SB Nation Bay Area Editor's Pick
My interview with Billy Beane
Happy Monday friends!! I am moving Dale's excellent interview with Billy Beane to the front page because it deserves to be heard... enjoy and thank you Dale for fanposting this in the first place! Maybe next week I'll finally get my requested interview with Lew Wolff -- he just won't agree to allow me to do it under my asked-for conditions based on the "Stuck In the Middle with You" scene from Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs, but perhaps a compromise can somehow be reached. --EN
Good morning, A's Nation!
I interviewed A's GM BIlly Beane on Tuesday, and we talked about Moneyball, Brangelina, the state of the A's, his struggling offense, Bob Geren, Chris Carter & more. The interview is about 30 minutes long. One interesting note: I asked him if he was going to sign or trade for some offensive punch in the off-season, and he said, "They're going to have to come through the system," which surprised me. With this lineup, I thought he'd be determined to bring some sluggers to Oakland, but he still might.
Feel free to hear entire podcast @ AthleticsAfterDark.com
Have a great day! --Dale
218 comments
|
7 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm looking forward to listening
For ANers who use iTunes (or any other comparable software, I imagine), you can subscribe to the podcast directly using this url: http://athleticsafterdark.com/feed
On my mac, I chose “Subscribe to Podcast” in the “Advanced” menu and just typed the url in right there.
Here's a direct link
to the interview. Really nice job on this.
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 10:53 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Awesome!
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
thats really good Dale
Congratulations
The A's are a fairly quiet team, and then there's Ben Sheets. Sheets, as a kid, must have been thrown out of every library in Baton Rouge. ~ Scott Ostler
While listening
I was wondering just how candid Beane was when asked about Geren.
He said the he looked forward to coming back and doing another. Pleasee hold him to that about a year from now.
Interesting answers regarding free agent sluggers and available money. I don’t think the team is going to get two corner OFs that route. One maybe — possibly doubtful. Carter will be given every opportunity to stick next season. I’m thinking that the years a FA slugger OF would ask for is going to be a huge problem for him based on his answer. Maybe ‘our’ slugger [loosely defined] comes via a trade with a team looking to salary dump.
I thought his comments on getting the rental Holliday a bit too early were also interesting.
"Are those new tarps? Or did they paint 'em?" Mark Ellis
I agree
Especially that part about not being patient with CarGo.
With hindsight, that trade looks really bad. But had things not broken badly with Chavez & Duchscherer, if Giambi comes romotely close to where he was just a year before, and if Holliday saves some of his Cardinals’ Dr. Jekyll for the Athletics instead of him being all Mr. Hyde with the G&G, that season would have been dramtically different. Oh well…“what ifs”
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 21, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
The problem is that the "what ifs" regarding Chavez, Duke, and Giambi were all unreasonable expectations
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Aug 23, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Duke and Giambi had unreasonable expectations on them?
How so?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions
That they might actually stay healthy and/or produce something?
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
i just wished when he said premier free agents don't sign 1 year contracts
that Dale would have reminded him that Beltre and Laroche signed 1 year deals, and they did it for the hitter friendly ballparks and a chance to come back next year and make more money. If Beltre had taken 3 for 24 million it would have been a bad deal for him based on what he will get after this season is over. Maybe its not the ballpark because of aesthetics that hurt the A’s but non hitter friendliness of the park. If it were just aesthetics that mattered ATT wouldn’t stop anybody from signing(remember Laroche).
The A's are a fairly quiet team, and then there's Ben Sheets. Sheets, as a kid, must have been thrown out of every library in Baton Rouge. ~ Scott Ostler
Without offering disclaimers for everything he says, Beane was basically correct...
…generally, elite players don’t sign 1-year contracts. Beltre, for example, was an exception, and for the reason(s) you noted. Bentre knew he was gambling, and it appears his gamble will pay off.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
by UncleLeo on Aug 21, 2010 3:00 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
This
And Beltre looked more like a question mark when he signed than he did an premier free agent — a label I think is even less fitting for LaRoche.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 21, 2010 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I thought that Beltre looked like a great pick
His injury from 2009 was a total freak accident. And changing home parks from Safeco to Fenway is a huge boost for a right handed hitter. I think that he (or Boras) knew this as well. Just a shrewd move to set up a big contract after this season.
The gamble for Beltre was getting hurt mainly...
…and not getting a big contract because of that. Moving from Safeco to Fenway was shrewd, yes.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
I suggested signing him to 4/32. I loved the deal for Boston
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 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions
but he always wants to use it as an example when he's talking about small market woes
being in small market didnt have anything to do with it, Beltre turned the same offer from Philly . He took a low risk gamble and it worked big time, technically he took less money but actually he was planning for a lot more. Can’t blame that on the Coliseum
The A's are a fairly quiet team, and then there's Ben Sheets. Sheets, as a kid, must have been thrown out of every library in Baton Rouge. ~ Scott Ostler
Granted.
And I do think Beane and the team has been using the small market thing as a crutch. An excuse to not be held accountable when they fail(1). Not that it’s totally invalid, but I don’t think it’s as debilitating as they claim it to be.
(1) Not saying they failed in this individual circumstance, just a general comment wrapped in with the point.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
I,m tired of this small market crap.
The Bay Area is the 5th biggest market in the U.S.
The only thing small market about the A’s is their marketing and business sense.
And maybe they see “small market” when they look in the mirror at their own reflections [by “they” , I mean managment and ownership]
by robertmelvin on Aug 22, 2010 12:50 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Self-fulfilling prophecy
There’s a case to be made about being a small-market team, and that the Coliseum sucks - but the marketing and promotion has been atrocious for the past few years.
you can blame it on the coliseum being a pitcher's park
Beltre’s contract is completely about building his value for this coming offseason. If he was playing his home games in Oakland, his batting average would be more like .300 instead of .324 and his home run total would be more like 15 instead of 23. Still solid numbers, but right now he is setting himself up as an elite free agent — and Fenway is helping him out.
THIS THIS THIS thank god someone else is saying it
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 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions
At least Beane knows he made a mistake
with the Matt Holliday trade. 2009 was a lousy year in decision making for Beane and Co. On the positive side, Beane has put together a wonderful starting rotation. But this interview suggests that because of salary limitations and the unattractiveness of the Coliseum to free agents, this team will be in the mid-tier of MLB for the foreseeable future. Their offense is horrible, and there isn’t a whole hell of a lot that can be mined from the farm system over the next year or two.
Very good questions
I enjoyed :)
Is this the real life-
Is this just fantasy-
Caught in a landslide-
No escape from reality-
Pretty depressing interview....he basically gave fans no hope or reason to care about the team.
Beane’s points:
1) We’re poor. Not only are we further behind the richest teams than we were 10 years ago, we’re behind almost everyone now that has a new stadium.
2) The stadium is terrible and no one would play in it if they have a choice
3) We have no offense and we’re going to have to wait for more guys in the system to develop before we get some.
4) We tried to win in 2008, and it was a mistake. I’ll never do that again.
5) At my age I’m OK with mediocrity because family is the most important thing
How about questions like:
1) What do the fans have to look forward to the rest of the season and the next few years?
2) Why should the fans care about the team and come watch…or watch on TV?
3) Which players have made the most progress this year, that you see as building blocks? Any plans to sign more guys to long term deals?
4) Who in the minors should the fans keep an eye on?
If this had been a post, it would have been flagged for relentless negativity.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
Beane sounded very Zen
And why not? He’s making millions. He’s part owner. I’m happy for him. Everybody should be so happy and content. Except for general managers of baseball teams. I didn’t hear anything to indicate that Beane had any fire left in his belly.
You can be content and still have a competitive desire to excel.
Contentment is not the same as complacency. He needs to try all out to win, and then be satisfied that he’s done his best if they don’t — accepting any result. He sounds like he’s burned out. He really doesn’t deserve millions if he’s approaching his job this way, nor should he be part owner. I’d be pretty upset if I were Fisher.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 22, 2010 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not so sure you can.
If contentment isn’t the same as complacency, it’s only different by the thinnest of hairs.
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 22, 2010 4:57 PM PDT up reply actions
How about this:
Contentment — I’m satisfied with that I’ve given everything I have in everything I do and can accept the results without regrets because I’ve done everything I can
Complacency — I’ve achieved what I want to achieve and don’t need to try very hard because, well, that would require my doing things I don’t particularly enjoy and I’ve already achieved my goals
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 23, 2010 5:53 AM PDT up reply actions
The thing is contentment breeds complacency.
It’s very easy to go from accepting the results without regret because you feel you’ve given everything you had in everything you did leads to not continuing to push yourself to go beyond what you have. When you start seeing poor results in what you did acceptable, you’re not likely to try harder because you’re already satisfied with what you’ve done.
Choosy Feebas choose Leopold Bloom nipples
Daring. Sensual. Invigorating. Squirrel.
BLOOM. For men.
If the eggs actually hatch I made more than a mistake, I made some scientifically impossible crime.
To whatever extent complacency really is rooted in contentment,
it is a good thing.
The only reason complacency is bad is because it prevents you from reaching contentment. But if you really have reached it, then that’s good.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Well he should work harder to reach our contentment, not his own. ;-)
I'm here to talk about the past.
Well yes... on a personal level this is very true
But on a professional level, by following that, you’re more or less committing career suicide if you reach that level.
Choosy Feebas choose Leopold Bloom nipples
Daring. Sensual. Invigorating. Squirrel.
BLOOM. For men.
If the eggs actually hatch I made more than a mistake, I made some scientifically impossible crime.
On a professional level, you are content
if you don’t need any more money. In which case that’s good.
If I have a flexible, pleasant, low-stress job that makes, say $90K a year, and I can keep it right there indefinitely, my career path is over. Why strive for more?
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Because if you become complacent and fail to push yourself
Odds are someone below you will. And someone above you will take notice that your work isn’t matching what they’re expecting of you and that someone, possibly someone making less than you, can do what you do better. This is especially true for jobs that require certain results.
Choosy Feebas choose Leopold Bloom nipples
Daring. Sensual. Invigorating. Squirrel.
BLOOM. For men.
If the eggs actually hatch I made more than a mistake, I made some scientifically impossible crime.
In which case you're not content.
I’m not arguing for all complacency, DMOAS. I’m arguing for complacency rooted in contentment.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
by iglew on Aug 24, 2010 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Because it's not satisfying to make less of a contribution than you can.
If you’re working purely for the money, rather than to make a contribution, you’ll eventually be dissatisfied and discontented unless you’re so self-centered that you don’t care whether you make a contribution or not. In that case you’re a sociopath.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 5:16 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not sure how I got grouped with those
who work purely for the money, a rather unfamiliar place for me given my history.
I thought I was arguing the opposite. Isn’t it the people who love money who are always dissatisfied and striving for more?
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
I dunno. I pretty much know when there was something more I could have done.
Then I have a regret.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 23, 2010 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions
I didn't come away from the interview depressed or lacking of hope/caring for the team.
1 through 3: the truth can hurt sometimes.
4: I didn’t hear the last part. The one about Beane saying he wouldn’t do that again.
5: I also don’t recall hearing him saying anything about being okay with the team mediocre. But I do think that he’s come to grips with 1 – 3 and isn’t going to be throwing any chairs anytime soon. And I don’t think that he replaced a chair with a towel sometime in the past.
Why would questions one and two be asked if one were trying to get the answers to question three and four? It seems like a way to set up an aversarial and borderline hostile interview.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 8:18 AM PDT up reply actions
There's a way to approach the questions...
1) What do the fans have to look forward to the rest of the season and the next few years?
2) Why should the fans care about the team and come watch…or watch on TV?
…so that they don’t sound hostile or adversarial.
Such as:
Your responses indicate that fans should have little hope for success in the next few years. Can you give fans a reason to come out to the ballpark, or even watch on TV, if there’s no shot at winning the Western Division or Wild Card? I mean, putting together a good pitching staff is nice, but outside of coming to a couple of games a year to eat some hotdogs, you’re not giving any reason for anyone to be a season ticket holder.
That’s not hostile, and it’s saying the same thing.
I wasn't even going to be that negative. I would have preferred that he started out
asking about the future improvements and not brought up the negativity at all. My questions would have been something like:
1) Hi Billy, thanks for taking the time to talk to me. Can you talk about what you’re happy with for this season, and where you think we need to improve for next season? How do you plan to achieve that?
2) We saw a bit of Chris Carter earlier. Is he a candidate to start in LF in 2011 and who else in the minors might be ready to help next year?
And go on in that vein. They could have mentioned the Moneyball movie toward the end, and there was no reason at all to rehash the crappiness of the stadium.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 23, 2010 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Tafoya all but asked those questions
and Beane gave responses in there to
1) Happy about pitching, need to improve offense through power. Probably not going to sign elite FA but wait for power from within the system
AND
2) In bringing him up now, we are getting the jitters out of the way for when he starts next year because we know he blows it when he first gets to a new level.
"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 24, 2010 7:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Another recent Beane interview gave me the same vibe.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
YES, exactly. I could not agree more!!!!!
The A's are a fairly quiet team, and then there's Ben Sheets. Sheets, as a kid, must have been thrown out of every library in Baton Rouge. ~ Scott Ostler
Does anyone think Beane will go after Manny if he's available for a 1yr deal and maybe a team option with a buyout for the 2nd year?
"Some of my finest hours have been spent on my back veranda,
smoking hemp and observing as far as my eye can see."
- Thomas Jefferson
NO
Looks like the A’s will not spend big money on free agents. Continued mediocrity.
by kimo from kauai on Aug 23, 2010 12:47 AM PDT reply actions
If this is true, they should trade everyone with value and rebuild.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 23, 2010 5:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Ive been on this bandwagon for a while.
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 23, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Just askin': isn't THIS what building/rebuilding looks like?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions
no this is what trying to contend while rebuilding and sacraficing the longterm health of the team looks like
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 23, 2010 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Let's say you and I were on different sides of an issue while discussing something about this team
I know this is comepletely hypothetical and unrealstic but please just roll with me on this.
Would you let me write something seemigly this contradicting without bringing it up?
no this is what trying to contend while rebuilding and sacraficing the longterm health of the team looks like
Just so I’m clear, this is what you’re saying, right?: This isn’t what rebuilding looks like; no it’s what rebuilding while trying to contend looks like. In other words, I think what you’re saying, is that it doesn’t count as a rebuild unless everything is scapped and a through rebuild takes place. Is that right? If so, how can a GM ensure that everyone develops at precisely the same time?
Futhermore, are you sure you’re admitting that Beane is trying to committ to having a contending team? Because it just seems you haven’t thought this in the not-to distant past. Please clarify.
Also, let’s now discuss how the long-term health of the team is being sarcficed. How so? Specifically, how do you see that playing out?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry i was contrite and I shouldn't have been.
I think Beane has massively fked this whole thing up. Rebuilding in my book is scrapping pretty much everything so that you can start over. By making a firm decision and doing it all at once it helps contribute to actually creating a core that develops at the same time. Plus the A’s are spending less than average on the draft which should be augmenting the planned rebuild more than it has. I think in both 2009 and 2010 the A’s were trying to contend A’s seen by attempts to plug holes with FA and the Holliday acquisition. He hasn’t gone all in with that route either, which again is a huge problem. The A’s have failed to turn assets into core level players to help the rebuild. Players like Huston Street and Michael Wuertz should have been leveraged for players like Josh Bell or Sean Rodriguez when we had the chance rather than keeping them because we are toying with competition or traded for present upgrades (aka Holliday). Furthermore, it gives playing time to stopgaps like Orlando Cabrera rather than players with marginal track records like Cliff Pennington that we need to find out whether the would break out (Imagine if we had signed Scutaro at this point and he was blocking one of our more productive players). We never just give half a season of ABs to Travis Buck for example. We are also getting worse draft picks by winning some games.
I think it is going to take a metric ton of luck for this “rebuild” to work out. Im thinking we are slowly moving into Astros land and Im really worried about it.
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 23, 2010 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Then we should never speak...
Furthermore, it gives playing time to stopgaps like Orlando Cabrera rather than players with marginal track records like Cliff Pennington that we need to find out whether the would break out (Imagine if we had signed Scutaro at this point and he was blocking one of our more productive players).
…of a player or pitcher needing more seasoning in the minors while in rebuild mode, correct?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Not necissarily.
There are plenty of players who have gotten rushed in rebuilds. Part of the trick with rebuilds is to realize it takes some time, whether that is not trading players to try to compete or rushing players trying to get them to compete early. The Pennington thing was just an example.
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 23, 2010 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions
what examples are there of teams going in full rebuild?
Marlins? and…
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
the Rays were never really good but they committed to rebuilding.
The Padres did and the Indians have.
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 24, 2010 2:55 AM PDT up reply actions
I think the rays were just inept
they would have traded Huff earlier if they were really rebuilding.
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - dannycakes
REbuilding?
“Building” would be more like it. REbuilding implies they once had previous success to which they aspired to return.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
also I want to point out that bringing players up too soon when were trying to compete has been the problem, not because we aren't contending
the pressure to do the former is far greater than the pressure to do the latter.
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 23, 2010 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I thought he did pretty much completely disassemble the team prior to '08...
…and the fact that we did better than 62-100 and a resulting great top draft pick was unexpected. The drive to try and be competitive in ‘09 was misguided, or at least jumping the gun, I agree with that. I don’t believe there is only one way to rebuild, however, and do not see our chance as being lost.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
No
The disassembling of the team was not complete until halfway through 2008. And one could make an argument that it was never completed at all, because Street wasn’t dealt until Holliday was acquired.
Not that I’m unhappy overall with what the team got for what was, in effect, very little given up in Harden and Blanton, but your statement is not accurate.
"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.
Basically,
get rid of Crosby’s salary and trade Harden, Blanton and Street. There were a few other liabilities but by that time they were all short-term except for the recurring bedsore of Chavez’s salary, which couldn’t be helped anyway.
"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.
Considering Beane's early comments regarding rebuilding...
…and that dragging it out is a good way to alienate fans, I would presume that Harden and Blanton and Street still had enough team control left that they were kept to be the “veterans” of the rebuilt team. There is clear evidence that he did not expect it to take as long as it has. Not necessarily an unrealistic plan, if that is indeed what he was thinking.
Crosby & Chavez couldn’t be gotten rid of without just releasing them and eating the salaries. From a baseball-only perspective that’s probably better that they do that, but unfortunately it’s not all baseball-only.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
I doubt it
I think the only reason they were kept was that the team hadn’t found offers for them yet. Which is kind of the point— rebuilding a team takes a while. You can’t just have one firesale and call it a day.
I’m pretty sure that as of January 2008 the team could have found a taker for Crosby’s salary. Probably no more than that, though. Chavez could probably have been moved for a C+ prospect if the team had agreed to eat most of his salary, as it wasn’t yet clear how badly hosed his career was.
"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.
I can see that as a possible scenario.
Not getting the right offers. I still think Beane expected rebuilding to go much quicker and easier than it turned out to be, though.
There is also clear evidence that he didn’t originally intend to trade Swisher, but was overwhelmed by an offer he couldn’t refuse.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
Getting rid of Crosby's salary?
No one would have wanted that. He was waived and not claimed, wasn’t he? The only way that salary could have been dumped is if another team was also dumping.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 2:19 AM PDT up reply actions
before that
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 24, 2010 2:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Let's consider the timeline here...
The A’s are a playoff team in 2006, so going into dump mode the next offseason wasn’t going to happen. So going into 2007 Crosby (whom I hated and advocated his removal often) was destined to be pencilled in as the starting SS and Street was a cheap and effective Closer.
After 2007 Crosby had firmly established his suckitude (although many on AN continued to believe) and Street began what has been (so far) a 4 year run of not being able to stay healthy. I’d argue that Beane eventually sold high on Street when he dealt him for Holliday, because by the end of 2008 he was no more than a seldom healthy middle relief pitcher for the A’s. Colorado picked him up hoping for a bounce back year, which they got in 2009. I’m not sure another team would have been willing to trade for Street at “former Closer” price tag in prospects.
So basically, for the A’s to have escaped Crosby’s salary and gotten peak trade value for Crosby they would have had to move them in the 2006-2007 offseason; which was doubtful to happen in wake of Oakland’s 2006 ALCS appearance.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Given what Street actually did in 2009,
a patient team would have been able to trade him for value at the 2009 deadline. Certainly for more value than they actually got.
"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.
Remember that the A's tried to trade Street
to the Brewers at the 2008 deadline, but the Brewers scouted him and said “No thanks,” which undoubtedly spread to other teams.
Sure they could have held onto him in 2009, but he could just as easily had ulnar nerve die-itis in 2009 as not — and had he stayed on the A’s I’m sure he would have gotten injured again because we have the gift.
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
Street picked a bad time to be terrible.
A's Fan Studying in Sweden
I was one of them
After 2007 Crosby had firmly established his suckitude (although many on AN continued to believe)
I admit it
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions
The problem with saying we sold high on Street
is that we were completely taken on Carlos Gonzalez. When we over-evaluated Sweeney’s value and underappreciated the signs of an emerging Gonzalez (we knew he didn’t walk when he was acquired as the centerpiece of the Haren deal—- and we thought he might be good enough that it wouldn’t matter), we allowed another team to step in and get a player whom I would bet the Rockies fantasized would eventually totally replace Holliday all by himself… which CG has already done.
I haven’t seen it mentioned on this thread, but THIS combination of mis-evaluation of talent and lack of patience with a young budding star has had and will have a large effect on our sputtering offense.
The interview gets at it
I haven’t seen it mentioned on this thread, but THIS combination of mis-evaluation of talent and lack of patience with a young budding star has had and will have a large effect on our sputtering offense.
Beane admits to making a mistake with this one…says the timing was wrong. Mentioning it, at this point, is akin to beating the horse after it’s already dead.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions
My main comment at the time of the trade was
“If it were Sweeney instead of Gonzalez, I’d be ok with it.” Estupido A’s preferred Sweeney (or else the Rockies insisted on Carlos, in which case the A’s should have said no).
Imagine if our COF spots right now looked like Gonzalez, Carter, Taylor going into the off-season. Grrrr…
And heck — if he were playing half his games in Coors Field, Sweeney might be a legitimate 8 HR hitter!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I wouldn't have been okay with giving up Sweeney either
Impressively, that trade would have managed to make the A’s worse in 2009 AND the future.
The whole thing was a ridiculous overestimation of Holliday’s (admittedly considerable) baseball skills. The package would barely have made any sense if it was friggin’ 2001 Bonds coming back, much less Matt Holliday.
"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.
I should clarify as I misspoke --
I would have been “at peace” with it with Sweeney for Gonzalez, rather than being “Gaaaahkkkkhhh????” I just really hated giving up Gonzalez.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I think the A's were hesitant to have a total yardsale all at once for marketing reasons
One horribly embarrassing year may give you a high draft pick but may also turn away a lot of casual fans for years, especially in a period where the A’s are trying to improve their radio and TV situation. I’m not saying I totally agree with the logic, but I’m suggesting it may have had something to do with not totally punting on 2008.
I agree with 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 23, 2010 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I get what you're saying, DFA
But say Beane said at the end of this season “you know what, nothing’s happening with this team until we have a stadium. I’m just going to sell all the pitching for A/AA guys. Let’s start over.” There are several problems with this:
1. In doing this, and likely losing 95-100 the next few seasons, you would then have the awesome draft picks but still have a bunch of talent better than that.
2. There is still a high probability that, despite your best efforts, your core group won’t actually mature at the same time.
2a. Given this team’s poor luck (for lack of a better word), some of your young stars will get injured young which will negatively affect your core group.
3. Your fanbase will think you went bats—— crazy and even fewer people will go to games than they do now.
Given all this, I think Beane and most GMs that don’t have a playoff team right now have no choice but to go with a middle-of-the-road strategy.
"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 24, 2010 7:11 AM PDT up reply actions
This is what I believe as well.
In the past Beane has commented that he thinks this particular market is unusually elastic downward; that is, he thinks that a string of really bad seasons would do long-term damage to the already dismal attendance. This is partly the stadium but mostly the culture of the Bay Area where sports tastes are more fickle than elsewhere in the nation and there isn’t a strong core of “baseball no matter what” sentiment.
Arguments for the boom-and-bust style of rebuilding cycle generally assume that the good years will yield great profit but the bad years won’t hurt much. My impression is that our GM does not believe that is the case for Oakland. I think Beane believes an especially bad period will hurt the team more than an especially good period will help, and I know of no evidence to convince me that he is wrong about that.
Therefore, I think, he has attempted to do a partial rebuild while still keeping the team good enough to hover near 500. That attempt has not been entirely successful. I think in 2008 and 2009 he genuinely hoped to finish somewhere around 81-81 and it didn’t work out as planned.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Well, if he's right about that,
and if the A’s ultimately care about attendance and money and not about winning, then there is truly no hope for this franchise. It needs to be sold, moved, and/or contracted.
"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.
Well, we also know that the road to attendance and money is through winning
But the road to winning is also through money. In other words, new stadium.
"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 24, 2010 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I remain unconvinced that a new stadium
will lead to a better W-L record. People say that all the time, but I just don’t see the evidence.
Winning does seem to correlate to profit, but a better stadium is only one type of revenue, and depending on how it’s paid for it can entail corresponding costs.
When you look at the quality of the stadium alone, I just don’t see a very strong correlation across the league. There are some good teams in good stadiums and some crummy teams in crummy stadiums. There are also some good teams in crummy stadiums and crummy teams in good stadiums. The A’s have the worst stadium of all, it is generally acknowledged, but they are by no means the worst team of all. The worst teams in the current era are typically the Pirates and the Orioles, and they do not have the worst stadiums.
I can see why fans want a new stadium, and I can see why the owners want a new stadium. But I think viewing a new stadium as a ticket to better W-L records is nothing more than wishful thinking.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
of course it's not direct
I don’t expect them to show up the first year and get past the ALDS. But, at this point, it’s a matter of the team’s facilities being inferior to those of other teams without the benefits of being a “classic” like Wrigley or Fenway. A new field will invariably draw more fans over-and-above the debt service on the cost of construction and give them more money to play with. If they practice Orioles and Mets style of baseball operations, though, then they will fail new stadium or not. (That’s the one thing you can say about Beane — when he fails he at least doesn’t spend money doing it.)
In ANS time (after new stadium), when the elite FA goes on the market and he fits the A’s needs and is legitimately good, we’ll be able to make a stab at him. Or, when a young star hits FA, we have a real chance to re-sign him. Right now, the A’s aren’t even in the conversation. If Anderson goes on to be the dominant pitcher we expect him to be, in 5 years, if nothing changes, we will be priced out of his market. Maybe he’ll be less valuable than he was pre-FA, but the fans will want him signed and then we can do it, retain those fans, and retain their goodwill. The current strategy is fiscally smart, but hard to explain to joe schmo fan who laments that player’s absence, then quickly loses his goodwill towards the team.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
Athletics Nation - WE'RE ALL GONNA MRIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!
by cuppingmaster on Aug 24, 2010 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
The better examples would be teams on the rise...
…such as the Indians as they opened Jacobs Field and the Giants as they opened PacBell. Those two teams definitely got a great boost by both great new venues AND the excitement of teams finally winning for the first time in a long time.
This was also hinted at for the A’s when they were to open in Fremont… timing the new stadium with the culmination of the rebuilding. Now, the stadium is in limbo, and the commitment to the team appears to be so, as well. Recent comments makes me wonder if they’re purposely waiting for the stadium before they commit again to the team, so they can happen together and the a similar benefit.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
Both teams built those winners in their shitty ballparks before they moved in.
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 24, 2010 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Why? I'm not saying he doesn't try to win.
I’m saying that he does his best to do a rebuild but within the restriction that he can’t let the team fall too far below 500 while doing it. That makes it harder, not impossible.
It also offers greater opportunity for lucking into the playoffs with a team that’s only a little better than 500 (which is what I think happened in 2006). It also gets the team’s ticket in the crap shoot to maybe reach the World Series as a slightly good team that hits a hot streak at the right time, like the 06 Cardinals, 87 Twins, or 73 Mets.
There is a vast difference between being a team that is consistently so-so with occasional periods of pretty good, and a team that is consistently awful, like the Pirates, Orioles or Royals.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
You notice how far apart those teams are?
That’s like one every 15-20 years league-wide. (They also were not built using this ridonkulous “let’s be average every year and pray for luck” stratagem— the ‘06 Cardinals, at least, were the dying embers of what was once a seriously dominant team— but that’s another story.)
It’s an utterly insane strategy. I’ll be, to paraphrase Betty White, talking to my friends by Ouija board before the A’s will win a world series that way.
"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.
Are you actually for rebuilding?
Or are you simply for losing with a bunch of minor leaguers?
I don’t get it. The pitching staff got completely torn down and rebuilt into what it is now. Our lineup has been a revolving door the past few years save for Cust, Ellis and Suzuki (who was brought up as part of the rebuilding).
What exactly is rebuilding if this isn’t it? We are bringing up minor leaguers left and right in hopes that they can stick.
We should tear down our lights-out incredibly affordable, youngest pitching staff in the league to go even younger? Is that really what rebuilding is all about? Are we ever going to build a wall or just keep tearing the half completed house down and redoing the foundation?
by Billy Frijoles on Aug 23, 2010 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions
you need to also score runs to win.
fact of the game.
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 23, 2010 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Definitely
So I don’t understand. I figure that we are in the middle of rebuilding right now. The pitching staff’s built. We are (hopefully) going to build hitting.
there was a while were we sucked at both.
When you say do a complete rebuild at this stage, do you basically mean ship out all our young pitchers (which are the only trade chips we have of any value) for minor league prospects?
I just don’t think aborting the rebuilding process midway through makes sense.
by Billy Frijoles on Aug 23, 2010 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions
They already aborted the rebuilding process midway through
so at this point the choices are to retry it, or to fail…
The utterly, utterly stupid Holliday trade killed it. Once they made that move they had to try to contend that season.
It’s very unclear to me how the A’s could “build hitting” without expending either money or talent that they don’t have.
"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.
There's always a variation on the Marlins approach
Spend a ton of money signing players to multi-year contracts…keep them for a year and then trade them for top MLB-ready prospects. Take a huge hit one year, and then the next two year hope the almost-major league ready prospects can quickly move into position before you lose your pitching staff.
In other words, sign Crawford and Werth to multi-year deals, keep them for a year, and then bounce them off to the highest bidder with the best prospect package.
That's not the current Marlins approach
which is to never spend any money on anything because you make more by being a farm system to the rest of MLB than you do by playing competitive baseball.
I’m just about 100% sure that that is the economically optimal approach for the A’s to take, too. Which unfortunately says a lot about the perverse incentives of the current MLB salary and revenue-sharing structure.
"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.
It may seem to be economically optimal in the short run but it isn't
going to add as much value even over say a 5 year term than growing the fanbase. Marlins value hasn’t grown anywhere near as much as the teams who have grown their revenues more.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 5:09 AM PDT up reply actions
You presume that value growth is possible
That’s not clear at all in the case of either franchise.
Besides, why take major risks when you can literally pull down eight-digit profits every year, guaranteed? The Marlins are a SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS as currently operated. (Quite embarrassing for MLB, but that’s their problem.) You can speculate all you want about financial “win-more” scenarios, but taking “win-more” moves is very rarely sensible in any game.
"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 24, 2010 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Beat me to it.
And much more concise and to-the-point…
IF the Athletics take their division next year...
…then it will mean that they have not had to rebuild and that they didn’t fail at the rebuilding that had just taken place: that’s correct, right?
And if it is correct [as I believe it is], will you eat your hat and write/say that perhaps there was really a third choice that you didn’t see coming?
And if they do take the division next year will you then, perhaps, admit that maybe there was talent on the team afterall?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 5:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Ive already outlined how they could win the division next year.
I don’t think its impossible. I just think its unlikely that the A’s are able to and that Beane’s moves have dramatically reduced the likelihood of that occurring. The path is pretty clear
1) The rotation stays health and all improves from this year. (which will require a ton of injury luck)
2) Carter and Taylor don’t struggle and can hold down 1 starting OF spot.
3) Rosales maintains his prorated value in a full time role
4) Pennington doesn’t lose his magic beans
5) Kouz figures out how to hit a little
6) Barton doesn’t regress
7) Coco/Davis maintain a healthy and effective CF
8) The A’s eat the contract of a player who experiences a resurgence in the other COF spot
9) Suzuki doesn’t suck anymore
10) The bullpen doesn’t suck anymore and is actually good
The problem is that almost all of those things need to happen. If 1 or 10 doesn’t happen it will be a huge problem.
The other thing is there could be a bunch of money that we are willing to spend that I don’t know about and we pick up Crawford (who isn’t THAT good anyway) and then less of those things need to happen but we have huge questions at 6 of the 8 positions and 40% of our rotation and 100% of our bullpen
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 23, 2010 7:39 PM PDT up reply actions
How do you manage to get out of bed in the morning? Your world is so bleak.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
How do you know he's out of bed?
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 23, 2010 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions
So, there is a chance, if things break correctly.
That the two extremes presented above aren’t the ONLY two things that could happen.
That if Beane, Wolff, Fisher [the real ‘we’] spend a bunch of money, some of these 10 problems can be papered over just enough.
That you won’t be eating your hat if the team takes the division since you’ve now given yourself the ‘out’ with this most recent post.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Well its like my Ryan Sweeney post. He was very likely to be a good player
He busted his knees and fucked it up. Even if a bet pays out 80% of the time you will lose a fair amount. is still a good bet. It was that 20% that happened.
Beane has consistently made choices that lowered the chance that his rebuilding will be successful after a very very good initial start (Haren and Swisher trades) to the point that it is unlikely to work.
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 23, 2010 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions
This makes all predictions scientifically untestable though.
You can say “[event] is 80% likely to happen” as often as you like, and then any time they turn out wrong you say, “gee, it was the 20%; I was still absolutely correct.” Maybe you were, or maybe you weren’t, but there’s no way to test it even after the fact.
Professional pundits make a living off this technique.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
And so do unpaid pundits...
…well, except the ‘making a living off of it’ part, which is basically the whole friggen sentence now.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 2:22 AM PDT up reply actions
I realize this
but think of it like a DIPS stat. I can show how I expect individual transactions to go about that and you can measure the some of the expected value of the transactions. I can show that on average Beane is making the team worse.
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 24, 2010 3:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Only if you never meta-test any of them
by looking at performance track record, although to be fair, since this is a blog, it’s unlikely that anyone will ever meta-test anyone’s predictions here, so it’s probably possible to get away with it.
That being said, I hardly think that DFA is the kind of person to overblow his projections deliberately just because he knows it’s difficult to catch.
"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.
I wasn't thinking of deliberately
boosting one’s predictions to impress others. Rather, I was thinking of growing attached to a theory because it pleases one’s way of thinking and never having to discover whether it’s right or wrong.
The same peril attaches to my own theory, which I’ve alluded to elsewhere on this thread, that Beane’s strategy is to try to put out a team that is at least ~500 year after year, and improve upon it only within that restriction.
Supporting this theory is my belief that the teams he has put out really are teams that can be expected to perform near 81-81, and the fact that they fell short of that the last couple years I explain with the same sort of 20% chance reasoning. (And I think the 2006 team was similarly flukish, but in the other direction.)
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Regardless,
the statement that such predictions are not scientifically testable is simply false. Looked at in the aggregate, they are indeed scientifically testable.
"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.
Any team could win its division if a ton of players suddenly improve their level of play
Even the Orioles.
That being said, the Angels and Rangers have more talent in the majors, more talent in the minors, and more money than the A’s do. So… no, not really. The fact that the current A’s team might hit an inside straight on the river card does not make it a good hand.
"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.
I don't think the Angles hae more talent
unless trout is ready next year
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 23, 2010 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm including the predictable boost they will receive
from outspending the A’s in the free agent market this offseason (as in every offseason).
"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.
that makes more sense.
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 24, 2010 3:01 AM PDT up reply actions
So where's the offense going to come from, then?
From the FA market? Doesn’t look like it, based on Beane’s comments and, even if the A’s did go the FA route, you’re talking about a pretty hefty financial commitment. Or worse, they could attempt to acquire a premier hitter by trading precious (and, frankly, scarce) talent…
Accepting that the pitching has come a long way and looks decent right now, those pitchers will not be cheap by the time any organic offensive pluses (like > 125 wRC+) make their way to Oakland. Even if the pitchers are signed to team-friendly deals through their arb years, that is still a significant looming financial obligation. And, if the past is any indication, the A’s will not be able to afford/keep all of them.
In other words, the offense that was supposed to be showing up in 2010-11 — e.g. Taylor, Carter, Brown, Cardenas, heck, even the retired Grant Desme if you really want to extrapolate — just doesn’t project to be enough to truly compete. At least not given those (and other A’s) prospects’ generally craptacular showings this year. Add in the fact that the pitching will be expensive by then, perhaps prohibitively so, annnnnddd…
= The notion that the rebuild is failing. And don’t even get me started on the CarGo/Holliday trade.
CarGon wouldn't have been a superstar
His stats are inflated by Coors. But I think DFA nails it: The team’s best trade bait — Huston Street, and then Michael Wuertz at the end of last season - were not leveraged into potential impact players. And CarGon himself, while maybe not the player he is in Denver would have certainly been a step up from people like Gabe Gross, Conor Jackson, Travis Buck and -- sigh — Rajai Davis.
I’m not sure if playing Cabrera necessarily slowed down Cliff Pennington’s arc to respectability, but it’s possible. It is clear that Giambi definitely slowed Barton down.
Inflated stats or not...
My guess is that every team in baseball would take CarGon over every single position player on our roster, and probably over every single position player prospect in our system… with the possible exception of Suzuki because of his positional value.
But would they take CarGon or Holliday...
…if they though they were in the hunt?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions
um the A's were never in the hunt before or after Holliday, which is the problem.
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 24, 2010 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm asking...
…Dickhouse which player, CarGon or Holliday, he would rather have if a team he followed [A’s or otherwise] were in contention. I wrote it this way because he wrote this:
Inflated stats or not… My guess is that every team in baseball would take CarGon over every single position player on our roster
The reason I wrote what I did is to determine who he thinks the better player is so as to determine whether or not he thinks the Athletics got a fair return for CarGon and company. I did not write this to see whether or not he thought it was a good trade to make…because I’m pretty sure I already know what that answer would be as well as the answers of many others who post here. Because while many of us are disappointed that CarGon no longer plays for Oakland, and we would be quick to point to all the position players currently on this roster that he is better than, we have to remember that the team got a half a year from Holliday and then eventually netted Shane Peterson, Clayton Mortenson, and Michael Taylor from the flip. These things have to be factored.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 25, 2010 8:09 AM PDT up reply actions
the return on the flip was pretty terrible to be honest.
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 25, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
I may never get my answer from Dickhouse
So, I’m glad you’re willing to play along. What should have the team expected back in exchange on a half year of an impact bat who, to date that partiuclar season, had numbers that didn’t look very impact-like?
Maybe the Cards did offer more but Beane, in his contentment/complacency, said, “Oh no, you don’t have to give up that much to get Holliday from us, John.”
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 25, 2010 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
the other thing is you have to factor in Street.
For the stretch run id rather have street and gonzalez over holliday
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 25, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
True
But by then, didn’t Street have a starring role in a sylvester stallone flick?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 25, 2010 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Looks like many fans will not spend smaller amounts of money on tickets
Continued closed-loop interaction between customer satisfaction/company’s product quality.
But what started that?
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 7:59 AM PDT up reply actions
tickets are hardly small amounts of money in this economic environment
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 23, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
Relative to a baseball player's contract?
That was the context I was trying to convey.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
$2
Isn’t really that much, even in this economy.
by Billy Frijoles on Aug 23, 2010 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions
and those tickets are always sold out. Also theyre day games which are inherently harder to go to.
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 23, 2010 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions
for some reason I find it really easy to get cheap or free A's tickets
I have bought 10 for $10 from scalpers. a lot of times people in the parking lot or on their way in just give them to you. And the value deck is dirt cheap as well. The scalpers have tons of comp tickets always so they’re willing to get rid of them for next to nothing (as they paid nothing). I have no idea how this works but I love watching the Oakland economy at work.
I think the ticket prices aren’t killing anybody, although, yes, I agree with you in principle that if you have a family of 4 and the main breadwinner is out of work, then you’re not going to too many games.
by Billy Frijoles on Aug 23, 2010 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions
You can get a bleacher ticket for 13 dollars, dude.
No promotions, no nothing. You can walk up to ticket services and get one.
Pam liked my old sig better.
I know and I do.
Im just saying that times are tight for a lot of 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 23, 2010 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions
oh absolutely
But, IMO, to say that the A’s haven’t taken steps to make it cheaper to go to games would be false.
(not saying you said that, just saying in general)
Pam liked my old sig better.
It's hard to read into it that way.
What Beane said is that it would be hard to get a top tier free agent to come here. He didn’t say the A’s wouldn’t try.
Also, saying that he would make a huge offer to Adam Dunn in the off season would be considered tampering and result in a huge settlement to the Nationals. What would you do in that situation? Would you tip your hand to the league that you have 30 million to spent and start a pre-emptive bidding war, or would you bluff so you could come in and make a stealth offer later on?
by Mr. Clean Sweep on Aug 23, 2010 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
That’s a tough question to get to the root of when you’re talking amongst fans who are pissed and want answers.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions
this makes sense
Yes I felt discouraged, but yeah…what is he going to say? No need for him to divulge anything at this stage in the game. Beane has built winning teams before and I want to give him a chance to do it again.
by Billy Frijoles on Aug 23, 2010 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions
He will sign Free Agents
He has to spend most of the money coming off the books somewhere to avoid the wrath of MLB for hoarding revenue sharing money. We might not get Crawford or a similar high profile name, but a good chunk of that money will go somewhere.
I suspect MLB's wrath in regards to the A's is either over exagerated or non-existent
Choosy Feebas choose Leopold Bloom nipples
Daring. Sensual. Invigorating. Squirrel.
BLOOM. For men.
If the eggs actually hatch I made more than a mistake, I made some scientifically impossible crime.
I am 100% in agreement with this
they spend the revenue sharing unlike loria. Theyre fine
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 23, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
and they spend
on people MLB prolly likes, like Piazza, Crisp, gross etc.
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - dannycakes
There is no wrath.
There is simply the requirement in the revenue sharing agreement that those funds go toward player development. So long as they do, they’re fine. Florida got in trouble because they came short of that. Oakland isn’t even close to that problem.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Free Agents
I wouldn’t worry to much about his comments on free agents since Billy never talks about who he is going after. Sounds to me he will pick up the options on Ellis and Crisp. I think he is looning down the road on Cahill, Gio, and Braden on paying them. It does sound like Crawford and Werth are out but if a power hitter becomes available for a few years he may go for it.
by Arcman on Aug 23, 2010 8:16 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
+1
Last October he talked alot about staying “disciplined” and not getting ahead of himself just to have a couple of press conferences. But then in the next couple of months the team made competitive offers to Beltre, Scutaro, and Chapman. I believe he will be active.
+1
And an actual Rec to go along with it.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 23, 2010 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Serious question. What's the logic of using Carson in CF for the River Cats while Corey Brown is crushing the ball in Midland?
I know Brown had a bad start at AAA this year, but Cardenas has been recalled to AAA and is doing okay.
The only thing I can think of
Is maybe their having him work with some hitting coach in Midland to close some holes in his swing and that while they’re tinkering with his swing they want him playing at a level where he’s comfortable and not pressing too much.
he's improved his walk rate this year, but i think he's always going to strike out a lot. question is whether he's swinging at good pitches and missing or is he swinging at slop?
one thing is clear. when he makes contact, he’s very productive.
Great job here, Dale
You’re a very good interviewer. I look forward to listening to more of your work.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
Somewhat relatedly, anyone been BizofBaseball this morning
And the detailed financials of the Pirates, Rays, Angels, Mariners, and Marlins leaked?
"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!!!!!
i put all that in my DLD
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 23, 2010 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions
EN
“You can say… whatever you want, I’ve hear it all before. All you can do is pray for a quick death, which you ain’t gonna get.”
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Aug 23, 2010 10:24 AM PDT reply actions
I wish Dale had asked Beane about the ever smaller crowds
Ownership has allowed fan enthusiasm to fall so far that looking at crowd size for home games is almost like watching a snowball roll uphill (getting smaller and smaller) and surely that doesn’t bode well for the team’s future. The only good thing I can see about it is that, as a fan living in Northern Nevada, I can go to games on the spur of the moment and be assured of getting good seats. P.S. It sucks that we no longer have A’s games on the radio here in the Reno-Sparks area.
Imagine you're BB . . .
. . . and you’re planning to spend a lot of $$ on FA’s this offseason. It’s all competitive bidding, and you have limited resources.
Q: What’s the one thing you would never do?
A: Declare that you are planning on spending $$ on FA’s.
What he said in the interview was interesting, and it was a great job getting the interview. But I would put a couple million grains of salt on before I swallowed anything BB (or any other MLB GM) said about their intention to spend $$ on FA’s. BB does not want to bid against himself.
Your second place Oakland A's.
by eastcoasta'sfan on Aug 23, 2010 2:42 PM PDT reply actions
I'm not sure if this is totally true
The front office has a policy of not discussing individual players, but I don’t think there’s much of a competitive advantage in saying one thing and doing another.
5th largest market try 4th
NY
LA
Chicago
Bay Area
Philly
I'm also in the camp of Beane not tipping his hand in any way
At least I hope that is what the situation is…….
On Crawford I would not put it out of the realm of possibility, even though we’re talking about a pretty massive amount of money to bring him here. He did say the other day in the SF Chronichle that he liked the area and the weather in the bay, and that the pitching is pretty good, so of course he would consider coming to Oakland. A lot of it depends on what Tampa’s plans are for next season and beyond etc………something to that effect, at least.
I could see it happening and maybe the A’s use one of their starters as a central piece to a trade that brings someone like a Kemp or Uggla, as has been discussed here plenty, to add that second bat. One would be nice, but adding two bats is what it’s gonna take to put the A’s into contention, in my opinion. Good post NSJ and keep up the good work!
Go A’s!
"By the end of the year, I'll have Dallas throwing right-handed'' -Ben Sheets
This is the only straw I can grasp at after that interview.
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 23, 2010 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree that he doesn't tip his hand...
…but that doesn’t explain the vibe… the “sigh, we’re not even going to try” vibe… that I’ve gotten from two recent interviews.
Bob Geren... Jackie Moore without the personality.
I think it's safe to say Beane is burned out and he doesn't care anymore.
I think rather than promote Forst, the organisation should think outside the box and hire me.
I’d do everything in my power to bring back Carlos Gonzalez and Andre Ethier. I’d sack Geren and install Chavez as the new manager. I’d also stop the use of the black alternate jersey and replace it with a gold one, the style of which is yet to be determined.
Most importantly – I’d remove the tarp and make all the players wear high socks.
So, AN, do I have your vote? If so please start a write in campaign.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
by OldhamA on Aug 23, 2010 8:12 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
You forgot the part about hiring me to be your consigliere
Therefore, no vote for you!
The monster at the end of this blog.
I don't know if Wolff is that progressive.
Asking him to hire an Englishman. Maybe. A muppet though?
I’ll certainly float the idea when I get in power though.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
Not good enough
If you aren’t going to have enough juice to hire the brain trust you want, then the reality is you’re going to be nothing more than a sock puppet for The Man.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I was just trying to break it to you gently.
There’s no room for you in the brain trust. I’m hiring PT and DFA to do all the heavy lifting. I’m just there for my looks and to sign off on things – mainly by saying "No! He’s awful! and “Who? Ok, but it’s coming out of your salary.”
It’s a system that I think is going to work wonders.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
wow youre asking for trouble excluding the muppet.
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 23, 2010 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, you're a limey. I've got the inside track, and I've already planned on hiring most of the ANers to help.
You can be my overseas scout
Pam liked my old sig better.
Going to mine the cricket leagues for cheap arms?
By the way OldhamA, take note how mikev makes promises like this to earn support.
In true American fashion, once he takes over he has no reason to actually keep his word and follow through!
The monster at the end of this blog.
"Going to mine the cricket leagues for cheap arms?"
That’s why you’re not on my team.
As for cheap promises – I’d make them, but I want to run a campaign based on integrity. Plus you’d all know where I work.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
I'd give it one season...
That’s how long it would take for your chosen brain trust to burn every bridge betwixt the A’s and every other team in baseball.
As for your integrity… I’m part Irish. I know all about English “integrity”.
The monster at the end of this blog.
That's half the fun.
I’m part Irish too. Both sides have their faults.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
How are you going to attract latin talent when you're xenophobic?
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
You're European, how are you going to know not to scout Spain and Portugal?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Cos I'm not building a football team.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
Hmm...If one of them's gay then I'm sold
Otherwise, you still need to befriend an American Indian.
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
Planning on having a casino at the new ball park?
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
Why not?
We already draw 21 fans.
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
He'll delegate that task to Paul Thomas.
Paul speaks Latin.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
To whom?
I hate Bob Geren and his peanut brain so much -- lenscrafters
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 5:12 AM PDT up reply actions
To Latinos!
Guh!
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
See I'm only interested in Latinas.
Which is why I’d leave all the heavy lifting to PT and DFA.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
You have Latin talent in me right here ese'!
:)
"By the end of the year, I'll have Dallas throwing right-handed'' -Ben Sheets
Oh, that 2001 team
I’d love to see, like, a 4-5 hour retrospective on that season, just for a chance to see that lineup and rotation in action again. I’m looking at you, MLB Network. Knowing full well, of course, that it’ll never happen.
"I've made a huge little mistake." - G.O.B.
Chris Carter hit his 30th HR today
Woo hoo! Come back soon, beast!
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
He was, like, 0 for 93.
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
In that same vein..
Michael Choice hit his 5th homer today. A 3-run dinger. 5hr in 15 games. Not bad. Time to extrapolate.
by Pop N' Locktapus on Aug 23, 2010 10:59 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Wow
Choice has as many HR’s as Michael Taylor (5)… in 392 less PA’s. In a much less hitter friendly environment than the PCL.
by Colorado Fan on Aug 24, 2010 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions
At a much lower level.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
Billy Beane has become
The JaMarcus Russell of GMs.
And rightfully so.
He could easily be replaced by the fans of this team. Given the additional money that would be there to be spent on players and the availability of other teams’ talent that suddenly and miraculously opens up, a firing becomes something that Beane should do to himself.
Fire. Beane. Now.
Unfortuantely I think he’s become too complacent to carry out what needs to be done.
by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 2:41 AM PDT up reply actions
... yeah that analogy doesn't make any sense
JaMarcus Russell came into the league, immediately sucked, sucked some more, and then was quickly busted out.
That has no relationship to Beane’s career arc regardless of what you think his current GM skills are.
"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.
I didn't want to comment until I had a chance to listen
So I listened on my way to work today. First, fantastic job Dale! I’m impressed that you were able to get Beane for your inaugural podcast.
The most striking part was when they started to talk about money. Tafoya implied that the A’s would have $20M+ to spend on FAs. Beane pulled back on the assertion we would sign an FA but said that existing players would get raises. In this case, I’m revising my expectations for the offseason:
1. Some of the money will be used to lock up Pennington, Cahill, and Barton to long-term deals to take them through arby.
2. They will at least make an offer to a slugger. Crawford is out for money, so probably Werth. Dunn is less likely.
3. As usual, the A’s will go after a role-player that has some power potential, knowing that 2 is unlikely to work out.
4. In case neither 2 nor 3 work out, Cust will be resigned to another 1 year deal.
5. There will NOT be trading of any of the current 5 rotation guys. In fact, all three of the others may be signed to longer-term deals.
"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!!!!!
Lock up Cahill & Gio
IMO, you should probably lock up Cahill (during the offseason) and Gio (Mid-2011) to go along with Anderson & Suzuki. Pennington is having a solid year, but the way the Arby System works, it’s probably best to lock up our pitchers since their statistics will look a lot more shiny than Pennington and/or Barton. If Carter breaks-out in his 2nd season (2012), you should lock him up as well.
by Colorado Fan on Aug 24, 2010 7:39 AM PDT up reply actions
Hi, A's Nation!
Glad you enjoyed the interview. I tried to cover as much as possible.
-Dale

by 























