Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Carmelo Anthony, Amar'e Stoudemire Vow To Fit In With Lin

Hungry? Eat Nate McLouth's Contract, It Might Be Rather Delicious

Evil Don here, on behalf of my better half. Today our guest-host is DFA, who serves up a scrumptious sampling of under-performing players A's should look into. With danmerqury taking a much-deserved break, Good Don will be here this afternoon in the role of pinch-threader as the A's begin a three-game series with the Cleveland Indians. 4:05 start time.  Until then, enjoy DFA's fine work. And speaking of work, well, yeah. Sigh.

There has been much hubbub about the A's inability to sign their premium free agent targets over the last two off-seasons. The Coli sucks blah blah blah, no one wants to play in front of 17 and 1/2 people blah blah blah, you'll get stabbed in Oakland blah blah blah.  I don't really believe any of it since information available to the public shows that the A's have offered all of 1 free agent the most money before he signed with another team (Scutaro) and Beane/Wolfe/Fisher have an incentive to put out when a free agent chooses somewhere else to further the San Jose is necessary meme (which I don't buy either). 

That being said, this post, the first in a series, operates under the idea that Carl Crawford and Jason Werth want absolutely nothing to do with the A's and even if you backed up a Brinkley or gave them the keys to the San Francisco Mint they wouldn't care (yes I know the SF Mint doesn't actually produce money anymore but you get the point).  Well what are the A's to do if that's the case?  Their rotation is potentially dominant next year if Anderson stays healthy, Cahill improves from average to above average, Gio does what hes been doing or breaks out into a true ace by lowering his walk/combustion rate, Braden pitches like a strong #3 starter, and Mazzaro becomes the best 5th starter in baseball as a league average innings eater.  The A's position players as a whole suck eggs so we are going to focus on players that can or should be acquired because their contracts suck and the A's rather than their current employer are in a superior position to pay for the vast sums they once convinced a unscrupulous GM to fork over.

Star-divide

I am going to start with a CFer that should be playing in the OF corners and who is probably the easiest to acquire.  Nate McLouth.  His contract, per Cots, is thus:

Nate McLouth of
3 years/$15.75M (2009-11), plus 2012 club option

  • 3 years/$15.75M (2009-11), plus 2012 club option
    • signed extension with Pittsburgh 2/17/09 (avoided arbitration, $3.8M-$2.75M)
    • $1.5M signing bonus
    • 09:$2M, 10:$4.5M, 11:$6.5M, 12:$10.65M club option ($1.25M buyout)
    • 2010 & 2011 salaries may increase by $0.5M ($0.2M each for Gold Glove or All Star selection in previous season, $0.1M for Silver Slugger)
    • 2012 salary may increase by $0.75M ($0.3M each for Gold Glove or All Star selection in previous season, $0.15M for Silver Slugger)
    • acquired by Atlanta in trade from Pittsburgh 6/3/09

I estimate that McLouth is the easiest to acquire for several reasons.  First the Braves already have $62m committed to their payroll for 2011 before arbitration awards.  Compare that number to the level of the A's payroll commitments, $11m for 2011 and you can see how the Braves will want to cut payroll.  This is especially true since the Brave have both a bunch or holes to fill in the lineup if they don't pick up options and retain their arbitration eligible players, which will add up to about $20M and take them to their payroll threshold this year.  

Without expanding past their current level of payroll the Braves would still have to fill their closer gig and 1b gig.  Now Freddy Freeman is one of the better 1b prospects in the upper minors, so he should be able to take the 1b job; but their bullpen could use another arm as they will be without the services of Billy Wagner, who insists that he is retiring and has been a third of their excellent bullpen's runs above average. Theoretically, the Braves would be significantly less need to cut payroll if Chipper retires rather than tries to comeback from his ACL injury but that would also leave the Braves with the need to look into a free agent third baseman, and getting a real replacement (Beltre) would cost more than Chipper.  If you are planning on cutting payroll wouldn't a player who is making $7.75m in the minor leagues be a good place to start?

Why would the A's want to take on such a commitment?  Well first it would come nearly freely.  McLouth is providing a lot less value than Juan Pierre was when he was traded to the White Sox from the Dodgers (3.1 WAR less to be exact).  While 2008 had Pierre posting 0 WAR, at the time of the traded Pierre had just come off of a resurgent year with the bat in 2009 with a wRC+ of 109 and hitting the tar out of the ball while MannyWood was doing SuspendedWood.   Pierre, while never likely to hold up to Coletti's contract sums had consistently be league averageish before his disaster of 2008.  For John Ely, who at the time was a AA starter with ok numbers who didn't look like had a third pitch, and Jon Link who had a ok year as a AAA reliever. The Dodgers were also footing a huge part of the bill, paying $10.5M of $18.5M left on Pierre's deal ($7M in 2010, $3.5M in 2011) and that financial package is far far more interesting than McLouth's who only gives one year of control at $7.75 for one year or $17m for two years.

I think another comparable deal would be the Chris Snyder deal between Pittsburgh and Arizona. The remaining commitment is similar. For Snyder the Pirates assumed the prorated portion of $4.75 million this season, plus $5.75 million for '11 and $750,000 buyout or a $6.75 million club option for '12.  Initially it looks like the Pirates acquired Snyder with about $8m.  However, the Diamondbacks not only sent $3 million in deal but they accepted the prorated portion of ~$3.5 in junk salary from Bobby Crosby, Ryan Church, and DJ Carasco.  Only Carasco, a ho hum blah reliever has any value to anyone (a side note it really is amazing how craptacular Crosby is).  To boot, Arizona also contributed a 24 year old AAA all glove no hit SS to the mix who has some upside in his own regard.  McLouth was better at his peak than Snyder was but also sucked more when he had his rough year this year.  Snyder also looked as if he had rebounded to a above league average backstop this year, rather than McLouth who has not had a rebound to date.

I could not find a comparably expensive player who was a 3 WAR player who just fell of the the face of the earth and then was traded so much of this is guess work but considering the level of commitment, I would expect that if McLouth was put on waivers and the A's claimed him the A's would not pull him back (a la Esteban Loiaza to the Dodgers in 2007).  I would expect the A's would need to give a token player a sacrificial Cedrick Bowers if you will to make the whole thing look better for Atlanta, but it absolutely should not take more than that if the A's are going to absorb all of McLouth's salary.  Furthermore this would still leave plenty of money to sign Brandon Webb and Orlando Hudson (at $8m a pop).  If it does take more than this the A's should absolutely not be giving up any talent to acquire a huge contractual risk.  If anything the A's should be on the receiving end of a insignificant prospect like Pittsburgh was in the Snyder deal.

Lets now look at McLouth's chances of recovery.  First,  the A's would move McLouth out of center field which would help his defense but those gains are likely to be lost in the positional adjustment for moving to the COF position.  McClouth isn't a good defender in center but Total Zone hates his defense less than UZR.  Chone's new projections see him as -4 FRAA (fielding runs above average) in CF which after the positional adjustment of +2.5 runs is -1.5 positional and fielding runs.  Putting McLouth in the corner will cost him 10 positional runs, however it is projected that he will gain 10 fielding runs so he will still be -1.5, though there should be some optimism that his range is better against his peers in a corner and will improve his fielding runs.

Its really his batting line that makes McLouth valuable so lets look at it.  Before the season McLouth was projected to have a wRC+ (a stat that shows park and league adjusted wOBA where 100 is average and each point above or below 100 is equal to 1% more or less than average)  between 114 and 125, which translates into between 10 and 15 batting runs above average.

Now things look a lot less rosy.  His line drive percentage has dropped 1.4% and is now 5% lower than league average.  The number of home runs McLouth hits on the balls he puts in the air have fallen in half.  His current level of performance over 600 PAs would cost his team 3.5 wins.  Its really ugly.

Then what is the upside?  Well if you regressed his batted ball rates to their expected values his wOBA jumps from horrific .260 to just bad at .300.  His BABIP is an unsustainable low .200. He still has a significantly higher than league average walk rate. Chone projects his true talent to be -1 BRAA (batting runs above average) moving forward.  Prorating ZIPs rest of the season projection for 600 PAs gives you 6 BRAA which is about a 2.5 WAR player. The final reason for optimism is that McLouth suffered from problems related to a concussion he sustained while fielding.  Sometimes it takes time to unring your bell and while the results haven't been outstanding if you don't neutralize for luck, but in his minor league stint since his concussion his LD% is much higher and his home run per balls in the air has more than doubled.   His ultimate upside is what he has done; he could potentially regain his 3.7 WAR form.

If McLouth succeeds he has an expensive option for 2012.  If he fails your out about $8m. I think this is one avenue that Beane should pursue McLouth provided that 1) McClouth is essentially free to acquire. 2) Taking on the money doesn't preclude any other better FA options (I don't think it does but if you can sign Crawford you do it) 3) In the next part of my series looking at Alfonso Soriano, I don't decide that that is a better option.

Poll
Eating Nate McLouth's contract, it:
tastes like heaven, Id eat it again
32 votes
tastes like cough syurp, no, no no.
143 votes
is a value priced if bland meal with some nutritional value
123 votes

298 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 569 comments  |  4 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I'm tired of Beane bringing in NL players

and expecting them to reach the levels they did in the NL. I know someone will correct me but I can’t think of a single NL player who has come to the AL and been a better player but I can think of 10 AL players who went to the NL and have put up better stats. Please don’t use Fenway as an example, every one puts up superior numbers in Fenway, Bay, Beltre, and anyone else who goes there. Beane got suckered in the Kouz trade because he thought that since Kouz played in Petco, his numbers would be at least equal in Oakland, wrong.

by Laoren on Aug 24, 2010 8:25 AM PDT reply actions  

Cabrera?

"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 24, 2010 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Kouzmanoff is a fine player

despite the lame bat. He’s certainly been less disappointing than the two players the A’s surrendered to acquire him.

Even in retrospect it’s hard to fault that trade, especially since it also got the team a decent-looking utility infielder.

"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 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ummmm... seems to me we gave up more than two players to get limp-stick Kooz...

…IIRC, we traded Webb and Italiano last year for Hairston, who we then packaged in the off-season with Cunningham to acquire Mr. .299 OPS marginal MLB 3rd Baseman. So in order to give our fans the horror of witnessing an unending succession of first-pitch popups, rally-killing GIDP’s, and swinging strikeouts on balls that bounce twice on the way to the plate, Beane forked over FOUR players to SD—Hairston, Cunningham, Webb, and Italiano. Not exactly your Bily Beane F’in A trade, if you ask me.
Oh, maybe Sogard will become the next Pujols and validate the trade that way! Ummmm, probably not, I’ll pass on the BB Kool-Aid this time, thanks anyway…
I’m sure you’ll correct me if you perceive me to be wrong, though…

by kitoko on Aug 24, 2010 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

the sad thing is

kouz’s batting line is roughly what he’s done the last couple years in SD too.

"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball

by flipgatey3 on Aug 24, 2010 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions  

You can't double count the players in the Hairston trade

That’s just like people writing this:

Carrasco, Marson, Donald, Knapp, Drabek, Taylor, D’Arnaud, and Lee for Halladay, Aumont, Gillies, and Ramirez.

The trades were Webb, Italiano, and Gallagher for Hairston

Hairston and Cunningham for Kouzmanoff and Sogard.

If you want to factor in the players we gave up to get Hairston and write it all as one trade, its:

Webb, Italiano, Gallagher, and Cunningham for half a year of Hairston, Kouzmanoff, and Sogard.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 24, 2010 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

agreed

usually poor form to group trades into one, i.e. mulder for all the guys we got in the haren trade etc. etc.

"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball

by flipgatey3 on Aug 24, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Each deal is an independent decision

The second Holliday trade was independently a good move, even though it obviously required the first (which wasn’t) as a prerequisite.

Honestly, though, even if you look at all the players given up for Hairston, three of them have been pretty terrible since being traded, and even the fourth is only a setup man-type relief pitcher.

"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 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

With 1.9 WAR, Kouzmanoff has been equal in value so far this year to Ryan Webb, Scott Hairston and Aaron Cunningham

And Italiano is striking out 6 people per 9 innings, while walking 4.5 per 9 innings. Good ERA, bad FIP. Cunningham has actually been really good so far in San Diego, but he hasn’t played in a month (he’s not on the active roster) and has been really bad in AAA. His .365 BABIP in San Diego helps. Even with Kouzmanoff’s terrible offense, I really liked this trade.

by NateHST on Aug 24, 2010 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Kouzmanoff is only a "fine player" is you really believe he's coming close to doubling his previous best defensive performance

As an above average defender (about 7.5 runs per 150 games, which is about what his 08-10 defensive numbers average out to be), he’s well below average. He’s really not even close to “fine.”

And to be a “utility infielder” don’t you have to at least play one defensive position well? Sogard is a serviceable-at-best 2B and he can’t play the other spots (they might be putting him in other spots, but they also tried Carter at third at one point). His ceiling is also David Eckstein (probably more like 85% of David Eckstein).

www.zekeishungry.com

by thejd44 on Aug 24, 2010 8:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I can't figure out why you would believe that he's halving his previous offensive performance

and yet disbelieve that he’s doubling his previous defensive performance. Both of those numbers are subject to regression to career norms.

TotalZone thinks Sogard’s 2B defense is pretty good, actually.

"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 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Kouzmanoffs slugging has been falling for awhile now.

.457 n 2007
.433 in 2008
.420 in 2009
and now .380 in 2010.

If he doesn’t slug then he’s just about worthless from an offensive standpoint. All the 1 pitch AB’s and GIDP aren’t worth his declining ability to change a game on one swing.

Scott Hairstons played his way of the Padres. Which was a difficult thing to do earlier in the season. But I wouldn’t take Cunninghams AAA numbers too seriously. Most of the guys in our AAA are pissed to be there and play like it. Webb was dominant early in the season but for some reason people can hit his unbelieveable stuff. He’s still young and has as much upside as anyone in your organization. You’d really need to put your Ipad down and look at the movement on his 96mph heater to know what I’m talking about there.

Sogard is a fringy AAAA player. Nice bat, limited athletecism, and ultimately a roster filler.

"Never have a motto, that's what I always say" - Me

by padmadfan on Aug 25, 2010 4:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Kouzmanoffs slugging has been falling for awhile now.

.457 n 2007
.433 in 2008
.420 in 2009
and now .380 in 2010.

If he doesn’t slug then he’s just about worthless from an offensive standpoint. All the 1 pitch AB’s and GIDP aren’t worth his declining ability to change a game on one swing.

Scott Hairstons played his way of the Padres. Which was a difficult thing to do earlier in the season. But I wouldn’t take Cunninghams AAA numbers too seriously. Most of the guys in our AAA are pissed to be there and play like it. Webb was dominant early in the season but for some reason people can hit his unbelieveable stuff. He’s still young and has as much upside as anyone in your organization. You’d really need to put your Ipad down and look at the movement on his 96mph heater to know what I’m talking about there.

Sogard is a fringy AAAA player. Nice bat, limited athletecism, and ultimately a roster filler.

"Never have a motto, that's what I always say" - Me

by padmadfan on Aug 25, 2010 4:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

This is all incredibly biased opinion

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

+1

"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 25, 2010 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ipads are a terrible way to do statistical analysis trolly mctrollerson

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 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'd prefer it if next time you avoid the snarky little remarks

like “put your Ipad down and look”.

I realize that by itself it’s no big deal. We’re not such babies that we can’t take a joke. But combined with numerous other similar remarks, as well as jibes going the other way in which sabermetrically inclined fans poke fun at traditional minded fans, it creates a culture of hostility between the “stats” guys and the “non-stats” guys, in which they take turns insulting each other.

We’ve sometimes had trouble with that on AN, and it’s a shame. There’s room for both types of opinion here, and it’s good for all of us if both sides can engage each other in debate without belittling each other.

If avoiding snarky remarks helps us maintain that environment, it’s worth giving them up.

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

It was intended a friendly little jab.

But I understand what you’ve said and I apologize if I offended anyone.

I think were nearing the point where the “war” between the stat guys and the non-stat guys is losing meaning. I think most people do their best to reconcile their observations with statistical data these days.

"Never have a motto, that's what I always say" - Me

by padmadfan on Aug 25, 2010 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

were you not paying attention to baseball last year with the Tex UZR debate?

its very much real in the game and on this site.

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 26, 2010 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Even his upside is depressingly non game-changing

And the upside is still highly improbable. This does not excite me. May I see what else is on the menu?

by boilerdan on Aug 24, 2010 8:38 AM PDT reply actions  

What qualifies as both nondepressing upside and something that won't cost a fortune?

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 9:23 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Trading for Pujols and kidnapping his family during contract negotiations.

"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 24, 2010 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

The upside of 25 to life in an 8x8 cell with a murderer named Bubba is less than appealing

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 9:33 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Well obviously I'd have other people do it.

I’m not getting my hands dirty.

Still it’s this outside the box thinking that is sadly lacking in this organisation.

"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 24, 2010 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not the GM yet.

I wouldn’t post my under hand tactics online if I had any power.

I’m just playing fantasy GM, like everyone on AN has been doing for the past day.

"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 24, 2010 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

Too late. You will hear a knock on your door shortly.

Pay no attention to the guys in the suits and dark sunglasses.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 24, 2010 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is he even better than Connor Jackson?

Jackson put up a 3 win season in the NL in 08, and he would cost less than $6mill. Maybe the suggestion is to get/keep both of these guys and let them fight it out with Carter and Taylor. Can’t be any worse than Davis and the Matt’s, right?

by drink on Aug 24, 2010 8:42 AM PDT reply actions  

McLouth put up 3.7 and 3.3 WAR seasons in 2008 and 2009

Why he’s decided to become horrible this year is a mystery.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 24, 2010 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes he is better

Jackson hasn’t been a valuable player since 08 and while he’ll cost less he has far less upside. Furthermore, McLouth was a first division starter and provided nearly all star level production LAST YEAR. His lack of production is likely due to injury (concussion) and small sample size. Jackson has been sick/ hurt for two whole years. I have little confidence in him moving forward as a legitimate solution

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 9:11 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Fair enough

You sold me, at least until your next solution.

by drink on Aug 24, 2010 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

Conor Jackson sucks

One 3-win season doesn’t mean you don’t suck, it means it was a fluke. His career WAR is barely half McLouth’s even including all of McLouth’s horrendous 2010 campaign.

"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 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well they both kinda suck, but it's true that Jackson likely sucks more than McLouth.

CHONE projects McLouth as a 1.8 WAR player in 430 AB and Jackson as a 1.2 WAR player in 423 AB. ZiPS basically agrees that they’re similarly mediocre offensively. The main difference seems to be that McLouth is worth about a half a win on defense more than Jackson.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Fortunately Jackson could be that player

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

maybe the surgeon can put a chest protector in

for his sports hernia and he can be converted to catcher

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

How would he hit with a chest protector?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

just like he does without

badly

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm really hoping that Jackson is non-tendered at this point

The only acceptable reason for tendering him is if the A’s know another team will give up something to get him.

www.zekeishungry.com

by thejd44 on Aug 24, 2010 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think the direction Billy is TRYING to go

is to really try to capitalize on speed – not so much because it’s undervalued (see: Signing Crisp, Coco for $5.5 mil / season after being on the shelf for a whole year), but because our home park, while repressive towards most offensive outbursts, is a triples heaven. Not quite like Bank One, but still pretty prominent.

That said, I don’t know if McLouth plays into that idea. I know the speed is a direct substitute for power (because of the company line that we can’t afford power), and as drink said above,

Can’t be any worse than Davis and the Matt’s, right?

I guess for minimal to no cost, I’d be willing to give him a shot. But I’m interested to see why you shun Soriano in favor of this option. I assume it has something to do with value given up, but how much can the Cubs really ask for in return?

by noava22 on Aug 24, 2010 8:59 AM PDT reply actions  

I haven't shunned soriano I just haven't worked him up yet

I writethes as I do research so for example in my draft druthers posts who I thought we should draft by post two and who I thought we should draft June 6 were different. I’ll probably write a summary peice at the end but this is just a is this a good idea in a vacuum thing. I ended up way less enthusiastic about it than when I started thou I think it’s not a bad move.

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 9:19 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

CHONE thinks he's a 1.4 WAR player in 482 AB. ZiPS plus UZR are around 4 WAR

At least there’s some upside, in case CHONE is wrong and ZiPS is right. Of course $54M over 3 years is a lot to pay to find out.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Really?

That’s a crazy huge difference. Am I reading this correctly

"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 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Should be a question mark at the end there

"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 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

ZiPS has a .368 wOBA which comes to something around 12 BRAA

UZR thinks he’s something like a +10 defender in LF. Add 20 subtract 7-8 and you get around 3.5 WAR. So my first guess was a bit high.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Soriano has 4 years left on his deal after this season ($72 million total)

But there’s also no chance any deal involving him would require the A’s (or whatever team) to take on that entire contract.

www.zekeishungry.com

by thejd44 on Aug 24, 2010 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Soriano in LF is a really good idea

high reward, low risk, not very expensive.

-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 25, 2010 1:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Uhh, how much of his contract do you expect the Cubs to eat

Even if they take on 50% of his remaining money Soriano would be expensive and acquiring him would involve taking a significant risk.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 25, 2010 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think we'd be paying 4/30

maybe less. worth it.

-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 25, 2010 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

4/30 just isn't worth it, IMO

Last year’s 0.0 WAR scares me a little too much

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

You said this
His line drive percentage has dropped 1.4% and is now 5% lower than league average. The number of home runs McLouth hits on the balls he puts in the air have fallen in half.

then you said

but his LD% is much higher and his home run per balls in the air has more than doubled

Are you saying that in a luck-neutral environment, his LD% would be higher and HR/FB ratio would be higher, too?

I’ve always liked McLouth for some reason. That said, if he has serious post-concussion effects that don’t go away, you just ate $8M. At least with Jackson, he’s having a procedure that may return him to the 109-188 wRC+ guy he was. Like mike said, why McLouth sucks now is a mystery except for the concussion.

"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 9:02 AM PDT reply actions  

er, 118, not 188

I wish he was that!

"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 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

In the minor leagues he has

Which is where he’s generally been after coming back and sucking.

Sorry for the confusion. I would edit it but I’m on a phone at a funeral all day. If a mod can add something to make that clearer I would appreciate 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 24, 2010 9:15 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

no prob dude, just wondering

Sorry about the funeral.

"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 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

I appreciate you pointing it out

As it undermines the clairity of the argument.

And thanks for your thoughts.

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 9:27 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Its edited now to reflect what I said.

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 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

McClouth could be an intriguing plan C or D

If Crawford, Werth, etc. don’t work it, which they most likely won’t.

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 9:39 AM PDT reply actions  

It would be a lot more intriguing if it didn't cost $7.25M

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

It's a similar deal. You're getting a 2 WAR player with 3.5 WAR upside and sub-replacement

level downside. I guess he’s $3M cheaper. Sheets was also a high risk, mid-reward deal. Meh.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

OK, but I'm not expecting much different results.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

So you think the 2 WAR is more sure with McLouth or that McLouth is

undervalued by the projection systems?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

The 2 WAR is more sure with McLouth

It’s a freak injury and a freak season. You don’t go into seasons expecting players to get knocked in the head. Getting knocked in the head by a baseball once doesn’t increase the likelihood that it happens again.

Sheets (I far supported that signing, btw),

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 24, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

had a much less chance of success due to his history of injuries

although I do prefer Alfonso Soriano with the Cubs eating half his contract

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 24, 2010 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

I tend to be with nevermoor

You don’t suck that bad for no reason. At least with Jackson he can rehab his body and be into playing shape by ST. There’s no amount of rehab that post-concussion symptoms can help you with. Just time.

That said, McLouth has more upside and I don’t see how Jackson fits into the strategy, here. If Taylor, Carter, and Coco are all with the team in 2011, McLouth would be a great 4th OF and has more defensive prowess than Jackson.

Overall, though, it’s meh all the way around.

"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 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ya it won't matter much. It's not as irrelevant as the Patterson vs

Carson debate, but it’s about as relevant as the “sign Sheets or don’t sign Sheets” issue.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

I really think Atlanta would have to eat some salary

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

yeah. i think they would.

since the A’s don’t have a bad contract they can send back.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 24, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

They could pick up Chavvy's option and send that back!

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

if they did they would want something real like Breslow or Ziggy

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 26, 2010 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well if it cost less then wed have to send talent back which would defeat the purpose

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 26, 2010 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well this post supposes that they won't sign here.

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 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Here's a question

What if we just traded them McLouth for Jackson, straight up? You guys think they’d take it?

"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 9:43 AM PDT reply actions  

Yes. They could then non-tender Jackson and save $7.25M

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yep

But it sounds much more like something done in the NBA

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

right or they could just not take jackson and save some trees.

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 26, 2010 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

I vote no

I’m all for upside, but you don’t suck as much as he sucked this year on nothing but a fluke. And it was pre-concussion, so we can’t just hand-wave it away for that.

Obviously you wouldn’t expect him to put up a .200 BABIP going forward, but I think this is a too-bad-to-be-meaningless year for him. Plus, I’m not at all convinced that the Braves want to sell super-low on him.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 10:35 AM PDT reply actions  

also some good points

especially about the concussion.

just because something is unlikely doesn’t mean it can’t happen, WRT what mclouth was going to do coming into this year.

"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball

by flipgatey3 on Aug 24, 2010 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with nevermoor.

-Too much potential for downside
-Not enough upside, even if everything breaks right

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 24, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

The use of the words breaking and right in the same sentence

With this team is highly ironic.

"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 3:39 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Both updated ZiPS and CHONE project McLouth as basically an average hitter.

Batting Runs Above Average: 0
Fielding Runs Above Average + Positional Adjustment: -2
Non SB Baserunning Runs Above Average: 0
Replacement: +20

You’re basically getting a 2 WAR player, who could has been anywhere from -1.3 to +3.7 WAR for $7.25M. Mediocre mid-priced players are the riskiest of uses for FA Dollars. I’d pass.

Beane is supposed to be adept at getting 2 WAR guys a lot cheaper than that. If we’re spending FA Dollars I want a legitimate 5 WAR player. If Crawford won’t come because he hates the Coliseum and the A’s have no fans, I’d keep the money in my pocket and wait till another big talent became available mid-season.

If that doesn’t happen and they’re not a legitimate World Series contender at the end of 2011, I’d trade Anderson, Cahill, Gio, Braden, Bailey, Wuertz, Suzuki and Barton and rebuild from scratch.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 10:48 AM PDT reply actions  

I don't think a lack of desire to play in Oakland is what is likely to keep players like Crawford away

I think the bigger issue is that, while the A’s can afford to pay the ~$15M or whatever he would likely earn per year in 2011 and 2012, they can’t afford to guarantee him that kind of salary for 6 or 7 years into the future which he would likely get in contract offers from other teams.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, that doesn't seem in their plans.

I know the idea is to build teams that don’t need fire sales/rebuilding, but I think that cycle is a fact of life right now. As I see it, take the window you have with the growing talent, sign the best free agents to supplement, and hope that you can recoup some prospect value later when those guys are traded away in the dismantling.

by rebus on Aug 24, 2010 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Seems like having a Carl Crawford doesn't mess with the rebuilding cycle at all.

Sign him to his stupidly long contract, trade him for a bundle after he’s catapulted us into contention and someone cheaper comes along.

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 24, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is incongruous
Sign him to his stupidly long contract
trade him for a bundle after he’s catapulted us into contention

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 24, 2010 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

By the way, if you want to take a flier on someone who might bounce back from injury,

I’d consider Magglio Ordonez. You could even trade for him and pick up his option, if you feel like throwing money around for the right to imprison a guy in Oakland for one year.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 10:53 AM PDT reply actions  

Doesn't work

No-trade clause. There’s no purpose in dealing for him, as he’d have to approve coming to Oakland 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.

by PaulThomas on Aug 24, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

Does his no-trade protection include approval in a trade to Oakland?

If so, he might approve it if he knew his option was being picked up.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

How much does he cost?

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 24, 2010 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

$15M

His option is economically unviable for Oakland, and indeed for Detroit. Detroit can cut loose from his deal at the end of the year, though.

I have no doubt that Ordonez would sign off on a trade-with-option-guaranteed, but the A’s would have to pay Detroit to get them to sign off AND pay Ordonez his bloated salary. No thanks. I’d rather take the chance on getting snubbed on the open market.

"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 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Plus he just had surgery

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

So much will he cost on the open market?

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 25, 2010 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'd guess something like 2/$15M or 1/$8M with an option

"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 25, 2010 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thanks DFA, good stuff for a lazy work morning.
Billy Wagner, who insists that he is retiring and has

and has what? I must know.

McLouth seems like a decent idea as part of a larger strategy. In the event that pigs fly and the A’s sign Crawford AND Werth (what I feel like they’d need to do to be serious contenders, and not a totally crazy thing to do if they feel like their window is the next 2-3 seasons before the next rebuild), it’s certainly unnecessary, but yeah, forget it. I do kinda wish they’d go bonkers and pony up 40 million for all three (Hudson too). Fevered dreams I guess.

Anyway, like I said, I like it to an extent. It makes sense to me for the A’s to purchase assets that they can be reasonably sure will appreciate in value over time, given their park and recent player development results. So they buy up pitching, the Ben Sheetses, Brandon Webbs, and De La Rosas; keep defense a priority for the infield; and look for the comeback players or Cust-like languishing in the minors types on cheap deals (not Gabe Grosses and Emil Browns).

by rebus on Aug 24, 2010 11:51 AM PDT reply actions  

Gabe Gross was the perfect "comeback" type player

Look at his 2008 with the Rays.

The problem is that they still haven’t cut him, despite it being clearer than anything that the comeback is over.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 24, 2010 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I guess he did have the upside of an above average player.

He was probably never really a 3 win player though, and, although he could be valuable in a platoon role, his defense that he depended on for a lot of his value doesn’t look too good. At least he didn’t look right to me in the limited time I’ve seen him this season. Perhaps he never got adjusted and didn’t have the time to prove his worth with the glove.

by rebus on Aug 24, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

He sure looked nice on Sunday against the Rays.

Why can’t you play like that every day, Gabriel?

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 24, 2010 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

The lack of a willingness to give up on project players when theyre dead is a huge problem

Emil Brown
Keith Foulke
Gabe Gross

These players needed to be cut when it was clear that they weren’t going to be successful

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 26, 2010 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

I am 100% in agreement with
Anyway, like I said, I like it to an extent. It makes sense to me for the A’s to purchase assets that they can be reasonably sure will appreciate in value over time, given their park and recent player development results. So they buy up pitching, the Ben Sheetses, Brandon Webbs, and De La Rosas; keep defense a priority for the infield; and look for the comeback players or Cust-like languishing in the minors types on cheap deals (not Gabe Grosses and Emil Browns).

Its what they should have been doing for the last three years and their lack of buying assets that will appreciate has hurt them IMO

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 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

"When Cahill impoves from average to above average?"

Have you missed the season he has had so far? I’d say a bit better than average.

by HRH on Aug 24, 2010 12:10 PM PDT reply actions  

That refers to an ongoing discussion

about the degree to which Cahill’s success this season has been due to a combination of luck and excellent defense behind him. DFA tends to be on the “he’s benefited from luck/good defense” side of the conversation.

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

by Nick on Aug 24, 2010 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is an accurate assessment of state of the debate

I don’t want to derail the discussion, but….

Isn’t a fair to say that next year, Cahill will have the same defensive “advantage.”

Can’t that be part of a holistic evaluation of players?

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

I suppose it would depend on how you break down the pure luck vs the "pitching to the park/defense"

Also, Cahill’s only 22, and he could improve a good deal (so his performance could move towards this year’s outcomes) as well.

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

by Nick on Aug 24, 2010 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Next year, anyone you prospectively replace Cahill with would have that advantage

as long as the defenders were equally effective. Your holistic evaluation of them would have to reflect that also.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

unless that replacement doesn't induce as many ground balls as cahill

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Aug 24, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's interesting because the Coliseum suppresses HR to RHB and doesn't really

help much with Ground balls, but the A’s IF defense is a lot better than the OF defense. They offset each other but I’m not sure which would dominate.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

opposing pitchers have the flyball advantage as well

they don’t have the advantage of pitching in front of the A’s defense

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 24, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

But they do have the advantage of pitching to the A's offense

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Hah!

100% Athletics, 100% Baseball. 2009 Athletics, 40% Baseball.

by fruitattack on Aug 24, 2010 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is a good question.

If you nontender Kouz you don’t. If Rosales cant hack it at 2b you don’t.

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 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rosales can hack it at 2B.

If Pennington is considered to be good right now and expected to be great in the near future, then Rosales should get the same consideration. He presents very similarly: he makes some spectacular plays and boots the very occasional grounder. Another season and he’ll be a solid middle infielder.

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 25, 2010 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Pennington's defensive true talent level is unlikely to improve. He is already past his defensive peak

and he has already adjusted to the MLB.

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 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

DFA really never misses an oppurtunity

to take pot-shots at Penny. Korach argued on the air the other night that the opposite would be true: his high amount of error’s has been part of his maturation at the mlb level.

by hishnik on Aug 26, 2010 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

Potshot? It was a simple statement.

Guys usually stop getting better at defense at around age 26.

Pennington is 26.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 26, 2010 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

So is Slusser's

drumbeat article about his ability to win the gold glove next year a soviet era pravda based article?

by hishnik on Aug 26, 2010 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes. Just like how every player is in the best shape of their life and is locked into hitting every spring,

until they start April 0-17.

Beat writer stories while nice and appealing to a general audience do not actually examine the real value of a player, they tell a story.

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 26, 2010 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

Um you realize that it is unlikely for any player Pennington's age who has consistently played the position

to improve their defensive true talent level considering that defense peaks at 24/5 and Pennington is already 26. Its not like he hasn’t gotten reps at SS and is a recent convert to the position, something where you would expect improvement over time.

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 26, 2010 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

While I am confident your analysis has merit

You are stating that your opinion is definitive (or very close to a definitve statement). I have more confidence that Slusser is basing her gold glove projection story on conversation’s with baseball scout’s, internal members of the Oakland organization, press box affiliates etc etc.

Even if her angle is to tell a story to a general audience: I value her comparative advantage of her opinions over one not paid to cover the team professionally.

by hishnik on Aug 26, 2010 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

The team's respected long time Beat writer

Is stating in an article he has the potential to win a gold glove this year or next at SS. Isn’t that an assessment of his actual and potential talent level?

by hishnik on Aug 26, 2010 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

its an assessment of his ability to hit

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 26, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

1) Gold Gloves have nothing to do with talent

2) Pennington is likely to get worse in terms of true defensive talent. That is a definitive statement. This has been shown in peer reviewed studies (which are far more accurate than beat writer fluff pieces) that defense peaks at 24/25.

3) Her article relies on Bob Geren to make a judgment about Pennington’s defense. What is going to say? “My SS leads the league in errors so no despite some good plays he shouldn’t be considered a gold glover?” Imagine how that would go over in the clubhouse.

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 26, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

You do realize that the gold gloves are voted on by the coaches of the other teams, right?

Geren’s invite to the all star game indicates part of the “club” of voting coaches who dialogue about such things
.
I’m not really seeing how MLB coaching staff’s are biased into voting for players who lack talent. I suppose Chavez gifting a gold glove or two to Ron Washington validates your statement……

by hishnik on Aug 26, 2010 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

Rafael Palmeiro won a gold glove for a year where he spent more than half his games at DH

Come on.

"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 26, 2010 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

More than half?

Shit, he only played 28 games at 1B that year, and over 100 as DH.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 26, 2010 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Some observations on the gold glove award:

1. I you have won three or more gold gloves in the past, chances are you will continue to win them until you retire.
2. When all else fails, just vote for the most recognizable player at the position.

I concede that these two factor’s water down the prestige of the award.

But at the same time there are similar biases that factor into the Cy Young and MVP awards, and there is still a huge margin for error. I have felt for years that the league should come up with a better way of giving out the award, but I contend it’s still an award based on an honest assessment of skill and the winner is usually deserving of the recognition.

by hishnik on Aug 26, 2010 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Derek Jeter and Nate McLouth have won the award while being among the worst defensive players at their position.

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 26, 2010 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Criteria for the award soes involve politics within baseball, granted

At the same time do you expect Gold Glove voters to be reviewing advanced statistical metrics such as +/- ranking, I am sure they also calculate econometric model’s while reading the Wall Street Journal while traveling with their organizations.

However they probably at least consider traditional fielding metrics beyond mere fielding percentage and some observational data. For McLouth he had a good fielding % that year and the previous winners: Jeff Francoeur or Aaron Rowand simply had worse years, imo anyway

by hishnik on Aug 26, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

There were 9 NL players who had better UZRs than Rowand the year he won (2007)

and again this has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Pennington is unlikely to improve. his true talent level next year, which you haven’t disputed.

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 26, 2010 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

I vehemently disupte this claim

Despite your statistically sound arguments. When I heard you call in to Townsend’s show at the begging of the year: I thought the way he dismissed you was perfect.

Korach, Jane Lee, Slusser, Fosse are all using their bully pulpit this last month to say that Penny will be a more dominant and more talented SS next season. I subscribe to their rose colored glasses on his talent level to improve next year.

by hishnik on Aug 27, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

You have made no argument as to why Pennington's true talent level will improve

Furthermore, none of those people have ever actually said that Pennington’s true talent level will improve. They have said that he is likely to be perceived by gold glove voters (aka people like themselves the BWAA ) as more likely to win a gold glove, which I have shown has absolutely nothing to do with his defensive true talent level.

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 27, 2010 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Um, yes. Yes I do.
At the same time do you expect Gold Glove voters to be reviewing advanced statistical metrics such as +/- ranking,

I also expect them to look at UZR, and I expect MVP voters to look at wOBA and WAR and pretty much every other damn stat there out there that says how valuable a player was over a given season.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 26, 2010 1:53 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 26, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not to hijack your thread DFA

But it looks like Uggla wants a 5 year extension for around $55-60M.

Florida most likely won’t pay that, so I think we make a trade and sign him to that extension.

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 12:14 PM PDT reply actions  

wow that's it?

Sign me up for that.

"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 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Absof$%^&*(ly!

That’s like a super increddible value for Uggla! Pull the trigger Billy!

"By the end of the year, I'll have Dallas throwing right-handed'' -Ben Sheets

by mrod on Aug 24, 2010 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, please!

Now where will he play…?

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 24, 2010 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why wouldn't they pay that?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

same reason they didn't want to pay Cody Ross $4.45M

plus arb raise

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

I can see not wanting to pay a 2 WAR player $5M. That doesn't mean a 4 WAR player

isn’t worth $11M. He is.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

A's could conceivably trade for Uggla, give him that extension

And still have around $15M to play with this offseason

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cahill for Uggla?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Carter, Brown and Weeks for Uggla?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm in.

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

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 24, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't think they would want Carter

They have Morrison and Stanton on the corners, and for some reason, they like Gaby Sanchez at 1B.

I think Mazzaro will have to be the key piece going there.

by drink on Aug 24, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah I want nothing to do with that.

Uggla is old and has old player skills and the back end of that deal will be terrible.

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 26, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'l pretend you didn't just suggest that WC

and chalk it up to the stifling heat we’re currently experiencing!

"By the end of the year, I'll have Dallas throwing right-handed'' -Ben Sheets

by mrod on Aug 24, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

hey mrod are you working at the bar tomorrow? might stop in after work.

by Billy Frijoles on Aug 24, 2010 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hee hee.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

no no no

Cahill has more cheap control and is likely to get better. Uggla will get old and expensive real quick.

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 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd be OK with that as a contract

even though it’s really more like a 3-year extension for that much and then two years of what is likely to be total dreck at the end.

But I doubt I’d be willing to pay the price in prospects.

"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 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

This

Thats pretty much his market value. The dude is 30 already and would cost a ton in prospects. No thanks.

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 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

A Realistic Plan

Considering that we have 35-40 mil to spend…
Sign Manny or Ordonez (DH) ~ 8 mil/1 yr with incentives that can go up to 10 mil
Sign O-Dog ~ 16 mil/2 yr
Sign Brandon Webb ~ 2-3 mil/ 1 yr with incentives up to 6 mil
Trade for Mazzaro, Jemile Weeks, Kouz or something similar for Dan Uggla (sign to 50 mil/ 4 yrs and play 3rd)
Sign either Xavier Nady or Austin Kearns to play one COF and Carter and Taylor will battle for the other COF
Lineup
Coco Puffs
O-Dog
Uggla
Manny or Ordonez
Barton
Kearns or Nady
Suzuki
Carter or Taylor
Pennington

by scorerunsplz on Aug 24, 2010 12:55 PM PDT reply actions  

That lineup looks about 2 Wins better than this year's version. We can win 84 games, and pay

20% more for it. Yay!

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

two wins better with 5 OFs and no 3rd base

that’s pretty good

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I assumed Uggla was 3B and one of the OF was a DH

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Carter at 2nd?

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Were you thinking of breaking up that DP?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

[wags finger]

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

The lineup is a vast improvement

It makes the offense at least somewhat respectable. I’m sure everyone here doesn’t want to see Zook and Cust at the 3 and 4 spots next year. Uggla can easily hit 25-30 hrs and Manny and Ordonez have been injured but were producing before they got hurt. Hudson and Ellis have declining defense but are still good but Hudson’s offense is much better than Ellis.

by scorerunsplz on Aug 24, 2010 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Coco (CF)
Orlando Hudson (2B)
Uggla (3B)
Manny or Ordonez (DH)
Barton (1B)
Kearns or Nady (RF)
Zook ©
Carter or Taylor (LF)
Penny (SS)

by scorerunsplz on Aug 24, 2010 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

That defense will give up slightly less runs than this one:

Coco (CF)
Orlando Hudson (2B)
Uggla (DH)
Manny or Ordonez (DH)
Barton (1B)
Kearns or Nady (DH)
Zook ©
Carter or Taylor (DH)
Penny (SS)

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

LoL

I’m not sure if Coco can handle the entire outfield

by scorerunsplz on Aug 24, 2010 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

his brother

super sugar crisp could

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rickey was Rickey.

Manny being Manny was MADE for the Oakland A’s.

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 24, 2010 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rickey never assaulted A's employees.

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 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sigh

Cust is quite likely to be better than either Manny or Magglio next year, and if he isn’t he’s still a mortal lock to be a better value.

No way Webb signs for $3M.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

The general opinion of Cust's worth just totally boggles the mind

Of course, if he had spent the past 4 years playing for the White Sox, Diamondbacks, Reds, or some other team with a launching pad park, that would almost certainly not be the case.

www.zekeishungry.com

by thejd44 on Aug 24, 2010 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

It probably sucks for him, but it's great for A's fans.

It means he doesn’t get expensive or in-demand.

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 25, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

this.

"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball

by flipgatey3 on Aug 26, 2010 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

I like the idea as a buy-low cadidate

Aside from the box-of-chocolates that McLouth is — he has been a very good offensive player in thepast, there are two things, for me, that do raise concerns about his numbers in the minors so far:

He only has six extra base hits and, oddly, five are HRs and only one is a double. Why hasn’t he been smoking some pitches down the line or in the gaps?

He’s a left-handed bat but one with some pretty extreme splits.

I’m anxious to see the next installment. While McLouth’s contract seems ugly, a $7,750,000 total committment for a player that could rebound back to very good leadoff hitter isn’t all too much of an albatross to provide a sense of urgency by the Braves

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 1:09 PM PDT reply actions  

How is he any better than Sweeney?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

McLouth has to have better knees.

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

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 24, 2010 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not so sure that McLouth IS better than Sweeney...

..at this point. However, if you compare both of their offensive numbers for the 2008 and 2009 seasons, McLouth’s number sem more impressive to me. Take a look and let me know if you feel differently. With McLouth, Athletics’ management would speculating on a comeback that may never happen.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Looks to me like you've got 2 guys with 3.5 WAR upside coming off lost years.

Both are probably around 2 WAR guys. One costs $7.25M and the other might get $2M in arbitration.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well sort of

McLouth’s 3.5 WAR year was offensively fueled, Sweeney’s was defensively fueled. We know with much more certainty that McLouth was twice actually about a 3.5 WAR player rather than Sweeney who we don’t know what his true defensive talent is and his 3.5 WAR season is much more likely to be a measurement mirage. Furthermore, concussion symptoms are more likely to subsided without a long term impact than knee surgery is likely to repair shredded knee syndrome. I think we should keep both personally.

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 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd dump both and pay a real and healthy player $9M

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

got any suggestions?

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 6:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not so sure about the medical conclusions here

Concussions essentially never go away and make further concussions exponentially more likely (I’m using exponentially in the true math sense here, not just as a synonym for “a lot”).

"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 11:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed

However, if he were to avoid another concussion, the effects from the one and only he has had shouldn’t last much longer.

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 12:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

As someone who has gotten multiple concussions playing baseball I know this (yay getting trucked while catching in MS and HS)

That being said the likelihood of a full recovery to previous abilities is higher with concussions than it is with surgically repaired knees even if it does dramatically increase the risk of recurrence.

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 26, 2010 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

Lineup

Coco (CF)
Orlando Hudson (2B)
Uggla (3B)
Manny or Ordonez (DH)
Barton (1B)
Kearns or Nady (RF)
Zook ©
Carter or Taylor (LF)
Penny (SS)

by scorerunsplz on Aug 24, 2010 1:10 PM PDT reply actions  

that is a defensive atrocity.

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 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Meh

I think you under-estimate the cost of acquisition.

I’d be cool with claiming him on waivers if the opportunity presented itself.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 1:46 PM PDT reply actions  

There's a lot of things working in favor of getting McLouth,

including his pre-2010 track record and the fact that his salary really isn’t that high. But…

The main reason I’m against it is the same reason I’m against Conor Jackson, and Ryan Sweeney, and that is that it stops the A’s from doing what they really need to do which is to get an “impact player” such as Matt Kemp.

There are only two COF spots for guys you plan to start everyday if you can, and if you add McClouth you most certainly won’t add Kemp (or whoever else you might be able to get who is a potential “true middle of the order threat”). And while guys like Jackson, and Sweeney, and McClouth have the potential to be “ok, even kinda good,” the A’s need more than that at COF right now in order to be legit.

I’d rather sign a SP, and give up Mazzaro if I had to in order to get Kemp, or try to get Luke Scott, than I would like to go get someone else who might be “pretty good” and might be totally insufficient. We already have two of those in Jackson and Sweeney, and they’re not what this team needs.

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 24, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Or

You could sign Carl Crawford and still have Mazzaro.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

No thanks

The amount you’d have to pay Crawford to sign would make it a poor decision on the A’s part. I’m not in the camp who’s in favor of signing Crawford, nor do I think the A’s really have any chance.

My three favorite targets this off-season among position players are Matt Kemp, Aaron Hill, and Luke Scott, in that order.

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 24, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Can you tell this to Billy, please?

by TBRMKane on Aug 24, 2010 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you trade Mazzaro (alone) for any of them

You’re shooting the team in the foot.

If you trade Mazzaro and others (as you would probably have to) it’s even worse.

Given that we don’t have a strong set of MLB-ready players in AAA at the moment, the only way we get better is by signing someone. So lets sign someone really good, instead of someone who might be ok if things break right.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not really

Since Chavez’s turned out about as poorly as possible and wasn’t really nuclear.

And, quite frankly, CC strikes me as about the least risky player out there for this kind of deal (under 30, not HR-based, good physical shape, great defense), so you’re basically saying you never want to sign a good free agent.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well CC's contract is definitely going to be worth more than Chavez's.

Committing 90-100 million to Crawford isn’t the same as committing 66 million to Chavez.

There is no such thing as a “least risky” player in these types of deals. Heck, Chavez fit that criteria you have for Crawford pretty well and he was even younger at the time of his contract. With the way MLB is set up right now, it seems to me like small, mid market teams are actively discouraged to sign good elite free agents.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 24, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Fair point

Crawford would almost certainly take up more than a quarter of the A’s projected $60 million budget.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

They certainly are

There are far too many rewards for just putting any old team out there and too few rewards for actually winning it all.

It would be nice if MLB could actually just pay teams for winning games (create a “kitty” by taxing teams based on their market share or something), but I suppose that might conflict with whatever stupid gambling laws various states 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.

by PaulThomas on Aug 24, 2010 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't see this at all. Can you elaborate?

Most teams that have substantially increased recurring revenues — Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Mariners — have gained a lot more in franchise value than teams in similar size markets that haven’t increased recurring revenues — Mets, Dodgers, Marlins. I’m not at all seeing how there’s no reward for attracting more fans to your team, nor how winning isn’t a big part of the formula for doing that in most cases.

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Mariners suck

They have high franchise value because they play in a high-quality market and baseball teams that can monopolize high-quality markets are major assets. They’re actually a key point in the proof that winning has very LITTLE to do with making money in baseball.

[I’m not sure where you’re getting that the Marlins are in a similar quality market. They’re not. Miami is an awful baseball market given its population size.]

In any case, the best estimate based on the new financial data is that even winning the World Series is fairly limited in its fiscal value. It’s not a goal worth taking major financial risks to achieve.

"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 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Lol..then why play?

"Never have a motto, that's what I always say" - Me

by padmadfan on Aug 25, 2010 4:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

This seems like an awful idea to me.

As it stands right now, all teams would like to win, but some are better able to do it than others, and those team win most of the time. You want to encourage the loser teams to try harder by offering greater rewards to winning. You figure that will motivate them to spend more. Sure it will, and it will also motivate the good teams to spend more, too. The end result is everyone’s payroll costs go up, the Yankees and Red Sox still outbid everyone and win, AND the Yankees and Red Sox win extra financial rewards for continuing their domination. Whoopee!

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

Eh?

They’d mostly just be winning their own money back. How is that worse/more unbalanced than the current situation?

"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 25, 2010 12:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm all but certain this is academic anyway

Until our revenue streams dramatically increase, there’s next to zero chance Carl Crawford signs here. In fact, I’ll just say it: Carl Crawford won’t sign with the Oakland Athletics in 2011. There is no way we will commit that kind of money to one player.

Werth, Beltre, and Dunn I can all see us making an offer to but for more like 3 or 4 years, not 6. Kemp and Uggla could be had for the right players, but I’m not sure Mazzaro will be one of them. If any of the young guys go, though, I’d bet on him.

"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey

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

by cuppingmaster on Aug 24, 2010 3:32 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Totally agree with all 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 24, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Two things

1. I don’t care what your view of the tea leaves is. I care whether it’s the right move.

2. If the A’s sign Dunn they’re no longer among the smart teams in the league. To the extent they still are these days.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

If we had the

"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 3:42 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

I agree that he's a good player

Probably worth the money despite the diminished SLG at the coli, too. We just don’t have it and that’s not our style. It’s not just reading the tea leaves; if the A’s were to sign Crawford, it would be a monumental change from the way this team has operated for the last 15 years. To me, it’s no different than saying Bobby Crosby is going to win the triple crown next year: very unlikely given the history.

I’d love to be wrong and Wolff opens up the checkbook and we sign Crawford and Beltre. I just don’t see it.

"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 3:49 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Because the hallmark of Beane's tenure is predictability?

What’s the point of having ~20 good cheap players if you don’t spend your budget to make a playoff-challenging team

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

The ONLY predictable thing about the Beane tenure

Is having a constrained budget

"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 3:59 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

And we have room in the budget for, at least, the next three years

With extra space.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

The problem is you can't count on having around 20 good cheap players for the length of Crawford's contract

Crawford is going to get a 6 or 7 year deal, there is just no way a team can plan to continually produce enough good, cheap pre-arbitration players to make devoting that big a chunk of the salary to one player a good idea.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

So lets not take a step we can afford for the foreseeable future that makes us an instant playoff contender

Because four years from now we might have to increase payroll?

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Take a look at the numbers

We have no major obligations for the foreseeable future. The only reason I can’t promise no issues after 2013 is because there’s no responsible way to look that far.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well you have the obligation to pay a 25 man roster

That means paying at least 24 other major league salaries which can add up real quick when over a quarter of your already modest salary is going to one player. It’s just not good business to think you can consistently build a competitive team around a player like Carl Crawford by spending an average of around $2M per player on the rest of your roster.

I mean assuming Crawford would sign for $15M a year, by the third year of his deal you’re also paying $12M for Anderson and Suzuki. There goes almost half your salary for three players. And that’s before you even get into arbitration awards for guys like Cahill, Braden, Gio, and Barton.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Or you've won the AL west consistently

And can add another $10M in payroll (like they have in the past)

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well they had a payroll over $62M once this decade

and that basically came at the expense of almost all scouting international amateur talent and severely reduced draft budgets which helped to decimate the farm system. I was hoping the A’s wouldn’t relive this little bit of history, especially if they are hoping to surround Carl Crawford with cheap young talent.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Link?

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

The payroll numbers come from Cot's contracts

You can check the A’s numbers here. In 2007 the A’s bumped it all the way up to $79M but we all remember how that turned out and since then the A’s have made it pretty clear they want to continue their investments in talent development.

I’m just going off the A’s history but I don’t think it’s likely they will just bump up the payroll unless something big happens, like a new stadium. The more likely result of a big long term contract would be selling off all our young pitchers once they start hitting arbitration and hoping the farm system can replace them.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Funny

I’m just going off the A’s history saying that if they make a playoff run (or 3 by the time there’s an issue) they’ll pay to keep the team together.

And keep in mind $70M in 2013/2014 will be less money than in 2007.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

They might have said that in the past

but they have clearly been very reluctant to go much over that $60M threshold. Now that revenues appear to be decreasing I don’t see them pushing it up any higher.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whatever

I’m not telling you what they said. I’m pointing to what they did.

And if this team wins 90+ games for the next 3 years, revenues will come back up.

But I think we’ve reached the useful end of this discussion

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Your fear re: the pitching is largely unwarranted

And the A’s didn’t do over-slot signings for a long time prior to 2007, so it’s not necessarily accurate to suggest that the A’s minor league budget expenditures (or lack thereof) in 2007 were tied to the big league player’s budget.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Maybe I'm remembering wrong

but I thought Beane had said that the lack of spending on scouting amateur talent was due to them focusing more of the budget on the big league roster.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

International scouting had been going downhill for years

And prior to 2008 the A’s didn’t do over-slot signings… that goes back to the start of the Beane era.

It’s true that the amateur side of things was neglected for an extended period of time but that hardly coincides with the player budget going over $60 million.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well I think it coincides, just can't be sure if it's a causal connection

I mean as the amateur scouting was going down the major league budget rose, then the year the A’s announced they were going to start investing more in scouting the major league budget dropped a lot. There’s at least a temporal connection and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that the money saved on payroll is helping to fund the new scouting investments.

Whether there is a separate pot of money out there that the team would be willing to dip into to fund a contender I don’t know. But personally I am skeptical.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Amateur skimping was happening before the A's ever hit $60 million in payroll

To the detriment of the team.

And while it is true that an influx of cash went into the amateur side of things after the payroll came down from its $79 million peak that does not mean that the earlier bare bones approach was caused due to efforts to bump the major league payroll.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's the thing...

The A’s don’t need to open the check book beyond what they’ve already shown themselves willing to spend ($60 million) to afford Crawford.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Can you elaborate on this?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes I can.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Awesome

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Eh?

I seem to recall an article— by you— last year more or less proving that the A’s would eventually have to sell off assets if they signed Matt Holliday long-term.

What’s different (other than him not being as good) about signing Carl Crawford?

"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 25, 2010 12:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

That article assumed a few things

Namely, an $85 million payroll plus Adam Dunn and Rafeal Furcal in Green & Gold along with Holliday.

I’m thinking some adjustments might be warranted.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 25, 2010 1:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

If you sign a SP,

just taking the best available value of Webb, De La Rosa, Lilly, you can go into the season with a great 5 (Anderson, Cahill, Gio, FA, Braden), plus Outman/Mortensen for depth, and I think that’s worth it to get Kemp or Hill.

If I were signing a FA position player, I’d probably target Beltre first. If the A’s sign Beltre it means BOS, PHI, STL and LAA didn’t, and Kouz is a great fit in BOS, PHI, STL on teams that have hitting and need strong defense.

How’s this for a plan/dream:

- Sign Beltre (3/30? 4/40?)
- Sign a FA starting pitcher
- Mazzaro + for Kemp or Hill
- Kouz for Allen Craig +

Each “+” is a reliever. Maybe you have to give up Wuertz, maybe you only have to give up H. Rodriguez, but you get back a comparable reliever in the other deal.

Rotation: Anderson, Cahill, Gio, Braden, Webb/De La Rosa

Lineup:

Crisp – CF
Barton – 1B
Cust – DH
Beltre – 3B
Kemp (RF) or Hill (2B)
Carter – LF
Suzuki – C
Craig (RF) or Ellis (2B)
Pennington – SS

Drool.

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 24, 2010 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't like it at all

Kz is >>>>>>>>>> than whoever we have to play LF next year, and I’m not at all convinced Beltre can hit in Oakland. He’s also a couple years older.

I also don’t think:

Mazzaro and a RP gets you Kemp
Kemp is better than CC
Webb is better than Mazzaro going forward (see Sheets, B.)
Allen Craig would be an asset

My plan is simple:
Sign Cust (1 win for full season)
Keep Coco (neutral, although if he can stay on the field…)
Sign Carl Crawford (5 wins vs our current 0 WAR)
Try desperately to find 2 WAR from Rajai/Sweeney/Carter/Taylor in RF (+2 wins)

In other words, we just added 8 wins for the same amount of money as your plan ($10 for beltre and at least $5 for your SP, vs. at least 15 for CC).

Your plan would add:
Cust (1 win for full season)
Beltre (4 wins over Kz if he has another season like this one)
Kemp (+1 win)
Hill (no upgrade)
Mazzaro (-1 win)
FA SP (unknown)

Or, 5 wins plus your new pitcher. Obviously, Hill and Kemp could improve, but Beltre could also regress a lot.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree Mazzaro + RP doesn't land Kemp

Webb might be better than Mazzaro but no one will know how healthy he’s going to be until late in the FA process. So trading Mazzaro on the assumption of signing Webb could end up backfiring big time if Webb has another setback.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's hard to tell with Kemp

The Dodgers are in financial straits, they are truly sick of Kemp, and Kemp is having a very poor season. Meanwhile, Mazzaro is not only making league minimum, he has 5 years left on his contract and he’s already posting a sub 4.00 ERA in the AL.

And the A’s have leverage: Don’t like the deal? We’re talking to the Blue Jays about Mazzaro-Hill…

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 24, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hill is having a terrible season

And has had terrible seasons in the past (along with good ones).

I don’t see the appeal.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

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

Good power at a "non power position,"

which makes Barton and a non-power hitting COFer work better, and he has a great contract. (Note: I believe balance is important in a lineup, including power — I understand the “we don’t need power, we just need good hitters” meme, and respectfully don’t share it but don’t really want to debate it as it’s been debated before.)

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 24, 2010 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Fair enough.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

To be clear, I didn't mean the last part snarkily --

I’m trying to avoid “same argument, different day” on here, as I don’t think it’s constructive. I understand that there are good points on both sides.

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 24, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Toronto fans would rightly lynch their GM if he gave up Aaron Hill

for Vin Mazzaro and a relief pitcher. His deal is one of the most club-friendly in baseball and he’s shown 4 WAR upside.

"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 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

What would the Blue Jays reasonably 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 24, 2010 6:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

PT's saying that won't do it and I believe that

I’m not good at “trade equity” — though you’d think Hill’s sub .300 OBP wouldn’t make him that valuable. He can be very great or very meh. But it’s a terrific contract.

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 24, 2010 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Vinny + H-Rod is more than enough, IMO

Hill is pretty good defensively, is he not?

by TBRMKane on Aug 24, 2010 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

How is Hill any better than Hudson or Ellis or Rosales?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

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 24, 2010 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hudson seems to be pretty good, although he's old and has some collapse risk

but I don’t really “get” the comp to the other two. Hill has been bizarrely unlucky at the plate this season.

"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 25, 2010 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, that BABIP is disgusting

But he’s also hitting line drives at an abysmal rate and FBs 53.3% of the time.
He’s clearly not as bad as he’s been this year, but he’ll never come close to last year’s numbers again.

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 12:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

That does a good job of explaining his current BABIP

but little to project it for the future. LD rate is notoriously fickle, and I’ve found it to be virtually useless as a statistic which says anything about the future.

If he was anywhere near his own career level of BABIP, he’d be having a strong offensive season. I calculate a slash line of something like .280/.335/.480.

"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 25, 2010 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

But when you’re 100 points under your (already lower than normal) babip, that’s not a number you can assume away.

That says something more than just bad luck.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

The bottom five BABIP guys last season

Ian Kinsler (rebounded fully, though his power is off for some reason)
Carlos Pena (didn’t rebound)
Jimmy Rollins (didn’t rebound)
Yuniesky Betancourt (rebounded somewhat)
Aubrey Huff (rebounded fully)

None of these guys were anywhere near as far off their career numbers as Aaron Hill is. The odds of at least a partial rebound are overwhelming. The odds of a full rebound are actually pretty solid.

"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 25, 2010 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm seeing a 60% chance of some rebound

Among guys who were nowhere near as bad.

I’m saying the degree to which he’s unable to turn balls in play into hits means he’s less likely to rebound, rather than more likely.

Does anyone have the ability to look at players with low BABIP’s? It’s not an option on BBR’s search tool, but I’d like to see if anyone with a BABIP in the .200 range has ever recovered, and if so how often.

An analysis of much smaller declines is unconvincing.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

There's a reason why there's no evidence on this point

It just doesn’t happen. Players just don’t have full seasons with BABIP under .200. I just looked at the last 10 seasons on Fangraphs and no qualifying hitter has ever been as low as .220, much less .200.

Your second paragraph is just fundamentally wrong. Players who go way off from their career norms are more likely to eventually bounce back than players who are only modestly off theirs. This is basic regression to the mean principles.

It is very unlikely that Aaron Hill suddenly and without warning lost the ability to hit in major league baseball.

"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 25, 2010 1:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

I disagree

I think there is a reason, and it’s something we don’t know. Because, as you just said, players don’t have seasons this bad, but he’s having one.

And you’re simply wrong about my second paragraph. Regression to the mean does not ignore measured performance. The worse he does now, the worse his regressed stats will be.

I guess the unprecedented-ness of this season makes me think that, unlikely or not, Aaron Hill lost a meaningful part of his ability to hit.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not sure you two are disagreeing at all.

One is saying that the way-off guy will regress more than the slightly-off guy. The other is saying that the slightly-off guy will be closer to average than they way-off guy will be after they’re both done regressing.

These two are not incompatible.

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Obviously his performance is impacting the bottom line

of his career average. That’s already been accounted for by the fact that I’m talking about his career average, not his career average prior to 2010. Prior to this season his career BABIP was, I think, north of .300. Now it’s like .290.

A terrible season certainly “drags” the true-talent estimate downward, but when you’re talking about something as fluctuating and variable as BABIP, it doesn’t drag it that quickly.

"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 25, 2010 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is where we disagree

First of all, you’ve got to weight this year, so it drags further. Second, the part we disagree on, is that I think an outcome this aberrant is more than a statistical blip that you can regress away. You don’t, and that’s fine.

I asked how people with .200 BABIPs do in future years, you said it never happens. I don’t want to bet my 2011 season on Aaron Hill.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

The reason why it never happens

is that normally, the player in question is either an obviously terrible AAAA guy or so old he’s a worried phone call away from a nursing home. They don’t even get to 400 PA.

As far as I can tell, there’s nothing physically wrong with Aaron Hill. He’s not old, and he’s obviously got MLB-level game. I’ve never heard of HITTERS getting Steve Blass Disease. If he’s just “on tilt” at the plate right now, then one would hope that an offseason and a fresh statline would clear his head a bit.

Other than some kind of crypto-injury, which would hopefully be disclosed by a physical, I’m having trouble coming up with logical explanations for his performance that would presumptively continue to operate next season.

"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 25, 2010 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

I fully conceed it's odd

but it’s too many PA for it to just be bad luck / routine slump.

It could be he’s hurt and not telling (or the Jays aren’t telling). It could be he’s got mental issues like Duke or like Blass. It could be he’s lost interest.

I just think it’s a lot riskier than predicting a return from a guy who is 20 or 30 points low.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good to know

Clearly there are players with a very strong ability to hit line drives who do so at a much higher rate than others, but for most other players, are we to assume then that there is something like a +/- 5% fluctuation in their line drive rates?

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Something like that, yes

but there’s a deeper problem, too, which is that LD rate correlates with future BABIP to different degrees for different players.

It’s generally the case that using a player’s past history is more predictive than using LD rates once he has a meaningful number of MLB at-bats. You can surely do better than just regressing to career numbers, but for a back-of-the-envelope calculation, it’s what I use.

"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 25, 2010 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Heh

Oh they’d do that deal, and no mistake. Even given his rebound this year, Wells’s contract is one of the largest liabilities in all of baseball.

One of the funniest articles I’ve ever seen was the one I saw last year which demonstrated that even if they offered to give you Halladay along with Wells, for no cost, you’d be a fool to take the offer.

"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 25, 2010 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Probably at least two upper-minors prospects with similar, 4 WAR "reasonable upside"

presuming that one of them will probably bust out.

The A’s just don’t have what they’ll be asking for. The trade is a nonstarter.

"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 25, 2010 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

There is a ton wrong with this plan

Beltre will require more money that that youre looking at 3/39 at a minimum IMO

I agree with nevermoor that Kemp is worst than Crawford (but I like the shorter commitment) and that Craig isn’t valuable to us.

Kouz doesn’t match well with the Cards whose system is completely barren, unless you want Craig and nothing else, which is a huge hit in value.

You underestimate the cost of your acquisitions of Kemp and Hill

Furthermore the A’s bullpen has been -13 PRAA this year so giving away Wuertz or Breslow makes little 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 26, 2010 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldn't let Mazzaro keep me from acquiring Kemp

I don’t like the lack of difference in velocity between his fastball and change-up.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Totally agree.

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 24, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Your three favorite targets aren't good enough to make the A's a playoff team without

a lot of luck and tanking by both the Angels and Rangers. If they actually acquired those guys, they’d have to pay something around $18M in 2011 salaries and would cost a serious amount of talent — think something like Braden, Davis and De Los Santos for Kemp, Weeks and Brown for Scott and I’ve no idea why the Jays would want to trade Hill.

Can you explain why this strategy is better than paying Crawford a similar amount, or even $5M/year more and not losing any players?

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

by WaddellCanseco on Aug 24, 2010 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

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 24, 2010 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

First of all, I'm not for getting all 3. I'm for getting one.

And I heartily disagree that the A’s wouldn’t be contenders if they, say, lost Mazzaro, added a FA SP, added Kemp, and just got a solid rookie season from Carter. And that scenario still leaves the door wide open to look at O. Hudson, or a salary-dump addition like McClouth, if you wanted.

I don’t want to allocate 40% of my payroll to one guy for 6-8 years, which is what it would take (even if Crawford were open to coming, which I doubt he is). For that kind of commitment, I’ll wait for a true star. I’d do it for Pujols, sure. I’d do it for Utley. Crawford is very good; he’s not THAT great.

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 24, 2010 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

40%?

Our payroll is $60M. 40% of that would be $24M. There is no way CC gets that much money, nor is anyone advocating it.

And I’m with WC. Your moves don’t add enough net wins.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 7:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sorry, whatever % it actually is.

I don’t know why everyone thinks the A’s could get Crawford here with some “competitive offer” — short of making some ridiculous overpay offer, I don’t see him giving Oakland any serious consideration.

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 24, 2010 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

If his best other offer is, say 5/70

What do you think it takes to get him?

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Do you really think his best offer is going to be 5/70?

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 24, 2010 7:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Jason Bay was 4/66

Matt Holliday was 7/$120

So I think his best offer will be between that. 4 to 7 years at 16.5 – 17.5M per year.

Which means I undershot. Make it 5/85. Given that, what do you think it takes to win?

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Speaking of Jason Bay

Ya think the Mets might want to dump his salary?

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 7:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think they might wish he'd hit better this year

But if I’m the Mets I assume he’ll hit better next year (and have the payroll to absorb the hit)

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

No one dumps four-year contracts a year in

That’s horrible PR, not to mention an admission of failure by the GM.

That shouldn’t influence decisionmaking, but it does, because GMs are people, not perfect-agent extensions of their ownership.

"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 25, 2010 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed

Same reason Z didn’t give up Figgins yet and won’t this offseason

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 12:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Happened in the NBA

with Trevor Ariza. Different situation but Daryl Morey is considered a shrewd GM. Not sure how this will affect future FA’s for the franchise.

by rightbackin on Aug 25, 2010 5:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

Except he got immense value back

That was a trade for talent, not a trade to dump a useless player

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 7:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

It does happen

Dan Haren a year and a half in
Edgar Renteria signed a 4/$40M in December of 2004 and was traded December of 2005
Mike Lowell was operating on a four year contract with the Marlins [Lowell had an escape clause if a new stadium was not built so the Fish decided to get him to waive his clause for garaunteeing some money that wasn’t previously garaunteed…he was dealt a year later to the Red Sox in what was a salary dump. In fact, he was being shopped by the Fish as a certain handcuff that came with Beckett to anyone who was interested in Beckett] and was dealt.
Nick Swisher was dealt a year into a four year deal but, admittedly, it wasn’t a salary dump.

And there shouldn’t be any denying that Derek Lowe and Vernon Wells were discussed players whose GMs were shopping them just a year after their recent deals.

Jose Guillen was dealt after a year but this was just a three year contract. And Nate McLouth, they player being discussed here, signed a three year a year ago.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 25, 2010 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Most of those trades had nothing to do with salary

It’s one thing for a GM to say that team needs have changed and a rebuilding phase is in order. It’s another entirely to say “whoops, we really screwed up signing this guy. Um, sorry. Here, take him.”

"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 25, 2010 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

So here's my feeling --

If Crawford negotiates with the A’s it will be a Furcal-like situation, where he’s really just using the A’s to get a better offer elsewhere. My guess is that when it’s all said and done, he’ll want to sign with a team that’s in a big media market with sold out crowds.

Now obviously there’s some breaking point where an A’s offer would be so much more than the rest that he’d have to give in. What’s that amount? Say it’s 7/150 or something. Again, I’d save that level of massive overpay for a true star, not for Crawford.

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 24, 2010 7:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wow

I completely disagree. I think if we beat the next highest offer by $1-2M/year or add a year we’ll win, but then I don’t put much stock in the “no one wants to come here” plaint. After all, he could become the face of a franchise / star that pulls them to the playoffs / best Oak LF since Rickey.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just think...
After all, he could become the face of a franchise

…he could become the next Chavez!

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 24, 2010 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's true

But the only way to 100% avoid that is to never pay anyone.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

works for the marlins.

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 8:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

The threatening letter from the MLBPA

sitting on Jeffrey Loria’s desktop suggests that his math is fine.

The Marlins only have to spend up to the revenue-sharing figure. Since pre-FA players are the efficient place to put that money, they’ll do that, and continue to be nonfactors in the free agent market.

"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 25, 2010 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

So the Marlins do pay, but only after being threatened

Brutal, but works to back my point.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 25, 2010 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Get back to me when they make a serious bid

on an actual free agent, and not just an arbitration-eligible player that they already control.

"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 25, 2010 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

So the millions they're spending on Johnson and Hanley isn't real money

The point was the Marlins “never pay anyone”. I understand what you’re saying but you’re arguing a completely different conversation.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 25, 2010 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Actually, rereading the post sequence,

you’re right. Only ever signing arbitration-eligible players to extensions while ignoring free agents would not prevent a Chavez-type situation, although it would lower the risk.

"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 25, 2010 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think it really depends on the player

We’ll see, I s’pose.

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 24, 2010 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Im fine with not being high on Crawford,

but I really think your assessment is way way way too rosy. First its going to take more than Mazzaro to get Kemp and second when Braden and Anderson are hurt who gets those games?

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 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

we're screwed if those two are injured for any significant amount of time anyways

Plus, the Dodgers are low on Kemp. Monasterios started for them the other day. I think they’d take an SP plus some other guys gladly.

"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 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why do you assume the Dodgers are low on Kemp?

He’s struggling and Torre’s benched him a bit, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t think he has a bright future with the organization.
I mean it’s not like we heard he was actively shopped at the deadline or was put on waivers this month…

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 11:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

fair enough

It sure seems like they’re scratching their heads about him, though

"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 25, 2010 12:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not saying it isn't a possibility

And time will tell (this offseason) how they value him going forward…

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 12:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

Why are people so afraid to deal Mazzaro

He is a 0.7 WAR pitcher this year. Has a FIP of about 4.6. He seems very “average” and benefits a great deal from the A’s strong D and extreme pitchers friendly ball park. His main benefit is that he has many years of cost controlled performance in front of him.

I would be more than willing to deal Mazzaro for a hitter, if possible, then sign another “average” pitcher who had pitched in a hitters park to a 1 year deal with a club option. I am thinking like Jorge De La Rosa from COL.

The move from the hitters park to the pitchers park + the A’s strong D should allow this SP to have better typical numbers, which may allow him to net us draft picks when his contract expires.

by echerrst on Aug 25, 2010 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

Because he's young and quite possibly could get better

And better than Mort, Ross, Tomko, Jennings, or any of the other guys who could step into the 4/5 starter role. Plus, he comes virtually uninjured.

"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 25, 2010 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree

He’s not that good, and the A’s have the opportunity to cash in on people overvaluing him.

"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 25, 2010 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

does anyone besides us overvalue him?

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 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, you can really never know what other teams think

But there is a pretty good history of teams overvaluing pitchers with good contracts (or years of team control) with good ERA’s that may not be supported by more advanced statistics.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 25, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not afraid to deal him

But dealing him cuts into the benefit provided by the player you acquire (since we don’t have anyone better than Mazzaro internally to take his place).

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

fixed

But dealing him cuts into the benefit provided by the player you acquire (since we don’t have anyone better than as good as Mazzaro internally to take his place).

"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins

by justANotherAsFan on Aug 25, 2010 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Fair enough

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

I also very much agree with your main point

When we amateurs start throwing around trade ideas, it always seems we overlook the lost value of whoever we are willing to deal.

Ex:

Need more homers? (Not necessarily, but some would like that…) Deal Suzuki + whoever. For a 30-homer guy. But as of right now, even batting as poorly as he has lately, Suzuki has 12, and your 30-homer guy is now hitting in the Coli, and might only hit 20, so you’ve gained maybe 8 homers and paid for a 30-homer guy.

"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins

by justANotherAsFan on Aug 25, 2010 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

There are no amateurs here

Ask people (or just read their contributions), do they seem like amateurs?

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 25, 2010 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I mean amateurs as in they are donating their time

Or is this a secret hideout where all the GMs congregate?

"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins

by justANotherAsFan on Aug 25, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

We are all amateurs

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

No

But signing Crawford, playing Cust all year, not playing Chavez/Fox/Matts/Patterson, and getting 2 WAR from the Carter/Taylor/Connor/Rajai/Sweeney/Buck (if we keep him) monster is.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sure, but those caveats apply too if get Kemp and Scott (i.e. playing Cust all year, not playing Chavez, etc).

In the end, I don’t really see much difference in expected wins.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 24, 2010 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

I did the math somewhere in here

My plan looked like it was 3 wins better.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's entirely possible that the A's could offer Crawford a billion dollars and still not sign him

I don’t think it’s accurate to say “you could sign Carl Crawford” because it’s possible (maybe even likely) that no matter what the A’s do, they can’t sign him.

www.zekeishungry.com

by thejd44 on Aug 24, 2010 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

No. No it isn't

And I (still) don’t buy the “noone wants to come here” whine. The only time that has actually happened is Scutaro.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't think it's that "no one wants to come here"

so much as that the poor attendance, the poor stadium, and the poor clubhouse facilities, gives players 3 more reasons to prefer another option. And if the thought of a lot of media attention and/or electric crowds and/or first-class facilities appeals to you, Oakland starts out very low on the list.

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 24, 2010 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

The only thing going for us is that the Trop is terrible, too

So, it wouldn’t be much different for him! Still, though, I stand by my earlier assertion in this thread.

"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 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sure

But for several million dollars I’d give up some amenities.

I’m not sure why that means we need to double the next highest offer. Especially since there’s glory in being the guy who brings a once-proud franchise back to the playoffs.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

There may be greater glory in playing for a perennial playoff contender, though.

"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 25, 2010 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

...

Which we would become.

And, for the record, that’s the exact opposite of public consensus on, for example LeBron’s stuff.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

I don't see how you can just assume the addition of Crawford makes the A's a perennial contender

He would be a serious improvement but the A’s have a lot of holes to fill, Crawford makes us better but there’s no guarantee the A’s instantly become a play-off team.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 25, 2010 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

My plan would add 8 wins

We are 8.5 out.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well if we're talking about what makes an attractive pitch to major league ball players

Good luck convincing a free agent that a team that hasn’t contended for a play-off spot since 2006 is instantly a perennial contender because of all the WAR you plan to add in the off-season.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 25, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whatever

I’m not going to psychoanalyze Carl Crawford’s ability to determine playoff odds. Especially based upon zero information.

The point is we probably would become instant playoff contenders in 2011 and 2012.

If you don’t think that has any appeal at all to a marquee free agent, fine. Maybe you’re right. Like I said, though, I can point to 13890471908765190876923401876902876 articles about how LeBron’s path to glory was NY or Chicago, and he was a wimp for going to Miami.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whoa, I'm not saying you need to psychoanalyze anyone

Just that if you’re discussing the attractiveness of playing in Oakland with regards to potential free agents, the “chance to play for a perennial contender” is not a pitch the A’s can realistically make.

And as an aside, did you spell out your full plan to add 8 wins to the A’s earlier in this thread? I didn’t see it in a quick scroll through but I could’ve missed it and it would be something I would be interested in seeing.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 25, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes

Here

I obviously disagree, unless by “perennial contender” you mean backwards looking only to 2007, in which case we obviously aren’t.

We have very good pitching, very good defense, and some talented position players. We also don’t have any black holes if we add CC and get something approaching average from our 3,412 headed RF monster.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Getting average production from a "monster"

is much more difficult than it looks.

It takes time to evaluate players. Even if you actually have an average (or even above-average) player in the melange somewhere, the odds of correctly picking him out quickly are not good.

Let’s say you have 3 players, two of whom are replacement level and one of whom is 3 WAR, and it takes you 2 months to evaluate a player comprehensively. You will get 3 WAR when you open with the 3 WAR dude, 2 when you open with one replacement and then pick the 3 WAR dude, and 1 WAR when you go through both replacement dudes first. Each of those is equally likely. On average (despite having a 3 WAR player) you’ll only accrue 2 WAR that year.

That’s obviously kind of simplistic, but it makes the point. Expecting 2 WAR out of the mess of seemingly-bad corner players the A’s have now is grossly optimistic.

"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 25, 2010 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well

The A’s lost 1.9 WAR from Buck/Chavez/Gross/Matt/Matt/Donaldson/Fox

So just replacing them with replacement level production would do it.

I think you know in ST whether Sweeney can defend. If he can, he’s gotta start. If not, the task becomes somewhat harder.

And, best of all, if it doesn’t quite work out in 2011 you still have CC in 2012.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just saying "stop playing bad players"

is like running for office saying you’ll balance the budget by “ending waste and inefficiency.” Nice campaign slogan, not so easy in practice.

Obviously if the A’s had known that they’d be sub-replacement-level, they would have gone out and hired someone else.

It’s rare for a team not to have any significant quantity of negative WAR from some number of fringe players.

"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 25, 2010 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

You didn't know Chavez was going to be negative WAR?

I think we have 25 solid contributors next year (if we follow my plan). You’re undoubtedly right that some will struggle, but the above list is quite the collection of easily predictable suck. Not playing those guys, or guys like that, will help get to a very reasonable 2 WAR

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

At least four of those guys

could probably have been predicted to be replacement level-ish or better (Buck, Donaldson, Fox and especially Gross).

Chavez, I don’t know what the [censored] was going on with that. That really WAS obvious to anyone with a working pair of hemispheres. If you want to count that as improvement, fine.

"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 25, 2010 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

My point is we got 0 WAR in RF

And -1.9 from those guys.

If we add 2 wins to that combination, we are in great shape, and that isn’t a tall order.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Even if you add the 2 wins you want to finagle out of Sweeney/Taylor/Jackson/the rest of that outfield mess

Crawford by himself isn’t a six win player.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 25, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nope. He's 5

Cust is 1

And the finagled mess + not playing the negative WAR guys we played is 2. If Sweeney’s knees are ok, he’s 2 WAR easy.

So that’s 8. Before we count any potential improvement by Anderson/Cahill/Gio/Mazzaro/Pennington/Barton/Kz/Rosales

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ah I see, this makes sense.

But how comfortable are you with Crawford’s defensive value? Is he really worth +1.5 wins on defense?

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 25, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Quite comfortable.

Both fangraphs and BR have him in the mid-to-high teens quite consistently (with this year being even better).

I also think that’s the profile of a good FA acquisition for us since you’re going to take an offensive production hit.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

They aren't going to go out and acquire Kemp,

at the cost of valuable trade chips, if they already have McClouth + Carter/Taylor (+ maybe Valley Hamstring Side Surgery Jackson and “Flip It To LF Sweeney”) already in tow.

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 24, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Meh

The pieces involved in landing McLouth wouldn’t create an extra burden to the real cost of landing Kemp.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's not cost --

The A’s aren’t going to go out and deal someone as valuable as Mazzaro to get Kemp with nowhere to play him.

Unless you think they’ll dump Cust and put Carter at DH — and I don’t see how they will when Carter has still never DHed and Cust is one of the few good hitters the A’s currently have in their lineup — they don’t have room for McClouth, Kemp, and Carter to slot into the “plan A COF” spots.

In other words, if you have McClouth you don’t target Kemp, you probably target an upgrade at 2B. Which is why I don’t want McClouth — because I want someone better at COF, the one place the A’s can really upgrade (instead of “sort of/maybe” upgrade).

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 24, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not so sure the A's bring back Cust

He’s basically the same hitter he was last year when the A’s non-tendered him except with a shiny .386 BABIP rather than the .316 he posted on ‘09. He still takes a lot of walks but it seems clear that whatever has changed in him since is awesome ’07 and ’08 years he doesn’t have that kind of power anymore. I had hoped his dip in power last year was an aberration due to changed hitting mechanics but at this point I don’t think so.

If he were to come back I would bet you could expect a line similar to what he put up in ‘09 .240/.356/.417 which, while I guess you could do worse in a DH, is not something the A’s should really plan around going into this off-season.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think Non tendering cust was a business decision more than a baseball one

and there is no Chavez factor this year.

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree on the expected line,

but this lineup has a dire need for any .356 OBP guy it can get.

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 24, 2010 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't know

I guess I would just hope that with the financial flexibility the A’s have, even if they can’t get a premier free agent they could get their hands on a DH who could do better than that.

by OkayJay81 on Aug 24, 2010 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just keep Carter & Taylor down next year...

Neither has shown they are ready to contribute.

It seems both Kemp and McLouth could be had in the same offseason.

COF: Kemp & McLouth (with Sweeney, Jackson as backups)
CF: Crisp (with Davis)

I’m not saying this is what they should do, just that it is possible.

by echerrst on Aug 24, 2010 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I guess it's possible to go with McClouth-Crisp-Kemp

As long as you jettison Conor and Swooney, I guess it’s all good.

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 24, 2010 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

You keep Swooney and Davis

thats 5 OFers

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 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

I can see Jackson and Sweeney non-tendered regardless of the team's pursuit of other OFers.

Then again, the A’s would only be on the hook for a pro-rated portion of any arbitration decided salary should they keep ’em and later (say pre-ST) release them.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just for negotiating purposes

It seems crazy not to tender them now.

It improves our bargaining power for the cost of some fraction of their award.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Might help.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

And at this time I don't think Carter is ready

If he comes up and struggles in September then I don’t consider his inclusion on the 2011 Opening Day line-up as a sure thing. There is also the chance that McLouth is toast, meaning the A’s would have a spot available soon enough.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cust was one of the few good hitters they had last year

And they basically dumped him twice in the offseason/spring training.

I’m still hoping that the second dumping was a genius “let’s get an extra year of control” move.

www.zekeishungry.com

by thejd44 on Aug 24, 2010 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

I was thinking about that as well

It’s very convenient how he was just down long enough to gain a year of control

by echerrst on Aug 25, 2010 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

That's not true at all

He was down much longer than necessary to gain an extra year of control. And even a Custophile like myself has a hard time seeing how he’s an A in 2012.

The reason that he was down was that the front office was moronically fixated on extracting value out of the sunk-cost Chavez contract.

"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 25, 2010 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

I bring this up again only because you say "moronically",

which I think is unwarranted. I feel like I’ve posted this a dozen times, but I know you were away for a while, so maybe you missed it.

The A’s decision to play Chavez earlier this year was economically rational if you assume a contract completion insurance policy. We can only speculate on the coverage, but a standard policy would pay out the remainder of the contract if Chavez has a career-ending injury (as defined in the policy) but would pay nothing if he is cut, hangs out on the DL, or just sucks at baseball. In this situation the “sunk cost” isn’t really entirely sunk.

We can make reasonable estimates for probabilistic expectations of how much Chavez might produce, how much Cust (or anyone else) might produce, and what are the chances of Chavez getting hurt in a way that would trigger his insurance policy. Again, we can only guess at these probabilities, particularly the last one, but when I did the math I found that reasonable numbers would yield a situation in which, at the start of the season, it made economic sense to go with Chavez, with that advantage gradually decreasing as the days of salary went by and Chavez continued to suck. Such a model is consistent with what the A’s actually did, starting with Chavez and then giving up on him partway into the season after he neither produced nor broke permanently.

Obviously, it didn’t work out for them, but my point is that there are reasonable assumptions under which the decision would have been a rational one, and it doesn’t warrant being called moronic.

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

So you're saying playing Chavez was a possible cost cutting move?
The A’s decision to play Chavez earlier this year was economically rational if you assume a contract completion insurance policy. We can only speculate on the coverage, but a standard policy would pay out the remainder of the contract if Chavez has a career-ending injury (as defined in the policy) but would pay nothing if he is cut, hangs out on the DL, or just sucks at baseball.

I’m sorry, but if the A’s front office actually does business like this, then they are moronic. There goal should be to win by putting the best 25 guys on the roster, not 24 and the guy they hope gets injured so that we can save some money.

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm saying that no move is certain.

You never know who is going to play the best. You always have to take your best guess.

Money is part of the calculation. If it weren’t, you’d go out and buy all the best FA’s every year, but that may or may not be worth it. Even if you don’t care about profit and only care about winning, there’s still only so much you can afford to buy so you have to allocate your money strategically.

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would argue that if in fact the A's were following this path

that they did not do a very good job of it. If the idea was to play him with hopes that he would either do well (unlikely) or get hurt (likely) they took away some of the oppurtunity for him to get hurt by moving him to DH to start the season.

I am glad they did since once we got Kouz he needed to start the season at third, and screwing with Barton by benching (or sending him to AAA) this year to let Chavez play first would also have been a bad idea, but heck throw him in LF and see if he could run into a wall or something. I don’t wish injury on Chavez, but if that was something the A’s were secretly hoping for they certainly helped make it less likely by handing him a DH role.

by AsFanInLA on Aug 25, 2010 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

If they have such a policy,

then perhaps the moronic move was buying it in the first place— because that sounds like a very poor sort of insurance policy to buy. How many players literally become suddenly unable to take the field anymore? There’s Juan Encarnacion, and… um… Thurman Munson?

If Chavez just retired, he wouldn’t be owed his salary anyway. It was, thus, predictable that he would hang on until the end of the contract. An insurance policy which makes no allowance whatsoever for someone who is able to put on a uniform but is physically unable to perform at a valuable level is a useless policy.

"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 25, 2010 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you look at any website of an insurance agency

specializing in sports coverage, you’ll see that a contract completion policy is a standard package. I assume it would not be a standard package if people weren’t buying it. Now, maybe MLB is an exception — I don’t know — but this is a normal policy that gets bought somewhere.

As for it being an unlikely event to happen — well, isn’t that the nature of insurance? You may as well say that fire insurance is stupid because, after all, what are the chances that your house is going to burn down. The whole point of insurance is to boil down the product of a small chance of a large cost to some manageable price. The smallness of the risk is presumably built into the premium price.

If you sign a player for $66 million for six years, it’s because you expect him to produce value for those six years. If partway into the contract he has a devastating injury and his career is done, that is a devastating financial loss, so it makes sense to insure against it.

Admittedly it’s also a devastating loss if they guy stops being good at baseball, but I know of no way to insure against that. How exactly could such a policy be written that would be clearly defined and makes sense for the insurer?

You’re arguing as if it’s only sensible to insure against likely events, but that’s the opposite of how insurance works. The likelier an event, the closer the cost of insurance is to the actual cost, at which point you may as well just bear the risk yourself.

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

I do not see how one could possibly invoke such an insurance policy

Shit, even Juan Encarnacion could physically put on a baseball uniform. He’d hit like .100, but so what? What’s the qualitative difference between that and Chavez’s sub-replacement-level performance in 2010?

And if I recall rightly, the estates of players who are killed do not receive remaining owed money under a contract. MLB has its own pension coverage for the survivors of players.

Even the weird examples I tried to think up don’t work. Nothing works. This putative insurance policy cannot possibly pay out.

"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 25, 2010 11:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Several websites show a brief description

such as this one. It’s the fourth bullet point, starting with “teams”.

The best known case was Jeff Bagwell’s, because it gave rise to a public disagreement between the team and insurance company whether Bagwell’s condition met the test of complete disability. The team filed a claim, the insurer denied it, and both were prepared to litigate. Ultimately, they settled, but along the way it was discussed in several news stories. This one, I think, well illustrates the nature of such a policy. I’m assuming the A’s had something similar with Chavez.

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

by iglew on Aug 26, 2010 2:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yep

I’ve been saying this to crickets, but “acquiring a bad contract” either means paying too much for someone (in which case, signing a FA would be a better deal) or getting the old team to eat some of the cost (in which case, you’re paying talent).

There are good free agents at the positions we need to upgrade, and we don’t have a ton of prospect depth to trade.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not against McLouth... just thinking that DFA is underestimating the cost

Put another way, off the top o’ my head the A’s could afford to trade for McLouth and take on the full contract while still signing Crawford.

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sure

But that cost underestimation is why it looks like an appealing option. Like the “if we could get Beltran without giving up any talent and the Mets eat $9m” stuff.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

picks up phone

“omar, buddy, you are going to get fired anyway, why not Beltran for Bobby crosby?”

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

by Future Ed on Aug 24, 2010 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

The underestimation...

I haven’t seen anywhere that the Braves have placed McLouth on waivers, which is why I’m doubtful of the Cedrick Bowers price tag. I could be wrong on this and DFA right… although I’m fairly confident in my opinion.

Which means the real question is: What is the actual cost (in talent) to acquire McLouth?

The monster at the end of this blog.

by grover on Aug 24, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

who do you think they would demand?

Why is it not a Snyder like deal?

If youre trading Capra for him do you think that its a bad idea?

If you are the Braves, why would you want to keep him?

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 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you are the Braves, why would you want to keep him?

Because his value right now is nil, he could be a good player next year, and is not expensive.

Sure they’re committed to $60M, but they’re a $90-100M payroll team (and Chipper is making retirement noises).

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't think this accurate. Look at the linked spreadsheet of their payroll on Cots page.

with McLouth they are already slightly above their current payroll levels if you give everyone a reasonable raise in Arby that deserves one. Furthermore suggesting that they are going to spend more money next year I think is specious given that they have really gone out of their way to send Bobby Cox off with a winner so you would think that they wouldn’t be holding back for nothing. Secondly they were actively trying to cut payroll last year which necessitated the Vasquez trade and their attempts to dump Lowe. The are going to need a closer and a 1bman in addition to their already maxed out payroll.

Everything from Chipper Ive seen is that he is going to come back.

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 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

$62M is your number

As to payrolls:

2010: $ 83,890,334
2009: $ 96,726,166
2008: $102,365,683

So maybe 80-100 instead of 90.

As for Chipper, my understanding is he’s going to try to rehab and decide then.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 24, 2010 7:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Right and I have them at 90 without a closer. Theyll probably need to get rid of some salary

They could ditch Kawakami and save a bundle but I don’t think anyone wants him especially at ~13m/2y

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 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Freddie Freeman will be the 1B, for what that's worth

"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 25, 2010 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

I had no idea he was hitting so well this year

Or that he was in AAA.
Kid is 19 years old.
Him and Heyward are going to scare the shit out of NL East pitchers for quite awhile

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 12:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

if the contract tastes like cough syrup

can we get arrested for eating it?

death to myspace!

by malikot on Aug 24, 2010 2:30 PM PDT reply actions  

Buy low opportunity?

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 24, 2010 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Off-season plan

1. Trade Mazzaro, Brown and Henry Rodriguez for Matt Kemp
2. Sign Carl Pavano
3. Sign Koji Uehara
(4. Non-Tender Kouzmanoff)
5. Sign Adrian Beltre
(6. Don’t pick up Ellis’s option)
7. Sign Juan Uribe
(8. Pick up Crisp’s option)
9. Sign Jesse Crain
10. Sign Eric Hinske

Lineup:
1. Crisp CF
2. Barton 1B
3. Kemp RF
4. Cust DH
5. Beltre 3B
6. Uribe 2B
7. Suzuki C
8. Carter/Hinske LF
9. Pennington SS
        Bench: Rosales, Powell, Davis, Carter/Hinske

Rotation:
1. Anderson
2. Cahill
3. Gio
4. Pavano
5. Braden
(6. Mortensen)
(7. Ross)
(8. Uehara-move from bullpen)

Bullpen:
Uehara
Wuertz
Crain
Breslow
Ziegler
De Los Santos
Bailey

Frank Cohen
TeamTICKERmlb.com
Your Effortless Baseball Connection

by FrankCohen on Aug 24, 2010 3:27 PM PDT reply actions  

How much money are you spending?

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 24, 2010 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

None -- but Wolff's spending some!

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 24, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Life would be a lot better if I could spend someone else's money.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 24, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I can't tell you exactly obviously but

in the case that a guy like Pavano or Uehara or Crain are demanding contracts above what we would have to pay for a similar player, the plan I outlined could obviously adapt. Just get a good value for a 3/4 starter and relievers. The only essential pieces here are Beltre and Uribe, and I don’t think Hinske will really require a great deal of money.

Frank Cohen
TeamTICKERmlb.com
Your Effortless Baseball Connection

by FrankCohen on Aug 24, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

My 2 cents

I really don’t think. We are going to see too many changes…

  • Crisp is staying
  • I think Ellis too (maybe for less money than the 6 million option)
  • We all want to see Conor Jackson leaving, but I think he’s not going anywhere unless Taylor shows something in Spring Trainning. Beane always like him and I dont think Sam Demel for 20 games of CoJax will make Beane happy. I can see him as a Bench RH bat / Cust’s Platoon.
  • Rajai is still good as pinch runner/late inning defense replacement for Carter
  • The one I can really see leaving is Kouz. 3B is the place where I think Beane needs to find somebody, because Kouz sucks with the bat and theres is nobody else in Minor leagues. My favorite obviously is Beltre, if not try to get Aramis Ramirez (looks like the Cubs are in selling mode)

My lineup?

Crisp CF
Swenney RF (Rajais vs LHP)
Barton 1B
Beltre / Ramirez 3B
Cust DH (Jackson vs LHP)
Suzuki C
Carter LF
Ellis 2B
Pennington SS

Bench: Rosales, Powell, Jackson, Rajai

by Olijerez77 on Aug 24, 2010 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

As much as I don't like Kouzmanoff, he's probably more valuable than Ramirez going forward

Ramirez is a brutal defensive player, and it looks like he’s on the decline offensively. May as well just keep Kouzmanoff. He’s cheaper and probably better.

www.zekeishungry.com

by thejd44 on Aug 24, 2010 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

The only option available that (we know of) is Beltre.

Kouz isnt going anywhere. He should be hitting 8th on a good team then no one would be complaining as much. But he’s being used as a heart of the order guy, not his forte.

-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 25, 2010 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Nate Ms contract gases like cough syrup...

Shouldn’t Jamarcus eat it?

WTF GEREN?!?!?!

by robbo650 on Aug 24, 2010 3:28 PM PDT via mobile reply actions   1 recs

Well, he should be able to afford it.

He might have already blown all his money on large fur coats, though.

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

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 24, 2010 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Tastes not gasses

Stupid ipod

WTF GEREN?!?!?!

by robbo650 on Aug 24, 2010 3:39 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

If McLouth costs us nothing to acquire

This is exactly what we should be doing

Flexible contract too…. $6mil for 2011, then $10mil if he recovers or buyout if he’s permanently broken.

I’m guessing if we get Kemp he’ll be in RF (as a natural RF), but does McLouth have the arm to play RF – just in case we don’t get Kemp?

Is this the real life-
Is this just fantasy-
Caught in a landslide-
No escape from reality-

by Daniel777 on Aug 24, 2010 3:46 PM PDT reply actions  

I don't think we're getting Kemp

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 10:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Honesty I don't see CC coming here

I think CC would be a great addition with his great speed and defense and I know we can offer him probably the best deal in terms of $ but i just dont see him giving up an opportunity to play for a big market team. i also think we would need to vastly overpay for Beltre but i think it can be done.

by scorerunsplz on Aug 24, 2010 5:47 PM PDT reply actions  

awesome username

"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball

by flipgatey3 on Aug 26, 2010 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

How about the A's invest in a good training staff

and some top of the line off site facilities to keep the guys we sign healthy. Going out and signing a McLouth, Ordonez, some other previously injured good hitter even at a discounted rate is hard to eat if nobody has the faith that the training staff can keep them healthy.

The worst person to run from is yourself.

by noesis78 on Aug 24, 2010 9:13 PM PDT reply actions  

I don't understand the allure of Matt Kemp

IMO, he’s one of the most overrated players.
Much higher K rate this year, a relatively normal BABIP and he’s an absolutely terrible fielder.

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 10:21 PM PDT reply actions  

He's an absolutely terrible CENTER fielder

shift him to right field and he’s average or better.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 24, 2010 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just curious

Why is this assumed?

He was just as terrible in RF in 2007.

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

There have been many, many outfielders shifted from center to a corner

The shift is consistently worth about 10 runs a season, which is the reason that the CF positional adjustment is 10 runs better than that for corner OF.

In Kemp’s case, over his career, he’s been roughly -9 in defense-and-position per full season, which suggests slightly below average D in a corner.

"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 25, 2010 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ok, basically what I assumed

Obviously, corner OF is an easier position to play, I’m not denying that.
So…
Average CF= good corner OF

Terrible CF= ok corner OF

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 1:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well

Barring a specific aptitude for a particular spot, a player is equally valuable in any OF spot (because CF is 10 runs harder to play, but worth 10 runs more)

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

What you said!

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

He's only 25, for one thing,

and is a true “5-tool talent” — now whether he’ll reach it or flatten out is a fair question, and his attitude has certainly left something to be desired. But he seems like a good candidate for a “change of scenery brings out his potential” guy, and his potential is rather sky high.

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 24, 2010 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

And taught our starting pitcher how to stare really goodly.

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 24, 2010 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

eh

I just don’t see it.
I mean, perhaps, but I’m just not impressed.

I see potential for failure in him where others see greatness

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 24, 2010 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Great Post.

Thank you for writing this. Very persuasive, I do see McClouth as a likely comeback guy.

Chad Gaud really blows now, sad.

by ChadGod on Aug 24, 2010 11:04 PM PDT reply actions  

thanks.

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 26, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Lost in translation

Was is the other thread where we were talking about decipherability? You wrote of

the idea that Carl Crawford and Jason Werth want absolutely nothing to do with the A’s and even if you backed up a Brinkley

“backed up a Brinkley”?

While the thought of Christie Brinkley backing up toward me is surely a pleasant one (David Brinkley, not so much…), that’s too bizarre an image to be what you really mean. When I tried googling “Brinkley” for some other meaning I’m not aware of, it turned up several references to the lovely former Mrs Billy Joel, but still no clue on what the heck you mean by that. Urban Dictionary has a few listings, but they just leave me even more befuddled that before.

Is this some hipster slang that’s so new it hasn’t reached the Internets yet? I’m guessing it must be a typo or misspelling, but for what? My google-fu is usually pretty strong, but this time you’ve stumped me.

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 12:44 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Brinkely = Brinks

i.e. an armored truck for carrying money. I knew exactly what he meant, but it took me minute to figure out the name issue.

by el generico on Aug 25, 2010 2:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Brinkley= brinks plus a Bentley?

"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins

by justANotherAsFan on Aug 25, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ah, I should have figured that out.

I think I’ve seen Brinks trucks before, though I wouldn’t have considered it a household name.

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

by iglew on Aug 25, 2010 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not sure where I got it

although it did help that I had just seen a Brinks truck a few hours before I posted. However, I’ll just blame it on/credit it to my east Oakland upbringing, and claim that the hip-hop crowd uses Brinks the way they use Krystal and Hennessey. Gotta get your nose out of the La Traviata score, my friend, and listen to some Tupac (I tease, as I in fact grew up in a house where both parents were semi-professional opera singers).

by el generico on Aug 26, 2010 6:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

you know me and my inventing words/armored car companies

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 26, 2010 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

Posnanski also mentioned Brink's in a recent story!

It’s everywhere!

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

by iglew on Aug 26, 2010 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

I really like the idea of a 3 way deal with the Marlins and Red Sox

BOSTON GETS: Daric Barton & Kurt Suzuki
OAKLAND GETS: Dan Uggla and Cameron Maybin
FLORIDA GETS: Jed Lowrie, Ryan Kalish, Michael Bowden, Rickie Weeks & Michael Taylor.

Deal is pretty fair to all teams and solves problems for all.

-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 25, 2010 2:15 AM PDT reply actions  

I'll assume you mean

Jemile Weeks, since I’m pretty sure Rickie is still on the Brewers. Might be a fair deal in terms of talent, but the A’s take on a lot of salary.

by el generico on Aug 25, 2010 2:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

oops, my bad

posted at 2:15 am from my million degree apartment. Jemile Weeks, duh. Actually dont even give him up, give them Corey Brown and Raj Davis instead so they have a CF and a CF for the future.

-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 25, 2010 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

Why would the Marlins give up Maybin for Kalish?

They would have Kalish, Stanton, and Morrison, so no one who could play CF.

And if the A’s give up Suzuki, why not just trade him for Kalish straight up?

by drink on Aug 25, 2010 7:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

I was under the assumption Kalish was a CF

http://www.soxprospects.com/players/kalish-ryan.htm

-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 25, 2010 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, even in what you posted, it says he's more of a corner guy
Likely projects as a corner outfielder at the major league level, but should be able to cover spot duty in center field.

But again, it seems that you are ready to give up Suzuki (presumably because you like Donaldson). So why not just trade him to Boston for Kalish? That way the A’s don’t have to give up Barton and they add the RF they need.

by drink on Aug 25, 2010 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

The idea is to upgrade at 2B and CF

I think Kalish is slightly better than Maybin, and the Fish have talked about moving Maybin in the right deal, and Kalish is an upgrade over Maybin, although both are really good. Would I do Suzuki for Kalish straight up? Yeah definitely, but that still leaves a quandary at 2B. Uggla is a 5 WAR player there and wants a 5/55 deal. We have plenty of organizational depth at 2B so Uggla could move to 1B or DH the last 2 years of his deal. Carter takes over at 1B and even if he flops its not hard to bring in a 1B.

Sign Olivo and Crawford. Maybe Manny if the organization really doesnt like Cust.

1B: Carter
2B: Uggla
SS: Pennington
3B: Kouzmanoff
C: Olivo
LF: Crawford
CF: Maybin
RF: Crisp
DH: Cust or Manny

That team is going to the playoffs.

-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 25, 2010 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wow

You just made the A’s worse and more expensive, while giving up two of what pass for top prospects around here in the process.

Impressive. Normally trade scenarios are unbalanced in the opposite direction…

"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 25, 2010 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

I don’t see why we should give up one of our most valuable position players and our only proven catcher for that return. Let alone two of our better prospects.

This is why signing a FA is worth the overpayment. It actually makes us better.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

How is it worse?

Carter replaces Barton = no idea if that is an upgrade or downgrade. Carter could be a 3 WAR guy next year, could be a 1 WAR guy. Barton is 2-3 so its not that big an issue.
Olivo replaces Suzuki = upgrade. Suzuki isnt good.
Uggla replaces Ellis = massive upgrade. No contest.
Crawford in LF = massive upgrade. No contest.
Maybin, combined with Choice and Crawford forms the best OF in mlb in 2012.

-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 25, 2010 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

There's no way Choice is ready in 2012.

If he starts 2011 in Stockton, there’s no way. If he starts 2011 in Midland, it’s still very unlikely.

Also, Daric Barton will be closer to 4 WAR than 3 WAR by the time the season ends.

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

by Rated-R Superstar on Aug 25, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Choice tore up Vancouver like nobodys business.

I mean its SSS but its all we have, you or I cant predict what will happen. He will be 22 in 2012, plenty of guys start in the bigs at that age.

-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 25, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

The 40% strikeout rate means he's going to have issues.

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

by lenscrafters on Aug 25, 2010 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

I used to like Maybin

but the guy has been utterly terrible for years now. He’s no more a top prospect than Andy Marte or Brandon Wood are. I’d rather start Rajai Davis.

Carter at 1B is asking for replacement level performance. He’s unlikely to be worth much as a hitter next year and he’s appalling with the glove. 0 WAR is far more likely than 3.

Crawford and Olivo are irrelevant free agents and mingling them with a trade scenario is poor analysis.

"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 25, 2010 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

This

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 26, 2010 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

turn it green

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 26, 2010 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

That deal is pretty bad for Oakland

Like, horrendously bad.

Needs moar dingerz.

by Blicks on Aug 25, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

this really understates how bad it is.

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 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Didn't Maybin get sent down earlier this year or something?

"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 25, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

yes.

He use to be a top prospect. He was rushed and now sucks.

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 26, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Cool, care to explain?

-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 25, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldn't trade trade Barton and Suzuki let alone throw in Taylor and Weeks too.

Uggla is a free agent after next year. Maybin hasn’t been able to hit in the majors yet. There is too much risk involved without throwing in two of our top prospects as well. Suzuki may be having a down year with the bat but he is young and very durable and is has excellent defense. Barton is a 3.2 WAR players already and under club control for another four seasons.

The Redsox make out like bandits in that trade though.

by DeJay on Aug 26, 2010 5:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

Another idea for a potential power-hitting C-OF

Think the A’s could get the Rays to part with Matt Joyce this offseason? The batting average is ugly, but he definitely knows how to walk and hit a few home runs. He could be a 20-25 homer guy if he played every day. And the defense is good in the small sample we have thus far.

Why don't you make like a tree, and get out of here.

by thelincolndude on Aug 25, 2010 9:06 AM PDT reply actions  

Pitcher pickup, if we deal Mazzaro

Hiroki Kuroda? He’d probably have some bump going into the Coli. Fairly cheap, I would imagine.

"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 25, 2010 12:21 PM PDT reply actions  

I could see it

But if he’s cheap, then every single other GM in baseball is asinine.
He’s a clear cut No. 2 who is in the process of posting his 3rd straight year of sub 4 FIPs, xFIPS and tERAs.
Those are very good numbers. Even though he’s 35, he should be worth a 3 year deal around $10M+

AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.

by stranahanahan on Aug 25, 2010 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

How about this?

1) Trade Mazzaro, Cardenas, and Donaldson to the Jays for Aaron Hill in November. The Jays can replace Hill in the lineup with Brad Emaus. They add a young/cheap starter to their rotation.
2) Use that move to recruit Werth. Hill and Werth were both in the Jays organization in 2003, maybe Hill can help persuade him to come. Regardless, by making the move early in the offseason, it shows Werth that the A’s are serious about contending. Sign Werth to a 5yr/$75 million deal.
3) Pick up Crisp’s option, bring back Cust and Kouz.
4) Sign one of De La Rosa, Lilly, Kuroda, Webb to be the 5th starter.

1) Crisp – CF
2) Barton – 1B
3) Werth – RF
4) Hill – 2B
5) Cust – DH
6) Suzuki – C
7) Carter/Jackson/Sweeney – LF
8) Kouz – 3B
9) Pennington – SS

Anderson, Cahill, Gio, Braden, De La Rosa/Lilly/Kuroda/Webb, Outman, Ross, Mortenson
Bailey, Breslow, Blevins, Wuertz, Ziegler, Hrod, Devine

Payroll would be around $60 mill, if my rough estimates are correct.

by drink on Aug 25, 2010 1:48 PM PDT reply actions  

I don't think 1+4 really add much to 2011

But then I don’t think you can project Hill as more than a 2 win player (with extreme up- and downside risk) next year.

Taking away Cardenas and Donaldson is just additional pain.

Also, I don’t think you can pay Werth, Hill, Coco, and your #4 while staying under $60M.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is what I projected for payroll w/o 1,2, and 4

Chavez, Eric $3,000,000.00
Sheets, Ben FA
Ellis, Mark
Crisp, Coco $5,750,000.00
Kouzmanoff, Kevin $4,000,000.00
Jackson, Conor $1,000,000.00
Cust, Jack $3,000,000.00
Wuertz, Michael $2,800,000.00
Duchscherer, Justin
Davis, Rajai $1,800,000.00
Anderson, Brett $1,250,000.00
Gross, Gabe
Suzuki, Kurt $3,440,000.00
Devine, Joey $550,000.00
Bailey, Andrew $450,000.00
Breslow, Craig $800,000.00
Braden, Dallas $1,800,000.00
Sweeney, Ryan

Barton, Daric $450,000.00
Buck, Travis
Cahill, Trevor $450,000.00
Outman, Josh $450,000.00
Rosales, Adam $450,000.00
Ziegler, Brad $450,000.00
Blevins, Jerry $450,000.00
Gonzalez, Gio $450,000.00
Patterson, Eric
Meloan, Jonathan
Pennington, Cliff $450,000.00
Bowers, Cedrick
Carson, Matt
Carter, Chris $450,000.00
Taylor, Michael
De Los Santos, Fautino
Donaldson, Josh
Figueroa, Pedro
Kilby, Brad
Mazzaro, Vince
Mortensen, Clayton $450,000.00

Powell, Landon $450,000.00
Rodriguez, Henry $450,000.00
Ross, Tyson $450,000.00
Souza, Justin
Tolleson, Steve
Watson, Matt
Wolf, Ross
Gaudin, Chad
Giambi, Jason
Tavares, Willy
Jackson, Conor
Miles, Aaron
TOTAL – OAK – O/D $35,490,000.00

So, add $5 mill for Hill, $15 for Werth, and around $7-8 for the starter, and you are at right around 62-63. So you are correct. It is a little over 60.

I disagree on Hill’s value.

by drink on Aug 25, 2010 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think you are a bit low

You aren’t paying Sweeney (who is arb1), Ellis has a buyout, Conor is guaranteed to get more money than that (there’s a maximum percent you can cut). I think you’re more like 65-67.

All this also goes to show we could easily pay CC 17 or 18, since we’d then still have Mazzaro as a starter.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 25, 2010 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

#1 is a monumental overpay

"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 25, 2010 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Unfortunately, I think that is what it will take

He’s a guy I bet Toronto would trade in the right deal. But they don’t have to, as he has 3 club options after 2011.

And I’m not sure anyone thinks Cardenas and Donaldson are more than B level prospects.

by drink on Aug 25, 2010 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

I like Aaron Hill.

He could very easily be this year’s Kelly Johnson. I feel like you could get a deal done with just one of those prospects and a lesser prospect––of the Hornbeck, Capra, Hoehn variety.

by NateHST on Aug 25, 2010 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why?

You have to think of trades from the other team’s perspective. Why on earth would Toronto do something like that? They don’t need to dump his salary; they’ve barely got anything left on the budget other than the Vernon Wells eyesore, and his deal is incredibly favorable because of all the team options. If they wanted “rebuilding,” surely they’d desire high-upside talent which could help them compete with the big boys.

You tell me— why, as Toronto’s GM, would I ever sign off on that deal?

"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 25, 2010 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Here are a couple:

1) The club options aren’t going to cripple the team financially, but they aren’t exactly cheap either. $5M next year guaranteed, then two $8M options and a $10M option in 2014, when he’ll be 32.

2) Brad Emaus is doing quite well in AAA––it’s Vegas, yes, but still quite well. He’s hit .272/.402/.434 in AA and .282/.396/.502 in AAA. Combined, he’s got 29 doubles, 14 homeruns, 10 more walks than strikeouts, and 11 stolen bases with only 2 caught stealing.

Obviously the Blue Jays aren’t going to trade him if they think he’ll rebound, but if it’s a Kelly Johnson situation from last year (because Hill walks so little, he’s actually been worse this year than Johnson was in 2009) where they don’t want to pick up those options, then they get what they can for him now. After this season, they can’t reasonably ask the A’s for a Cahill or an Anderson, or even a Gonzalez for that matter.

The thing is, the Jays have decent depth at catcher, and while their pitching isn’t great now, they still have Drabek and Stewart in AA––so Mazzaro and Donaldson probably wouldn’t have much interest in him––and Emaus could be a better prospect than Cardenas right now. I understand why they’d have no interest in the deal I suggested.

Still, I think a deal could be worked out that wouldn’t involve giving up all of Cardenas, Donaldson and Mazzaro.

by NateHST on Aug 25, 2010 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

1. Having options is not worse than having no options.

2. Having options is not worse than having no options.

Neither of these is a good reason at all for trading Hill. The monetary commitment to him is peanuts in the baseball context. Emaus can profitably be used elsewhere on the diamond, notably at third base, where Bautista is a crap defender. He in turn can be moved to first.

If that deal won’t work, it’s because it’s not enough talent, and/or the talent plays the wrong positions— certainly not because it’s too much talent. The notion that they could be foisted off with one of those guys and a C-grade pitcher is preposterous. If I was them I’d ask for Jemile Weeks, Corey Brown, and Ian Krol, and really wouldn’t even consider anything less than two of those plus a throw-in.

"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 26, 2010 12:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

No, it really isn't

Toronto will want significant value coming back for Hill. Trying to match upside for upside is hopeless, because the A’s don’t really have any prospects with 4 WAR upside other than maybe Carter (I suppose Green… I’m not really buying it though), and they’re already coping with one talented-but-struggling DH so I can’t see them taking on another.

Short of that, you’d better give them a LOT of high-floor players that they can use as cheap roster spots to allow them to compete with the rest of their division on the expensive players. I’m actually not sure drink is offering them ENOUGH value for Hill.

"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 25, 2010 7:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

This might be the best and most reasonable "action plan" that I've yet seen

Hill might be a disaster but he also might be very good. I like the “trade Mazzaro/sign someone else” angle. And I can’t see how the team can even hope to compete without making a serious free agent signing. Werth isn’t the #1 option on the market, which helps the A’s’ chances of landing him (all the recent “burnings” at the hands of FAs came from people who were the top available option and thus had significantly increased bargaining power).

"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 25, 2010 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why wouldn't Werth be the #1 option?

He’s a power hitter. Crawford is seen as a “speed” guy.

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 25, 2010 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

CC is better at baseball

But who knows how individual GMs evaluate them

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Aug 26, 2010 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

dingerz get paid.

unless you’re Adam Dunn

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 26, 2010 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think the A's should sign a FA SP whether or not they trade

one of their pitchers. First off, that’s where the FA value is, comparatively, this year. But also, if you are able to stash Mazzaro in AAA until the first injury and Outman is your #7 (Mortensen or Bonser #8), then you are actually likely to make it through the season with a terrific rotation from start to finish.

And the flexibility to be in a position to trade Mazzaro to bolster the offense is huge. Either way, it’s well worth it, IMO, to sign Webb or De La Rosa, or whoever turns out to be the best value opportunity.

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 25, 2010 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why are you assuming no contribution from Ross?

I thought he just needed rest, not surgery.

Am I wrong?

by drink on Aug 26, 2010 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'll be surprised if he doesn't.

No, I have no inside information. Call it one of those “hunch” things that PT had the other day

Pam liked my old sig better.

by mikev on Aug 26, 2010 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sorry..

Maybe it’s the frugal side of me, but I say…do absolutely nothing!

Save the money for :

( a) the new stadium (whether in SJ or Oakland or Timbuktu)

(b) locking in young studs in the making (suzuki / cahill / etc.)

© signing more international free agents

(d) getting a $$ rental in a trade

In the interim, wait to see whether Carter, Taylor, and (to a lesser extent) Choice pans out for the OF.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 26, 2010 7:58 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Saving money on player development to build a stadium is a horrible idea

Why would you get an expensive rental when you can have someone who is plays the whole year.

Why do you think Carter or Taylor are ready after crapping the bed in AAA?

Why do you think Choice, who is in single A, will have any impact on the A’s this 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 26, 2010 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

At least

in the world of DFA, b) was not shot down…which can be a fairly decent amount if Suzuki and Cahill continues to develop.

Who said that Carter crapped in AAA? Wasn’t he just recently brought up or was that a figment of my imagination (waiting for the requisite counter that he sucked in his at bat here, all the while ignore the original statement. Or the fact that Taylor has improved significantly from the beginning of the year especially after coming back from his injury (readies for counter argument that it doesn’t mean he can hit in the Majors)? Or did I even say that Choice will make an impact on the A’s this year. On the expensive rental front, with not much depth in the minors as well as no willingness to trade youth, the other alternative is to take on some bad contracts to get a premium player with only $$$ as the only costs. If it is for a year or 2, it won’t break the bank and still allow the a’s to develop their youngsters and possibly net an additional pick or 2 later. Now, expecting the requisite DFA response of “you’re stupid then”…..

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 26, 2010 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

And btw..

having a significant revenue generating as well as modern (read: attractive) will allow us to afford our good players as well as attract further free agents. That is a smart investment.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 26, 2010 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

whoops..

i mean that in the context of a new stadium…

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 26, 2010 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

You do realize the A's already signed Suzuki (to a pretty expensive contract relative to his actual value, too)

right?

And BTW, if anyone else is reading this, that last sentence is exactly what I mean when I talk about people fantasizing (nay, hallucinating) that others are insulting them just by questioning their ideas. I’m not making that stuff up, people. It’s a major reason why I think policing the boundaries of the “personal insult” concept is ultimately doomed. People just do not behave as if they can differentiate attacks on their ideas from attacks on their personal characteristics.

"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 26, 2010 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

yes i do...

but im hoping he matures and gets better through the next few years to justify a longoria type of contract (that’s more of wishful thinking than any actual numbers against it).

as far as personal attacks, DFA is notorious for his the way he posts rebuttals in a narcissistic fashion. if you object to me calling out in his holier-than-thou attitude, oh well….

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 26, 2010 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you insist on crucifying yourself and then blaming it on someone else,

then I suppose no one can stop you. Sure is annoying to read, 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 27, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

I would love to see people on AN not be so quick to take offense.

I also would love to see people learn to write in a more friendly tone that is less likely to give offense to those who are sensitive, but if I had to choose I’d say the first is more important.

Both of these apply to people on both sides of the supposed stats-vs-non-stats divide.

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

by iglew on Aug 27, 2010 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm guessing that you'd also like to see...

…people on AN people be able to take an attack on their ideas and just respond “thanks” and leave it at that if there not they’re type of AN members that are good at defending their positions. Correct, or not?

But if they do happen to defend themselves well, you’d like to see them be able to do so in such a way where it’s good enough to cause the attacker to back off and concede that they now see the view point for what it is OR have it lead to more dialogue and then resolution/agree-to-disagree. Correct?

Notice the italicized word? Dispensing with that kind of shit to begin with would likely increase both things that you’d love to see. At least that’s the way I envision it.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

The only reason why things are worth discussing is to test an idea in the crucible of debate

otherwise there is no point in discussing anything. Ever.

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 27, 2010 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

why do you insist

that every opinion be a “debate”? I merely added some thought discussion to the thread trying to open up a different avenue of opinion. there is no right or wrong and in the grand scheme of things, regardless of who, what, how, where we debate this, it probably has no bearing at all on the actual real life outcome….

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Your absolute purity makes me smile, DFA.

No point in discussing anything ever!

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

by iglew on Aug 27, 2010 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Annoying to read?

then either you can ignore it or read about sock puppets and such….no one’s forcing you otherwise.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

btw -

why the need to “attack” on an idea at all? Yes, I realize you’re a lawyer so its probably your kind of MO, but I’m an engineer. I rather stick with facts then spice it up with “colorful” comments that may be sorely misinterpreted as something else otherwise…especially for strangers that share the same kind of passion and dedication for a sports team we all enjoy.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 26, 2010 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why the need to perceive it as an attack?

In the current case, why not just take DFA’s post at its word and not read any attitude into it at all?

Here is the entirety of what DFA wrote.

Saving money on player development to build a stadium is a horrible idea.

Why would you get an expensive rental when you can have someone who is plays the whole year?

Why do you think Carter or Taylor are ready after crapping the bed in AAA?

Why do you think Choice, who is in single A, will have any impact on the A’s this year?

The first line is a statement. DFA thinks it’s a bad idea. You think it’s a good idea. You’ve each expressed your opinion, and that’s fine. No need to answer this.

The next is a question. I think it’s a good question, so maybe you could answer that.

The last two questions start “why do you think….” and DFA attributes to you a position that you never claimed. So your answer to that could be, “I never said I do think that. I said let’s wait and see.”

And that would be that. No attacks, no counter-attacks.

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

by iglew on Aug 27, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

He absolutely did claim those positions

These questions

Why do you think Carter or Taylor are ready after crapping the bed in AAA?
Why do you think Choice, who is in single A, will have any impact on the A’s this year?
are a direct response to
In the interim, wait to see whether Carter, Taylor, and (to a lesser extent) Choice pans out for the OF.
If your plan for next year is wait to see with Carter and Taylor, these are legitimate questions.

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 27, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, I'm not here to assume someone else's argument

just for the sake of sparring with you, but if I had said “Wait and see whether Carter or Taylor pans out” that certainly would not be equivalent to stating that I think they will.

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

by iglew on Aug 27, 2010 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Look at it this way the A's have from 2011-2013 to contend or were fucked

you have to believe that they will in order to think that trying them in 2011 and wasting 1/3 of the years we can contend if they fail is a good idea.

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 27, 2010 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

if you had made an argument

in the same context of grover and why we’d be “fucked” if we didn’t make a move, i can buy that. However, your argument was just for McLouth. Taken in both accounts, then I can definitely see the argument for McLouth as opposed to just waiting.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

i did not perceive it as an attack

rather, it was facetiously making out a typical DFA remark afterwards. Whether that is in good taste or not is another matter altogether. ;)

 I typically avoid most DFA threads because he is very close minded in his responses, but that doesn’t mean i won’t post my opinion accordingly.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

If this is "typical"

then you should have no problem at all finding threads in which DFA has called someone stupid.

I’ll be generous to the concept of “typicality” and just ask for one link.

"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 27, 2010 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ask..

and you shall receive:

http://www.athleticsnation.com/2010/7/21/1571741/dfas-between-a-rock-and-a-hard#

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

I just ctrl-f'ed "stupid" on that page

and got:
LCJ saying fans shouldn’t say management is stupid
mikev getting angry that LCJ is straw manning fans by arguing that they are saying management is stupid
LCJ blockquoting mikev
dfa saying he didn’t call Beane stupid
LCJ denying that he said that dfa called Beane stupid
dfa accusing LCJ of straw manning him

Still waiting.

"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 27, 2010 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

So you were being literal?

Isn’t this enough for you?

Bet your facts straight before you make an ass out of yourself again.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, first things first, it's a 220 comment thread from like a month ago

I’m not going to read the whole damn thing and you didn’t link to the actual comment in question.

That said, saying that someone is “making an ass out of him/herself” is not calling them stupid. It’s saying that their current behavior is, well, 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 27, 2010 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Are you really going to try to argue this point?

“Don’t make an ass out of yourself” remarks are typically said in a context of “don’t be stupid”…especially when in an debate about said topic.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

A more careful reading will disclose

that dfa is alluding to a history of what he believes is disruptive comments by LCJ on threads that DFA has posted.

When he says “making an ass out of yourself,” he is referring to truculence, not stupidity.

"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 27, 2010 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Are you reading the same thread?

DFA was responding to me directly and my counterarguments….

But yes there is a history between LCJ and DFA that I won’t get in the middle of…

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

You're right

I wrongly assumed it was somewhere in the same post sequence that I alluded to above.

I don’t support that use of the phrase. Even I can’t really defend the tone of that post.

I would politely suggest that the two of you clear the air, perhaps by email rather than publicly, of whatever grievances you have toward one another.

"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 27, 2010 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Please don't tell me

you’re practicing divorce mediation… ;)

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well you did get in the middle of it which is why you got hit by shrapnel

And I apologized at the time. However you had come over here and insult me like 2 months later, whose the ass now?

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 27, 2010 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Insult?

Poking fun was rather the motif…sorry if you got a taste of your own kind of medicine….

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

that should of read

“rather the motive”….sigh….i really need to proofread before posting…motif, lol…

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Your facts were wrong. I suggested that you check them before you made an ass out of yourself

way different than randomly calling me a narcissist without any regard for my argument.

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 27, 2010 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Shrapnel?

As in you’re explosive, like a grenade…while causing demage via flying metallic debris?

And then the angry provoked bear?

Tell me, why use the tough-guy imagery? Seriously, why? What’s the purpose?

And then perhaps you could tell me why this post from grover so amused you?

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

What I'm curious about..

if this is how he really is in RL or if this is an e-peen intarweb extension of himself…

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

FYI, I'm flagging this comment

Not only is it, in my view, a personal attack, but the whole “2 people gang up on a 3rd person with belittling banter” disgusts me. Looking at your comment/flag history, I’m beginning to wonder if you’re a troll anyway.

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 27, 2010 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

If I am using belittling banter...
the whole "2 people gang up on a 3rd person with belittling banter

…then you should also flag me, Nico.

But let’s not pretend that the same two-person [or more] gang ups [if that’s really what this even is here] don’t happen elsewhere. And when it does happen, I’ve seen you much less quick to throw flags than how quickly you have tossed one here.

Your job is a tough one, Nico, and I have generally supported what you do and have done my best to understand how difficult it is to juggle competing things and promote tranquility.

However, in this matter, I think that you’re protecting someone who could stand to be exposed to some tough questions that hopefully cause e introspection on tone and motive.

Before you flag me, if you decide to do that, I have to know: did someone ask you to come to this thread or were you reading the whole time and then just finally decided to step in? Please answer honestly.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think there is a pretty big difference between what youre doing and what ST is doing

I think were having a discussion about the way people interact here that is sort of productive. ST is using that to take pot shots at me (which ironically is what I went after him about (I was mistaken and apologize for) because I thought he was starting to do the same thing on another thread and why hes being a dick here).

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 27, 2010 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not answering your question

about Nico, because I really don’t know. But some general insight on how the blog works:

When you’re a mod, you have a page that tells you all the recent comments that have been flagged. It is your responsibility to look at all of them and help to determine if they warrant a strike. Most of us do our duty and read the conversation leading up to the flag, even if it was a thread we weren’t already following. (This is not a particularly pleasant task. Strange as it seems, it’s not actually fun to read all the AN threads in which people lose their temper and lash out at each other. After about two weeks the novelty wears off, and it’s about as fun as scrubbing the toilet. But you still do it.)

My point is that, if Nico’s experience is anything like mine, sometimes he will be called into a thread he wasn’t already following, by virtue of there being flags in it. It needn’t mean that someone wrote to him directly, simply that someone — maybe a participant or maybe an onlooker — flagged a comment. That’s how flags work.

This particular conversation I’ve been following all along the way, but there have been plenty of other threads where I wasn’t reading but got called in due to a flag. Usually, if I’m coming in late, I just read and don’t say anything, but occasionally I’ll add a comment as a result of being pulled into a thread that way.

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

by iglew on Aug 27, 2010 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

e-introspection?

What is this, some kind of postmodern psychology class? Introversion In The 21st Century Digital Boy, perhaps?

[Joke, joke.]

"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 28, 2010 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

I've been reading the thread for days

I replied to ST, and not you, because his comment is very specifically, “Hey person A, isn’t person B {insulty insulty}?”

FWIW, any flags I “throw” carry no more weight than ones you throw — they are “non mod” flags.

Finally, being seen as protecting DFA is hardly a concern as the perception, from him and/or the community, is hardly that I’m his bodyguard. But when he’s wronged he wronged, and I think ST’s comment is just bush league.

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 28, 2010 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

Help me Nico, youre my only hope! :-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 28, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hehe AN quickly going downhill

Might have to take a PT type of sabbatical myself, enforced by mods who either have a vendetta ie EN or do not carry the same weight of statements as others: calling someone not to be an ass is not a personal insult, but citing how they would respond is? Please…….

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 28, 2010 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thanks

Yes, I’m a troll from 2002 timeframe /rolleyes

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 28, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Eh, youre forgetting my personal favorite
Im going to use that gauntlet to smack you in the face… don’t be mad if you lose a tooth or two

I like rhetorical bluster. Im a sucker for it. I also like to think of pretty much all forms of intellectual life as a debate battle royal till the last one standing declares victory.

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 27, 2010 10:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

And so...

…the purpose is to win and declare victory? Okay. From now on, you win.

Give me an example, if you would, how you would respond to the quote above had someone written it to you? Then, after you have looked at both ‘rhetorical blusters’, would you be so kind as to tell me who won?

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

For future reference, and this goes for more people than just LCJ

telling someone who thinks they’re playing a game with you and wants to beat you “you win”, while it may be a good way to irritate them, is a dismally poor way to get them to go away. No one is interested in just being labeled “Winner” without any actual play.

In many circles, conceding mid-game is very poor etiquette. Either don’t start, or see the thing through to the end.

"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 28, 2010 12:22 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

This
In many circles, conceding mid-game is very poor etiquette. Either don’t start, or see the thing through to the end.

One of the most obnoxious things about AN is that when some people start arguing with you with absolutely wrong ideas and you prove them wrong the decide that “ohhhhh i don’t actually want to argue this, just leave me alone.” If you don’t want to argue something don’t reply to anyone.

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 28, 2010 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

Are you really

an ass like this in RL? Life is not a game about winning or losing…seriously, you need to get laid.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 28, 2010 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hmm...not really poking holes in my thesis here...

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 28, 2010 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

I dunno why

but I’ve always found this to be the most hilarious comment on the internet.

you need to get laid.

A's Fan in Sweden

by travdog6 on Aug 28, 2010 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

I understand your point as it

regards to games like board games, but with discussions some of us genuinely want to discuss up to a point and not further. I don’t see why it has to be all or nothing.

From my point of view, there really is diminishing returns in most of these discussions. I like to exchange ideas for a bit, clear up some misunderstandings, maybe learn a bit from each other, clarify where opinions differ, and then that’s good enough. I have no desire to dig deeper.

I find that sometimes when I debate a little with someone like you or DFA it’s interesting at first, but then you keep pushing trying to goad me into more when I have no more to say. I don’t like the suggestion that I’m not allowed to talk to you at all if I’m not prepared to “go all the way” with you.

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

by iglew on Aug 28, 2010 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

Believe me, you are NOT one of those

who I consider to be someone who regularly “concedes mid-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 28, 2010 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

this.

Iglew is my favorite person to debate with here, when I can goad him into it at least :-) and I cant think of a time when he was a hit and run commentator.

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 28, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

No the purpose is to have the best idea

which allows you to be the last one standing and to have illustrated the most advantageous course to follow.

If you wanted to me destroy the person who in their words was calling me out for not knowing my numbers because I thought that Wallace was a better prospect than Matt Spencer you can look here. Grover has responded to me with such bluster and we have had some fine debates, as he is a worthy opponent. I have won some and lost some with him in what I think are some of the finest examples of rhetorical bluster.

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 28, 2010 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Using

phrases like “last one standing”, “destroy the person”, “win some and lost some” is the finest example of your really screwed up logic on a fan based board encouraged to solicit ideas and comments. If you can’t comprehend that, i feel sorry for you…

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 28, 2010 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

This!

That! And not too much of the other.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 29, 2010 7:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

I hate rhetorical bluster and would like to remove it from the human playbook

Bob Geren was born in a suburban apartment complex he built with his own two hands.

by QueenOfCansAndJars on Sep 8, 2010 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

Carter craped the bed to a MLE of .736 which is basically replacement level in the MLB with his defense

Carter has hit worse than Tolleson, Watson, Carson in AAA

Michael Taylor is a below average hitter in AAA. And he plays COF. His MLE is 608.

That is the definition of crapping the bed.

You realize that a proposed Nate McLouth waiver claim/trade for a garbage bullpen arm is exactly the kind of rental you are talking about. Otherwise rentals cost a ton in prospects and money, see Holliday, Matt.

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 27, 2010 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

+1

I valued your point-of-view. And if it premise is over the next 1-3 years, I don’t see the need to attack your ideas — though I rarely see the need to attack character or idea since it isn’t constructive. If your idea is just one year, I don’t think that Choice isn’t going to be ready. By rental do you mean getting a player early-on (maybe even before spring training) — one that has only one to two years left on their contract?

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 3:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

Dude how can you +1 that and then say this
hough I rarely see the need to attack character or idea since it isn’t constructive.

When ST goes after me like 8 times when I didn’t attack him on this thread?

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 27, 2010 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, first.

This was a gratuitious 1 to let ST know that I appreciated his input even though it wasn’t necessarily profound, original, or thouroughly thought provoking. I ’1’d it’ because I can.

Secondly, I wasn’t reading the thread closely. I only engaged sporatically and must have missed where ST attacked you how many ever times it actually was.

Finally, the gist of what I wrote was not directed at you so that you would be the one to take notice of it and comment. It was mainly to express a counter view point to PT’s, “People just do not behave as if they can differentiate attacks on their ideas from attacks on their personal characteristics.” I was actualy hoping it would be read and then just left unreplied to…though, admittedly, I did want for it to be taken in and it given thought.

Attacks? Those are his words not mine. Why even really want to be on the attack? No matter if it’s personal [which is clearly CGV worthy] or whether it’s someone’s ideas? I’m of the opinion where the minute one views discussion in the stark terms such as “I disagree therefore I must attack”, it’s as though one is inviting and intentionally seeking something other than constructive dialogue.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

When you play chess do you object to pieces getting taken by attacking pieces

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 27, 2010 7:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

If I'm playing chess..

I would take the other person out using his own strategy of intimidation and rudeness by calling him out on it before he attempts to do so…

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

It seems that you are not acknowledging my point above and I'm not sure if it's deliberate or not.

And I do not understand the chess reference/analogy you’re trying to make or how it relates. Does this make it a stalemate?

Thanks.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

In chess you test a strategy by having an opponent attack you.

If your strategy fails, you change and improve it, or you continue to lose. This is why you attack ideas.

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 27, 2010 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Allow me to be literal here
This is why you attack ideas.

Consider instead: this is why one would attack the ideas of others if they were so inclined to test strategy.

I certainly don’t make it a habit of attacking someone’s ideas unless I’m exposing hypocricy or contradictory statements made within a reletively short time span from each other. But I suppose that the person being called out for being hypocritical/contradictory might view that as a personal attack. Is it a personal attack if this happens?

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

You're playing a euphemism game

You know full well what I meant. Whether one calls it an “attack” on an idea or merely a “kritik” or “deconstruction” or “questioning” or whatever word you use, the action is the action.

This actually, I think, reinforces my point, which is that most of the time someone questions someone else’s viewpoint, that gets mentally reframed as an “attack” which is then reframed as a “personal attack”, and that’s the end of that.

Unless people are consciously committed to not taking offense where it is not amply warranted, catfights are going to happen.

"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 27, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I know

that the original rant you had was probably due to others who criticize your responses as well, but seriously I think it provoked more than what my original message was trying to portray (mainly just poking fun back). I respect most of your critiques because you attempt to stick to the facts and not try to get caught in the emotional side to belittle others, at least as far as I have seen.

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

You're correct that this is an area of particular sensitivity to me

I’ve been vocal about the nebulous and easily manipulated nature of the “personal attack” concept for a long time.

I think it is best for everyone to generally assume the good faith of other posters on a topic until they conclusively demonstrate otherwise. I feel that your comment, even if meant as a joke, did not do that but rather preemptively turned the thread into a dispute.

"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 27, 2010 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think there's a big difference...

…between questioning what someone’s views are [and why they actually have those views] and attacking those views. The former would seem to be a quest to understand. The latter would be a means to attempt to humilate and belittle. I’m suspicious of any posts that use the phrase “um…” or contain any such language like “you don’t have any idea what you’re talking about…”

Reasonable person test applies in many aspects of law, correct? In the past, I think others have tried to let you know that what you had written could be considered offensive to many reasonable people. You have either chosen not to believe it or you do understand it and welcome these so-called catfights. This is the way I see it.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

In practice "reasonable person" means "whatever the factfinder thinks it means"

so, uh, that doesn’t really carry a lot of water with me.

"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 27, 2010 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, certainly! When one defines his/her supporters as the 'fact finders'...

…I’m sure the water pail is bone dry. Or maybe it’s not entirely empty and the attacking is something that even his/her supporters find off-putting.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 27, 2010 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

8 times?

Hehhe, I’m sorry if I rattled you just by poking fun at your style of responses…however touche…. ;)

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rattled hardly, your arguments were pretty terrible.

The reason that I pointed it out was a part of an ongoing conversation with LCJ about the way people treat people 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 27, 2010 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

admittedly

it was very shallow, but it was intended to provoke more options in thought then an actual constructive argument….as i said, maybe it was the frugal side of me coming out as a counterpoint…

"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."

"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff

"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden

"Oakland is the emotional choice, and could still work, but San Jose really is the best choice." - UncleLeo

by ST on Aug 27, 2010 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

+8

But apparently he’s really not at all rattled. The angry bear avoided your stick and threw an exploding gauntlet at you.

by LowcountryJoe on Aug 28, 2010 7:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Aperture_logo_small
Community Prospect List #4
Img_2672_small
Long-Term Outlook

Recent FanPosts

Small
A's reportedly sign Cespedes
Unknown_small
Is It Really Worth It: Three Veterans Who May Be Playing Oakland Next Year, But Shouldn't Be
Small
Manny's Contract
Small
fantasy baseball league for A's fans!
Small
NYY Proposal
Small
Roy Oswalt = opportunity
Choice_small
Tom Milone, by the numbers: Maddux, Glavine, Halladay, Radke...
Img_1877_small
Behind Enemy Lines
Lt-922060_small
All-Time Oakland A's team

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Front Page Writers

Maya_papi_small Tyler Bleszinski

08-_the_author_small 67MARQUEZ

Josefav2_small danmerqury

Baseball_small baseballgirl

Poochini-butt_in_box_2_small Nico

Img_0653_small dwishinsky

Front Page Writers

Smiley_face_small gigglingone

Venasfans_small OaklandSi

60-minutes-clock_small cuppingmaster

Patpicturebucky2_small YonYonson

Img_3830_small David Fung

Moderators

Photofunia-5c770b_small coffee roaster

Denver_small Colorado Fan

Ls_logo100_small LoneStranger

Thumbs_up_small LongTimeFan

Marty_profile_in_green_small mrod

Img_1877_small Billy Frijoles

Babycomputergeek_small paris7

Img_0115_small Tutu-late