) They think he was on the 40-man roster of the Cubs in 2007, and used an option when he started the year at AAA (he wasn't)
2) They think he spent 20 days in AAA to use an option July-Aug of 2007. As grover pointed out, he could have only been there 19 days; oaktownpower pointed out that he played in the majors before and after the supposed 20 day span.
What else are we missing that used an option for Fox?
UPDATE 4: It looks like Fox was sent down again on 8/25/07, even though it's not on the MLB transactions list. This would be enough to use his option and it looks like Jake Fox is out of options, which means he better make the club out of Spring Training this year, because I honestly don't know how the team could take Chavez over him. If Chavez makes the team, it should be at the expense of another player.
UPDATE 5: Jake Fox is out of options. From our favorite staff writer:
**UPDATE**OK, there has been a lot more discussion this morning about Jake Fox's options, and he still doesn't have any left. The issues revolved around when his contract was first purchased (July 2007) and whether he then spent enough time in the minors after that to qualify that as an option year.
Here is the timeline that a member of the A's front office forwarded me:
Fox selected to ML roster July 19, 2007.
Optioned July 27.
Recalled Aug. 14. (No optioned used, not 20 days)
Optioned Aug. 24 for remainder of season. (Option)
Also optioned in 2008 and 2009.
Apparently the Aug. 24 transaction was not accounted for on various sites, which seems to have led to a lot of confusion and probably more wasted time than members of the A's front office might have liked. Thanks to them for their patience in helping clear this up; I'm impressed how many people took an interest in this and tried to track down as much information as possible.
It would be nice if MLB just provided full information about option status every spring so we could avoid all this; I remember one spring telling Dan Meyer that he had a fourth option and how upset he was to learn that. He'd had no idea. Safe to say, that ruined his spring and probably a lot of his year. Options are one of the trickier bits of business around, which is why I usually just ask the experts.
Baseball Prospectus is counting down the minutes until Spring Training begins (and aren't we all?), but they have published a recent standings update for the AL West that I thought I'd share (subscription):
Texas Rangers
Projected record: 87-75
Seattle Mariners
Projected record: 83-79
Oakland Athletics
Projected record: 82-80
Los Angeles Angels
Projected record: 76-86
My initial thought after my first glance at the data? No way do the Angels end up ten games under .500. I don't care how it's calculated.
Let's take a closer look.
Like most of us already assume, BP has projected the AL West to be an interesting, tightly-fought race between four clubs, who could all end up finishing at any position in the standings. Based on the Angels winning 5 of the last 6 division titles, you would assume they are the team to unseat this year, but after losing ace Lackey to the Red Sox, and Figgins and Vlad to division rivals, the Angels' stronghold on the AL West could very well slip this year. However, Angels usually outplay their run differential and exceed BP's PECOTA projections year after year, so I wouldn't bet against them, especially considering the weaknesses of the other clubs. In their division write-up, BP highlights the Angels' weakness of late-inning relief.
The Mariners have added a second ace to their rotation (Cliff Lee to join Felix Hernandez) behind their solid defense. Wildcard Milton Bradley will try his luck with another AL West team, which could be good or bad for the M's. BP doesn't like the Mariners' chances based on the fact that they gave up more runs than they scored last season (they still managed a 85-77 record).
Nothing about the A's projections should be a surprise to AN, including the fact that the A's season hinges on the health of their starting pitching. As we know, Justin Duchscherer is already hurt at Spring Training, and despite what positive reports will be thrown our way, this does not bode well for his 2010 campaign.
PECOTA's darling this year is the Texas Rangers, and it is predicting a changing of the guard for the AL West this season. However, when your starting rotation includes Rich Harden, I wouldn't pop the champagne quite yet.
The real question for the day is although the BP ranking system seems to make sense overall; that there is a true connection between the runs scored/runs allowed ratio and overall record, why does it always seem to low-ball the Angels? How do the Angels keep winning, even though on paper, they really shouldn't? Is it even possible for the Angels to win 97 games last season and 20 fewer this season? Were Lackey, Figgins, and Vlad worth 20+ wins or did the Angels really get that "lucky" last season? Is Scioscia a real factor, as some seem to think? Do they win close games and lose blowouts? What is PECOTA missing when it comes to projecting the Angels?
314 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No way the Angels finish last
Sure, they lost Vlad, but he was a shadow of his former self last year anyway. I’d love it if they stunk this year, but I’m just waiting for some young pitcher to show up and start striking out the A’s to replace Lackey. I’ve thought the Angels would be worse in the past, so maybe I’m just gun-shy…
@worldblee on Twitter.
Brandon Wood
If Brandon Wood has a breakout season – 25HR’s, 800+ OPS, and if Kazmir rebounds…then the Angels are the team to beat… no doubt about it.
by Colorado Fan on Feb 24, 2010 9:04 AM PST up reply actions
What if Ryan Sweeney, Daric Barton, Ben Sheets, and Trevor Cahill do the same?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Trevor Cahill will definitely have 25 HR's
Just for the other team.
"Smokey, this be not the foul jungles of the darkest East Orient. This be ninepins. We are bound by laws."
Yes way the Angels can certainly finish last.
It has absolutely nothing to do with their moves, its that the other 3 teams in the division have been terrible over the last 3 years and now they arent. The Angels constantly failed in the playoffs because they were also not very good, rather the best of a bad group. Their pythag W-L was always lopsided towards more wins, this is more due the incompetence of the other 3 teams (that they play too many times thanks to the unbalanced schedule).
Replacing Lackey with Pinero is like, okay, but we replaced Cahill, Mortensen and Eveland with Sheets and Ducscherer. Thats huge.
The Mariners, Rangers and us have improved dramatically, the Angels essentially stood pat.
strength of schedule
has no bearing on whether or not you beat your Pythagorean record. If you play bad teams, then you will tend to beat them and you will also tend to outscore them, so the formula for Pythagorean wins should hold.
It might be true that strength of schedule is the reason (or part of the reason) why players on the Angels outperform their projections. For example, the Angels might have a pitcher who’s not very good, but then puts up improved numbers because he shuts down the A’s offense four times per season.
What would make the most sense to me is for BPro to project player performances in a context neutral situation, but then to take strength of schedule into account when they propagate the player performances forward into team RS and RA. I have no idea if they do this.
Right, but this discussion is about
the Angels beating their projections, not about them beating their Pythagorean, which is a separate issue.
I agree with PL about the Angels looking good the last few years largely on the strength of a weak division. The same effect made the other three teams look less bad than they are, too.
As for PECOTA, I think it’s best as a player projection system, which is what it’s designed for, and when it is pressed into making team projections it doesn’t fare so well.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
For the record, they do.
First-order wins are just regular old wins. When BP talks about second- or third-order wins, they’re talking about using luck-neutral projections. Second-order wins use some kind of runs created equation, and third-order wins adjust for strength of schedule.
Taken down with hearts alive, our hearts alive.
Explain more.
:-)
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:09 AM PST up reply actions
Second and third-order standings
Regular standings are just W-L records
Second-order standings are based on Pythagorean W-L — that is, what the teams’ records would be if their Ws and Ls reflected their runs scored (RS) and runs allowed (RA) according to the “pythagorean ratio”.
Third-order standings are based on all the teams’ run-elements (BBs, HR, etc), to calculate how many runs they should have scored and allowed based on their on-the-field performance (using a formula like Runs Created), and using those numbers for the Pythag calculation.
So there are always two levels of luck at play: a team should have won more or fewer games, based on how many runs they scored and allowed; a team should have scored or allowed more or fewer runs, based on how many HRs and 2Bs and BBs they got or gave up.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
Actually, I think first-order wins are based on Pythagorean.
Second-order wins are where they calculate how many runs a player should have created (using wOBA, or in their case, EqA or whatever). Third-order wins goes one step further and adjusts for schedule strength.
Taken down with hearts alive, our hearts alive.
Oh, okay, thanks for the clarification
This is like asking an English person where the first floor of a building is!
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
Yes the Angels can finish last
However you short change the pitching changes on the Angels, an accurate analysis or comparison from 2009 to 2010 is:
1. Weaver (33)
2. Saunders (31)
3. Lackey (27)
4. Santana (23)
5. Palmer (13), O’Sullivan (10), Kazmir (6), Loux (6), Bell (4), Moseley (3), Ortega (3), Adenhart (1), Escobar (1)
So replace Lackey with Pineiro for sure, but then replace the mass of replacement pitchers in the five spot with Scott Kazmir. Then if Santana can start the season healthy, he could do real damage and start more games (and not pitch as a recovering pitcher too). He was one of the best pitchers (top ten in FiP, xFiP, WHIP, K/9, K/BB and WAR) in MLB in 2008 do not forget.
The changes the Angels have made to their SP is huge as well.
And actually, one of the issues with the PECOTA projections is their RA numbers for the Angels pitching staff. Over on Baseball Analysts a discussion has been going on regarding the Angels PECOTA projections. In the comments Sean Smith (CHONE) did a little bit of legwork and took issue with the numbers:
Something don’t add up. 832 runs allowed is 5.15 per game, which suggests an ERA around 4.75.
Even PECOTA does not project any of our starting pitchers to be that bad, as you posted:
Kazmir 4.32 (2nd lowest of career, at age 26)
Santana 4.60 (evidently 2008 was a fluke?)
Saunders 4.44 (ignoring his post-injury improvement?)
Weaver 4.06 (decline at age 27?)
Pineiro 4.29 (makes sense)
That’s a group average about 4.30-4.35? So how do you get a team figure of 4.75? Either the bullpen has to be horrible, or else a lot of injuries leading to Bell, O’Sullivan, etc. making starts.
Last year’s bullpen had an ERA of 4.49, and that is as bad as it’s been in the Scioscia era. The bullpen should be much better thanks to Jepsen having learned how to pitch and Shields coming back.
But even if I assume the 5 starters are 4.35 ERA, and the bullpen is 4.49 just like last year, then to get to 832 runs allowed I have to assume only 104 starts for our top 5, and 58 starts from the backup starters at an ERA of 6.00.
I’m taking this straight from him, as I thought it was a pertinent point that might highlight the disconnect many would have with seeing the Angels as 10 games under .500.
I would take issue with the PECOTA projections of those numbers for the Angels SP staff, they don’t seem realistic. Although if they were to occur, I could definitely see the Angels finishing last. However I just don’t see Weaver, Santana and Kazmir all being that bad at the same time, nor do I see 58 starts from Angels back-ups at the moment.
by TheQuestforMerlin on Feb 24, 2010 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks for the link
I read the thread and noticed Rev posted some comments that did absolutely nothing to contribute to the discussion.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Wow
Thats’ almost exactly why I never spend time on HH anymore.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Dude, how did you call it over an hour in advance?
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Um.
Throwing aside the ridiculous notion that PECOTA is an “incompetent method of measurement”, you’re grossly exaggerating your own weight. If you think that Baseball Analysts needs your approval to feel validated, you’re mistaken.
Taken down with hearts alive, our hearts alive.
Plus, 'ignoring them' seems to be a better way of 'not validating' than 'engaging in dialogue'
but that might just be me.
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
The ninth fastest thirty year old in San Francisco
Thanks very much for this!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 2:07 PM PST up reply actions
In a rotation with Kazmir and Santana, bad pitchers getting starts isn't exactly a stretch
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 6:33 PM PST up reply actions
Sure, replacement pitchers are a fact of baseball
But as CHONE highlighted, to get the kind of RA numbers PECOTA were predicting, you would need 58 starts at about 6.00 ERA from replacement pitchers.
Thats some serious and simultaneous injury crisis to hit the Angel rotation for replacement pitchers to rack up 58 starts (Santana is not as injury prone as you suggest, last year was the first year he had injury problems since 2004 when he was in the minors).
And as an interesting side note, BtB also did a quick and interesting study on how many wins a team loses to injury from 2002 – 2009 which has the Angels coming out on top. As a team, the Angels cope pretty well with injuries and seem to have replacement players that haven’t killed them during the past decade. Whatever the reasons – I would argue a combination of a solid and underrated minor league system and intelligent trade/pick-ups like Figgins, Izturis, RIvera etc – they’re a team that manages to spread its risk well. Scioscia really emphasis versatility and depth, its his undervalued asset if you will.
All of which doesn’t bode well for a prediction that requires its 5 starters to (under) perform as predicted above and get injured, a bullpen to perform as bad as any bullpen has performed under Scioscia (as was the case in 2009) and for 58 starts from replacement pitchers throwing up a 6.00 ERA.
by TheQuestforMerlin on Feb 24, 2010 8:02 PM PST up reply actions
Personally, I think the PECOTA projection is ridiculous
and I still think the Angels are “the team to beat” — but the question persists, in my mind: Why does PECOTA, a reputation projection system, think these predictions are best? Weird.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I totally agree with PECOTA and generally with team projections
I’m a skeptical empiricist when it comes to projections/prediction systems.
One of my faves:
Under the most rigorously observed conditions of skill, age, environment, statistical rules and other variables, a ballplayer will perform as he damn well pleases.
Although the one thing you can say, at least PECOTA takes a stand with the Angels projection.
Rather than a generic regression to the ‘mean’ and a projection of around 82-80 they think the Angels will have horrible pitching that will cause a free fall. It makes for an interesting discussion. If not totally convincing as a ‘reliable system’ for projection.
by TheQuestforMerlin on Feb 24, 2010 8:25 PM PST up reply actions
Well I for one hope they're right!
But I don’t see a sub-.500 team there.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
We will see soon enough!
But yeah, i’d be surprised if the Angels finished under .500
by TheQuestforMerlin on Feb 24, 2010 8:29 PM PST up reply actions
I meant to say, I totally agree with your position on PECOTA
Not that I agree with PECOTA…
by TheQuestforMerlin on Feb 24, 2010 8:28 PM PST up reply actions
Ah, that makes more sense
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Oh, and I meant to say "reputable," not "reputation"
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
We both really failed at communicating with words
And we thought PECOTA was having problems…
by TheQuestforMerlin on Feb 24, 2010 8:53 PM PST up reply actions
It's really pretty
iconic erotic ironic.
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
Seems like I say this a lot:
PECOTA is a reputable projection system for players.
Its unique design is geared specifically toward recognizing how individual players will perform.
As a projection system for teams, PECOTA becomes a two-step process. First they use regular PECOTA to project each player. Then they run it through a bunch more algorithms to try to figure out how those individual numbers translate into wins and losses when put together on a team.
Even if you knew as absolute fact what every guy on the roster’s numbers would be at the end of the year, it would still be a complicated trick to use that information to predict the final W-L record of every team. To achieve that trick, PECOTA team version has to make all sorts of guesses and assumptions about playing time, trades, etc. This second step is not the original PECOTA method; it is something else layered on top of it.
I’m not saying PECOTA team projections suck. I just think a lot of people need to stop assuming that PECOTA’s reputation as an excellent projection system for players applies equally to its ability to project team wins. It does not.
For those who are asking questions about what PECOTA does and doesn’t measure, there is an excellent discussion of PECOTA methodology on Wikipedia.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
by iglew on Feb 24, 2010 9:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks iglew
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Feb 25, 2010 12:13 PM PST up reply actions
The difference between A's fans and Angels fans
We see Trevor Cahill and his 5.33 FIP and 4.63 ERA as being extremely lucky and not very good in 2009 and want him at AAA in 2010.
Angels fans see Joe Saunders and his 5.17 FIP and 4.60 ERA (with 16 Wins!) and think he’s a front-line #2 or #3 SP.
They also see his 2008 ERA and think he's somehow a good pitcher.
"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
A lot of A's fans are gun shy
it;s only natural after three consecutive loosing seasons.
Next up
Three consecutive tightening seasons.
I guess we forgot lefty loosy righty tighty?
"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 mnemonic always irritated me.
How is clockwise “right” and counterclockwise “left”? Sure, the top of the knob goes to the right when you turn clockwise but the bottom goes to the left.
Obviously it makes sense to everyone else, and my brain is just out of sync with the world. I have trouble with blue=cold and red=hot, too. I mean, I know that’s the standard, so it’s not like I ever get confused, but who decided that red is a “hot” color and blue is a “cold” color? Physically it makes more sense the other way around.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
This comment just makes me SO orange.
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
This mnemonic is clearly northocentric,
an artifact of hundreds of years of colonial domination of the southern hemisphere by the northern. One might be tempted to call it northologocentric, but perhaps that is redundant.
A Ballade [for the Angels Fan], by Eustache Deschamps: "We are cowardly, ill-formed and weak / Aged, envious and evil-spoken. / I see only fools and sots / Truly the end is nigh / All goes ill."
Seriously, it's deeper than that.
Yes, the world is northocentric, but why is north on top on maps in the first place? Somehow top is perceived to be more important and the northers, asserting their dominance, put themselves there. Why not put themselves on the right? On the bottom?
Maybe a similar attitude makes us think of clockwise and counterclockwise only in terms of what direction the top of the circle moves.
I don’t get why logocentrism is allegedly synonymous with phallocentrism. Male-dominated society, sure, I get that. The cultural drive to give focus meaning of things in their names, OK, I get that, too. But why is the latter perceived as a male trait? Women don’t like to name things, too? Women don’t strive to assert a vision of order on the universe, too?
Seems to me that the very act of calling logocentrism phallocentric, even if meant in a derogatory way, is itself phallocentric.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
It was pretty common as late as the 17th century for West to be at the top of a map
as in the map of the Netherlands in the background of Vermeer’s The Art of Painting:
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
Awesome. I didn't know that.
I wonder if top-centrism is specific to our Western culture, rather than universal. Islamic culture, which is in some ways Western and in some ways not, emphasizes centrality rather than uppermostness, as is evident in numerous idioms in the Arabic, Persian, and Turkish languages. There, the status position is to be in the middle/inside rather than on top.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
well, china means "middle kingdom"
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
Yes, the world is northocentric, but why is north on top on maps in the first place? Somehow top is perceived to be more important and the northers, asserting their dominance, put themselves there.
the north is, objectively, far more important, at least for humans. the southern hemisphere is mostly water and an empty continent (aside from a few hundred northerners):
all of asia, europe, north/central america are in the northern hemisphere, as is part of south america (north of the amazon delta, which is right at the equator) and most of africa.
the southern hemisphere is like 10% of the global population, both india and china are far more populous just by themselves…
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
You're overthinking it, I suppose.
Here’s why: Pretend you’re standing on the knob (facing the same direction you would be to turn it). Tightening is ALWAYS to your right. Always. Even when you’re upside-down on the bottom as it’s being turned, your right-hand side is still the direction of “tighter.”
The mnemonic makes perfect sense if you assume 12:00 as the starting point, and I think it’s fairly normal to do that.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 25, 2010 12:36 AM PST up reply actions
Sure, I know.
I know how you’re supposed to think it. I’m just saying it’s not intuitive to me.
In this picture, for example,
To tighten, the hand needs to turn the wrench to the left, not to the right. To me, that’s the natural way of thinking of using a wrench. You don’t generally position the wrench on the far side of bolt and push it away from you.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
As from Physics, it's always "frame of reference" (Sorry for the accidental entry, finger hit the wrong key)
If you’re standing exactly on the North Pole, every direction will be “South.”
I had the same problem before but eventually you’re forced to realize the conventions. Science does that a lot because you can look at things pretty much any which way
I agree, the Angels still have some good pitching and some offense
and not just old guys either; Kendry Morales’ 2009 was not a fluke.
But they won’t run away with the division. I think it’s going to be pretty close.
My guess would be that the A’s wind up in third place, though with a good season they could be the surprise second place finishers (shades of 1999).
I think the team that comes in fourth will be the team with the most injuries. (JINX)
I'm with you
I think the division will be close, and the Angels don’t appear to be good enough to coast to another division win. But I don’t see them go first to last.
@worldblee on Twitter.
Thanks for sharing BBG.....
The way I see it, the Angels are still the team to beat, and they are very beatable. The real question is “who is going to stay the healthiest over the course of the season?”.
As you alluded to, Duke has already got an “owie”, so that is not a good sign for us, and I think the A’s track record of dead bodies this decade speaks fir itself. Seattle, has the best 1-2 punch in their rotation right now, and then I think the A’s, if healthy, sport the best 1-5 ( I’m thinking Sheets, Duke, Anderson, Braden, and Gio) starting rotation, with the Angels right behind us. Texas is starting to improve in the pitching department with the young talent coming up, but they still don’t come close to the A’s, Angels, or Mariners. Bullpen wise, the A’s look to be deepest and nastiest…
On offense, who the hell knows? Texas is still going to score runs in that ballpark in Arlington even though their offense isn’t what it used to be. Angels are always going to find a way to manufacture their way to wins, somehow. Seattle has really good defense and pitching to keep them around and Bradley and Figgins are definitely going to add some runs to that team.
The A’s….we saw what being aggressive in the second half of the season did for them, even in the face of a virtual power outage (HR’s). Stealing bases, taking the extra base from 1st to third, putting pressure on the opposing pitcher, hit and run, all did the A’s a lot of good and showed some promise of the offense figuring out how to score without the long ball.
I’m predicting a really good year from Ryan Sweeney….I just have this feeling that he’s gonna open some eyes around the league and around here. Would also like to see if Barton is for real or not….this is the year he better put up or shut up. Go A’s and Happy Humpday everyone….!
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
If the question is really "who is going to stay the healthiest over the course of the season?",
that’s not good news for our heroes.
But baseball! Fuck yeah! -- lynnzgal
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 24, 2010 9:21 AM PST up reply actions
I'm getting worried.
I not only can’t feel Dallas Braden’s toes, I can’t feel any of the rest of our staff’s toes, either!
There is no "i" in Teamocil. At least not where you'd think.
by GreenNGoldSooner on Feb 24, 2010 9:47 AM PST up reply actions
But at least you still have your pants....!
{ jumps over Nico’s backyard fence….runs for cover…}
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
Haha, not so much, no.
Do we have the latest on Duke?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 9:52 AM PST up reply actions
We do...from that same Fox article
Justin Duchscherer is expected to stop by today after his nerve ablation procedure yesterday; he’s still a little on the sore side, apparently, but he’s only a few days behind the other starters at this point and it’s believed he’ll be OK to throw within the week.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/athletics/detail?blogid=21&entry_id=57865#ixzz0gTiblILD
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
And I think that IS the question
The A’s entire pitching staff has to be healthy for them to make a real run at it. They might be able to pull it off with Duke and Sheets, but I don’t think the rest can step it up quite yet to that level.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 9:56 AM PST up reply actions
Brett Anderson stands to have the best season out of all of them, in my opinion BBG.
Thanks for the update on Duke by the way…
:)
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
I agree...I'm also trying not to jinx him ;-)
Anderson is right there, of course, but I think it severely drops off after that…totally depending on Braden’s toes, of course :-) But Anderson, Sheets, and Duke, would be enough to win some games, but will we see them all together?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
Exactly...
Don’t forget about Gio-Metro…..he could also finally put it all together this year. Crossing my fingers…
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
I agree. Anderson is the ace of this team.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 11:13 AM PST up reply actions
If Duke and Sheets are at their all-star levels then... look-out!
If they aren’t… then, well, look-out below because we’re falling fast.
"The only way I'm going to get a Gold Glove is with a can of spray paint." - Reggie Jackson
by the_rozeboom on Feb 24, 2010 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
I agree with the Rangers being the team to beat. They're like the 2000 A's.
Hopefully the A’s will be like the 2002 Angels.
But baseball! Fuck yeah! -- lynnzgal
I'd prefer the A's were like the '27 Yankees, but alive. And in 1927.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
I can see Taylor as Ruth and Carter as Gehrig. After that....
But baseball! Fuck yeah! -- lynnzgal
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 24, 2010 12:05 PM PST up reply actions
How about the '49 Yankees?
Went on to win 5 World Series in a row. I wouldn’t mind that.
"To tell the truth, I'm not excited to go to Cleveland, but we have to. If I ever saw myself saying I'm excited going to Cleveland, I'd punch myself in the face, because I'm lying" - Ichiro
by Philip Christy on Feb 24, 2010 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
5 WS is one year
No projection system could’ve predicted that!
"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
Did they just update that?
I checked last night…
"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 Feb 24, 2010 9:53 AM PST up reply actions
Im guessing you mean the A's?
Angels are still 76-86
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 9:59 AM PST up reply actions
Haha...wow man
The article was about the Angels, so just asking. Yikes.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 2:18 PM PST up reply actions
PECOTA Calculations
I am not too familiar with how they calculate their projections, but one guess I would make is that they don’t take into consideration some intangibles that the Angels have done well with. Situational baserunning maybe?
When its time to shoot, shoot... don't talk
by Charlie O the Mule on Feb 24, 2010 9:40 AM PST via mobile reply actions
That's exactly what I want to know.
What is it exactly about the Angels that is not being measured?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 9:53 AM PST up reply actions
It's a question with an answer that people have been furiously digging around for.
I’ve heard hypotheses about how LAA tends to be SLG-heavy rather than OBP-heavy, which leads to a more consistent run output.
But no definitive answer, not by a long shot.
Taken down with hearts alive, our hearts alive.
Thanks so much...I knew you would know!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:19 AM PST up reply actions
another possibility
Another theory is that the Angels have had unusually strong front half of the bullpens and weak bottom half of bullpens (remember Chris Bootcheck?), so they win a more by one and lose more by ten than you’d expect.
This too.
We almost never throw a pitcher out to the wolves like that. Teams would just tee off against their bad bullpen pitchers for innings and innings. If you consistently have an abnormally large amount of huge blowouts, Pythagorean is going to undervalue your team.
Taken down with hearts alive, our hearts alive.
But the first half of their bullpen was far from excellent last season.
"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
this is an answer
to the question about why the Angels outperform their Pythagorean record though, right?
There are really two different questions, that frequently get lumped together and confused (see my response above to PL78, for example):
- How have the Angels managed to have a consistently post a better actual record than Pythagorean record?
- Why have recent Angels teams, especially the 2009 team, had many players perform much better than projections?
Yes! This...
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:51 AM PST up reply actions
That second one? No idea.
Could be that there’s something to projections that we’re missing (but the Angels have in spades). Or it could be a statistical fluke. That’s something that particularly interesting (and relevant to us).
Taken down with hearts alive, our hearts alive.
I think the second question
is what baseballgirl was going for with this post. If we all think that the Angels will outperform the PECOTA predicition, then which players are the ones driving it (unless it all comes from beating their Pythag record)? Last year, Hunter, Morales, and Izturis (and maybe some more Angels that I’m not remembering) all played much better than their projections.
But yeah, it could have been a statistical fluctuation.
There are some clear answers
Mainly:
1) They’ve hit much better in high leverage situations than in low leverage situations, particularly relative to the league.
2) They’re excellent at non-SB/CS baserunning.
The latter is likely repeatable—given similar personnel—but the former is likely not.
by Danny on Feb 24, 2010 10:58 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The AL West will be an exciting race
But picking the Angels last, 10 games under .500 is ridiculous. I do agree that success will largely depend on health, and if all the A’s key players stay off the DL, that will be a victory in itself.
Looking at the Depth charts
They still predict the Angels to score more runs than the A’s or Mariners, which seems reasonable. it’s really the RA where they project the Angels to do terribly. My gut says that their projections for Weaver, Santana, and Piniero are all a bit too pessimistic, but my gut doesn’t have a great track record and projecting performance.
My gut tells me...
No way the Angels finish last and ten games below .500
And no way the Rangers end up winning the division (just because they’re the Rangers and will figure out a way to lose).
But, honestly, this prediction is probably as likely as any other outcome. This should be a very exciting season; anyone can take this division.
There is no "i" in Teamocil. At least not where you'd think.
by GreenNGoldSooner on Feb 24, 2010 9:50 AM PST reply actions
My gut says that if Ron Washington
bats Nelson Cruz 7th, and sits him in favor of Vlad, like he says he will, the Rangers will definitely find a way to lose.
Agree on the division race; it SHOULD be exciting!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 9:54 AM PST up reply actions
But my gut's also hungry...
… and therein lies the tension between discouraging free rodent upgrades and relying on random walkup business. LB, you should tarp your kitchen. And move to San Jose. -mb
by Leopold Bloom on Feb 24, 2010 9:57 PM PST up reply actions
WTF BBG WHY CAN'T YOU POST ANYTHING A'S RELATED
oh…
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Best part was that I was totally waiting for that.
Thanks for coming through. ;-)
"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 Feb 24, 2010 9:57 AM PST up reply actions
John 3:16!
(j/k)
There is no "i" in Teamocil. At least not where you'd think.
by GreenNGoldSooner on Feb 24, 2010 10:30 AM PST up reply actions
WTF BBG BBQ?
100% Athletics, 100% Baseball. 2009 Athletics, 40% Baseball.
Hey, folks, guess what? Turns out Jake Fox is, in fact, out of options.
Reported by SuSlu:
I checked with Fox this morning, however, because I’d heard from so many people who’d said he’s out of options, and he insisted that he was out and was horrified to think otherwise. He said his agents also had confirmed that.
So I asked the A’s yet again, and – yes, Jake Fox is right. He’s out of options. “Brain cramp” on the A’s part, I was told.
My guess is that the brain cramp will send Beane to the DL for at least 15 days.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
Yeah, that was Friday's post, but it's true
All of our speculation about the 25-man roster is now moot…they HAVE to take Fox, or lose him.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 9:59 AM PST up reply actions
And with the A's' amazing conditioning program, there is absolutely no way, no how, that the roster crunch will be solved by an injury.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
No kidding! But if they choose Chavez and lose out on Fox
I’m going to FLIP OUT, and I’m not kidding.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:09 AM PST up reply actions
A Compromise
Hire Chavvy as a extra ball boy. That way he can sit on the bench in an A’s uniform and we won’t have to use a roster slot.
There is no "i" in Teamocil. At least not where you'd think.
by GreenNGoldSooner on Feb 24, 2010 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
Oh....wait.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:51 AM PST up reply actions
Brain cramp?
Wow…that’s not good.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 10:00 AM PST up reply actions
I just realized....
I CAN’T FEEL MY BRAIN!
There is no "i" in Teamocil. At least not where you'd think.
by GreenNGoldSooner on Feb 24, 2010 10:33 AM PST up reply actions
Perfect! Haha.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:33 AM PST up reply actions
Don't worry, the A's front office is only day-to-day with a brain cramp
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 11:16 AM PST up reply actions
Beane’s hypothalamus will be radiologically ablated at 11:30 Phoenix time. He is expected to be thinking again by Friday.
Haha...awesome.
HOW do you miss THAT?! Seriously…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 Feb 24, 2010 10:09 AM PST up reply actions
Jake Fox is wrong
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I’m not sure Fox knows the CBA by chapter and verse. There is a clause in the CBA that states a player must spend 20 days in the minor leagues for the option to be used/spent/whatever.
It is true that Fox was optioned to AAA during the 2007 season, but according to the transaction history on MLB.com that happened on July 27th. He was recalled on August 14th. Assuming those two dates are correct (and I haven’t seen any info to the contrary) then Jake Fox did not spend 20 days in the minor leagues after he was added to the 40 man roster. If the above dates are correct he did not burn an option in 2007.
The monster at the end of this blog.
WHOA...really!?
That is very interesting…I wonder how we can find out for sure. I’m sure the A’s are digging right now, if they admitted to Slusser that they had overlooked this…
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
Meaning, the A's DID confirm that he was out of options
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
Seriously!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
Awesome...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 Feb 24, 2010 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
The A's confirmed he is out of options in Slusser's story.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
If the transaction dates are correct, than the CBA says otherwise
You simply can’t get 20 days in the minors from July 27 – August 14. Time of day matters in the counting process, but at most you’re looking at a 19 day stay in AAA.
Someone want to check Rotoworld to see if they have different transaction dates? Sometimes they differ with MLB.com by a day or two which would have an affect. I can’t go to Rotoworld at work.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Well, he played in the Majoe July 26 and August 15th
So your dates have to be right.
As for Rotoworld:
Jake Fox-3B- Athletics Aug. 14 – 6:28 pm et
Cubs recalled catcher-outfielder Jake Fox from Triple-A Iowa.
Fox was up last month, but he was a non-factor, getting two at-bats in eight days. He might only hang around until Cliff Floyd returns from the bereavement list.
Jake Fox-3B- Athletics Aug. 14 – 12:45 pm et
The Cubs will call up Jake Fox and left-hander Carmen Pignatiello prior to Tuesday’s game. It’s not known who are being sent down, but Eric Patterson and Sean Gallagher seem to be in danger. It’s about time that Pignatiello was given a chance after all of the success he’s had as a minor league reliever. Fox was up last month and received two at-bats in eight days.
Source: Chicago Tribune
Jake Fox-3B- Athletics Jul. 27 – 6:00 pm et
Cubs optioned catcher-first baseman Jake Fox to Triple-A Iowa.
We’re still not sure why he was called up in the first place. Fox had all of two at-bats in eight days with the Cubs.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 10:38 AM PST up reply actions
Clearly went back to 07....
They just update his team for all notes.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 10:40 AM PST up reply actions
Thanks
Now is it “affect” or “effect”? I always get the rule mixed up.
The monster at the end of this blog.
in that case, it would be "effect"
Effect: Drugs have an effect on you.
Affect: If the A’s had signed John Lackey, it would have had an affect on what I think 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
First one is right...
Drugs have an effect on you (noun)
But this one is for affect:
I was affected by the drugs. (verb)
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
Yes. I was going for the most used.
But yeah, they can both switch in different meanings.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
Actually
Can you also check to see when he first got called up? MLB.com says he was selected… which I take to mean his contract was purchased. Do it say Fox was re-called on July 19 or selected/contract purchased?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Contract Purchase - 07/19/2007
Jake Fox 3b-of-c
1 year/$0.4015M (2009)
1 year/$0.4015M (2009)
re-signed by Cubs 2/25/09
acquired by Oakland in trade from Chicago Cubs 12/3/09
1 year (2008)
1 year (2007)
contract purchased 7/19/07
drafted 2003 (3-73) (Michigan)
$0.5M signing bonus
ML service: 0.145
by Colorado Fan on Feb 24, 2010 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
That's from Cots
Which is where I got the 7/19 start date, confirmed by MLB.com I just wanted to know if Rotoworld said anything different.
The monster at the end of this blog.
What's it mean, grover?
What’s it mean?
This is fun.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:56 AM PST up reply actions
Never a doubt.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
This is what they have....
Jake Fox-3B- Athletics Jul. 19 – 1:03 pm et
Cubs purchased the contract of catcher Jake Fox from Double-A Tennessee.
Well, he’s not really a catcher, but he might be able to contribute off the bench. Fox, who turns 25 tomorrow, was hitting .284/.327/.504 with 18 homers for Tennessee. Besides being able to serve as a third catcher, he can act as a backup in left field and at first base. He might get a couple of starts before Derrek Lee returns. He shouldn’t have any fantasy value, though.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 11:01 AM PST up reply actions
Sorry to keep asking but...
Can you check to see what it says about Fox at the end of ST, 2007? Does it say he was optioned down to the minors or re-assigned?
Thanks for this.
The monster at the end of this blog.
This is all they have close to that timeframe....
Apr. 8 – 2:20 pm et
Jake Fox homered twice and doubled twice Saturday for Double-A West Tenn.
Fox made a nice impression on the Cubs with his bat this spring. Unfortunately, he’s a long shot to make it to the majors as a catcher and he’s probably not going to hit enough to make it at first base even on a team without Derrek Lee. His best hope would be to find a team that doesn’t mind carrying an offensive-minded backup.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
I have an answer...
Was he was on the 40-man roster that spring? If he was sent the minors before the season begins, is that his option?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
Nevermind...see above.
You have the same answer.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:16 AM PST up reply actions
For the record...
A player has to spend 20 days in the minors (not necessarily AAA) for the option to be used. I might have said AAA in Fox’s case ‘cause that’s where he went.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Question
Do those 20 days have to be consecutive?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:40 AM PST up reply actions
i.e. If he spend more than 20 days during the season
Would that take the option?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:42 AM PST up reply actions
As best as I can figure... no, the days don't have to be consecutive
The wording (to me) is a little vague on that point but I believe it was NSJ made the argument that the rule counted as 20 days through the course of a season.
The monster at the end of this blog.
So if he spent more than 20 days in AAA
during the season, he used an option.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:52 AM PST up reply actions
News article from send down if helps...March 07
Five non-roster invitees were also returned to minor-league camp: left-handed pitchers Ryan O’Malley and Carmen Pignatiello, infielders Casey McGehee and Micah Hoffpauir and catcher Jake Fox.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 11:21 AM PST up reply actions
And one more since the words were key
CHICAGO CUBS—Optioned LHP Sean Marshall, RHP Carlos Marmol and C Geovany Soto to Iowa of the PCL. Reassigned LHP Ryan O’Malley, LHP Carmen Pignatiello, INF Casey McGehee, INF Micah Hoffpauir and C Jake Fox to their minor league camp.
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Feb 24, 2010 11:23 AM PST up reply actions
She replied to my e-mail
Although i’m not sure what her reply meant.
The monster at the end of this blog.
What did she say?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 10:56 AM PST up reply actions
She said...
“20 days”. Not 20 years. That would be a long minor league assignment.
Which led to my reply:
Huh?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Did you accidentally write "years"
instead of “days?”
I asked Christina Kahrl this last week when she reported Fox was out of options. She didn’t respond until today, citing Slusser as support.
Okay, I have a possible answer...
Was he on the 40 man roster that spring? Is it an option if he’s send down THEN?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
No
He wasn’t added to the 40 man that offseason, and he was eligible for the Rule 5 draft.
20 years bit... I think she sent me two e-mails
And I got the one clarifying the typo before I got the one with the typo.
The monster at the end of this blog.
You're right.
Five non-roster invitees were also returned to minor-league camp: left-handed pitchers Ryan O’Malley and Carmen Pignatiello, infielders Casey McGehee and Micah Hoffpauir and catcher Jake Fox.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:22 AM PST up reply actions
(from oaktownpower)
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:22 AM PST up reply actions
wait, so is this the answer?
That he wasn’t on the 40 man, therefore an option was used?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:23 AM PST up reply actions
No
Beacause he wasn’t on the 40 man roster, the Cubs did not use an option when they reassigned him to the minors at the end of ST, 2007.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Then you are right.
he should have an option left.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:25 AM PST up reply actions
Please say that again
You know, the part when you say “I’m right”. ;-)
Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
The monster at the end of this blog.
You're dead right.
I think Fox still has an option, unless there is another rule we haven’t thought of!
a) He didn’t spend 20 days in AAA in 2007 to use an option
b) He wasn’t on the 40-man to start the season (Cubs) so didn’t use an option to go to AAA at the start of the season.
What 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 Feb 24, 2010 11:28 AM PST up reply actions
but you ARE warm and fuzzy.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
No, an option is only used if he WAS on the 40 man
and he wasn’t!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:24 AM PST up reply actions
Alright, that seemed a little backwards
So, what are the A’s looking at that we aren’t? Or vice versa?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:26 AM PST up reply actions
Two possibilities:
1) They think he was on the 40-man roster of the Cubs in 2007, and used an option when he started the year at AAA
2) They think he spent 20 days in AAA to use an option July-Aug of 2007. As grover pointed out, he could have only been there 19 days; oaktownpower pointed out that he played in the majors before and after the supposed 20 day span.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:30 AM PST up reply actions
Or some rule that we DON'T know.
And grover would have to answer that.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:30 AM PST up reply actions
Say what?
How am I supposed to provide answers for something I don’t know about?
The monster at the end of this blog.
No, that WE don't know about
You’re the smartie :-) It was the royal ‘we’, did not include you.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
OK
Using an option requires two parts. First, the team has to option the player to the minors. The Cubs did this when they optioned Fox down to AAA on July 27th.
The second part, the part that actually “burns” the option, is that the player has to stay down in the minors for 20 days. That didn’t happen with Fox. He was recalled on August 14.
The A’s are probably thinking: “Oops! The Cubs did option Fox down at the end of July, therefore they burned the option.” They didn’t count the days.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Thanks for the explanation
Assuming it truly is a brain fart, I wonder if the A’s can say something like “well, crap, the Cubs didn’t tell us that”? There’s obviously due diligence that wasn’t done, but it seems not having this detail clear would fall on the Cubs to some extent.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:36 AM PST up reply actions
I'm sure they're working on it
they’ve got enough emails/tweets from us, that’s for sure. I’m interested to see why he’s out of options (if he is)…
…and why we didn’t know until now!!!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:44 AM PST up reply actions
I found the answer
He was optioned back down on August 24th, even though it’s not listed on the MLB transactions. This explains why he didn’t play after that date.
See you soon? To make room for Monroe, the Cubs optioned Jake Fox back to Triple-A, but he may be back up as soon as rosters expand.
“I appreciated the opportunity,” said Fox. “Hopefully, I’ll be back here in a week or so. They haven’t told me anything yet. Anytime you can get a veteran like Monroe, I understand what happens. You’re in a playoff race, and sometimes the veterans are the guys that can make a difference. I’m just going to go down and continue to work hard.”
I don't know
But, for confirmation, he was playing for the Iowa Cubs in September 2007.
Could you do me a favor and check the rotoworld angle?
My work won’t let me access the site.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I need to know how hard to kick myself
I can forgive myself for not seeing the demotion on the MLB.com transaction page… ‘cause they didn’t bother to include it! I used Rotoworld as a 2nd source to check my facts. If they screwed up as well I’m only a little embarrassed by my gaffe.
The monster at the end of this blog.
A's confirm he is out of options
**UPDATE**OK, there has been a lot more discussion this morning about Jake Fox’s options, and he still doesn’t have any left. The issues revolved around when his contract was first purchased (July 2007) and whether he then spent enough time in the minors after that to qualify that as an option year.
Here is the timeline that a member of the A’s front office forwarded me:
Fox selected to ML roster July 19, 2007.
Optioned July 27.
Recalled Aug. 14. (No optioned used, not 20 days)
Optioned Aug. 24 for remainder of season. (Option)
Also optioned in 2008 and 2009.
Apparently the Aug. 24 transaction was not accounted for on various sites, which seems to have led to a lot of confusion and probably more wasted time than members of the A’s front office might have liked. Thanks to them for their patience in helping clear this up; I’m impressed how many people took an interest in this and tried to track down as much information as possible.
It would be nice if MLB just provided full information about option status every spring so we could avoid all this; I remember one spring telling Dan Meyer that he had a fourth option and how upset he was to learn that. He’d had no idea. Safe to say, that ruined his spring and probably a lot of his year. Options are one of the trickier bits of business around, which is why I usually just ask the experts.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:58 PM PST up reply actions
I'll take the blame for stirring up the ruckus
But damn MLB.com and Rotoworld for not doing their job. DAMN THEM TO HELL!!!
The monster at the end of this blog.
Agreed
And why didn’t the A’s seem to know this before TODAY?
"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 Feb 24, 2010 2:09 PM PST up reply actions
Nothing about Fox between 8/14/07 and 3/11/08
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
Any chance Fox was sent back down ala' Patterson after the August call-up?
There’s no mention of Fox getting sent back down via MLB.com. What about Rotoworld?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Rotoworld has nothing about Fox
from 8/14/07 and 3/11/07
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:01 PM PST up reply actions
3/11/08
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:01 PM PST up reply actions
20 years would be a better story than the Fox one
Although, he’s NOT going to be pleased at this news.
But if his career depends on Chavez getting injured…well…let’s look at those odds.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:06 AM PST up reply actions
Weirdly enough, she said something about asking ESPN.
Taken down with hearts alive, our hearts alive.
snicker.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:06 AM PST up reply actions
She better not make fun of Chris Berman
ESPN might suspend her.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 11:19 AM PST up reply actions
A more pressing issue
is what to do now that my 5-year old nephew has joined the Angels in his T-ball league.
I mean, do I cheer for him?
I'm here to talk about the past.
You just can't.
He’ll get used to boos early.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:10 PM PST up reply actions
Ask him how come his t-ball team always outperforms their Pythag and their PECOTA projections
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
QOTM
fantastic
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
Knowing him, he might actually have an answer.
Oh, and I agree with the girl up there.
I'm here to talk about the past.
Hey everyone!
Well, I got to know some of you better today, which was fun. :)
The timeline provided by the front office should be up on the Drumbeat blog; it shows Fox was sent down for good Aug. 24. I’m not sure why that seems to have been missed so many places, but the A"s media guide does say he only had those two stints, including one from Aug. 14-24.
I’m impressed how many of you care and devoted so much time to this!
thank YOU susan for paying attention to us ANers
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks so much for the update!
We have been discussion Chavez vs. Fox all season, and this DEFINITELY changes things!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
Can you let rotoworld know so I can get a definitive answer? :-D
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I just appreciate all those nice things you said about me in the previous thread.
… and therein lies the tension between discouraging free rodent upgrades and relying on random walkup business. LB, you should tarp your kitchen. And move to San Jose. -mb
by Leopold Bloom on Feb 24, 2010 10:06 PM PST up reply actions
slusser just said linky.
… and therein lies the tension between discouraging free rodent upgrades and relying on random walkup business. LB, you should tarp your kitchen. And move to San Jose. -mb
by Leopold Bloom on Feb 24, 2010 10:08 PM PST up reply actions
No, that's Lusser who said "slinky"
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
Also
Having known Jake Fox all of two days, I can already guarantee you he will LOVE that everyone spent the morning trying to track down all of this. He’s got a big personality – someone described him as Byrnes-like to me, but honestly, he’s even more intense. Lots of eye contact, booming voice, very friendly and upbeat.
He’s football coach-level intense just while having a conversation; I can only imagine what he’s like on the field.
Thanks again, Susan!
I’m not sure how safe an Eric-Byrnes-in-a-Jake-Fox-sized-body sounds. Tell Chavy and Ellis let him catch all the popups.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
Well, if Fox really wants to make the team
All he has to do is compete for a popup with Chavy and…WHAM. One roster spot for the Fox-meister.
@worldblee on Twitter.
Well, I was already rooting for him to make the squad
And this description just reinforces that. By, like, a million.
"Smokey, this be not the foul jungles of the darkest East Orient. This be ninepins. We are bound by laws."
He's our pick to make the 25-man
Send him our way! :-)
"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 Feb 24, 2010 2:10 PM PST up reply actions
So I guess Jake Fox...
Is out of options…
by ElQuesoCapitan on Feb 24, 2010 1:49 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am Ray Fosse's infatuations with Clay Wood and high-definition television.
by franks a lot on Feb 24, 2010 2:24 PM PST up reply actions
glorious
If Pennington manages 17 HRs, I’ll vow to consume an article of clothing to achieve a humorous effect --Joey C.
okay, so fox is out of options
are the a’s saying they didn’t know that when they acquired him?
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
It looks like they missed something, doesn't it?
Just about every report on the 25-man I’ve read this off-season talks about sending Fox down, as if it’s an option. Clearly, it’s not. Which means Chavez’ chances of making the team just went down too.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 2:11 PM PST up reply actions
Actually... no
There does seem to be some mis-communication between whomever originally told Slusser that Fox did have an option remaining and whomever straightened out the situation today.
The monster at the end of this blog.
If that's the case, that's really stupid...
If you don’t know one of the major issues with a player you trade for, someone’s not doing their job.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
The A's knew his status all along
When I asked about him originally, the person I spoke to just spaced on it, and having done that on myself on occasion (lots of occasions), that happens. A miscommunication is all. There is no doubt at all they knew his roster status.
Strange that it wasn't out there
Everything I’ve read/studied this year made it seem like sending him to AAA was an option.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 5:00 PM PST up reply actions
That's because every commentator all over the Internet
was looking at the same MLB.com info that grover was.
We get so used to having accurate data at our fingertips that we focus all our attention on debating how to interpret it. It doesn’t occur to anyone to question if the numbers everyone is working with aren’t actually correct.
Somewhere upthread someone said something like, “with all due respect, Jake Fox probably doesn’t know the details of the option rules as well as we do.” And indeed he may not. But he does know when he was sent down, even if MLB fails to report it correctly, better than all of us do.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
For the record...
When I researched player options I cross checked every transaction using MLB.com and Rotoworld. After yesterday’s debacle I went to Evil Septic Putrid Necrophiliacs.com and checked their transaction page and no shock… they missed the August 24th option as well. Foxsports’ Cubs transaction page doesn’t go back to 2007. Baseball-Referrence doesn’t keep a complete record of team transactions. The only data base that I’m aware of which actually caught the August 24th option was Baseball America. So why didn’t I use BA as a cross-check? Because their transaction page records moves in week-long blocks and does not always give a specific date for when the move occured. And when you’re counting to 20 to make sure an option got burned having the date of a transaction helps.
Point is, I got the call wrong. Fox is out of options. But don’t assume the research methods I used where inadequate or faulty.
As for the “with all due respect” bit, that was me as well. I have no doubt that Fox realized he was in Iowa from the end of July to mid-August but I thought he might not have been aware that he hadn’t been in Heaven long enough to burn an option. And since I wasn’t aware of the August 24th demotion I never thought to ask how his second trip to Iowa went.
The monster at the end of this blog.
It is an interesting characteristic of the Internet
that what we like to think of as multiple sources are often not so multiple at all. I’d bet that the reason everyone but BA got it wrong is because they all copied from the each other or some common source.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Quelle Surprise
This is a bible based pun, and I’m not afraid to admit it.
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
The ninth fastest thirty year old in San Francisco
Considering that Rotoworld and MLB.com
tended to differ on the exact date of the transaction I was under the (probably) mistaken impression that they were getting their info from 2 different sources!
The monster at the end of this blog.
Hmm, which of those two is more prone to making typos...?
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Ask Tom Lasorda...
….about Jeff Shaw. When Tommy took over in LA as interim GM he traded for Shaw (apparently) without realizing that Shaw would be able to exercise his 5/10 rights and demand a trade. They had to throw a ton of money at him to keep him from leaving, when the whole point was to trade for a guy making below-market.
What happens now?
Both Jake Fox and Eric Patterson are out of options.
The purpose of trading for Rosales was to have a utility infielder with SS ability.
A’s are fooling themselves that Chavez can be a utility player like Crosby since they are stuck with his contract.
All 3 Fox,Chavez,and Powell have been working at 1b.Probably not a huge vote of confidence for Barton.
Fox and Patterson could fill in the OF, so how does this influence Grossand Buck chances.
Best case scenario: chavez retires and leaves $15 mill on the table or takes a buy out.
Most likely: Both Fox, Gross, and Chavez kept on 25 man roster. Patterson traded for cash or ptbnl. Rosales and Buck in AAA.
And with typical A's injury luck
THIS will be the year spring injuries don’t solve these roster problems for the A’s.
Being so early I’m not too worried (only disappointed the A’s seem to have missed this when they acquired Fox.) In the next six weeks something will happen, someone will get hurt to solve it. Maybe a trade.
But wouldn’t it be classic if this is the year the A’s have a healthy spring, leading to a dilemma around this?
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 24, 2010 2:52 PM PST up reply actions
The logical thing to do is to cut Chavez.
But the A’s won’t do that out of sentimentality + Chavez’s 12 million dollars owed this year.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 24, 2010 4:04 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with you
but they HAVE to keep Fox. They will lose him.
"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 Feb 24, 2010 5:01 PM PST up reply actions
Wait a sec...
Wouldn’t the logical thing be for the A’s to try and get some return on their $12 million investment this season? Or are you convinced that Chavez’s skills have so eroded due to injury that there’s virtually no chance he can be a positive contributor to a baseball team?
The monster at the end of this blog.
That's not a totally unreasonable belief
I don’t think they should cut him NOW, but if everybody is healthy coming out of spring training, I think there has to be discussion about it.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 6:40 PM PST up reply actions
The second one.
What are the chances that Chavez’s bat, after two years and multiple shoulder/back surgeries, will still outperform Barton’s or even Fox’s? And is he gonna provide any defensive value whatsoever, after coming off said surgeries, at positions he’s just learning now?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 24, 2010 6:58 PM PST up reply actions
^^^^^
this
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:21 PM PST up reply actions
there is no reason to think the A's don't understand sunk costs...
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
I'm sure they do.
But that’s not the only way the A’s look at players. The emotional aspect of cutting Chavez will factor into Beane’s decision making.
At the end of spring, if everyone is healthy but Barton, Fox, etc all outperformed Chavez, do you really think the A’s would cut him?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 24, 2010 7:58 PM PST up reply actions
Especially if Chavez looks at Billy with those big brown eyes and says,
“But I just got a first baseman’s glove and everything!”
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
SAD!!!!!!
TEARS!
"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 Feb 24, 2010 11:22 PM PST up reply actions
there isn't?
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
example?
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
i can't think of any of the top of my head, but there have been plenty of a's players who have been kept around even when they're contributing little
chavez, crosby, nomar, giambi, piazza,etc. i’m not going to do the research to figure out if any of those were the result of the a’s not understanding sunk costs or if it just seemed that way at the time because of irrational fan frustration.
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
Each of those can be explained by
some combination of sentimentality and keeping a promise made to the player when signed.
Anyway, I don’t think any example would really demonstrate inability to understand sunk costs, because you would never know if they really don’t understand them or do understand them but are making decisions based on other criteria anyway.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Chavez: should they have cut him prior to this year?
Crosby: Signed Cabrera last year; tried to sign Furcal.
Nomar: You got me there, I guess, but he stopped playing.
Giambi: released, counterexample
piazza: got a lot less pt when he came back from injury; A’s undertook moving him to C charade to keep him from coming off the DL too soon.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
Wait was there any particular reason DFA never got DFA'd in 08?
Too many injuries…?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 25, 2010 5:52 PM PST up reply actions
Am I the only one who considers Patterson a total non-entity?
I just don’t see how he makes this team better. At all. I think there’s a halfway decent chance he’d pass through waivers, too.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 6:39 PM PST up reply actions
After giving serious consideration to your question...
Who?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Feb 24, 2010 6:54 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
nice
I agree on dropping Patterson over Fox. But the other problem that needs to be addressed is who on the bench can back up Pennington at SS. I really don’t believe the rumors that Chavez could play there. But I do sort of like the strategy of just not giving Pennington any days off until the situation sorts itself out.
I think he should be a non-entity
but I don’t think he would get all the way passed 29 other teams.
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
I wouldn't guarantee such a thing, but it also wouldn't surprise me.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 8:37 PM PST up reply actions
What WOULD surprise me is if I cared.
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
Is Barton out of options?
Another alternative would be to start Barton in the minors, and have the season start with Chavez, Fox and Patterson on the MLB club. So then you have:
1B: Chavez
2B: Ellis
SS: Pennington
3B: Kouz
OF: Crisp, Davis, Sweeney
C: Suzuki
DH: Cust
Backup infield: Fox
Backup outfield: Gross
Backup catcher: Powell
Backup infield/outfield: Patterson
Bringing to a total of 13.
Barton
I think having him in the minors is a waste of time since his .372 on-base percentage was one of the best marks on the team, I think, even if it was a small sample size.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Feb 24, 2010 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
That's not an alternative that should be considered if the A's are actually interested in, you know, winning baseball games
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Are we sure they are though?
Serious question. Signing Sheets doesn’t indicate that to me (it indicates they don’t want to keep rushing not-ready pitchers/they’re hoping he’s a Type B after the season)).
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 6:41 PM PST up reply actions
isn't there one of those non arb offers for sheets?
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
yeah, but only if he's Type A
If he’s Type B, then we can offer him arbitration and get a draft pick when he declines and signs elsewhere. The crucial thing with Type B is that the team that signs him won’t lose a draft pick, so it doesn’t really hurt Sheets on the FA market.
And he basically can't be type A anyway
Because of the missed time. Right?
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Well, I'd agree with that if the proverbial "they" weren't saying Cahill is apparently the frontrunner for the #5 spot.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
He might very well win it
But he’s not the only young pitcher who could use some more AAA time (Mazzaro comes to mind). In general, Sheets is a lottery ticket whose presence accomplishes a few things that don’t have anything to do with winning games this year (limiting major league innings/service time of young pitchers, setting up for a mid-season trade for prospects or perhaps getting a sandwich pick out of a Type B Sheets after the year, etc.). He probably will help them win some games, but as the main “win now” type of acquisition, I’m not sure he was really acquired so they can win now.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 24, 2010 8:39 PM PST up reply actions
My take is that Beane's philosophy right now is,
“The road to competing begins with .500.” This season, and last season too I think, he tried to build a team that might be 81+ win worthy at the outset, hoping that a little good fortune might lead to being “July buyers,” and so on.
And given that this time none of the future was mortgaged to accomplish this, I’m all for it.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I sure hope not
That’s a deeply foolish way to build a roster.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Sure, but ASSUMING HEALTH IS OKAY I'd figure that a few guys are locks for the rotation
Anderson
Sheets
Duchscherer
Braden
I don’t think Gio has anything to prove at AAA, where I agree that Mazzaro needs a season there, and Cahill as well.
Honestly, I’d rather see a guy like DiNardo or Saarloos (wait, he went to the minors right?) take the 5th starter spot if, in fact, the “Sheets was signed to keep them from rushing guys” theory has some truth behind it.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Well, I think it was one reason they signed him
It also makes the team better if he is even kind of healthy. And it might get them prospects down the road. There’s a lot of reasons to sign him. I just don’t think “win in 2010” is necessarily the top one.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 25, 2010 12:38 AM PST up reply actions
oh brother
YES DUDE BEANE NEVER TRIES TO WIN. YOU ARE CORRECT.
someone shoot me in the face already, sheesh.
Since I've been hanging out here so much today
May I direct you to the Bobby Cassevah/Josh Donaldson piece I had in this morning’s Chron? I think it got a little lost in the paper with the Olympics and other things going on, but I can’t get over the fact they’ve been best friends since they were 5. It’s so unusual.
Also, I provided a link! I’ll try not to break the thing I always whine about.
There isn't confusion about remaining options, is there?
I’ve had enough of that for the day.
The monster at the end of this blog.
That was a very good piece
and it was interesting to see the A’s FO themselves make the comparison to Steinbach. You might have seen all the discussions about Donaldson over the last year, especially this offseason. After the potential superstars, he’s one of the minor leaguers ANers are keeping an eye on, although he’s another guy whose future is made a little more uncertain by the trade for Kouzmanoff.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
I saw this earlier
I was quite surprised of two players, the same age, one had yet to make it to AAA, whilst the other had just been picked up in the rule 5 draft… different paths, indeed
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
The ninth fastest thirty year old in San Francisco
Does Henry K Lee have a site he can post on to genrate a few more hits?
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
You should hang out here more.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I hang out here a lot.
You been a way for awhile. Maybe they didn’t come up there and tell you. I don’t shine shoes no more.
… and therein lies the tension between discouraging free rodent upgrades and relying on random walkup business. LB, you should tarp your kitchen. And move to San Jose. -mb
by Leopold Bloom on Feb 24, 2010 10:10 PM PST up reply actions
Link doesn't go to rotoworld
fail.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Fox is out of options?
That’s it, Game Over. Play again in 2011.
"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
Question -- With Fox and Chavez both masquerading as OFers,
is it possible to keep, as the 4 bench players:
Chavez
Fox
Rosales
Powell
That’s my vote.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
That means no Gross (or Davis or Crisp), and they can't send any of those guys to minors (nor should they want to)
Chavez is the obvious guy to be left off, and I bet he will be.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
I did forget about Gross
Just for the “Gross At The Net!” headlines, he has to stay.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I seriously doubt that
If Chavvy is healthy, why wouldn’t he be on the team?
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
roster crunches always work themselves out...
with 6 weeks or so to go, you can guarantee that there will be an injury, trade or a surprise candidate to make the team. Remember Todd Walker in ‘07, Powell and Bailey in ’09, nobody was talking about these guys and yet, they were on opening day rosters. There’s no point in trying to predict the 25-man roster when position players haven’t even been mandated to report to spring training. However, speculation and conjecture is all the fun.
Thanks SuSlu for your contributions to AN today! This just proves this blog is a cut above the rest.
"just a beating heart ... plasma that we'll put into our uniform." - Billy Beane
by athleticsBB4life on Feb 24, 2010 8:05 PM PST up reply actions
Scutaro had no options and was supposed to be "odd man out" twice
only to make the roster and start most of the year.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Because he is completely useless.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
Only because he can't physically stand up on a bus ride to Atlanta.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Not exactly
The statement was “if Chavez is healthy.” If that’s the case, he’s not useless.
I don’t see Chavez as a problem. If he’s healthy enough to contribute, he will be. if he’s not healthy, he’ll be on the DL and it won’t matter.
While they're laughing, can we shove giant metal rods down their throats?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Feb 25, 2010 12:39 AM PST up reply actions
I support this plan
"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 Feb 25, 2010 7:57 AM PST up reply actions
...
"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
Was it a bar or a bat I saw?
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Cahill and Gonzalez projections
I use these two sources for projections.
PECOTA and Baseball Notebook projections for Cahill and Gonzalez:
Cahill PECOTA 152 IP, 161 H, 19 HR, 64 BB, 89 SO, 4.66 ERA
Cahill B Notebook 153 IP, 141 H, 19 HR, 61 BB, 90 SO, 4.38 ERA
Gonzalez PECOTA 117 IP, 114 H, 15 HR, 62 BB, 116 SO, 4.61 ERA
Gonzalez B Notebook 66 IP, 62 H, 8 HR, 33 BB, 60 SO, 4.77 ERA
Cahill should definitely be in the Majors. IMO.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
