Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jeremy Lin's Game-Winner Was Incredible, Worth Remembering

"Cheaper" Ways To Bolster The Corner Outfield

Ideas are flowing fast and furious on how the A's might address what has emerged as a serious weakness: An outfield with much quantity, little quality, and no power at the corners. The idea of enticing Carl Crawford with gobs of cash has been floated, as has the possibility of trading for a power-hitter non grata such as Matt Kemp -- an idea I like but also recognize will not come cheaply in terms of talent, just as Crawford and even Jayson Werth, will not come cheaply in terms of, well, money.

First of all, I want to say that I'm not ok with either Conor Jackson or Ryan Sweeney going forward -- I see both as very good "place-holders" but not as the right pieces for the 2011-12 A's teams if they are going to go to the next level and contend.

Jackson's ".820-.840 OPS years" were 2007 and 2008 and since then he has been seriously ill and then hamstrung -- literally -- by injuries, and has gone from being a 15 HR guy to lately being more of a 1-2 HR guy. I see Jackson as a mediocre defensive player who is likeliest to play 100 games, not 150, and to slug around .420 with 10-12 HRs, not .460 with 18-20 HRs, and if I am going to put a meh defensive player out there I want him to really slug, not to kinda slug. (Funny note: I wrote this on Friday just before seeing that Jackson had gone on the DL yet again. Oy.)

Similarly, I think Ryan Sweeney is a really valuable RFer if he's playing "gold glove level" defense and hitting .320. But with his "single digit HR power," Sweeney profiles as a .290 hitter coming off knee surgery at the age of 25 and that's not what I feel the A's will need in RF. Without a lot of power on the infield, I think the A's flat out need a couple legitimate bats -- bats who belong in the 3-4-5 spots, bats with slugging attached -- even if Oakland has to give up a little defense to get there.

So I'm looking at the A's needing two more bats and also needing two COFers -- how convenient. Chris Carter may be one, we'll see. I'm still very optimistic, but that's only one if it's even one. Free agents and established sluggers are expensive, yet the A's need to find two guys to play LF and RF who can flat out hit. Here's one way to go...

Star-divide

 

When the A's acquired "soon to be major league ready" OFer Michael Taylor they were on the right track. They just may or may not have identified the right guy. Prospects have high flameout rates and if you want one "Michael Taylor" to pan out you might need to get two. I'd like to see the A's stockpile slugging COFers, targeting guys who are stuck in their current organization and who, because they're "major league ready" but not "major league tested," are available for less than you'd have to give up to acquire an established hitter.

One possibility is Todd Frazier (Reds). Frazier is 24, has been a good hitting prospect for years, but has still never cracked the Reds major league lineup. He has been a man without a position, most recently moving from 3B to LF, and at this point his biggest value to Cincinnati may be as a trade chip. He's also having a down year in AAA (.252/.323/438), which might lower his trade value nicely -- yet few doubt he can hit and even this year, despite concerns about his defense, John Sickels gave Frazier a robust B+ grade.

Another possibility is Allen Craig (Cardinals), winner of Sickels' 2010 "This Guy Can F***ing Hit" award. Having turned 26 last month, Craig has repeatedly stalled in St. Louis, but not for a lack of hitting. After batting .322/.374/.547 in 2009, Craig has hit .322/389/558 in AAA this year. (Note: Gaudy as they are, these stats should be viewed in the context that Craig is old for his league.) Craig has also recently moved from 3B to RF.

I would be happy to see the A's trade for not one but both of these guys, even if that means that in theory Frazier, Craig, Carter, and Taylor are competing for 2 COF spots in spring training of 2011. All four of these guys are at an age where if they can hit big league pitching they can be put in a big league lineup now, and the best two should be ready for prime time -- while two others can be at the ready at AAA until they force their way up.

The A's problem is not that they have good sluggers blocking other good sluggers. The A's problem is that they have so little to choose from that they have too many eggs (hopes) in too few baskets (players). True, any of these guys can be expected to struggle at the outset of 2011, but once you have the team that will grow up together and thrive together your rebuild is done -- now you just hope the adjustment comes sooner rather than later, knowing that someone will probably hit the ground running, someone else will probably get it going midway through 2011, and a couple might need more time or might flameout altogether. That still gives you the chance for a very good 2011 team and a great one going forward.

Plus, the asking price for Frazier and Craig should be low compared to the asking price for similar but younger prospects or proven big league sluggers. This frees the A's up to spend their free agent money where I think it belongs: Starting pitching.

Sign Brandon Webb, or Jorge De La Rosa, or Ted Lilly, and you have the depth to compete, as well as the depth to trade a pitcher if that's what you need to do in order to get real hitters for the middle of your order. I'm not worried about starting Vin Mazzaro in AAA. As an added benefit, but not as any sort of manipulative gimmick, you slow his service clock -- but what you really do is allow yourself not to miss a beat when your first injury hits. That's huge. Mazzaro would also become a reasonable trade chip if you had the chance to acquire Matt Kemp or similar "young slugger of your dreams."

So my questions to you, AN, are: How do you like the idea of trying to acquire one, or even both, of these "veteran minor league" sluggers rather than giving up better players/prospects to get an already proven slugger, and what do you think, realistically, the asking price would be for these two? I'm betting the A's could nab both these guys and still not mortgage pieces of the future that are wholly integral. And with the best 2 of those 4 flanking Crisp/Davis in the COF come April 2011, backed by the depth of two others pushing in AAA, I think now you're looking at a team that can contend sooner rather than later and is poised to compete for a long time.

Unless they all stink, of course.

Comment 754 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

We could do

what the Giants are doing ….. grab 17 OFs and hope 3-4 stick.

by Dub_TC on Aug 21, 2010 8:11 AM PDT reply actions  

The Giants are becoming the Island of Misfit Toys...

or the Island of Misfit Too-old Washed-out Corner Outfielders.

But Nico, I completely agree. Picking up Frazier or Craig (or guys like them) should be what we’re trying to do during the offseason. Of course, I’ll imagine we’ll have our share of Jake Fox sized flareouts with this tactic, but like you said: The key is to have enough of these guys that a pair will work.

Which is pretty much what the Gnats are doing, just on the other end of the career curve.

by kidlondon on Aug 21, 2010 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

What the Giants did was get lucky with Huff and Burrell.

Andres Torres is translating part-time success into full-time success.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

The sun sure has shined on their a**...

Moving Huff to 1B to let Jose G. get some AB’s is also another option, their hoping pans out.

I have to give it em!

Every man for himself...

by MMunoz33 on Aug 21, 2010 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hate that Panda guy!!! At least Bengie is gone... (Oh wait!! )

 I’m still forced to watch Fat Boy Molina (tex)

Every man for himself...

by MMunoz33 on Aug 21, 2010 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

lol, they are still paying mark derosa.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Mostly agreed

I’ve absolutely got a hard-on for our rotation right now, and I’d hate to break it up.

I wouldn’t mind adding a vet pitcher with some spare change, but I think we should save the cash for trades.

I think stockpiling MLB-ready prospects is a nice strategy, but I think our team could really use a big bat that takes the pressure off our underachieving lineup. When the pressure is off, they’ll stop forcing mistakes.
I miss the days of having Giambi as a huge threat in our lineup, and you knew you had a shot to tie the game any time he came to the plate.

Ticket sales would probably benefit if we added a big name bat with our team on the verge of something special.

It's just more exciting with Billy Beane running the team.

by ru155 on Aug 21, 2010 8:36 AM PDT reply actions  

what i meant

about saving cash for trades, is to perhaps trade for a big name bat, and use the Chavez/Sheets money to pay his salary.

It's just more exciting with Billy Beane running the team.

by ru155 on Aug 21, 2010 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Like who

Big Bats are very expensive. Are you willing to trade Cahill & Chris Carter for a “Big Bat”? And, who is that “Big Bat”?

by Colorado Fan on Aug 21, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly -- this is what I'm trying to avoid,

sacrificing “guaranteed to thrive right now” for “likely to be very good very soon.”

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

David Wright.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agree on your feelings about Jackson.

I was scratching my head when we acquired him, and I still don’t know why we gave up Demel to get him. We already had Jackson types. I don’t want him starting next year either, but I just have a feeling Beane wants that badly. As far as OF, I’m done with acquiring prospects, we need established MLB hitters, nothing less.

by dashman33 on Aug 21, 2010 8:43 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

agree on Jackson absolutely

Beane has liked him ever since he scouted Jackson in college. But this is not the same player, and he hasn’t been since Valley Fever. The A’s did check to make sure he’d recovered from Valley Fever, but evidently didn’t feel his being on the DL this season while still with Arizona with hamstring issues was a problem – which it also turned out to be with the A’s.

And Jackson now says he’s felt the abdominal pain since March but wanted to play through it this season? So neither Arizona nor the A’s knew about it? What kind of medical exam did he have before the trade?

About Sweeney: I really like Sweeney, but sadly I’m starting to agree. Not so much because of the power outage, but because of the bad knees at such a young age.

by OaklandSi on Aug 21, 2010 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

Jackson was a great pickup

He was essentially free. Minor league bullpen arms are a dime a dozen.

It’s too soon to give up on him. He should have a chance next year to prove he can still play.

by Mattel on Aug 21, 2010 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

Eh Demel is pretty damn good.

I think it was a good trade, but Demel could have been a good reliever/possible close or used in other trades, or the first then the latter.

Keep in mind, of course, that "the best defense of Derek Jeter's life" ranks somewhere in between "the best fiscal responsibility of Mike Tyson's life" and "the best not-getting-assassinated-ness of James Garfield's life." -FJM

by travdog6 on Aug 21, 2010 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

I actually agree it was a fine pickup,

even though I also REALLY don’t want him in the post 2010 plans. But he instantly became the A’s best COFer for 2010 at the cost of a relief prospect, and that alone was worth something.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

As far as the Jackson trade goes, if your GM doesn't make that deal, you start rooting for other teams.

On the spectrum of how valuable different types of players are, decent major league hitters––even ones that are coming back from injury or illness––are close to the top. Minor league relievers are at the bottom. Forget about Demel. The A’s still have incredible depth when it comes to relievers. Trading a minor league reliever, Demel, for a major league outfielder, Jackson is like trading a quarter for a torn five dollar bill. Maybe the bill is broken beyond repair, but all you lost was one quarter. If the bill is repairable, you just traded $0.25 for $5.

by NateHST on Aug 21, 2010 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

Calling Jackson a major league outfielder is highly questionable

Calling him a five dollar bill even more so. Frankly, I’d rather have Honest Abe…

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

lol

Every man for himself...

by MMunoz33 on Aug 21, 2010 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

What's wrong with acquiring assets?

especially when we don’t have to give up anything significant. We would have had to give up a lot more to get Jackson a couple years ago. I’m looking fwd to seeing what a return-to-good-health CoJax will do next season.

by sf drift king on Aug 21, 2010 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

a couple years ago Jackson hadn't missed a whole year to illness

and then the beginning of the next year to injury.

and he was never a GREAT player anyway.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Don't know enough about either, obviously.

But I do have to wonder if these guys are even on Billy’s radar? While your plan, in theory, sounds like a good one- especially matched up against the here and now- I kind of agree with dashman33. Just seems that Billy gets a crush on a certain guy or a type sometimes.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Aug 21, 2010 8:50 AM PDT reply actions  

For this reason, the abdominal injury

may have been a blessing: Sorry, Billy, your .280/.350/.420 meh defensive LFer with “Valley Abdominal Hamstring” just isn’t a go. Try again and this time get someone who can mash.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

yeah so basically I wrote about Frazier here last year, so you know that hes on Billy's radar :-P

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

Since I follow

other major league teams’ farm systems more then their actual major league rosters, i’ve kept track of both guys for the last few years. I like them both, especially Frazier. Either one would be a solid addition to our organization. Having said that, I really hope the A’s target guys that have proven they can adequately hit at the major league level. We have a rotation that by next season could be the best in the league. We have an above average bullpen and defense. This team is very close to contending IMO, and I’m afraid that grabbing a couple veterean minor leaguers and hoping they produce at the major league level is putting more “eggs” in more non-proven “baskets”. I see the logic in doing this, I mean, I am an A’s fan and am familiar with how this organization gets run, but I think it’s time to bite the bullet and trade away some prospects for a non-rental, solid outfielder. I understand what it will cost in terms of talent but we have some minor league depth and its not like dealing 2-3 of our better prospects is going to leave the farm system in shambles. 2011-2014/2015 looks like our window for a nice little run, and with a trade for an OF, and a couple FA signings (another bat, veteran SP, bullpen arm) this team WILL be good enough to compete for the next few years at least.

by JPShark on Aug 21, 2010 8:58 AM PDT reply actions  

Basically agree here

There’s money available so a quality MLB bat should be the goal.

by Mattel on Aug 21, 2010 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

What minor league depth?

Every prospect who was highly rated before this season has either stagnated or gotten worse this year. Most teams are not exactly thrilled by the prospect of getting minor leaguers coming off a sucky year and hoping for a rebound. It’s hard enough trying to trade a major leaguer with that profile.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Doesn't this
Every prospect who was highly rated before this season has either stagnated or gotten worse this year.

happen quite a bit to other teams, too?

"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

Athletics Nation - WE'RE ALL GONNA MRIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!

by cuppingmaster on Aug 21, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

The lack of a SINGLE breakout season from 23 players that Sickels graded at C+ or better?

I mean, maybe that’s happened before. I don’t know. I find it unlikely.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Grant Green is performing at the high end of expectations for him

I don’t know exactly how you’d define “break-out season”, and Green has committed a lot of errors and not walked enough, but especially since May he’s been tearing the cover off the ball.

Ian Krol has also had an excellent year. And Rodriguez is performing pretty well after a promotion to the majors.

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Aug 21, 2010 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

The high end of expectations for the #9 overall pick

was a decent hitting line in a hitter’s ballpark with zero plate discipline and crap defense?

Whose expectations were these, exactly?

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

He is a breathing SS prospect so hes got good value, probably the best in the system

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly

This is a league in which Cliff Pennington is among the best SS around. Grant Green has shown good doubles and HR power, and FWIW, is hitting for a high average. Probably the biggest worry about him coming out of college was that he really couldn’t hit for power — no one ever expected him to be Ozzie Smith with the glove. And he’s shown that he has power with a wood bat, albeit in the California League.

BTW, I just noticed an A’s prospect named Royce Consigli, who’s playing in the AZ league. Usually I wouldn’t pay any attention, especially since he was a 30th round pick in 2009, but the kid is an 18 year old COF and is putting up a line of .338/.403/.496, which is pretty good even in that league, I think. Did he just come out of nowhere? Has anyone ever heard of him before?

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Aug 21, 2010 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

I remember seeing him drafted and sign

It was unusual because he was a late-round pick out of high school and those guys normally never sign unless it’s for overslot money.

Never heard thing one about his actual skills, though.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

He's probably one of the top 3 SS prospect in MLB

Him, Dee Gordon, and Nick Franklin are the top in terms of SS prospects.

This isn’t including 2010 draftees like Manny Machado and Christian Colon though.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 22, 2010 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

His BB/K ratio is terrible.

Like really, really scary.

Keep in mind, of course, that "the best defense of Derek Jeter's life" ranks somewhere in between "the best fiscal responsibility of Mike Tyson's life" and "the best not-getting-assassinated-ness of James Garfield's life." -FJM

by travdog6 on Aug 21, 2010 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well it's not Greg Halman bad

but it’s not good, either. Maybe he hits the Michael Young comp which was kind of viewed as his upside, but it doesn’t take a whole lot of slippage to go from Michael Young to something that’s not very good.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ironically Greg Halman is now awesome

I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 22, 2010 7:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

I want to see Halman hit some MLB pitching.

I’m just not a believer.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 22, 2010 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not a believer either.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 22, 2010 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah not really

He hasn’t solved any of his issues (other than walking at a normal rather than positively allergic rate), he just has a great BABIP instead of a horrible one.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 22, 2010 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

isn't this Taylor, except there are no questions about defense?
He’s also having a down year in AAA (.252/.323/438), which might lower his trade value nicely — yet few doubt he can hit and even this year, despite concerns about his defense, John Sickels gave Frazier a robust B+ grade.

"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - dannycakes

by Future Ed on Aug 21, 2010 9:18 AM PDT reply actions  

Exactly what I thought

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Aug 21, 2010 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, good point, though my impression is that of the two

Taylor’s defense is less questionable and Frazier’s ability to hit maybe a “better bet.” But this is my point — that the A’s need multiple “Taylors” if they really want to be able to count on 1-2 successful ones. And right now very good ones can probably be gotten cheap, due to age and organizational stalling.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think that is what they did in the draft this year

get a bunch of bats and see what can stick.

But yeah, the more taylors the better, I just hope they don’t cost brown/dooolittle/cardenas and hope they cost jackson/buck

"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - dannycakes

by Future Ed on Aug 21, 2010 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is Doolittle still alive?

Seriously, is he ever going to play again? He missed almost all of last year and hasn’t played this year.

by sc00by on Aug 21, 2010 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Still needs more horse placenta

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm guessing

from the volume today that you’ve got all your resumes written and rewritten to match particular employment opportunities, and they’ve gone out in the mail.

…just speculating. Just attempting to keep your procrastination level down (below mine!!).

Blez: Most folks seem to believe that the big flaw with the 2010 Oakland A's will be the lack of any power.

Beane: They believe it because it's true.

by One won lost won on Aug 21, 2010 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

I really don't think thats accurate at all.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

Taylor had a much better bat than Frazier before this year's complete collapse.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 21, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

I wonder what the effects of being the burden of the teams future success has on young players.

Crosby crumpled, Buck buckled, Carter flopped (SSS, I know, but 0-20?).
Must be immense pressure.
I can’t think of many other teams that parallel the A’s in this respect.

by brian.only on Aug 21, 2010 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm still waiting to find out that the diabetes is a factor

Especially given that the main sudden dropoff is in power. Is valley fever contagious? ;-(

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Requires a little too much wishful thinking for me

Minor league prospects are just that. As you note, flame out rates are high. Plus, there’s almost always an adjustment period of a year or so.

The A’s need real hitting pronto. They can get one established bat, and hope the minor league system gives them another in a hurry. Or they can get two established bats. But starting out with zero known hitters in 2011 is a depressing thought.

by rovingralph on Aug 21, 2010 9:28 AM PDT reply actions  

starting pitching??? are you nuts

the team has MUCH more pressing needs than a starter.

by heartstopper on Aug 21, 2010 9:33 AM PDT reply actions  

Are you comfortable with this rotation in a pennant race:

Anderson Mortensen
Cahill
Gio
Braden Halama
Mazzaro

Plus if you acquire a SP, you can trade Mazzaro, for example, to get a Kemp. How else are you going to land an established hitter? You are underestimating the value of starting pitching — to the A’s and to trade partners — and overestimating the A’s depth.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Or even this one:

Anderson Mortensen
Cahill another guy
Gio Ross
Braden Halama
Mazzaro another guy

This is Oakland.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

So far, though, Outman has had only setbacks

I would think he needs some AAA time next year even if things go really well. I’d agree he’s on the depth chart, probably after Mortensen, but I wouldn’t count on him yet as being a “factor” to rely on.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm confused Nico-

you say acquire a SP for depth, but then trade Mazzaro, therefore getting rid of your depth. What’s your thinking?

www.kapayne.tumblr.com

by thewhizkid on Aug 21, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

My thinking is that you have depth,

but you also have the flexibility to trade Mazzaro if the right opportunity is there to get a really good hitter. You can’t have both, but you can guarantee having one or the other, your choice. (Though if you signed two FAs, like Webb and De La Rosa, you actually could have both.)

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Mazzaro's a major league pitcher

Jeez - last night he held one of the two best teams in baseball to three hits. Throw out his first couple of starts and he’s a real mensch.

Mortensen and probably Outman are acceptable back-ups in case of injury to one of the starts. The Chronicle compared the current five to the 1980 five, and it’s not a stretch to see this group as equally good. Without Billy Martin to destroy their arms, who knows what the potential will be. You don’t break up what could be a legendary group in order to have “depth.” That’s nuts.

The A’s need two solid hitters to be another Tampa Bay Rays. One of them can be a free agent or salary dump and the other someone from the minors. Cust, with his nine homers and long slumps, should be replaced by a better hitting DH, and the A’s should find an outfielder or third baseman for the other upgrade. People will laugh, but I think the A’s should try to pick up David Ortiz.

Sweeney is untradeable right now. If he is tradeable in the spring, the A’s would be selling very very low. An outfield of Crisp, Sweeney and (pick ’em) to start the season, with Rajai Davis as the fourth outfielder. As the season progresses, work in Taylor or Carter or whomever and trade Davis and/or Sweeney.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Two solid hitters and Evan Longoria. Then maybe we can be the Rays.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Aug 21, 2010 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

I disagree.
Cust, with his nine homers and long slumps, should be replaced by a better hitting DH, […]

Per 640 PA, Cust is averaging 23 home runs. Get him in there every day against no matter who is pitching and don’t send him to Sacramento. We can get him back for cheap next season and that’s awesome for someone with a .377 wOBA.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Cust's stats are skewed by his bursts of success

If he was a consistent .377 wOBA, great. But he’s not. He has those one-week binges and then things fall apart. The DH is the easiest fix on the team, and no matter how Cust compares as a player (using aggregate stats) to others on the A’s, the DH is the best place to upgrade because it doesn’t require someone who can field.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

wrong.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

We agree to disagree

You’re looking at stats, I’m looking at games. Sorry, I’m not seeing a guy who helps the team win with any consistency.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd have no problem with Cust if he could field

But he’s just another role-player, and this is the easiest position to upgrade.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

We live in different universes

I watch the games and what I’m seeing is a guy with a lot of walks, a lot of strikeouts, and save for those months as a singles hitter, someone with two or three one-week bursts of superman-like behavior each season.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

This

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

You refuse to agree to disagree

So I explain myself and you call me an ass.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Because it's incorrect.

“two or three one week bursts” is not going to have the effect on Cust’s overall numbers that you seem to think it does.

He is streaky. He does hit homers in bunches. Nobody denies that. However when he’s not doing that he still gets on base a lot which carries immense value.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

And you're arguing there is NOBODY who can replace him in MLB?

My point is that ANY player at any position, ANY hitter, can be moved to DH. Which means a crappy infielder, a first baseman, an outfielder who can’t catch, an older player who can’t move ….and Cust is better than any of them?

That’s my point. Obviously if you can upgrade elsewhere without sacrificing fielding ability, I"m all for it. I’m clearly not sold on Cust as being much more than a role-player because I haven’t seen it. He’s horrible with runners in scoring position, to a point where it’s a personal failing. Maybe that’s skewing my judgment.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not EVERY hitter can be a DH though

Being a DH takes a different mindset. This is why putting Ellis and Rosie in at DH doesn’t work.

www.kapayne.tumblr.com

by thewhizkid on Aug 21, 2010 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Eh

The reason those two can’t DH is because they’re not great hitters.

But that’s besides the point because Cust is a great hitter. The amount of people who don’t like Cust is staggering. HOW CAN YOU NOT WANT HIM ON YOUR TEAM!?

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

up until a week ago with RISP

he was 12 for 52 with 25 strilekouts. i know he then got a hit so that makes it 13 for 53….. whoopee!!! a sub 250 hitter striking out nearly half the time

by heartstopper on Aug 21, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

A tiny sample.

Keep in mind, of course, that "the best defense of Derek Jeter's life" ranks somewhere in between "the best fiscal responsibility of Mike Tyson's life" and "the best not-getting-assassinated-ness of James Garfield's life." -FJM

by travdog6 on Aug 21, 2010 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

.246/.409/.450

It’s really astounding that so many people despite being confronted not merely with generalized evidence that RISP hitting is not a skill, but with actual stats demonstrating that Jack Cust in particular does not suck with RISP, literally blind themselves to the facts.

Perhaps calling it a “lie” is uncharitable, but “delusional”? I’ll defend that characterization to the hilt.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

How about this year?

And “delusional” - well, I like you and your work too much, Paul, to care how you characterize me.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

Is it that you think that hitting with RISP is a specific skill

and Cust used to be good at it, but this year he’s suddenly lost that talent (while generally hitting very well)? How exactly would that work?

It seems a lot more likely to me that we’re dealing with SSS variance here.

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Aug 21, 2010 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's not intended to be a characterization

A delusion isn’t a character trait, at least not the way most people define “character trait.”

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

A characterization is not a character trait

One of the definitions of characterization is “description by a statement of characteristics” and “characteristic” is defined as “a trait, quality, or property distinguishing an individual, group, or type” (Webster’s Second International Dictionary). “Delusional” can, I believe, be used as an example of a trait, quality or property distinguishing an individual, group or type. I do not believe “trait” is used here specifically in terms of “character trait,” but rather in a broader descriptive sense.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just sayin'

However, you were referring to a statement rather than me, personally, as “delusional,” so this one goes to you, sir.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Here is the problem...

When you request that people just agree to disagree, you are treating the general community like it is a single person. There are always going to be people on here who will jump in and argue a point. There always will be one or two people. Then there are people who agree to disagree. They aren’t commenting. Then there are people who agree with you, but who don’t want to stand up to the argumentative sorts, seeing the futility of the whole process.

I would just request that you take it easy. You can never win all arguments with all people because there is always a way to win an argument, right or wrong.

by Chilango on Aug 21, 2010 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah I just realized that my subject line didn't make any sense

given the previous comment.

What I would have said, had I paid more attention, is that I’m characterizing the argument (which has, as noted below, emerged from any number of mouths).

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Right its not just that Cust cant controll it its that he cant and hes lucked into being good at it too

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

His incorrectness is no reason

for a personal swipe.

On the subject of Cust, I agree with you and disagree with Rich. Rich stated his view, you stated your rebuttal. Your rebuttal makes more sense to me and to most others here, so why not just leave it at that?

What is gained by proceeding to accuse him of “condescending bullshit” and calling him an ass?

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hate to sound like this

But Cust-haters bring up the same arguments over and over again despite being proven wrong each and every time. That resembles trollish behavior.

We treat trolls with disrespect so I’m fine with it in this instance.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not a Cust-hater

I just don’t value him the way others do. Please don’t characterize me that way. It’s not black and white.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I lump the haters

in with the people who think he’s easily replaceable. Going into the offseason looking to replace the best hitter on the team is not the best plan of action.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's a misstatement...

…and it’s assuming the A’s themselves want him on board.

But if this team is to go anywhere next year, the idea is to go after the best hitters, no matter the position. The thing about DH is that the position doesn’t matter.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

But why waste time replacing something

that doesn’t need replacing?

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't think it's a question of replacing rather than opening doors to opportunity

And if Beane has no interest in signing free agents or spending more money, then it’s really moot.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah if he does not try and improve the team

Then there’s no point in any of this. We’ll just be mediocre next year as well.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whether the A's do or do not like a player

has little bearing on whether they ought to, and personally, I find attempting to read the tea leaves of future team behavior rather pointless.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

On pointless:
I find attempting to read the tea leaves of future team behavior rather pointless.

Isn’t attempting to read the tea leaves primarily what discussion on AN centers around?

This whole thread [the OP] is just speculating what the team will do or should do or what AN contributors want them to do. Is it pointless? Perhaps. It is what seems to grip most people here, though? I mean, seriously, much of the discussion on this thread concerns a player who was DFA’d back in April of this year and many people defend said player. All of our love for that player doesn’t mean shit because none of us are calling the shots. It is seemingly pointless. At the same time it is what seemigly drives many of us to post here.

I did read your comment correctly, right?

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 21, 2010 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thinking about what the team ought to do

is useful and fun, because it involves learning about how to build a baseball team.

Thinking about what the team WILL do is pointless, because it’s just guesswork and a bit of data mining.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

I get that distiction

The boundaries between the two just seem so blury to me as I read through the comments.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 21, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

the should would dichotomy

is only really interesting on the should side. If youre going to predict would you might as well just wait for it to actually happen.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

To me the so-called

“Cust-haters” and so-called “Cust lovers” present the identical problem/MO: They derail thread after thread with the same exact points that have been made 43,632 times every time the guy’s name is mentioned.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

That's on the "Cust-haters"

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

No it's not. Absolutely not.

It’s on everyone.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Meh

I’ve resisted jumping into these arguments long enough but this season and last it has gotten too ridiculous. Every day people find it necessary to try and paint Cust in a negative light. It greatly resembles the SF Chronicle comments section. Without fail there are others who will defend Cust with the facts, yet it’s in one eye and out the other. I’m tired of it.

If someone is going to try and say that Cust is somehow not valuable to this team and should be replaced then I am going to continue to shove the facts in their face.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Then you're being part of the problem.

As if someone can’t say “Cust is not valuable” and you can’t just roll your eyes to yourself and talk about the topic at hand. Because people on both sides of this issue won’t do that, we have the same stupid and hostile repartee over and over and over and over.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Thank you.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well I've stayed out of it

pretty much every time before today. So maybe I am part of the problem now but I don’t think so. Keeping it civil doesn’t seem to work because I’m sick and tired of reading multiple posts every single damn day about how Cust suxorz and strikes out too much in important situations etc..

After today I’ll probably go back to rolling my eyes but for whatever reason I finally felt it was time to chime in with my 2 cents.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not trying to pick on you --

The whole community needs to stop having the same arguments over and over and needs to let people have their “wrong opinions” without feeling some obligation to “correct the misperception, even if it takes a flame war!!!”

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I'd be fine with it

But it’s gotten to the point that half of the anti-Cust posts are meant to rile the other side up. That’s how I feel at least.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

I couldn't disagree with that any more than I do.

I guess nobody should say anything when someone says Matt Holliday sucked last year even though it’s downright incorrect, too?

That’s really a ridiculous thing to say. You’re basically asking people to stop having discussions on the site.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Speaking for myself and

not for Nico, I had no problem at all with your guys countering Rich’s arguments and pointing out why you think Cust is good. That, to me, is “having discussions”, albeit repetitive ones.

My problem was with those posts that turned it personal and started calling him names.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

then maybe rich shouldn't insult people

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nope, just the same ones

that have been had, the same exact way, 1,000,000 times, and are always hostile. It’s hyperbole to take a handful of tired debates and extrapolate that to “all discussion.”

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed

When the same arguments pop up over the same subjects, at some point it just gets to be useless to keep it going. Best to just let people go on believing what they want even if it’s wrong, because most of the time they’re not going to change if they’re so locked in and stubborn about it.

Last of the Ninth - Photography

by Flashfire on Aug 21, 2010 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Regarding Holliday:

Not trying to start anything, but I keep hearing people defend his performance with the A’s. But this is the guy who OPS’d about 100 points below his career average.

It’s at least fair to say he underperformed, yes?

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not really, no.

He was terrible for 3 weeks, mostly because he had that whole McGwire helping him hit thing, and then he absolutely wrecked shop until he was traded.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yup.

If he had stayed with the A’s, I wouldn’t have been surprised to see his OPS approach .900 at the end of the year.

Keep in mind, of course, that "the best defense of Derek Jeter's life" ranks somewhere in between "the best fiscal responsibility of Mike Tyson's life" and "the best not-getting-assassinated-ness of James Garfield's life." -FJM

by travdog6 on Aug 21, 2010 6:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

YES!!!!!!!!!

And it always ends up with everyone calling each other liars.

It’s hard to believe that people have time for that.

by Brett Narloch on Aug 21, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good points

I’m gonna stop, and apologize.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

This kind of tack should be demonstrated more than it is at times

From my point of view, you’re not the only one who should be stepping up to take this tack.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 21, 2010 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Telling people that they don't watch the games is a personal attack being an ass and condescending bullshit

im not really sure why you are objecting.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

I wonder if you aren't reading

more into this than is there, DFA. Rich said that he watches the games; he never said that others don’t.

I think that you may have a chip on your shoulder about this.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

He said:

You’re looking at stats; I’m looking at games

Seems pretty close to me.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 21, 2010 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

bingo

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hmm, I didn't read it that way.

I thought Rich was just noting where his own opinions come from.

But it appears at least three of you read it that way, so I guess there must be something to it. If Rich didn’t mean to imply that, hopefully he’ll phrase it more carefully next time.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

when someone uses a stat to prove someone wrong and someone says "well i watch the games" its pretty much always an insult.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Look

If both people watch the games, the information that they get from doing so is probably equally valuable, assuming that one isn’t a professional scout or something.

At that point, if they disagree, the observational evidence is effectively useless to determine who to believe.

Saying “I watch the games” has no relevance except as an implied assertion (barely implied, in many cases) that the other person doesn’t.

Now, if they really don’t and have told you so (I for instance have barely seen any A’s games this year, so I’m not going to complain about it except when it’s irrelevant) then that’s one thing. But assuming it without evidence is both presumptuous and asinine.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

mikev watches games and goes to games

I am well aware of that and took pains to be careful in my phrasing.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

MIKEV

Are U an A’s fan with baseball knowledge? Or a guy who can look up stats? richwol1 is on POINT with his evaluation of Cust!!! Obviously U dont watch the games with any knowledge of baseball!!! Maybe u can look this up….how many RBIs did Cust have in the last month???

by DIEANATHLETIC on Aug 21, 2010 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

flagged as someone who cant find the letters y and o on the keyboard.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Banned for being a troll who doesn't say "yo"

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wow.
Are U an A’s fan with baseball knowledge? Or a guy who can look up stats?

I’m going to go ahead and say that he is an A’s fan, a guy with baseball knowledge, AND a guy who can look up stats (and know what they mean, even!)

Obviously U dont watch the games with any knowledge of baseball!

Wouldn’t knowledge of baseball tell you that getting on base 40% of the time is a good thing? And wouldn’t it tell you that leading all DHs in on-base percentage is a good thing?

Maybe u can look this up….how many RBIs did Cust have in the last month?

RBIs don’t really mean as much as you think they do. A guy can’t drive in runs if no one’s on base. RBIs are partially a measure of a hitter’s effectiveness with runners on, and partially a measure of a team’s effectiveness at putting runners on in the first place.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

obvious troll is obvious

Don’t feed the troll.

Mock them instead.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

nobody thinks you are one of those guys

"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - dannycakes

by Future Ed on Aug 21, 2010 7:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

when was I a friend of the obvious troll?

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 22, 2010 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

Again, I don't think that guy's a troll.

I think he’s about 60 years old and truly doesn’t understand the science and math of baseball.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

I interpreted it as a failed attempt

at humor, by demonstrating what a real troll would look like.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

And yet you seem to think he's worse than hitters who...

don’t walk, strikeout a lot, and have ZERO one-week bursts of superman-like behavior.

See Sweeney, Buck, Jackson, Gross, Davis, etc…

by Brett Narloch on Aug 21, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

This this this this

Cust is what he is, a player deserving of a full time DH role on an AL team. He might be the best full time DH in baseball right now.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thats true

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

And pretty cheap.

But the Twinks just get lucky like that. For us, Jack Cust is probably the best we can do at DH, and that is just fine with me. He’s a fine hitter and I want him on this team as long as he’ll stay here.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

why is this not green yet?

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Role he plays is...

an every day starting DH. Why throw away a good cheap player? Upgrade what NEEDS to be upgraded. Get a COF, 2nd baseman, and maybe sum1 to play 3rd (kouz is serviceable, but not really great).

by sums95 on Aug 21, 2010 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

nobody is that consistent.

and no, I will not agree to disagree when you think that replacing the best hitter on the team is the easiest way to upgrade. It’s not. Signing Crawford or Werth is the easiest way to upgrade.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, good luck with that.

Cust is fine if the A’s upgrade at 3B and the outfield. But the DH remains the best spot to upgrade because you only need a hitter, not a fielder.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Please list the available DHs with better numbers than Cust next year.

and then, when you go and get a DH better than Cust, please explain how you are going to fix LF, RF, and 2B, where the biggest problems have been this year.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm all for bringing Cust back...

I want Ty Wiggington at 2B and throw money at Werth to RF and hope Carter pans out at LF.

Every man for himself...

by MMunoz33 on Aug 21, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wigginton

Wigginton
Wigginton
Wigginton
Wigginton
Wigginton
Wigginton
Wigginton
Wigginton

Also, has he ever played 2B a day in his life?

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes.

He’s played 165 games at second base, but he’s not a legitimate second baseman.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Huh

Someone was optimistic. Or desperate. Or both.

Anyway, he’s an awful player (51 runs below average on his career). No one should ever suggest signing him as more than a late-February desperation stopgap.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Aug 21, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wigginton's defense kills his value.

If you’re going to sign a second baseman, make it Orlando Hudson. If not, try to trade with Florida (for Dan Uggla), Arizona (for Kelly Johnson), Baltimore (for Brian Roberts) or maybe Toronto (for Aaron Hill).

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

All of those, maybe even AZ too

can Mark Reynolds play 2B?

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

I doubt it.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

oh god what a terrifying thought

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

so then it's set...

Cust DH
Hudson
2B
Werth-RF
Carter- (praying he pans out) LF
Crisp & Davis – Platoon CF

Every man for himself...

by MMunoz33 on Aug 21, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Crisp shouldn't be platooning with Davis.

Crisp should be out there every day. Other than that, I like it. I would like to add another bat, though.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cust's numbers are skewed...

..so I don’t trust them. You do. I think the A’s don’t trust them as well, which is why he started the year DFA’d. Which is why Geren benches him for other players (granted that Geren’s an idiot but still, if A’s management objected, Cust would be playing every day).

That’s why this discussion is going nowhere. You have your opinion. I have mine.

We both agree this rotation is special, and shouldn’t be touched.

And sure, upgrade 2B, the outfield, 3B - fine.. Then let’s keep Cust. But DH is the most fungible position on the roster.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whether we agree or not, Cust is one of the better hitters on the team.

Which makes it a bad idea to upgrade, especially since there are basically no good upgrades. Manny? A slight upgrade, but he can’t stay healthy and will cost significantly more money. Thome? I don’t see why the Twins wouldn’t keep him back.

Fact of the matter is that DH is not a weak spot. Corner OF is, 2B is, 3B is depending on your feelings about Kouzmanoff.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thome

also would rather stay in the midwest.

by sf drift king on Aug 21, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

No, you dont have an opinion, you are merely telling lies.

You dont trust Jack Cust’s numbers? Boo hoo. I not only dont trust, but literally hate the bats of Sweeney, Suzuki, Ellis, Buck, Davis & Kouzmanoff. They all are terrible at hitting in Oakland and if they were all off the team, we would be in a much better place than we are now. This is a fact. Jack Cust is maybe the smallest problem we have. The only player Id replace him with is Manny.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cust has been the better bat in the tougher park, though.

Guerrero is almost more like to decline, I think, and face injury issues.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Huh?

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

I didn't say that to you.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

You cant back up your anti-Cust agenda with facts and numbers.

You are basically lying about the reasons why you think he’s bad at baseball or worth replacing. You are saying the sky is orange, its not, its blue.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oh also

many of your posts resemble that of a trolls. You seem to post quite often about things that rile people up deliberately on here, Cust is a shining example.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I agree

Not pointing at anyone in particular but the Cust-bashing is so ridiculously stupid that it’s trollish.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

So leave it alone

I’ve posted about other things here as well. Cust happens to be a lightning rod - a hero to some, not a hero to others. But he keeps coming up because he happens to be on the team, and his skills aren’t the skills of most players.

I’d rather see Cust DH than Ellis or Suzuki or Rosales or anyone else on the team because HE IS ONE OF THE TWO OR THREE BEST HITTERS ON THE CLUB (with Barton and apparently Crisp)..

But that may say more about the A’s than it does about Cust.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also, PL78, calling someone a liar is actionable here

Particularly when we’re just talking about baseball.

by richwol1 on Aug 21, 2010 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Then flag it if you haven't already

Don’t just say “that’s flag-worthy” or “that’s actionable.”

Last of the Ninth - Photography

by Flashfire on Aug 21, 2010 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

You may not be pointing at

anyone in particular, but I am.

Yes, there have many trollish and ridiculous Cust-bashing comments on AN, but Rich’s comments in this thread are not among them.

This thread is about suggestions for the future of the team. Rich offered his, and it included replacing Cust. When someone registered a disagreement about Cust, Rich elaborated by noting that he dislikes Cust’s streakiness and that DH is a relatively easy position at which to find an alternative.

This is a minority opinion, but it is not bashing, it is not ridiculous, and it is not trolling. In spite of that, a few posters have gone nutso over the comment and starting throwing out personal attacks and calling Rich a liar and a troll.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I agree that Rich is not the problem

But I also don’t blame others for jumping down his throat because the Cust-hate or dislike or whatever other mild mannered term I can attach to his name is just stupid. Rich offered his thoughts and opinions eloquently which I don’t have a problem with.

But whatever the Cust supporters have been doing doesn’t work. Facts don’t seem to work so maybe bashing is necessary.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

I disagree with your premise
But whatever the Cust supporters have been doing doesn’t work. Facts don’t seem to work so maybe bashing is necessary.

This presupposes that it is necessary to convince Cust detractors that they are wrong. I would suggest that it’s OK to just let them be wrong.

Why is it necessary to convert a person who disagrees? So long as he is being respectful and not acting like a troll, why not just figure, “OK, this guy undervalues Cust,” and let it be?

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

They can have their opinion

That’s fine. But like I’ve already said in this post, I cannot stand seeing the same stuff written every single day about Cust.

They’ve been proven wrong every time and usually that stops a certain thought from being expressed time and time again.

If you’re in a class and you answer a question incorrectly and are thus corrected you learn. If you come back every day and make the same mistake, seemingly in order to provoke a response, that’s where I find a problem.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with your premise

You know just to put a counter out on Iglew.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Duty calls.

Duty Calls

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

by iglew on Aug 21, 2010 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

welcome to my life on AN

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also

I’m not meaning to single you out. My vitriol is for everyone who criticizes Cust despite overwhelming evidence that he is not what they think he is.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Actually, it's sometimes 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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Um no its grey

< / San Franciscan>

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

no.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with you slightly.

But disagree with you with what you’re basing your argument on.

Cust’s streakiness is not important if the sum of his contributions is a .380ish wOBA, which it is. People make a big deal about streaky vs. consistent hitters but the fact is that it matters little at all. If someone hits .400 for half the season and .200 for half a season, they’re still contributing as much as someone who hits .300 every month of the season. Also, I disagree with you on DH being easy to upgrade because I’m not seeing any viable DH candidates, free agent or otherwise, who’ll definitively be cheaper and better than Cust.

However, Cust’s performance this year gives pause about how he’ll perform next season. He’s currently buoyed by a .400 BABIP when his xBABIP is more along the lines of .325. He ISO has declined a little bit more, down to a pedestrian .174. He’s basically been a singles hitter (with a great percentage of his batted balls falling in) who gets on base a lot (still valuable as a hitter). But with no defensive value, I don’t know how well his bat will play at DH in the future. I don’t know if this decline in ISO is age/decline related, or something else. I hope he hits a bunch more homers the rest of the year to make this discussion moot.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 21, 2010 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also he's been heavily platooned

And guys like him don’t tend to age well.

Assuming he’s going to give you an wOBA of .380 next year would be foolish.

by Mattel on Aug 21, 2010 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

his drop in power is concerning

but I still think it’s because he was told to swing for contact more and try to have less strickouts.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Or that he's being platooned

Maybe it’s preventing him from getting in a groove.

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

by Helloooo 1st on Aug 21, 2010 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Then trade for a DH midseason.

Sometimes it’s worth rewarding a player who busts his ass for you with another shot at busting his ass for you.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

To conclude that about Cust's consistency

you’d have to compare him to all the other hitters of his level. Are you sure that none of them are as streaky as Cust?

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Aug 21, 2010 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

All hitters are streaky.

They’re human beings.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 22, 2010 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Disagree.
Cust, with his nine homers and long slumps, should be replaced by a better hitting DH

If we, by some miracle, win the division, Jack Cust will deserve as much credit for that as the starting rotation. The dude comes through. I cannot abide the idea that you take the performance he gave us this year, after being humiliated with an unwarranted DFA, and just toss that aside. And emotional arguments aside, if he had qualifying PAs, he would lead all DHs in OBP. He does decent power-wise, so I don’t think you can really get a DH better-suited for the kind of ballpark we play in, and the kind of baseball we play. (OK, there are better hitters out there, obviously, but why would you focus resources on repairing a position that isn’t even broken?)

the A’s should find an outfielder or third baseman for the other upgrade.

An outfielder AND a third baseman. Frontload a fat 100/5 contract for Carl Crawford and frontload a fat contract for Beltre. We can get those dudes.

People will laugh, but I think the A’s should try to pick up David Ortiz.

What was that about long slumps?

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

not saying it will last BUT

duke will be back next year. certainly he won’t last the year but we can go to the pen and be a replacement starter and who knows…. he just might last the year.

certainly he will be had for less money than he signed for this year. he showed he can overcome the hip surgery as he did with the right hip already. that is just an odd congenital thing.

since the hip is a non-baseball injury, are the a’s on the hook for his entire salary?

by heartstopper on Aug 21, 2010 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would prefer next season does not involve Duke in any way

I just don’t like the idea of the team counting on him to stay healthy to the point they use up a roster spot on him.

Last of the Ninth - Photography

by Flashfire on Aug 21, 2010 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

they are on the hook for his salary

but the guaranteed portion wasn’t that much. Most of the contract was based on incentives, none of which he made.

Personally I doubt that the A’s will re-sign Duke.

by OaklandSi on Aug 21, 2010 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Braden is 27

I agree with you. I don’t want to see the A’s trade any of them – and Beane has said as much.

by OaklandSi on Aug 21, 2010 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

I would pretty much trade any minor league arm though.

STUPID TYSON ROSS AND YOUR HORRIBLE MECHANICS AND YOUR ELBOW PROBLEMS.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldn't mind trading Braden or Mazarro.

I wouldn’t be shook up about them leaving IF the bat was good enough coming back. It’d take a lot for me to part with them right now, but the other three are straight up not going anywhere unless the hitter coming back is an all-star.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Aug 21, 2010 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

Nobody is trading an All Star for Dallas Braden or Vin Mazzarro.

That’s the problem.

They are more valuable to us than they are to other teams anyway.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

I don't expect an all-star for Brazarro.

Gio, Brett and Trevor is who I was referring would require an all-star.

"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."

by kenntoe on Aug 21, 2010 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thank you

can people stop saying that something awesome is coming back for Braden.

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldnt be so sure

Teams that are not even close to a pennant race with giant albatross contracts certainly would take Mazzaro or Braden for their overpriced guy who is blocking prospects.

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

such as?

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 21, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

anyone with a big contract on the cubs, brewers, blue jays, orioles, royals, indians, mariners, nats, pirates, dbax, astros, marlins, dodgers....

-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.

by PL78 on Aug 21, 2010 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Some position-player contracts that MIGHT...

…be considered albatrosses by their respective clubs. Not endorsement:

Kosuke Fukudome $13.5M in 2011
Aaron Rowand $12M each season for 2011 & 2012
Travis Hafner $13M each season 2011-2013
Jason Bay $16M each season 2011-2013
Raul Ibanez $11.5M in 2011
Aramis Ramirez $14.6 in 2011 if he excerises player option
Alfonso Soriano $18M 2011-2014
Vernon Wells $23M in 2011 and $21M 2012-2014
Carlos Lee $18.5M in 2011 & 2012

Some of the players have no trade clauses which would affect things.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 22, 2010 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah Im doin a post that will probably turn into a serries on about half of these

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 22, 2010 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

Except, if the guy is overpriced and blocking prospects

he probably isn’t worth Braden or Mazzaro due to how much salary the A’s would be taking on.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 22, 2010 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Did Beane really say, "OaklandSi doesn't want to see us trade any of our 5 starters"?

I don’t believe you.

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Aug 21, 2010 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

This.

I try to keep myself open to the idea of trading one of the guys, but I just can’t shake the feeling that this is the second coming of the early-to-mid-90s Atlanta Braves rotation—maybe even better.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't know about "maybe even better"

You won’t find many trios better than Maddux-Glavine-Smoltz and if you say “maybe even better” you’re talking three Hall of Fame locks.

Even coming close to them would still mean you have three absolute studs on the mound.

Last of the Ninth - Photography

by Flashfire on Aug 21, 2010 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

My argument is more that the five guys we have might make a better top-to-bottom rotation than that Braves rotation.

They had a couple of other good pitchers in the 4 and 5 slots over the years, but I think I trust our rotation from the top to bottom a little bit more. I feel like we can win on any given day, because all five of those guys will keep us in the game for six innings, and the offense might step up and do something.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

That'd still be very much an ultimate "best case scenario" thing

But a rotation of five excellent starters is tough to compete against.

Last of the Ninth - Photography

by Flashfire on Aug 21, 2010 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Outman and Devine return -

Barring no major injury or regression, this team looks pretty fierce in from the mound 12’.
Then again this must be tempered re: the trainers and the fact that this is the A’s we’re talking about.

by brian.only on Aug 21, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

If that's our rotation down the stretch, we're probably not going to win the pennant anyways

"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

Athletics Nation - WE'RE ALL GONNA MRIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!

by cuppingmaster on Aug 21, 2010 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think that was his point.

That’s why you need the added depth.

Reliever Craig Breslow, the Yale graduate dubbed "the smartest man in baseball," said he doesn't have any theories. "Statistical variance?" he suggested. "I don't know at what point you attach statistical significance."

by StJosephBurningTheOakTreesToTheGround on Aug 21, 2010 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

A Good Question

If these guys were good, wouldn’t the teams that have them make room for them? When players stall, they stall for a reason—-and I don’t think it’s a logjam at the top that’s the main reason. They may see (negative) things that we don’t know about. Still, Frazier is intriguing. Meanwhile, we keep making some silly moves—-why do we bring Larish up when Conor goes down? Shouldn’t we bring up an OFer? Ok—-maybe Carter isn’t ready—-but what about Carson. He continues to hit, hit fairly well when he was up, made one bonehead play in the OF and has been banished to the minors. I don’t know—-but I have a feeling about him—-call it an esthetic hunch. He looks like a player to me.

"It's a cookbook!"---The Twilight Zone

by Buck18 on Aug 21, 2010 9:34 AM PDT reply actions  

carson hit "fairly well when he was up"

he hit 200… i know this is the a’s but 200 is NOT fairly well

by heartstopper on Aug 21, 2010 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

The usual cliche--small sample size

He did hit a HR, something we could use. When Cust (the bambino) hits those magnificent, towering HRs, my heart sings. Why not try a guy who has 11 HRs right now and is hitting over .300?

"It's a cookbook!"---The Twilight Zone

by Buck18 on Aug 21, 2010 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

You know who else hit a HR?

Eric Patterson.

Keep in mind, of course, that "the best defense of Derek Jeter's life" ranks somewhere in between "the best fiscal responsibility of Mike Tyson's life" and "the best not-getting-assassinated-ness of James Garfield's life." -FJM

by travdog6 on Aug 21, 2010 6:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Carson

Yeah, I don’t see that at all. He looked so overmatched at the plate. And defensively… ugly as well. Carson is Organizational Filler… A true QuadA player.

by Colorado Fan on Aug 21, 2010 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

I worry you're underestimating the cost to acquire Frazier and/or Craig

The “too few eggs in the basket” statement reflects the minor league system as well.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 21, 2010 9:45 AM PDT reply actions  

Maybe but that's the point of this post --

to get ideas on what you think the actual cost might be. I suspect Frazier will cost a lot more than Craig, because he’s 2 years younger. But I actually doubt either would cost “really key” pieces. More like Wuertz, Donaldson, or Capra type pieces, i.e., some “ouch” but totally worth doing for the right guy.

But what do you think CIN and STL would ask?

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not sure he's tradeable going into the off-season with an arm injury.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Cincy doesn't look like it will have a lot of holes next year

Without doing any research, they might might have interest in Donaldson.

Maybe.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 21, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

They probably would

but I would rather have Donaldson than Frazier

What we’re asking is for people to stop pretending that ipse dixit counts as a "source." When you make a claim about baseball, you should be willing to put some reasonable amount of effort into explaining why it’s correct if someone asks you to. That’s basic respect for the other poster. - PT

by designatedforassignment on Aug 21, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Donaldson doesn't really have a place on this/future teams.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 21, 2010 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Him and Cardenas

are probably the A’s biggest trade chips in the off-season.

by TBRMKane on Aug 21, 2010 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why Cardenas?

I’d rather not pick up Ellis’ option. Unless Hudson comes over, Cardenas is probably in competition for 2B next year.

by NateHST on Aug 21, 2010 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cardenas has to do something in Sacramento first.

He still only has a .605 OPS in 41 games there this season.

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, ignore that he's done much better since getting promoted

and was coming back from a wrist injury when he was there earlier this season.

by NateHST on Aug 21, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

So, again, Cardenas has to do something in Sacramento first.

He has a .731 OPS since being promoted again, right?

"You're all like big fat failure turtles." - Edge

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 21, 2010 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's a good thing we're not promoting him today, then.

He’s still 22. I’d rather have him than Ellis or Rosales.

by NateHST on Aug 21, 2010 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

2B is actually strangely thin

Rosales and Sogard are, IMO, “utility INFs” not everyday starter material. Weeks can’t stay healthy and Cardenas is as likely to stick at 3B as he is at 2B. If Ellis’ option is declined and he’s not brought back, signing O. Hudson would not be a bad move.

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

by Nico on Aug 21, 2010 2:13 PM PDT