A's, Balfour close to multi-year deal
by JPShark on Jan 14, 2011 8:21 AM PST
Email
PrintAccording to Jon Morosi's twitter account the a's are close to locking up Grant Balfour to a multi-year deal. I like this move since our first rounder is protected, and we grabbed ourselves a pretty good reliever to put at the back end with Bailey and Breslow. I've actually been thinking for a couple weeks that Balfour would be a good target, and expected the A's to at least pursue him. Any guess's on the terms of the deal? Two years with an option would be my guess.
547 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
fan-what now?
Take your silver mod tubescreamer, your dr. z, your nocaster, put them in a pile and burn them. if god gave you a thousand years, you still couldn't touch this. you can't f***ing keep time to this.
Now who is out?
Looks like Harden is going to be the 5th starter unless someone is moved. Weurtz is the bet best to be moved.
Ziggy
I’d say Ziggy could be moved. He’s a Super2 and will start to become pretty expensive ROOGY.
by Colorado Fan on Jan 14, 2011 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
Aww
I like Ziggy :(
"You ain't got nothin to say, it was perfect" -Dallas Braden, 05/09/10
hell hath no fury like a Cowboys fan scorned. -Leopold Bloom
by MissOakland on Jan 14, 2011 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
ALL ABOARD THE BALFOUR TRAIN!!!
I am pumped.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 8:36 AM PST reply actions
Starting a string of about six self-replies here...
My initial guess on a Balfour signing a few weeks ago was 3/10 or 3/11. To get him for a two year guarantee would be a win. My guess on a two-year guarantee would be $7Mish.
Not bad!
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 8:37 AM PST reply actions
The A's signed the last available Type A FA.
I think that this season was the last one for the next 2-3 years that the A’s will have a protected first-round draft pick, so really it was their last chance for a long time to sign a Type A talent without the severe talent cost.
Balfour will end up costing the A’s the No. 77-79 pick overall – their 2nd rounder. You can see the first four rounds of picks here.
A note about that link: Its says the A’s second-rounder would be pick No. 72, but it doesn’t reflect the signings of Soriano (-2), Qualls (-1), (Balfour -2), Felipe Lopez (-1) or Aaron Heilman (-1). Pavano is re-signing with the Twins so he won’t affect draft picks. We don’t yet know where Heilman or Lopez will sign, so the 77-79 range reflects the possibility of either man re-signing with his club from last year.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 8:43 AM PST reply actions
The problem is that they didn't sign a "Type A" talent. They signed a middle reliever.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 10:56 AM PST up reply actions
I endorsed this statement
signed
DFA
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
Or at least change his first name
How about Prevent Balfour. I just don’t like the idea that he is the one granting walks.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
by ArunisArun on Jan 14, 2011 8:50 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Balfour will yield to Outman. Problem solved.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 8:51 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
we have now the best and worst pitcher names in baseball
things are going to start happening to us now
Is it spring yet?
by eastcoasta'sfan on Jan 14, 2011 8:57 AM PST up reply actions
At least
we didnt sign Todd Walker
Work as if everything depends on you and Pray knowing that everything depends on God. - Michael Taylor
by supermarc589 on Jan 14, 2011 2:10 PM PST up reply actions
Wrong Walker
I meant to say Tyler
Work as if everything depends on you and Pray knowing that everything depends on God. - Michael Taylor
by supermarc589 on Jan 14, 2011 2:11 PM PST up reply actions
There's not a right Walker
"Some of us know him as the a-hole who piled into Ray Fosse in an All-Star game (it's why Ray is the way he is folks)" - OptimistPrime
If Larry Walker is wrong
I don’t wanna be right.
by PL78 on Jan 14, 2011 5:07 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Good Move, Hope It Happens
Balfour has actually been one of the relievers that I’ve kept an eye on ever since his breakout season of 2008. I’m glad about the possibility of this deal.
Having Balfour with add more depth to our ’pen, which means Beane has been accomplishing everything that he set out to do. Since grant can both set-up Bailey and pitch in middle relief, it gives us maneuverability as well.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 8:49 AM PST reply actions
Assuming no trades or injuries, which are bad assumptions, here's the 12-man staff:
Anderson
Cahill
Gio
Braden
Harden/McCarthy
Harden/McCarthy
Devine
Breslow
Ziegler
Wuertz
Balfour
Bailey
Those 12 guys have the talent/guaranteed contracts/lack of options that pretty much dictates that they will make the Opening Day roster if healthy.
Then you have these 9 guys who all have options remaining, and can fill in via injury (if and when they are healthy themselves):
Blevins
Cramer
Ross
Outman
Mortensen
Magnuson
Moscoso
DLS
Figueroa
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 8:49 AM PST reply actions
Who leaves the currently full 40-man roster?
I didn't realize you were veganalyst! This makes it totally different! You're one of my favorite twitter/ANers. - Susan Slusser
I think we get to go back in time and not needlessly protect Doolittle from the Rule 5 Draft.
Now that he’s (stupidly) on, he’d surely be swiped up by another team if the A’s DFA’d him, because that other team sees the three remaining option years and that’s attractive. It’s basically being gifted a free prospect.
So…MosCostco? Or Figueroa, who is will be using his second option year next season while rehabbing TJ?
Figueroa would me my vote. By the time Figueroa is finally healthy, he’ll have a very short window to stick on the A’s 25-man roster without being waived and exposed to other teams anyway.
But I think this Balfour signing might precipitate another reliever trade. We have cheap, cost-controlled relievers, and the relief market is insane.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 9:02 AM PST up reply actions
So, Choice A for me is trade one of the major league relievers for a non-roster prospect
Can’t trade Breslow, because then we are way too thin from the left side.
Probably can’t trade Devine, because he hasn’t established any health yet.
Can’t trade Balfour/Harden/McCarthy, because we just signed them.
So…trade Ziegler, Wuertz, or Bailey, in that order of preference, would be my vote. Try to get a “B+” prospect in return.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 9:07 AM PST up reply actions
Third Year's The Charm
Maybe Devine will finally be healthy and perform.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 9:10 AM PST up reply actions
Devine is either historically amazing, or he's broken.
There’s no in-between.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 9:17 AM PST up reply actions
HAHAHAHAHAHHA
really dude? You actually think that Ziegler or Wuertz gets a B+ prospect at this point?
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 10:05 AM PST up reply actions
B
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:09 AM PST up reply actions
That's too low
Good middle relievers now cost 2-3 years, $4-5.5M per, depending upon whether they have compensation attached to their name or not.
The A’s would be giving up a good reliever at a significant market discount.
A C+ prospect is too low for that. What’s the projected future value of a C+ prospect, like…$1M? Honest question.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:52 AM PST up reply actions
Pitcher or hitter?
I would absolutely trade Wuertz to get Corey Brown back.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
I can has waive Conor Jackson?
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
i think it's "haz" and if i had the power to waive conor jackson, you'd definitely "haz" it.
the artist formerly known as inbillywetrust
Looks Good
By the way, even if it adds depth to the bullpen, what was the point of signing Moscoso?
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 8:52 AM PST up reply actions
Lesser Minor Leaguer?
Which one? And why trade bad for bad?
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 9:02 AM PST up reply actions
Always worth it
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
The ninth fastest thirty year old in San Francisco
We traded Ryan Kelly, who was obtained from the Pirates for Corey Wimberly for Moscoso
And Moscoso was lights out at AAA in 2009, I don’t think he’s a throwaway prospect. He’s broken, yeah, but I think he can be fixed.
I'll Just Wait And See
I, personally, am just not positive about this deal.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 9:06 AM PST up reply actions
But you can stash Moscoco in AAA
He has an option left. You need lots of those guys, because over the course of a year the team will use 15-20 pitchers.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 9:09 AM PST up reply actions
My Thoughts Exactly
We got to do something with him now.
It just feels like dead weight, though.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 9:11 AM PST up reply actions
Okay, but the point is, they traded a guy who was even less valuable for him
How is this a bad thing?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 10:58 AM PST up reply actions
They basically swapped out Humber (no options) for him
"So, the A's new organizational philosophy involves adding Viking relievers? God save us all."
"Berserkers: the new market inefficiency."
-LonestarBall
Devine
I will believe it when i see it.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
that is your right
your devine right
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
Olney says
Great signing, especially in the crazy reliever market this winter.
I didn't realize you were veganalyst! This makes it totally different! You're one of my favorite twitter/ANers. - Susan Slusser
That sounds downright reasonable
If you buy into Fangraphs’ valuation of relievers using WAR, then this could actual provide some surplus value (which is fairly rare for relievers).
Balfour’s WAR/FIP for the last three seasons (from Fangraphs):
2008: 2.1/2.22
2009: 0.9/3.77
2010: 1.2/2.68
FWIW, Bill James projects him to have a 2.97 FIP over 46 innings
Even if you don’t believe that the cost of a win has reached the $5m mark, this still ought to work out in our favor, even factoring in the lost second-rounder.
Of course, money and “value” aside, this makes the 2011 A’s a better team, and that makes me happy.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
i think that he's a type A free agent made him cheap...
as a side note, the Rays have 10 picks before the second round in the 2011 draft. dang!
the artist formerly known as inbillywetrust
THIS
is frick’n ridiculous, and SCARY!!! Giving Andrew Friedman and company 10 out of the first 50 or so picks is insane!
If they could trade for draft picks, the Rays would have all of the top 50
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan at tvprookiecardretirementplan.wordpress.com !
I don't like signing free agent relievers to multi year contracts as a rule, especially when we have to give up a draft pick
Balfour is one of the better relievers on the market but has still only had two good seasons in the last four and is 33 years old. However if he is cheap enough I could get on board with it.
He's very similar to Rafael Soriano, and he costs 1/3 as much
ZIPS has Balfour with a 3.05 ERA and Soriano at 2.91. CHONE’s last update in August had Balfour at 3.29 and Soriano at 3.21.
If the A’s sign Balfour, they’ll have 5 locks for the 2011 bullpen: Bailey, Balfour, Wuertz, Breslow, and Ziegler.
The last two spots would be fought for by: Harden, Devine, Blevins, McCarthy, and Cramer. And DLS could make a statement in ST, like Bailey did a couple years ago. Anyone know how many options (if any) those guys have left?
by Danny on Jan 14, 2011 8:52 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
My belief was that Devine is out of options, so I was counting him as the sixth lock in the event that he is healthy...
but I hope someone else (even Susan if we are lucky) can confirm or deny Devine’s options.
And then I had I had the loser of the McCarthy/Harden 5th starter battle as the 7th bullpen slot.
In reality, the likelihood that McCarthy, Harden, and Devine all have a clean bill of health at the end of spring is about the same as the Warriors seeing me at a weekend pickup game and signing me on the spot as their starting center.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 9:15 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah, it looks like Devine was optioned in 2005, 2006, and 2007
Given the injury concerns of Bailey, Wuertz, Devine, Harden, and McCarthy, I don’t think the A’s should be in a rush to trade a reliever to make room for Balfour. If they have excess bullpen guys, they can trade them in ST.
I’m always in favor of a good trade should the opportunity arise, but I think they’d be best off waiving Moscoso if they can’t find a good offer for someone else on the 40-man. It’s not clear that Moscoso is any better than the 5th best injury replacement starter they’d have in Sacramento with Ross, Outman, Cramer, and Mortensen around.
Devine
Why can’t we put him in Sacramento for the 1st Month (15-Day DL with “Dead Arm”)? He hasn’t pitched an MLB game since 9/28/2009.
by Colorado Fan on Jan 14, 2011 10:15 AM PST up reply actions
Ziggy may be very expendable
if others are healthy.
Yes. Why not wait until spring training for someone's reliever to break,
and then deal them whomever you’re willing to trade?
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 Jan 14, 2011 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, of course...
I also figure that the moment Beane breaks down and trades a couple of his surplus relievers, his remaining relievers will all get hurt.
Devine is definitely out of options
That’s why he was acquirable for Mark Kotsay. The Braves didn’t have anywhere to put him and he was in Cox’s doghouse.
"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.
SuSlu says
no physical until Monday, so no official announcement until then.
I didn't realize you were veganalyst! This makes it totally different! You're one of my favorite twitter/ANers. - Susan Slusser
That gives them almost three days to play with the 40-man before they have to make a move.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 9:12 AM PST up reply actions
If you can't improve the lineup then improve the staff...
I’m ok with this.
I Agree
At least it’s improving something.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
Awesome Bullpen pickup
Amazing that the Rays have 10 picks now in the first 2 rounds.
C'mon Beane! Close off the bottom deck and reopen the top!
They are really setting themselves up for like 10 years of dominance.
If you believe the people (ie literally everyone) saying this draft is the strongest of all time.
They freed up a ton of cash and have made no major signings so far
I am in envy of how well that team is run, its like they planned for this year to be the one where they lose all their major FAs. And if they added Manny and Branyan or NJohnson, they could have a decent year this year too.
so they're gonna need to afford 11 draft picks before the second round. 'spensive.
the artist formerly known as inbillywetrust
Not until a year after the draft
C'mon Beane! Close off the bottom deck and reopen the top!
I dont think he's anywhere close to Soriano in terms of talent
But he’s okay, and the money and years are not anything that’s too soul crushing. While I preferred Soriano enough to make a post about getting him, I’m glad we got another somewhat legit reliever, we needed one.
Is Billy done now?
I'd be shocked if he did anything else
I would add a fifth starter, but I don’t get the impression that he is interested in doing that. Blanton please?
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
Why does eveyone have such a boner for pancakes?
I mean the food is pretty good, but the pitcher is the dictionary definition of mediocre.
But for real how is trading for Blanton and dealing with his enormous salary preferable to just signing Freddy Garcia, Dave Bush, Doug Davis, Kevin Millwood, John Maine or Rodrigo Lopez?
If we were allowed 1 more sign, I pray it will be for Justin Duchscherer. I’d pay a million for 5-10 quality starts before he broke down. Or even as a reliever…
You do bring up some decent options that would be substantially cheaper
I do still like most Blanton because of his durability combined with almost guaranteed average performance with the chance at above average performance.
Millwood looks to be about an average pitcher (at best) at this point, but he’s pretty consistent and has put up 190 IP each of the last two years.
Doug Davis is coming off of a terrible year, although before 2010 he was pretty similar (in value) to Millwood.
John Maine is also coming off a terrible year, and he has more health concerns.
Freddy Garcia is a pretty crummy wild-card. He might be the most effective of the bunch, but he’s hardly consistent and has plenty of health concerns.
Dave Bush just isn’t very good.
Rodrigo Lopez has very little upside or durability.
I wouldn’t mind taking a flyer on Duchscherer though. He is definitely the most talented pitcher listed here.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
How many years are we going to do the song and dance with Duke...
The guy can’t stay health. He’s an All-Star when healthy, but he never is. The A’s sign enough people who are prone to injury. That being said, I’d take him over Harden.
by Brett Narloch on Jan 14, 2011 9:32 AM PST up reply actions
Did you get my point about how I'd pay $1MM for 5-10 quality starts though?
That’s the attraction with Duchscherer. Sure he’ll get hurt, but thats 5-10 awesome games you got out of him, and you only paid him $1MM.
Especially when he can become Outman when he breaks.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I'm not sure why any of those options is better than letting the fellas battle it out:
I feel like there’s gotta be a league average pitcher somewhere in McCarthy/Harden/Outman/Mortensen/Cramer.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 9:39 AM PST up reply actions
There's an opportunity cost to finding that league average pitcher.
And it’s likely that two or even three of those guys each take up a rotation spot at one point in the season. There’s a serious need for a starter who can give you league average innings, and lots of it.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 10:01 AM PST up reply actions
There's not an opportunity cost if the answer reveals itself in ST.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
I highly doubt the A's or anyone could discern something like that in ST.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 10:20 AM PST up reply actions
I agree that there is a league-average pitcher somewhere in McCarthy/Harden/Outman/Mortensen/Cramer
But I think that we should be aiming for two league average pitchers since health is hardly our strong point.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
Hey! That's "Cupcakes" not "Pancakes" Bucko!
Now, “Pamcakes”…that’s another subject altogether…
:9)
"You're early, but hang around; we'll have a fight for you sooner or later."
-John "Blue Moon" Odom
I like the Duchscherer idea.
I think our team is a good fit for the sort of gamble he represents. If he stays healthy, we’re golden; if he breaks again, then he’s off the 25-man roster and we already have a whole bunch of tolerably half-ass potential fifth starters to choose from on the 40-man .
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I like the idea of a pool to chose from
As opposed to the Sheets debacle. If you have 5 guys that are good/great when healthy you have a much better chance of catching lightning in a bottle. If you’re going to take chances, the more you take the better your odds are of success.
The downside of the pool plan
is that when you’re testing guys out they might suck in a real game. What I like best about Duchscherer is that either he’s good or he’s on the DL. He doesn’t just suck. If he’s in, he’s good; if he’s hurt, he’s out of the rotation.
Or at least that’s how he’s been so far historically.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
don't tell Daric about the pool
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
by Future Ed on Jan 14, 2011 3:23 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Blanton never gets injured
The other dudes we have, well, almost always do. I’m completely in favor of paying him over Duke. At this point, adding Duke is really no better the five-headed monster of Harden/McCarthy/Outman/Ross/Cramer because of the injury risks/problems each have.
Plus, league average is quite respectable from your 5th starter, if that’s all Blanton is.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
Soriano Would Have Been Much Better
Instead, he’s pitching for the Yanks.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 9:09 AM PST up reply actions
Look at the price difference though. Sori's on the hook for $35M; Balfour for $8M.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 9:18 AM PST up reply actions
No, We Can't
But Soriano has his advantages and could have been better.
For the actual contract though, it’s a great deal.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:14 AM PST up reply actions
Huh.
I saw the signing, wasn’t too thrilled, but then saw the contract. Very, very reasonable. Count me on board.
This
I was mildly pleased with Balfour, but I love that contract.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 9:27 AM PST up reply actions
I think giving up a second round pick for a middle reliever for two years when the team will be lucky to crack .500 is stupid
Yes, Balfour should be worth the money. That still doesn’t mean it was a good move. Not a fan, even though I do think Balfour is a good reliever.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:00 AM PST up reply actions
I think the A's might agree with that
But I doubt they think they’ll be lucky to crack .500. Why do you think that?
yeah
the pessimism is out of control. imo, the team will have to get pretty unlucky to finish below .500.
i have them around 86-87. if theyre “lucky” and willingham, crisp, dejesus and anderson stay healthy, its a 90 win team.
Define "pretty unlucky" though
Is it at all unreasonable to think that the entire starting OF will spend a month (at least) on the DL? Is it unreasonable to think the #5 competition between Harden/McCarthy/whoever else will be a flop? It it unreasonable to think Kouzmanoff’s defensive numbers will normalize? Is it unreasonable to think that, despite the still-good defense, some of the A’s pitchers will regress as expected? Is it unreasonable to think that the DH moves will end up a complete disaster and Carter will be DHing by mid-June?
There’s a lot of lucky required just to make them as good as last year. A lot of that is tied to the health of guys who are likely to be unhealthy.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:11 AM PST up reply actions
i agree theres a chance that each one of those things happen
but the projections factor in those possibilities.
for example, i project brett anderson at around 3.4 WAR (i dont have the spreadsheet in front of me but its something like that). but if he stays healthy all year, hes a pretty good bet for 4 or 5 (or more).
ditto willingham and dejesus. i project them both around 3, but theyre more like 4 WAR players if healthy.
because of the multiple injury risks, this team’s projections have a HUGE variance, but the a’s kinda need to take that approach given their payroll limitations. and beane has planned for the injury risk by adding serious depth across the club.
sweeney was awesome just two years ago, and if hes not asked to start the whole season, could put up at least league average numbers. connor jackson has a history of playing very well when healthy, and there would have to be (at least) two injuries to starters before hes pressed into serious action. i think carter should be capable of league average performance out there by mid season (he really put up good numbers after his brief mlb adjustment/o-fer). rosales has shown he can be league averag(ish) and is there to cover for the three injury prone infielders.
And cholera!
You forgot to include cholera!
"You know, a long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody's crazy."
-Charles Manson
by kaweahkaweah on Jan 14, 2011 11:47 AM PST up reply actions
Yes, if everything that could possibly go wrong for the A's, goes wrong, then we'll have a hard time reaching .500.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 11:48 AM PST up reply actions
not to mention the rangers have similar injury converns
their three best players – hamilton, cruz and kinsler – have not exactly been pillars of health. and holland had some weird arm problems last year too.
Would that be Josh "I'm in the hospital for pneumonia at the moment" Hamilton?
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
you wondering
if he’s in some form of detox/rehab? I was kind of thinking the same thing.
Nick Swisher is handsome.
Or maybe he has pneumonia
"You ain't got nothin to say, it was perfect" -Dallas Braden, 05/09/10
hell hath no fury like a Cowboys fan scorned. -Leopold Bloom
No, I'm not at all.
Just noting that he’s already hurting — we’ve seen the effects on Ziggy, Swisher and others coming back from being really sick. And when you’ve ravaged your body with hard drugs in the past, your immune system is probably compromised.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I wasn't implying I knew something either.
It was about this time of year a few years ago he fell off the wagon is all and it made me curious.
Nick Swisher is handsome.
I have an excellent immune system, thank you.
It’s my memory that is ravaged.
"Honestly, the more I teach, the more I find myself in favor of medication. I don't think kids should take any, though." - Nico
Or, you know, if just a few of them go wrong.
If every reasonable thing goes wrong, we’ll be celebrating a top 3 pick in the 2012 draft.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
Well, you have the A's having things go very wrong in the outfield, starting pitching, the 5th starter position, 3rd base, and DH.
So, unless your definition of “everything that could possibly go wrong” includes the team plane crashing….
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
Don't laugh
Think of all the draft picks we would 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
And I think the A's will have to invest in a lot of horseshoes to reach that
I think Kouzmanoff comes back to earth defensively and is a win worse. Matsui is going to be a win worse than Cust. The #5 spot can very well be a total disaster. The OF looks to be much improved – until May when DeJesus is in center, Crisp is on the DL (and when he’s not, he probably doesn’t have career-year offensive numbers), Willingham is struggling/showing his age/hurt again.
Yes, if everybody is healthy and all the guys who struggled last year get better and nobody gets worse, the A’s are going to be good. I don’t see that happening.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:07 AM PST up reply actions
You think Kouz will get worse defensively and stay just as bad offensively?
this seems like pessimism.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
He's been trending downward offensively for years
I don’t see any reason for it to improve. His defensive numbers this year were a crazy outlier.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:22 AM PST up reply actions
agree on kouz
to an extent, though i wonder if the boost in his UZR is partly explained by the a’s groundballing staff.
he had 70 more putouts in 2010 than he did in 2009 in almost the same number of innings. whether thats random or a result of playing behind cahill/anderson, i dont know.
but if its the latter, perhaps we can expect his defensive numbers to regress less?
I really don't get this seemingly common sentiment
Kouzmanoff just had the worst offensive season of his career. The fact that he was better in 2007-2009 than he was in 2010 is an excellent reason to think he’ll bounce back some next year.
If Kouzmanoff had sucked so badly in 2007-2009 that 2010 was actually an improvement, then his offense would be trending upwards. By focusing on trends, you’re essentially saying that you’d be more optimistic about his 2011 season if he had been a worse player in prior years. That’ doesn’t make any sense.
Kouz should bounce back with the stick, which should make up for some of the regression of his glove. He loses 10 runs on defense, gains 5 runs on offense, and he’s still the same ~2.5 WAR player he’s been for each of the past 4 years.
What I'm saying is he's gotten worse and worse every single year. It has nothing to do with a "trend," per se
I think it’s just plain stupid to think that in 2011 he’s going to be more like 2007 than 2010. He’s gotten worse every. single. year. It’s not like he had one down year.
Why should he bounce back with the stick? Because 4 years ago he was a solid offensive player?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:07 PM PST up reply actions
I sure hope he's more like 2010 than 2007.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:08 PM PST up reply actions
With the bat? That's what we're talking about here.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:19 PM PST up reply actions
Why would you only talk about his bat and not the whole player?
Seems rather pointless to me.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:23 PM PST up reply actions
Because his offense and defense are unrelated
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
Not when you're trying to figure out his overall value...which is what matters.
You’ve been harping on this Kouzmanoff for a long time now even after being proven wrong many times. Please stop.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
So...breaking down individual components of a player's value doesn't matter to you?
What the fuck? That doesn’t even make sense. You’ve never once discussed a player’s individual skills?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:40 PM PST up reply actions
Problem is you handle both sample different
Offensively you see adownward trend that should continue. But with defense you ignore the trend and project him to be like two years ago. And we are not even taking luck on batted balls into the discussion.
And, by the way, I was absolutely not proven wrong when I said he'd be a lot worse in Oakland than he was in San Diego
Call it luck, a fluke, or whatever. It happened.
I admit I didn’t anticipate his defensive numbers being fluky great.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
OK.
So according to thejd, regression only applies to things he says they apply to. Anything he disagrees with is called a fluke.
Maybe it works like that in your head, but it doesn’t work like that in reality.
And yes, I’m considering individual components of a player. I’m considering that his defense will negatively regress and his offense will positively regress. Overall, he looks to provide the same value.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:45 PM PST up reply actions
This is a very basic tenet of regression and projections
What I’m saying is he’s gotten worse and worse every single year. It has nothing to do with a “trend,” per se
That’s exactly what a trend is.
Why should he bounce back with the stick? Because 4 years ago he was a solid offensive player?
No, because the totality of the data we have on Kouzmanoff tells us that he’s better than he showed in 2010. His 2010 is just a sample of his performance. We also have samples from prior years. Those samples were much better than 2010. Our best guess is that he was likely underperforming his true talent in 2010.
Again, you’re saying that Kouz would project better in 2011 if he had sucked in 2007-2009; he’d be trending up! That’s crazy.
To put it another way: the reason we should expect his bat to bounce back some is exactly the same as the reason we should expect his glove to decline. That’s how regression works. That’s how projections work.
As an aside, you’re hyperbolizing his trends. His 2008 and 2009 seasons were practically identical
by Danny on Jan 14, 2011 12:22 PM PST up reply actions 8 recs
I think his hitting skills are on the decline. That's not the same thing even if Dishonest Danny pretends it is.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
Why would they be on the decline?
He’s not old. There’s no reason for that to happen. It’s far, far more likely that luck, babip, and other factors are simulating a “talent decline”.
Also…“Dishonest Danny”? Heh. Really?
"Dishonest Danny"
Throughout 2008 and 2009, Danny was very honest. His dishonesty only began in 2010 (and half of those posts are in response to PaulThomas). It’s unreasonable to project a trend and say that Danny is becoming less honest when in fact the totality of his data suggests that he is more honest than his 2010 numbers show. I think we can expect him to bounce back in 2011.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
by iglew on Jan 14, 2011 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm more concerned with Judgmental JD44 and Irreverent Iglew at this point.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 2:17 PM PST up reply actions
nastysmellingjankynotsellingjeans?
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
I don't like this trend.
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
TotallysexyandcoolandniceandfunnyandsensitiveTravdog6?
Seems fitting.
"Some of us know him as the a-hole who piled into Ray Fosse in an All-Star game (it's why Ray is the way he is folks)" - OptimistPrime
I may not be the beacon of civility you once hailed me as
But I’m not dishonest. If you disagree, I’d love to see your examples.
There’s nothing dishonest about pointing out a false claim
I was just being silly about regression.
It was not my intention to confirm nor deny your honesty.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Ok this is getting into personal attack territory
“In decline” is a trend analysis. I say this even though Danny said it above because you don’t seem to believe him even when he’s right.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
I don't like when people say I'm making arguments that I'm not making. I find that insulting.
Danny has a habit of doing this kind of thing. Perhaps “Dishonest Danny” wasn’t nice, but I think it’s a dishonest way to have a debate.
The difference: Danny is saying that I’m saying “Because he got worse for X number of years, we should expect him to get worse the next year.” Of course, I never said that. What I did say was, “Because he’s continued to get worse, I think his skills are declining. I don’t expect him to get better again.” It has nothing to do with a “trend.” I’m not saying that because a guy went 0 for 10 he’s on a cold streak and that’s meaningful.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
....how are those two things different at all?
And they’re both pretty much textbook examples of a “trend”. Screaming about how it’s not doesn’t change the fact that it is.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
This
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
maybe
since he has gotten worse the last few years, there is no reason to think he will get better next year.
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
Well, now, he COULD get better
It’s possible 2008 and 2009 and 2010 were all flukes of some kind. He COULD hit like 2007.
I just don’t understand why everyone seems to think that’s likely.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:45 PM PST up reply actions
right I think people are focusing on the semantic argument
He is not good, therefor you can’t count on him being good next year.
in the last three years his wOBA has been 316, 312 and 296. I don’t see any real movement there, he is just a bad hitter and should not be counted on for more.
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
Which seems like a more likely wOBA next year?
.305 or .290?
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
yes.
what’s the difference?
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
....nearly a win?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
is it that much?
I tried to look it up.
I just don’t see the argument here.
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
Shouldn't each partial win increase mean more as the team gets closer to the division crown?
If Kouz goes from a 2.9 WAR to a 3.9, then that makes the cost risk of Beltre worse, right?
.
Because he’s continued to get worse, I think his skills are declining. I don’t expect him to get better again.
…that’s a trend.
You may think that he's declining as an opinion, and that's okay
But a meaningful regression to his body of data suggests otherwise.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
What skills, specifically, though?
Decline in bat speed? Worsening eyesight?
The only thing I’m aware of as having been publicly discussed was back problems, which are a bit daunting, to be sure, but hardly insurmountable.
"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.
Shinier pate?
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
Yep.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
Rec
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
You really do like to tell people what they're saying when they're not actually saying that, don't you?
The only correct thing you’ve said in response to me is that his 2008-09 are “practically identical.” Sure.
I don’t know about you, but I weight 4 years prior almost not at all when thinking about how a guy should perform. I mean, how far back do you wanna go? 2007 is virtually meaningless except to say he once did this.
He’s probably better than 2010, unless his skills are declining. That, for a reason that doesn’t make any damn sense to me, seems to be an impossibility to you. Players do decline in your world, right? Especially when they’ve shown a fairly steady decline for years?
Is it because he’s not yet “old enough” to decline that you presume this can’t happen? Serious question because I can’t even begin to understand what you’re trying to say here. If Kouzmanoff was 33 and he’s gotten worse every year from age 29, would you say you’d expect him to “bounce back” to how he was years prior?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
Yes
Kouz could be the exception to the rule who does start declining at an early age. It’s far more likely he’s simply had a bad couple of years with the bat. And “steady decline” is stretching when he didn’t really decline between 2008 and 2009, even if he did pre-2010.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
So when he puts up another sub.-300 wOBA this year, still just a "trend"? What about the next?
What if that coincides with LDs and HRs continuing to drop?
At some point the guy can’t just be having an unbelievable string of bad luck (and even if he is, it gets ridiculous to think that’s the cause). At some point he’s actually declining, right?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
well, then, his overall body of data starts looking worse, too
And with several seasons of suck (not necessarily consecutively) vs. no 2007-2009-like seasons, then he’ll be a sucky player. Just not yet.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:47 PM PST up reply actions
If he continues to decline
Our estimate of his skill does continue to drop. His 2007 numbers do mean less and less. Statistical models tend to regress to the mean instead of following a trend. He could very well continue to drop off.
The thing is that same model tends to predict better than following a trend for players in general.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
Why does it have to revolve around "movement" up or down
how about, he is a bad hitter. He likely won’t be a better hitter than he showed last year/
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
He's a bad hitter
But probably not quite as bad as 2010 because he’s been better every other year of his career.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
Hilarious
He’s been trending downward offensively for years I don’t see any reason for it to improve.He’s gotten worse every. single. year.What I’m saying is he’s gotten worse and worse every single year.
How could I possible think you were talking about a trend? That would crazy of me. But you can call it whatever you’d like to; it’s a poor way to go about analysis regardless of what you label it.
Kouzmanoff’s poor 2010 offensive performance means he projects to hit worse in 2011 than he projected to hit in 2010. But his 2008 and 2009 (you can throw out 2007 if you want, as it wouldn’t get much weight in a projection) seasons are still very relevant in projecting him going forward. And those 2008 and 2009 seasons tell us that he’s likely better than he showed in 2010.
Is that certainly going to be true? No, of course not. Just probably.
by Danny on Jan 14, 2011 12:48 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
So let me see if I get this right.
He had a .339 wOBA in 2007. Then , in 2008, he had a .316 wOBA. Because of that, his 2009 projection wasn’t as high as his 2007 season, because his 2008 wasn’t good. THEN, in 2009, he was worse: a .312 wOBA. Because of that, his 2010 projection went down a bit. Then in 2010 he was EVEN WORSE, with a .299 wOBA.
And now you’re saying he’ll have worse projections for 2011 because he hit poorly in 2010.
So can you explain to me how this ISN’T you talking about trends, which you just said was poor analysis?
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
by mikev on Jan 14, 2011 2:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Weighting more recent seasons more heavily in a projection isn't "trend analysis"
The basic projection model looks at the past 3-4 seasons and weights them according to recentness. Usually something like 5-3-2-1.
Once you get that projection, it doesn’t matter what the trends are. Knowing whether a guy has declined for three straight years or improved for three straight years doesn’t add any useful information to the projection.
so if a guy keeps getting worse, his projection will continue to get worse
but that’s not a trend
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
by mikev on Jan 14, 2011 3:24 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I remember a discussion over Kouz' defensive...
…where I was told it was poor proceedure to look at his trends. Even though his defense has improved, he regress downward, and his offense will tend to regress UPWARDS. Did I misunderstand?
by Tutu-late on Jan 14, 2011 3:37 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
In this case, yes.
Because his offense was below his recent career numbers, and his defense was above his recent career numbers. So a proper regression would bring his offense up a bit, and his defense down a bit from 2010.
Not really.
Like Danny was saying earlier, a trend would be looking at a general slope of production over many years. The projections just look at career numbers, weighting the recent ones more, regardless of whether they follow a pattern or not. And as far as the mean value, yes, it’s still regression to the mean, because the recent bad year brings Kouz’s career mean numbers down.
And no worries about the questions. Keep asking, if you’d like.
So, as long as the current trend doesn't reach the career mean, the projection will be opposite of the trend.
At the point where the trend crosses the mean, then the predictions will follow the trend. Have I got it right( in a basic sense, of course).
if the trend was downward, yet the mean was high enough,
then the projection would move against the trend. Say a player had a mean WAR of 6, yet his 3-yr trend showed 5-4-3WAR. Until his mean had reached 3, you wouldn’t project the 2 , could you? Shouldn’t he project to say, a 5? Once his mean reached 3, then the projection would be lower than the current year’s WAR?
Ah, I see.
And yeah, that sounds right. One thing, though. The projections weigh recent years more than the mean, so the projection for that 5-4-3 guy would probably be a 3.8 or so. Instead of the mean, they tend to look at a weighted average of the last 3 or 4 years, with recent years weighted more heavily.
Not very much, apparently
ZiPS thinks he’s going to be great next season.
Then again, ZiPS probably doesn’t fully “understand” his metabolism…
"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.
Does all this make Kouz a trendsetter?
Haven’t the teams he’s played on improved their record each year he was there? This trend would dictate that in order for the A’s to improve their record, Kouz needs to continue playing worse. You guys know I’m not a stathead, but even I wouldn’t base future preformance on trends.
The trend doesn't matter
If a guy hits worse than his projection, he’s likely to get a worse projection the next year. This is true whether the guy came into the year having improved for 3 straight years or having declined for 3 straight years.
If Kouz hits worse in 2011 than he’s projected to, he’ll have a worse projection for 2012. It doesn’t matter whether or not he had improved or declined for three straight years prior.
The problem with Kouz
Is that he was never really that good offensively to begin with.
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
I don't know if I'm missing a joke here or something
But his career BABIP is .287
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
And if Barton suddenly develops 20/25-homer power
and Suzuki remembers how to hit, and Wilingham stays healthy and knocks out 30, and Anderson stays healthy and competes for the Cy Young…
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
this
trend =/= regression
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
My squabbles with Danny notwithstanding,
you just lose this argument, frankly. The fact that a number has moved in nominally the same direction a few times in a row is not ipso facto evidence that it will continue to do so.
The best guess on Kouz is that his defense will regress downward a bit more than his offense will regress upward, but that’s only a small diminution of his overall value.
"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.
While his offensive numbers have been trending downwards, so has his BABIP
With just a normalized BABIP he has a better season.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 11:48 AM PST up reply actions
Well, he doesn't hit as many line drives anymore. That could explain the drop in BABIP.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
Or, most likely, IMO, his back problems explain it
and the best projection is that if healthy he’ll improve upon his 2010 season but if his back is really an issue he’ll be even a little worse (as he’s a year older).
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
Exactly
Why is it that people like to get caught up in numerical projections without looking for the root cause? Numbers don’t drive the players, it’s the other way around.
I’d like to attribute at least some of his decline on learning a new league. Unless his back gets any worse, I think a small improvement on offense could be expected. While his back has likely sapped his power, I think it’ll have to get a lot worse before it robs him of his defense. Put me down for same as 2010 on defense and mild improvement (+.400 slugging) on offense.
"Never have a motto, that's what I always say" - Me
http://marcel-oehler.marcellosendos.ch/comics/ch/1986/05/19860506.gif
Every time I see this line, my stomach turns around.
You look at a downward trend in his offensive performance and assume he will follow the trend down next year.
But defensively he has clear upward trend in UZR numbers. And last year wasn’t that crazy of a jump (he improved by 6 than 5 than 8.5 runs the last years). So you should expect him to get even better defensively.
I get that UZR is more volatile than offensive numbers, but to ignore a clear and steady trend in defense is ridiculous.
we had plenty of injuries last year
and somehow scored more runs than we gave up and finished .500.
What did i tell you...didn't I say they would win? Yeah that's right I did didn't ? Wait.. what? They LOST?!?!?
Matsui
654 PA’s from Matsui >>> 425 PA’s from Cust + 123 PA’s from Chavez + 106 from Fox… No?
by Colorado Fan on Jan 14, 2011 12:51 PM PST up reply actions
Probably a wash.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:53 PM PST up reply actions
The overall DH production was 1.7 ish WAR.
You’re projecting Matsui for greater than 3 WAR…nearly four.
He’s only reached 3 WAR once in his career.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
Matsui had a .356 wOBA last year....
Even assuming no decline or Coliseum hit, 10 runs improvement on that seems very optimistic.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 1:03 PM PST up reply actions
A's DHs hit .246/.338/.386 last year
Matsui should be ~10 runs better than that.
I'm assuming you looked at the A's DHs at Fangraphs
That 1.7 includes their “production” at other positions.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
So does Fox's 20 games or so playing the field really change things all that much?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
And Cust's 14
Probably not. But for future use.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
Yeah, thanks for bringing that up. I'll keep it in mind.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 1:12 PM PST up reply actions
No, it really should be better
I say that as someone who thinks Matsui is worse than Cust. He’s still better than Cust-adulterated-by-all-that-crap.
"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.
A strategy known as "Crazy Like A Patterson"
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
Twins get Thome, Royals get their new ace Jeff Francis
Francis being KC’s ace really shows how terrible that team is going to be next year. 2012 though, watch out.
Yeah, well we've been saying that for years with them...
Their prospects tend to fizzle. It’s almost as if the analysts feel compelled to talk about how good their prospects are to take away the embarrassment their MLB has shown to be.
“Yeah they suck, but their minor league system is awesome!” – Baseball Analysts, 1990-2010
by Brett Narloch on Jan 14, 2011 9:27 AM PST up reply actions
That fake quote is really misleading
Their minor league system this year really is all the rage in ways that it hasn’t been before.
“What can you say? This is one hell of a farm system.” – John Sickels
Royals’ Farm System: Best of the Decade? – Fangraphs Article
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
The coolest thing about that awesome "Best of the Decade" article,
Was the revelation about how good Arizona’s farm system was at one point, when Justin Upton was still coming up.
The A’s made an incredible trade with Dan Haren. That article made me realize just how rare the opportunity was, though. It’s rare for any other team to even have enough talent in its sytem to be able to offer what the D-Backs offered for Dan Haren. And the D-Backs felt secure offering it perhaps because their system was so deep, their Haren offer didn’t even empty it.
Another cool exercise is to imagine if the D-Backs had not made the “win now” move for Haren, and had instead kept Anderson, Upton, Drew, CarGo, etc. together, gone with an entire youth movement instead.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
I think I remember Scherzer being at the top of a lot of people's wish lists
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
by Helloooo 1st on Jan 14, 2011 7:04 PM PST up reply actions
I really don't think the Royals' farm system has been this good...in at least a long time
I’m no royals scholar, and I’m only an amateur in minor leagues, but the Royals system is mind blowing from everything I’ve read.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 9:41 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah, they've been pretty bad for a long time
This is the first time since 2000 that BA has ranked the KC farm system as one of the 10 best in baseball.
They have maybe 8 prospects who are better than anybody we have.
Possibly 10.
by danmerqury on Jan 14, 2011 9:51 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
KC's farm really should not be taken lightly
Its strange to read it on AN, I thought we were supposed to know everything about prospects.
rec
"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
Don't knock KC to much
No ace on the staff but at least for once they have a few quality arms that they can hope will become a ace instead of a bunch of retreads that are AAA pitchers on most teams. If they can stay in the rebuild mode and wait they will have a very good team in a couple of years.
Real quick pitchfx scouting:
He’s a fastball pitcher, with a fastball that has tons of vertical “rise” and moves laterally almost like a cutter. Easy to see why he generates a lot of flyballs. I’d guess that the pitch also gets a lot of swings and misses, where the ball ends up an inch or so above the bat. Kinda Breslow-like from the right side, actually, plus cutting movement. Sits at 93 or so.
Because of his fastball’s cutting movement, his slider most likely looks like his fastball where the bottom drops out halfway through. See how close the green and red dots are, laterally? It’s not a wipeout slider like Aroldis Chapman’s, that moves across the plate. Instead, it just drops. Think Wuertz, but not as insane, and not as much drop. Comes in at 86.
by danmerqury on Jan 14, 2011 9:44 AM PST reply actions 5 recs
rec'd, thanks for doing that Dan.
Do the A’s have anyone from the right side with a similar profile? I’m kind of trying to think if Balfour makes any of the incumbents redundant.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
You know, he's kinda Wuertz-y.
But with a better fastball, and a worse slider.
Wuertz:
by danmerqury on Jan 14, 2011 10:29 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
interesting that balfour seems to get similar splitter-like movement on his slider
much like wuertz (though less consistently, it appears).
their pitch selection and approach is very different, though. balfour throws an overwhelming % of fastballs and doesnt really command it that well inthe zone. its also an extremely straight/rising fastball, from what i recall seeing.
wuertz has a lot less velocity and relies on his slider to an extraordinary degree (too much for his own health i think).
It's a little less splitter-y than Wuertz's, but compared to his fastball,
yeah, I’d say that that’s accurate.
Generates A Lot Of Flyballs, Eh?
That’s good, because he’ll be pitching in the Coliseum.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
With a very good defensive outfield behind him...
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
SuSlu update:
She hears there’s an option year
I didn't realize you were veganalyst! This makes it totally different! You're one of my favorite twitter/ANers. - Susan Slusser
If that's true
then we all need to send Billy a thank you card
"Today, I am the greatest of all time" - Rickey Henderson
The A's have a 3.25M club option on him with a .25M buyout
so it depends on how well he does this year.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
That's a very favorable option figure, considering that $4-5.5M per for 2-3 years has been the going rate for good middle relief this year.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:26 AM PST up reply actions
ive always liked the wuertz deal for that reason
even though its been bashed on this site by many.
the a’s likely would’ve given wuertz the same money in 2010 and 11 as they did in the extension, and now they have the option for 2012 as a bonus.
stoked to hear that balfour will have an option as well.
What a fucking terrible idea.
This is the most stacked draft in years and the A’s are spending their 2nd round pick on a mediocre set up man that hasn’t even earned 2 WAR in the last three seasons.
What a terrible offseason.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 10:02 AM PST reply actions
(2.1 WAR in 2008)
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=718&position=P
But you’re right, I mean, who needs a marginal major league reliever when you can draft a marginal minor leaguer?
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
I counted a rehab stint as a season but its still
2010 1.2
2009 .4
2008 1.7
2007 -.1
using tRA which is better than FIP
Committing to relievers is a terrible way to build a team.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 10:11 AM PST up reply actions
I wouldn't call 2 years/8 million "committing"
It’s not like this contract is a chokehold we’re banking on for the next 7 years a la Chavez. We had some extra money, we had a protected 1st round pick, so we improved the Major League club.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 10:12 AM PST up reply actions
Me Neither
I’d call it “briefly investing in something that should have both short-term and long-term beneficial effects”.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
WAR is a poor way to value relievers
It’s an even worse way to project reliever value going forward.
Good relievers are quite easily worth $4M/year.
Its more like we gave up 10m over two years with the value of the pick
we aren’t getting a better than league average rate on the WAR.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
You're overvaluing the pick and not accounting for the club option
And there’s nothing wrong with paying market rate for wins when you’re on the edge of contention.
This ignores that Balfour could yield a future, higher pick...
or trade dividends.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 1:59 PM PST up reply actions
I wouldn't count on a future draft pick
There’s a sizable chance draft pick compensation vanishes after next season. I just don’t think either the union or the owners are committed to it anymore. The owners don’t like it because it stops them from putting hard caps on draft bonuses. The players don’t like it because it depresses the value of midlevel free agents (hence all the “no-type-A” contract clauses that are being negotiated these days).
"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.
You say "hasn't even earned 2 WAR in the last three seasons" as if that's something easy to do.
Ten relievers hit 2 WAR last year. Only ten! And how many were available? None. That’s like saying, “we got a batter who didn’t even get 6.5 WAR?”
And besides, aren't we trying to win now anyway?
By punting the future?
by danmerqury on Jan 14, 2011 10:10 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Then why didn't the A's get players who can win now?
This is the only real “punting the future” move this offseason (because I don’t much care for Mazzaro, HRod, or Brown, and Marks is too far away to worry about).
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:02 AM PST up reply actions
I'm not criticizing them for lack of effort
I just don’t think they made the team much better overall.
I like the DDJ/Willingham moves as the 3rd and 4th added pieces. They’re the #1 and #2 pieces. I think that’s a problem.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:09 AM PST up reply actions
How many teams added two players better than DDJ and Willingham?
Then also two players near their caliber? That is a lot to ask.
I don't disagree.
It’s really hard to make up a huge wins gap. I don’t think they came close to making that up. That’s why I don’t like giving away a draft pick, even a second rounder, for a middle reliever.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:23 PM PST up reply actions
the two aspirational targets we had signed for well north of $100M
And we pursued Beltre, but he was substantially overpaid by Texas. Do I think we should have paid Beltre what Texas did? Sure. But that doesn’t mean DDJ and Marlboro Man are lousy pickups.
Basically, what you’re saying is that without Beltre, Crawford, or Werth, this offseason was a waste. I don’t buy that.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
No. What I'm saying is that the A's tried hard to put a winning team together, but failed (not their fault)
And they’re left with a very average team that shouldn’t be wasting money and draft picks on middle relievers.
I’m so fucking sick of people not actually reading what is typed and making assumptions. I SPECIFICALLY SAID I was not criticizing them for a lack of effort.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
Just out of curiosity...
Who do you think we needed to get in order to put a winning team together?
I realize this isn’t a simple question to answer (unless you have already thought about it) but it seems to me that the only reason why the offseason isn’t a big win is that the Rangers ended up improving too thanks to Beltre.
I personally think we’ve done a commendable job of making a 2011 playoff run possible [maybe a 20% chance (off the top of my head)] without hurting the future much at all.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
so, you would prefer a complete punt of the next 2 seasons plus?
Look, maybe our true-talent level is average, but we have some guys now that are more than respectable at playing baseball. I’m betting our “within 1 SD” variability on wins is probably higher than other teams (or if not, it should be), so I’ll agree that we could suck.
Or we could be pretty awesome. I’ll bet on the high, you bet on the low.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
I'd actually guess that the A's SD of wins is pretty low
This team is full of guys who are kind of averagey without a ton of 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.
The SD is probably the usual: Health.
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
Although it sounds like you are specifically frustrated that the A's chose to add Balfour NOW thereby surrendering a draft pick
Which, if you believe that the A’s should be basically punting 2011, would be a bad move. I don’t think there is any reason why they shouldn’t be will to take another gamble (lost second-rounder) in order to slightly imrove their admittedly slim chances of a playoff berth
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
Eh...
The A’s should have a lot of solid bullpen arms this season. If the A’s are out of contention in mid-July, they could use one of these arms as a key asset in a trade.
I don’t know this answer, but on average, what grade is a 2nd round pick given after 1 year in the minors?
C+ish
Obviously some move upward, some downward, but that’s about the middle of the distribution.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
It depends on how well he does with his social skills.
We must never forget to encourage getting along with classmates.
And sharing.
And using our “inside voices”.
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
You're right we should have signed Crawford for 150 million...
WTF GEREN?!?!?!
by robbo650 on Jan 14, 2011 10:15 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
ah...if only
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
Heh
There was no chance of getting Crawford, Beltre, or any other “huge” guy. I saw that from the beginning of the offseason.
Of course, I did hope.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
That would have been a great move.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:45 PM PST up reply actions
compared to this offseason
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
The A's pick (77th-79th) would've had a surplus value of 500K or so.
Hardly worth making loud noises over.
But the best news of the day was the Twins signing Thome, I’ll give you that.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 10:16 AM PST up reply actions
I can't believe that Thome is going to be one of the cheapest DHs again
After that monster season he put up against righties I thought someone would have paid him twice what he’s set to get.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
Age
He’s old, so I think teams may be afraid of signing him for fear he’ll break down.
They’d have wasted millions and looked stupid.
Having the possibility of him breaking down for a small price is much safer.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:20 AM PST up reply actions
Poor Billy...
He thought he was so smart getting Matsui for under 5 million…
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 10:21 AM PST up reply actions
Billy NOT Thinking He's Smart?
He’s a good guy and a decent GM, but……..
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
This doesn't mean that we could have gotten Thome
for the same price as Matsui, only that the Twins could get him for less than the A’s payed for Matsui.
"Today, I am the greatest of all time" - Rickey Henderson
Probably not.
But I think he’ll listen to a 1/5 or 1/6 offer…which is significantly more than what the Twins offered, and still smarter than Matsui at 4.5.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 15, 2011 12:02 PM PST up reply actions
If the Rangers really did want him, as rumored,I imagine he turned down significantly more than $3m.
by AgitationStation on Jan 14, 2011 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
nah
Probably only a little more than 1 million
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 15, 2011 12:01 PM PST up reply actions
In a regular draft perhaps ... but this is the draft of the decade.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:47 PM PST up reply actions
So....what? What's your estimate of the increased surplus value for a second rounder in this particular draft?
1 million? 2 million? That would be a stretch.
If Balfour puts up one 2 WAR year, that’s already a surplus value of 4.5 million or so.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:52 PM PST up reply actions
Even though everyone says a "stacked" draft....
The 74th pick still likely won’t be worth that much. I wish the A’s could have kept the pick and signed Balfour. But it’s not enough to make it a bad move. Balfour’s a top setup man, not a middle reliever.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
After the 1st round, it's sort of a grab bag anyway
On average, sure, you’ll get some surplus value from the pick. Or, he could never make it past AA and retire to be a cotton farmer at age 22. Way too much variability to care about that more than a useful setup man who came fairly cheaply.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
Yep.
I would not want the A’s to give up a first-round pick – No. 16-30ish – under almost any circumstances. At that slot you can draft a guy who is likely to be a useful major leaguer. But we are talking about the No. 79 overall pick. There’s a big difference IMO.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 2:02 PM PST up reply actions
Is the surplus value difference between a 2nd and 3rd round pick significant?
The big “signability drops” happen in both the 2nd and 3rd rounds. there’s a significant drop b/w 1st and 2nd round, but not so much between 2nd and 3rd.
its not the difference between 2nd and 3rd round its the difference between having a second round pick or not
You can get some top 50 talent in round two that you are losing. Basically you are losing a Yordy Cabrera type player for Grant Balfour
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
Yordy - a No. 60 overall pick who fell further than expected.
Hypothetical Player That You Are Upset About Losing: No. 79 overall, and not as good as Yordy.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 2:03 PM PST up reply actions
But factor in the better-than-usual draft
and Yordy seems a fair comparison.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHA
You care way too much about the No. 79 overall pick.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I'd rather have the 79 overall pick than ~100-120 innings of middle relief in seasons that won't matter.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
If 2011 and 2012 don't matter
Then you should just accept that no season will matter until about 2017 at the earliest. This is about as good as we can expect for a while…
This is basically my standpoint
though, I think 2013 is still within the “window.” But, they have Balfour on an option in 2013, so that’s 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.
They will matter. Even if they don't lead to an A's playoff berth...
They could lead to a future trade. Balfour signed for slightly below true market value, because of that Type A status dragging down his value.
Plus there’s the possibility that Balfour is again a Type A or B in two years, in which case he yields a pick (or two) which is higher than No. 79 overall.
Money has to be spent somewhere, I’ve come to realize. The assets can always be flipped later on if they become superfluous.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
see danmerqury's post below
apparently the a’s agreed to not offer him arb if he’s type A, so they only get a pick if hes type B (which means he probably wasn’t that good during his time with the a’s). on the other hand, if hes type A, that means he was awesome and the a’s probably got some surplus value from the contract.
the option also has some quantifiable monetary value. who knows black-sholes for projected WAR?
And even that Type B pick after 2012 would be higher than the No. 79 overall pick being sacrificed next year.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 11:57 AM PST up reply actions
not true. The 2011 draft is the most stacked in years.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
You realize the A's cant get type A and also middle relievers don't get good value in trades unless they have closing experiance
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:52 PM PST up reply actions
Its really funny that pretty much everywhere except AN thinks the A's are going to have a great team this year.
The A’s could make the playoffs, ergo, could win the World Series this year. If you dont want that, I hope you get hit by a garbage can*.
*A plastic one though, wouldn’t want to seriously hurt you because of your dumbass ideas about baseball. It’s not worthy of torture-punishment to be wrong about things.
Who said I don't want the A's to win? Of course I do.
Let’s pretend I’m right, and the A’s are a .500 team (give or take a couple wins based on good/bad luck). Isn’t giving away a pick for Balfour a bad move? Even if he adds 2 full wins over the alternative, so the A’s are an 83-85 win team instead of 81-83. Okay. I still want my draft pick.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
We had 81 wins last year
And our Pythag record (though I don’t put too much stock into that) had us a few wins better.
Then we actually got an outfield.
I don’t see how you think we’re a .500 team again, or even 83-85.
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
To be fair, we had career years from Coco, Cust, and Barton.
Could they repeat them? Possibly. I wouldn’t count on it, though.
Career "half" seasons from Cust and Coco.
If they had been able to play all season, wouldn’t we have been quite a bit over .500?
It was a career year for Barton
but considering his relative youth I don’t see why that isn’t repeatable.
"You know, a long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody's crazy."
-Charles Manson
by kaweahkaweah on Jan 14, 2011 12:51 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, Barton was probably a bad example.
But the point still stands. We can’t just take last year’s numbers, tack on DDJ, Willingham, and Balfour, and call it a day.
Career worst seasons from Zooks+Kouz
but no, its too much to ask AN to regress upward is it? Nope, everything has to be the worst possible outcome. Our best players WILL all get hurt and the ones that dont WILL under perform. AN is the worst place to look for positive talk on the A’s these days. Cant wait for the season to start so these clowns can shut up with all these pointless negativity.
by PL78 on Jan 14, 2011 4:50 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
I am certain we will not finish 83-85
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 12:52 PM PST up reply actions
It's theoretically possible.
It would mean winning an extremely weak division with a record of 80-81 with one rain-out game that doesn’t need to be made up. Then we’d have to sweep the ALDS and be swept in the ALCS.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I see us winning 90+ if we get 30+ starts from BA.
Easily. We have one of the strongest squads in a long time, there’s no weak link, everyone contributes.
Tie division at 80-82
Win a 1 game playoff. Lose ALDS 2-3.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
I thought of that, but
I wasn’t sure if they did a tiebreaker game for tie division. I thought maybe the tiebreaker was head-to-head record, and that one-game playoff we had a while ago was for a wild card spot.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Of course they do a tiebreaker game for a tied division...
The only time they use some other form of tiebreaker is when the tie does not influence who gets into the postseason because both teams are 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.
Oh yay.
The fanhood argument. Again.
by danmerqury on Jan 14, 2011 12:26 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It's hard not to make
when there are people essentially saying that we’re average because WAR says so.
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
This is correct.
I’d say the A’s are in the top 3-6 teams in the AL. All these naysayers are going to have to face the facts: we will be good this year.
Besides personal threats do you have any evidence that the industry thinks the A's are a "great" team?
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 1:09 PM PST up reply actions
This this this.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 12:51 PM PST up reply actions
Overslot in the 3rd and 4th
Problem solved…
The A’s also have plenty of trade chips if they feel the need to restock the minors at any point this year.
Sigh...another mediocre year, here we come...
Hasn’t Beane realized that this formula doesn’t work? You can have all the great pitching and defense in the world but you’re still going to lose a lot of 2-1 games when you have zero offense. You might get lucky, like the 2010 Giants, but is this really a plan? Let’s hope we get lucky and some of our hitters play above clip?! Cmon! Is there anyone in our lineup that scares and opposing pitcher? Nope. Granted, we may have a shot at the division but aren’t we tired of losing to Boston/NY/Twinkies in the first round. It’s getting old!!!!!
All I wanted was a Pepsi
It Isn't That Bad
The fact is, this team has been improved over the offseason. No, we don’t have a scary team, but we can’t all be Yankees or Red Sox. There’s a chance, and we should just keep on building. Sooner or later, it’ll be our year.
Let’s hope it’s sooner.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:23 AM PST up reply actions
I don't see the A's as all that much better, if at all.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 14, 2011 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
I think you could make an argument that the A's are the fifth-best paper team in the AL.
BoSox, Rangers, Yankees, Rays…then us.
AL Central people would probably disagree.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 11:32 AM PST up reply actions
I think the Twins are better than us
But not the Yanks. AJ Burnett is their 3rd starter and their 30 something offensive players keep getting older. I don’t think they are bad, but I think the A’s are in the same ballpark, atleast.
CAIRO has the Yanks about ~90 wins after adding Soriano.
That’s a big jump up from the A’s. That Yanks offense is pretty good at baseball. And their defense, depth, and relief pitching will all be improved. I think they’ll add Andruw as their 4th OF, maybe one or both of the Hairston boys, and a little more pitching too.
Whereas I think the A’s are done with major-league additions.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 12:01 PM PST up reply actions
And man...talk about strength of schedule...
Even on the offchance that the A’s and NYY end up with the same record, they played one hell of a schedule.
And I still have the Yanks as the best offense in the AL, even with the age
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve got them pegged for 89 wins. I just also have A’s at 87-89. You might think it’s optimistic, but I think the A’s are in the same league.
I think Boston's offense tops the Yanks now
1.Jacoby Ellsbury (CF)
2.Carl Crawford (LF)
3.Dustin Pedroia (2B)
4.Adrian Gonzalez (1B)
5.Kevin Youkilis (3B)
6.David Ortiz (DH)
7.J.D. Drew (RF)
8.Jarrod Saltalamacchia ©
9.Marco Scutaro (SS)
C'mon Beane! Close off the bottom deck and reopen the top!
and considering that there are only three playoff spots availible to those teams being 5th best isn't very good
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Jan 14, 2011 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
I think this franchise is cognizant of not wanting to become an Expos/Pirates level franchise
They are consciously avoiding putting a 100-loss team on the field, ever again. They are consciously avoiding a situation when they have a comically low, 10,000 per game attendance. When teams get into those situations, they become national late-night jokes, laughingstocks for the common fan.
You and I are not the common fan. But Beane/Wolff are selling a product to the common fan.
You are totally cool with the A’s playing in the Coli, because you like cheap tix. And you are totally cool with the team posting a 100-loss season rather than being a faux contender, because you see the value of the No. 1 overall pick the following year, and rebuilding, etc.
But Beane has said before that the team’s poor play in the mid-90s was crippling for a few years to follow, and that he wanted to avoid that happening again. I think there’s some value in being average, and within striking distance. I can understand why you do not believe this…but I also am certain that the team is not marketing it’s product to us, specifically.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 2:09 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Beane's a competitive guy
Even in our rebuilding years he made sure the teams were capable of ~75 wins.
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
by Helloooo 1st on Jan 14, 2011 7:17 PM PST up reply actions
I don't understand this.
We signed three hitters with the hopes of improving the team (DDJ, Matsui, Willingham,) we aggresively pursued a big hitter (Beltre) but failed due to any number of concerns (money, lack of interest from the player, etc.) So when we have the extra money and protected 1st round pick to spend, you’re against it because “it’s not a hitter?” Who would you have preferred to spend 2 years 8 million on?
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 10:23 AM PST up reply actions
I'm against wasting the money and the pick
balfour is good, and will compliment Bailey. But does this really help us any? Let’s say Cahill pitches a gem, and gives up two runs on 4 hits. What does it matter that we have a bullpen to protect the start when we can only put up one run.? DDJ isn’t any kind of improvement in the outfield, Matsui will likely decline, and Willingham is switching leagues and moving to a black hole of a pitchers park. Save the money, save the pick. All I’m saying is our bullpen didn’t project to be a mess as it was constituted, our offense however, does. Spend the money where it’s needed. If not, save it.
All I wanted was a Pepsi
So what's your idea for improving the offense with the options left to us?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
well, i don't have one...I really just wanted to complain
and display my disdain. Touche! I guess I’m just lamenting the pitching/defense heavy, light offense teams we’ve had in recent years. I’m tired of seeing our storied team do it’s best to imitate the Royals/Pirates. Granted, our GM makes smarter decision, but second place really is the same as last in my book. Yes, the team had an improved record last year. And yes, they may have a shot at improving their record in 2011. It’s just hard to continue to go to games when I the odds say that I have about a 50/50 chance of watching something really frustrating happen when our team bats. I guess I’m just rambling, I’ll stop now.
All I wanted was a Pepsi
When was the last time the Pirates had even decent, much less above-average, pitching and defense?!?
"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.
Don't sell the 1979 team short.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Also remember that...
…pitching and defense are about 90% of the game. You make some very pessimistic assumptions that the A’s will simply have no offense at all.
...besides, polls are always an imperfect reflection of complex reality!
Guess You Could Be Right
But we got to be a bit optimistic about this. Obviously our team isn’t the best, so we have to do with what we can get. The team looks better this year, so maybe something will finally happen. I do, however, envision a few more years with the A’s out of the running for the WS. Maybe in 2016?
I have to disagree about Matsui, though. He isn’t incredible, but I don’t think he’ll just fall apart, or even decline that much.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:38 AM PST up reply actions
A few things:
1) DDJ is definitely an improvement.
Rajai Davis: 5 WAR over the last 3 years
Ryan Sweeney: 6.7 WAR over the last 3 years
David Dejesus: 8.5 WAR over the last 3 years
I won’t even mention the WAR of Carson/Watson/Murton/Jackson/whatever else the A’s threw out there. Just because DDJ was a Royal doesn’t mean he was bad; he was very quietly one of the better OF’s in the league the last few years. You may not like the signing because we need something bigger, but to deny that DDJ is an improvement, that seems silly.
2) Matsui is probably a wash with Cust, but probably better by a slight margin.
3) Willingham was in a pitcher’s park in Washington too. I don’t know if there’s a definitive source on park factors, but http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor has Washington at .965 runs (#18) and Oakland at .956 runs (#20.) It’s a pretty marginal switch park-wise in my mind. Looking at the aforementioned guys, Willingham’s 8.1 WAR looks pretty good too.
4) The fact of the matter is that, while our bullpen wasn’t a total mess, it could be improved. Wuertz was awful for the first half, Ziegler can’t pitch to lefties, and there are serious injury concerns with guys like Devine. We can’t “save” a protected pick, so it’s either we buy the type A free agent, or we just have the 2nd round pick.
Do you think the team is better off without Grant Balfour? If you don’t, then I don’t see why you would disagree with this signing. Balfour was very cheap, and was had for less than any impact bat could be at this stage. If we want an Adrian Beltre (which is a step up from the DDJ/Matsui/Willinghams we have acquired or the Manny/Thomes we could acquire) then it’s going to cost 6/100. If we want Grant Balfour, who is a stabilizing force in the pen (though admittedly not a game changer) its 2 years 8 million.
I’m skeptical that we could have acquired another bat at this point that makes a real difference. A Vlad or a Thome might, but they’d make the whole situation crowded and really hinder any chance that Carter might eventually have to get some MLB ABs, so I’m perfectly fine with Balfour.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 10:48 AM PST up reply actions 6 recs
And also...
…who says the A’s won’t acquire another bat? There doesn’t appear to be much available, but who knows. Mebbe Beane might swing a deal, Stranger things have happened. For example, in ST a contender could have an essential position player suffer a season-ending injury, they might have somebody else available (perhaps a minor league talent) and the A’s might be the only team with what the other team needs.
The season starts in April not January. The rosters are not final…yet.
...besides, polls are always an imperfect reflection of complex reality!
Dinging Willingham for moving to a pitcher's park isn't fair.
Everybody has to move to the same park. Even the away teams.
See repetitive insertions are fun.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
TWSS
"Some of us know him as the a-hole who piled into Ray Fosse in an All-Star game (it's why Ray is the way he is folks)" - OptimistPrime
by travdog6 on Jan 14, 2011 1:56 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
H thinks so too.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Doesn't work on softballs
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
No, I'm not sick of losing to Boston/NY/Twins in the first round.
It’s not getting old. It got old in 2006. Now it’s getting far into the past. I’d like to see the A’s back in the ALDS again, even as an underdog.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
by iglew on Jan 14, 2011 12:08 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
iglew wishing for the A's to be in the playoffs?!?!?!?!
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
Proxy for wishing to win the division.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Huh?
“I know this worked for last year’s champions, but it doesn’t work!”
That’s a… novel argument, to say the least.
"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.
And no, I'm not tired of losing in the first round.
The whole “not getting to that point” has caused more fatigue for me recently.
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
It's a pointless plaint anyway
No team is incapable of winning a short playoff series.
"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.
You ask way too much.
You have to remember that Billy Beane is not “God” or some wizard trading with idiots. The A’s can only make deals, moves, trades based on what they’ve got and what other GMs are willing to exchange.
Given that the A’s are (1) a small market team with, (2) an aging ballpark—that is the most hitter unfriendly park in just about all of MLB, and (3) play in a city that is generally not anyone’s first choice (unless you already make it or nearby cities your home), I’d say that Beane has done a fairly decent job so far this offseason all things considered.
Is it enough to turn the A’s into a contender? Who the hell knows!
Based on the WAR and other stat projections, the likelihood is not overwhelming, but there is a chance that enough factors could work out in the A’s favor.
Now of course, we all know that every A’s player is going to suffer career ending injuries, the big one will hit and the epicenter will be right smack dab in the middle of the pitcher’s mound (never mind that the nearest fault isn’t anywhere near the Coliseum), and we’re all going to die—but I wouldn’t count on that happening all in 2011. ;-)
Some of those things won’t happen for at least 1,000,000 years…
...besides, polls are always an imperfect reflection of complex reality!
I don't know what you are talking about
but what I do know is that the A’s might be in the World Series next year.
by PL78 on Jan 16, 2011 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
and I know that I might have a threesome with Christina Hendricks and Megan Fox
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
by mikev on Jan 16, 2011 3:54 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Beltre
Are we going to pursue him next year, and should we?
I think it’s worth a shot, but I’m VERY skeptical about him coming.
Anyone else?
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:30 AM PST reply actions 4 recs
How would we pursue him? The Rangers just locked him down for 6 years.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Oh Yeah
Of curse. I forgot about that.
Well, I think that answers my question.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 9:55 PM PST up reply actions
I think in this case
curse is applicable.
by coffeektchoo on Jan 15, 2011 6:36 AM PST up reply actions
Here's an idea
go to Arlington and steal his contract, scribble out Rangers and he can play for us!
"You ain't got nothin to say, it was perfect" -Dallas Braden, 05/09/10
hell hath no fury like a Cowboys fan scorned. -Leopold Bloom
what year is this?
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
I guess you could trade for him....
It’s not easy filling the shoes of fan favorite Bobby Crosby, but Cliff Pennington says he’s up to the challenge.
by DyeLongJustice on Jan 15, 2011 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
Some more info:
JaneMLB
AP reports Balfour to earn $3.75 million in 2011 and $4 million in 2012. Club option for 2013 worth $4.5 million with a $350,000 buyout.
susanslusser
New bit of Balfour info: The #Athletics will not offer him arbitration if he is a Type-A free agent at the conclusion of the deal.
Thanks for the info Dan
Now I’m getting out of here before I see any more gloom and doom posts about how shitty our off season has been and how terrible this team is gonna be.
I need to find a job anyways….peace. Go A’s@
"You're early, but hang around; we'll have a fight for you sooner or later."
-John "Blue Moon" Odom
by mrod on Jan 14, 2011 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, that last little clause was predictable.
Maybe he’ll be a Type B though.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
Hm. Seems like a bit of an overpay when no one else was even offering multiple years.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
This nonsense needs to be re-evaluated
With GMs gaming the type A/type B thing, I think there needs to be a better way of helping the team that a player left without punishing the player.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
I think it's very likely they'll rewrite that rule in the next CBA.
The current CBA expires at the end of the 2011season. If Balfour is getting a two-year deal, the whole type A thing may no longer matter by the time he’s looking for a new contract.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I think it will change
it seems neither party likes the deal.
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
Wuertz for Kyle Heckathorn - thoughts?
Brewers are clearly in win-now mode, and their major league pen is super-thin and fragile. Wuertz has his current year and then a team option at $3.25M in 2012.
Heckathorn is the 4th-5th best prospect in a decimated Brewers system.
Heckathorn is a 6’6" righy ground ball specialist with a healthy track record. Sickels gave him a B-. He sits in the low 90s while touching mid 90s. (The first link above is his stats, the second is the Brewers’ system). Drafted in the supplemental first round in ‘09 – wouldn’t need to be added to roster for a few years.
Great sinker, good slider, good control – seems like an A’s guy. The A’s lower-level SPs are very thin, as evidenced by Krol standing alone as the only SP prospect in the top 15 of the system. That’s ok for now, when the whole stuff is young…but those young guys will get expensive eventually and there’s no semblance of a bumper crop to eventually replace them.
I looked around and the Brewers were the only NL fit I could find for “win-now contender that glaringly needs relief help.” It wouldn’t make sense to help an AL contender, obviously.
If that’s too little for the A’s in return, throw in your favorite C+ from that system in the Sickels’ link above. Personally Heckathorn was the only guy I really liked after researching that list.
I don’t think the Brewers would have interest in Ziggy, given their horrific infield defense. If the A’s trade any RP at this point, it makes sense to trade the guy most similar to Balfour. Ideally you have different looks out of the pen.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 11:46 AM PST reply actions
I'd be Heckahappy with this
In reality, I have no idea who that man is, but I love the name Heckathorn
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 4 recs
I think you're jumping the gun a bit.
The point of adding Balfour is to add a top end reliever to a bullpen lacking in top end relievers. Trading away one of the other top end relievers in the bullpen will make the whole thing a wash. Plus, the “depth” in the bullpen is an illusion. There’s too many injury/regression/just plain sucky risks to consider right now.
I’d rather the A’s wait til midseason to trade a reliever. Wait til someone establishes themselves.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
I disagree
Last year was pretty worst-case-scenario for the A’s pen. Bullpens are highly unpredictable.
Subject to that caveat, the current A’s pen is, on paper, one of the best in baseball. I’d have no problem moving resources from it to other areas of the team.
"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.
Maybe if you're only looking at the names...
I see a closer with injury problems, who’s coming off surgery, and had a mediocre, declining K rate last year. Wuertz was inconsistent and injured last year. Breslow also had injury problems and is a regression risk. Ziegler couldn’t get lefties out…The rest is a bunch of dreck that you’re hoping to get at least one or two average performances out of.
The bullpen was in bad shape before this. Why did Beane bother to gather a smorgasbord of mediocre 5th starter/back of the bullpen types this offseason? Why even pursue and sign a reliever to a multi year deal? I think this is the first time he signed a FA reliever to a relatively expensive multi-year deal since Rhodes. He was desperate then, and he’s desperate now. And now, our bullpen is merely ok.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 15, 2011 11:40 AM PST up reply actions
If you buy into nonsense "trends", yes, of course it looks bad
It was bad last year. If you assume that all players who were bad last year will be bad this year, then it looks bad.
It’s a bullpen— sometimes shit happens. I have to say, I find it pretty weird that you’re criticizing jd earlier on the thread for overthinking trends and then adopting precisely the same fallacy down here. The guys who weren’t that great last year are, for all practical purposes, the same guys who were the best bullpen in the majors in 2009.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Are you completely obtuse?
Saying all the top end relievers in the bullpen have significant injury concerns is trend analysis? Really?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 15, 2011 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
You're not counting Tyson Ross as a SP in the top 15?
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I got my signals crossed on the Hottie/Prospect lists
(Total oversight, actually).
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 1:15 PM PST up reply actions
I'd do that trade in a heartbeat, based on name alone.
But as far as the actual guy…I’m not sure a 6.5 K/9 rate in A-ball will cut it.
He might be a rare case of guy pitching excessively to contact
The walk rate is very good…the hits allowed I give him a mulligan for, because he’s a wormburner with a Single A defense behind him.
The k rate…yeah, you’re right. I am wrong. I went back and looked at Cahill’s minor league numbers, hoping the K rate was comparably low. But Cahill obliterates him. And moving up levels, that would only get worse for Heck.
Gotta do a complete 180 here. I wouldn’t be at all excited about dealing Wuertz for the guy. And like I said, I couldn’t find another contending, win-now team in the NL that was hard-up for relievers. I say we go to camp with what we have.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 1:06 PM PST up reply actions
And at the deadline, you'll always have Ned Colleti...
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
Well, to be fair, Cahill was a fantastic prospect.
But most sinkerballers still manage to K a lot in A-ball. It’s when they graduate to AAA and MLB where the K’s go down.
Yeah. I would imagine guys with K rates as low as Heck's in A ball almost never pan out.
Would be an interesting sort of inverse-study to Paul’s “single A hitter k-rates” analysis.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 2:12 PM PST up reply actions
Aren't sinkerballers underrated as prospects?
IIRC there was a study done at Fangraphs indicating as much. Heckathorn doesn’t exactly excite me, but I’d be okay with 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.
didn't we just trade this guy to K.C. for DeJesus?
Sounds a lot like Mazzaro, just with a MUCH cooler name, which is enough to get you a few extra ticks on the prospect meter.
I’d be ok with this deal, I’m always for picking up young pitchers that can consistently throw strikes with a low to mid 90’s fastball that has plus movement.
Why bother signing Balfour then?
If Wuertz is healthy, he might be the most unhittable pitcher in the ‘pen. Plus, he’s only got a year left and he’s not that expensive. Having Balfour/Breslow, Wuertz, then Bailey is the coveted “6 inning game.”
Also, if all of these guys are that good/healthy, it has the ancillary benefit of not needing our starters to go 7, 8 innings a start.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 14, 2011 12:32 PM PST up reply actions
I have no opinion on Hecka-good, personally, but in general
if the A’s have deepened their bullpen in order to trade a reliever for a good prospect, I’m all for it.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Dumb dumb dum dum dum
We won’t give Cust 4 million, but we’ll give it to Balfour? AND give up a 2nd round pick? I don’t get this.
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
We gave Matsui 4 instead of Cust
I like Cust, but do we really need two left handed full time DHs? Balfour is an improvement that could’ve been made, so Beane made it.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 1:20 PM PST up reply actions
my point is that he let cust go in the first place
refusing to pay him 4 mil. but he’s willing to give it to a reliever.
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
Matsui has a much better track record then Cust
Balfour (an elite reliever) in our pen makes the entire staff better. I think its money well spent.
C'mon Beane! Close off the bottom deck and reopen the top!
"Much better track record"?
Matsui, career wRC+: 126
Cust, career wRC+: 127
And, believe me, you do not want people to go deeper into depth on this issue. Using career stats is actually generous to Matsui.
"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 Jan 14, 2011 8:28 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
If Jack Cust were to face Grant Balfour 20 times
My predictions:
10 strikeouts, 4 pop outs, 5 ground outs, 1 HR.
C'mon Beane! Close off the bottom deck and reopen the top!
Everyone knows those are useless...
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 14, 2011 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
I was partially being sarcastic
But my point was that Balfour is more of an asset then Cust, especially if we have Matsui.
C'mon Beane! Close off the bottom deck and reopen the top!
really?
did you really write that? on this site? wow. you betta check yo’self before you wreck yo’self.
I doubt Cust has ever gone 20 at-bats in his life without a walk
The man worked full counts in T-ball.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 14, 2011 2:14 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
You lose.
Sept 22-27, 2010 = 24 plate appearances with no walks.
He also had 21 plate appearances with no walks on June 4-12, 2010.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I would LOVE to see T-ball footage
where a 4-year old Jack Cust works a full count and then is called out on strikes.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
We should package Wuertz + Ross and see if we can get a B/B+ prospect
C'mon Beane! Close off the bottom deck and reopen the top!
or just keep wuertz and ross
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 Jan 14, 2011 2:58 PM PST up reply actions 4 recs
Isn't Ross himself a B prospect?
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 14, 2011 10:19 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I dig it
This guy is comparable to Soriano, in a lot of ways, at less than a quarter of the price tag.
Our ’pen, with Devine Intervention coming back and Harden/McCarthy and Outman in the mix as well as Wuertz and Bailey is shaping up as full of reasonable options. ST is going to be a madhouse this March, I cannot wait to go there and see it for myself.
Empires may crumble, FIP statistics may lose their meaning, but only a Keetsa mattress puts years back on your life while you're sleeping.
Relievers may have been far overrated at one time,
but adding a good reliever, and creating bullpen depth amongst your “high leverage” relievers, is not insignificant. Sure, it’s not like adding someone of Balfour’s ability at SP, but you don’t get those for anywhere near $4/year, either.
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
For $4 a year, you'd be lucky to get an eight-year-old child from Zimbabwe...
"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.
Sally Struthers says I can feed 20 hungry children AND her for just $4/year.
I believe the part about the 20 children.
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
If by "envision" you mean recent TMZ footage, so can I.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I'd like to blame the misspell on my keyboard.
Unfortunately, the"i" and “e” aren’t next to eachother, so I’ll blame it on the time of day. Or, arthritis. Or, poor lighting, or… OK, ok, it was brain fade. Anyhow, the video would probably include her saying, " Please send more. See how weak this child is? I can easily out wrestle him for his rice. Only you can make a difference. Just $4 a year, or the price of a Starting Pitcher, you can help me teach him not to let me take away his rice."
Could somebody please explain to me why thejd44's profile picture has an "x" for all of his comments in this thread?
I’m sure the answer is simple, but right now I’m confused.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
I'm not seeing it
So I don’t really have a good
Shades
X-planation for you.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 14, 2011 4:44 PM PST up reply actions
I'm guessing for some reason the pic is incompatible with
Your browser.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
So you can see the pic then?
Obviously, at this point the question is quite silly. I just didn’t recall seeing anything like this before, and the fact that this coincided with thejd44 being bombarded with people who disagree with his point of view just seemed curious to me.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
I get a solid black box for his avatar
"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins
by justANotherAsFan on Jan 15, 2011 8:24 AM PST up reply actions
And a very handsome black box indeed,
if I may say so.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I think you're green with envy
"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins
by justANotherAsFan on Jan 16, 2011 7:38 AM PST up reply actions
I'm getting this too and his profile is unclickable
Did he delete his account?
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 18, 2011 1:25 PM PST up reply actions
RIP thejd44
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Jan 19, 2011 7:51 AM PST up reply actions
I hate to see people leave after threads like this
Hopefully, one day, he will return will a newfound ability to not have people misunderstand him on the internet.
"Juuuuust a bit outside" - Harry Doyle
A good plan:
Step 1: Keep everyone. All year (barring making a deal to cover for an injury).
Step 2: Sign Duchscherer to a 1/1 deal.
Step 3: Party in the USA.
Step 4: Win all day.
Step 5: Don’t let the Giants have the spotlight for too long :)
Sign Duchscherer?
Not a good idea. I think his career is pretty much over. He is ver injury-prone, and I’m not even sure whether he’ll pitch well when he’s NOT injured.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:01 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not usually in favour of giving relievers real monies.....
But for some reason I really really love this signing.
Probably because
1. It was nearly at the same time as the bat-shiz insane Soriano contract
2. It shows free agents DO want to come to us
3. We’re still trying to improve
4. Balfour is an aussie
:)
Is this the real life-
Is this just fantasy-
Caught in a landslide-
No escape from reality-
Now Daniel #4
is not a positive
You are a fellow Kiwi (LOL)
I'm married to one so I have to say that
Is this the real life-
Is this just fantasy-
Caught in a landslide-
No escape from reality-
Maybe he can throw a bit more consistently than Mitchel Johnson?
I could go into this a bit more, but there’s a lot about that guy I like. Mostly, though, it’s his ‘continual serving up of nice wide long hops’
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
The ninth fastest thirty year old in San Francisco
Same Here
Balfour may not be Soriano, but he seems to be comparable to him. We got him for a cheaper deal, and yes, free agents ARE still interested in the A’s.
IN YOUR FACE BELTRE! WE DON’T NEED YOU ANYMORE! GUYS DO WANT TO COME WITH US! AND WE HAVE AN ALL-STAR THIRD BASEMAN, KOUZMANOFF, WHO’S MUCH BETTER THAN…….okay, maybe not.
At least not the fourth sentence.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:05 PM PST up reply actions
As a NRAF living in South Florida....
…..I have seen Balfour pitch many times. The guy has electrifying stuff and some serious attitude. Great signing for reasonable $$$ and a wise use of the protected pick scenario. Good Job Billy and Co.!
Being that Balfour is an Aussie
He probably is very arrogant and thinks he is better than anyone else.
This may be a good thing.
Flagged for obvious violation of CG#2
"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.
You have to be kidding
This is a joke between two kiwis.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
A Joke that only Kiwis or Aussies would understand.
It is not an attack of a player or a person.
Sorry but you are going overboard if you flag someone for something as innocuous as that. Actually I take offense to the fact you would be so petty but I guess it’s your right.
by Trainman on Jan 14, 2011 9:22 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I assume he was joking
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 14, 2011 10:19 PM PST up reply actions
I wasn't
"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.
In that case I don't see a bright future for your flag
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 15, 2011 3:59 AM PST up reply actions
It is a "C+" flag at best
with little upside and great potential to flameout.
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
It's trolling to note that an obviously bigoted post is obviously bigoted?
"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.
Trainman is right Paul
That is how Kiwis see Aussies.
Aussies think Kiwis have sexy times with sheep, and Kiwis think Aussies are arrogant dickbags.
But we’re still close like cousins who hate each other LOL
Is this the real life-
Is this just fantasy-
Caught in a landslide-
No escape from reality-
Dude he was just helping that sheep over the fence.
repeatedly
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
Dude, this is how British people see Australians, too
well, that, and Ashes losers
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
The ninth fastest thirty year old in San Francisco
I remember last time I was in NZ
I had a drink that was super warm. I asked the waiter for ice and they told me, “Sorry, we forgot the recipe.”
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
I did not like the signing. I'd much rather the A's have gotten the draft pick than sign a reliever.
"So, the A's new organizational philosophy involves adding Viking relievers? God save us all."
"Berserkers: the new market inefficiency."
-LonestarBall
Yes.
That pick coulda been a good bat.
"Carter's 25-game hitting streak isn't any normal streak. He's 46 for 97 (.474 average) during the run, adding 16 walks and compiling 81 total bases in the process. I'm out of superlatives for what he's doing." - Kevin Goldstein
I'm Quite Happy About It
I’ve had my eye on Balfour for sometime.
by Billy Ray Williams on Jan 14, 2011 10:32 PM PST up reply actions
Stalker
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 15, 2011 3:56 AM PST up reply actions
Spot is still relevant!
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 14, 2011 10:19 PM PST reply actions
A few thoughts...
— You never know with relievers. Balfour might stink next year, and then the moaning about the lost draft pick will never cease.
— The bullpen seems thin to me, at least at the moment. That could change, depending on health and performance. If things go well, the pen will go back to being a team strength – a positive. If not, Balfour provides a needed arm.
— This seems like a bargain contract, for a pitcher who should thrive at the Coliseum.
— I always get confused. First, I must worry that the A’s are losing their window of opportunity while our young starters are in the fold. Then, I must worry that we gave up our second round pick in the best draft ever. You must decide. The A’s are either trying to contend or not.
then again, every year seems to be either the best draft ever or the worst draft ever
"So, the A's new organizational philosophy involves adding Viking relievers? God save us all."
"Berserkers: the new market inefficiency."
-LonestarBall
I think that's the human condition
It works for a lot of things. Presidents are never appreciated in their time, education leaders seem to think that America’s kids are getting stupider every single year (or at least that’s how they treated us when I was in school), etc. Evaluation has to wait until years afterward.
I like the signing, but has anyone considered what it does to our bullpen?
It looks like Breslow will be the lone lefty unless Blevins or Kilby are able to sneak in due to an injury, etc. I have a feeling that Geren is really going to misuse him if he is.
Miscounted.
Blevins should be in if Devine and Outman starts out on DL/AAA/whatever, and De los Santos, etc don’t steal a spot. New question: Is Blevins a lock purely because he’s a lefty?
No, Blevins isn't a lock because he's got options.
These 7 guys are locks, if they are healthy:
Devine, Ziegler, Bailey, Balfour, Wuertz, Breslow, and the loser of the McCarthy/Harden fifth-starter battle.
All of those guys have to make the big league club out of camp if they are healthy, because they have guaranteed major league contracts and/or no option years remaining.
In reality, one of those eight dudes will be hurt and Geren will have his two-lefty pen with Blevins anyway.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 15, 2011 1:49 AM PST up reply actions
The A's first three picks in the 2011 draft
First round: No. 18 overall
Third round: No. ~109 overall
Fourth round: No. ~140 overall
Pretty huge gap due to the loss of the second rounder and no comp picks. Hopefully someone highly touted slips and the A’s can give out another record $1M+ bonus to the 3rd/4th rounder, similar to the Stassi situation.
It also arguably places some added importance on that No. 18 overall pick. They damn well better hit on that one.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Jan 15, 2011 1:46 AM PST reply actions
I'm not sure it would be any different with the 72nd or whatever pick.
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Jan 15, 2011 3:56 AM PST up reply actions
this is hilarious
im all for them spending money who gives a shit about a second rounder i dont know the results but im willing to bet we dont have many second rounders doing anything right now
Trevor Cahill: second rounder
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
Dallas Braden: 24th rounder
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
Kurt Suzuki: Second rounder
"Some of us know him as the a-hole who piled into Ray Fosse in an All-Star game (it's why Ray is the way he is folks)" - OptimistPrime
Brad Ziegler: 20th rounder
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
Um, I would take Anderson 100 times out of 100 over Ziegler
so I dunno WTF your point is by saying that.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
Rickey Henderson: 4th rounder
Is this the real life-
Is this just fantasy-
Caught in a landslide-
No escape from reality-
Wait, what?
It was in response to Chris Schlitz’s statement more than Dan’s. I didn’t know we were listing them in order of ability or anything.
Chill?
"Some field has fences, and sometime, the field cant hold a player, but most of the time, a field cant hold Domingo"
www.domingobeisbol.com/Domingo/Home.html
72nd pick
Pat Osborne 2002
RObert MCFall 2003
William Killian2004
Ralph Henriquez 2005
Robert Fontaine 2006
Brian Reike 2007
Charlie Blackman2008
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
by Future Ed on Jan 15, 2011 6:00 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
This
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 16, 2011 11:08 AM PST up reply actions
also
cant people just be happy they are trying to win. at least they have some depth and im all for not watching jack strike 3 no swing cust. people should just stop complaining like someone said above alot of people are saying at worst we are sleepers and then you come on here and its the same 4 people bitching about not making moves and then turning around and complain when they do
we dont need this with all our injured relievers
With Balfour, 33, the A’s already-strong bullpen gets all the better. He had a 2.28 ERA last year, and in 2008, when the Rays went to the World Series, he was among the best in the game, with a 1.54 ERA. Opponents hit .216 off the Australian last year – .143 in 2008.
if they dont contend then it still isnt a waste
I'll just be blunt and say this:
This post is a terrific example of what not to do when analyzing a player. It is the definition of cherrypicking. You cannot just ignore entire seasons because they don’t line up with whatever drum you’re beating.
So, stop doing it.
"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.
and you must know more then the "expert"
because they all like the signing
Who the fuck is this "you" that you're talking to?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 15, 2011 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
People who don't seem to compusively hate everything the A's do?
Which seems to describe a handful of Eeyores ’round these here parts.
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
Yes, and people have responded to those people by making plenty of reasonable arguments as to why Balfour isn't a bad move.
The OP should at least use the reply button when making his passive aggressive attacks.
Which seems to describe what’s lately been a common occurrence here. Apparently, everyone’s who’s not overly optimistic about the A’s is at risk of being snidely derided — as demonstrated by your “Eeyore” comment. When people make unreasonable criticisms of the A’s, people will make reasoned rebuttals in turn, as shown here by the Balfour and Kouzmanoff arguments. But lumping together and deriding all criticism of the A’s as overt negativity, even the reasonable critiques, is quite counterproductive as well.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jan 15, 2011 6:37 PM PST up reply actions
There's actually a middle ground between
“overly optimistic” and “absurdly pessimistic” — which is where 95% of the community sits.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
That makes sense.
We live in pessimistic times overall and so people tend to be naturally pessimistic about those things they love (like the A’s). It’s a natural emotional reaction. It’s also frustration out of love for the team.
...besides, polls are always an imperfect reflection of complex reality!
... including the people you're calling names
“reasonably pessimistic” is how I would describe a lot of people.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
I don't know if I can really follow up on the last four posts, but
What!?!?!
Sources: A’s Want Fuentes
I was mildly surprised (and pleased) by the Balfour signing, I really didn’t expect interest in another top reliever!
I think a deal must be in the works
We have a very bad situation at the moment with our crucial infield: Kouz isn’t happy, Pennington will not be ready til late spring training , if then, Rosales will probably not be ready by the start of the season and that leaves Sogard and Tolleson as our utility/SS…
"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins
by justANotherAsFan on Jan 15, 2011 9:16 AM PST up reply actions
good point
My first thought was that this makes Wuertz potentially expendable at the trade deadline if the A’s aren’t in it, but still makes for a good pen in 2012, when Devine and Outman will hopefully be in better form.
Fuentes would make an awkward situation
I agree, there probably is a deal in the works, probably involving Wuertz, Ziegler, Breslow, and/or Blevins (Fuentes is a lefty, so now Breslow and Blevins are fair game.) I’m actually ok with seeing Sogard and Tolleson stopgap for a little bit while Pennington and Rosales recover; I think I’m required to be after how much I’ve been pushing Sogard in the prospect threads.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 15, 2011 9:29 AM PST up reply actions
If the Yankees offered Montero for Soria
I wonder if we could swing something with Bailey. At the least it shows the value of top relievers in the trade market and I expect us to make a move and get something worthwhile. I’d like to see a Zieglar or Blevins trade but with 3+ potential closers on the roster, I have a feeling it’s Bailey.
I don't believe these rumors about Montero
He is too good. No way Yankees have been offering him for Soria, Smoak etc.
"Not in your wildest alcoholic nightmare would you ever imagine such events unfolding!" Bill King
by Buck Turgidson on Jan 15, 2011 12:18 PM PST up reply actions
We've traced the origin of the Montero-for-Soria idea.
It was born out of someone’s liberal interpretation of someone else’s offhand comment, and then repeated all over the place as if it were fact. But there is, in fact, no evidence that the Yankees ever offered Montero for Soria, and plenty of reason to think they didn’t.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
If we got Montero for Bailey
I’d be extremely happy, to say the least.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 15, 2011 2:08 PM PST up reply actions
I doubt it's Bailey, given that he just had a surgical procedure.
If someone’s on the block, I’d guess Wuertz or Ziggy (who’s arby eligible), more likely Wuertz because he’s 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
Is Balfour the first Australian player we've had?
The Australian national baseball team’s uniform is identical to the A’s one, so I’m a little surprised more Aussies haven’t gone out of their way to play for us. Dave Nillson where you at???
Doyle says hi
"So, the A's new organizational philosophy involves adding Viking relievers? God save us all."
"Berserkers: the new market inefficiency."
-LonestarBall
"So, the A's new organizational philosophy involves adding Viking relievers? God save us all."
"Berserkers: the new market inefficiency."
-LonestarBall
dammit, I wrote a header, but it erased it because it was in < > 's
"So, the A's new organizational philosophy involves adding Viking relievers? God save us all."
"Berserkers: the new market inefficiency."
-LonestarBall
note this picture is from the Australian National team
As he did not wear # 14 in his week as an active Athletic.
and note the black shoes
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
Aussies cant style like us
White shoes or GTFO :)
by PL78 on Jan 16, 2011 7:58 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
balfour and aussies etc
you hardcore A’s fans will love Balfour – he is a competitor and thrives on the big moment. A great signing – really proud of the balf!!!
by thunder from Oz on Jan 17, 2011 12:46 AM PST up reply actions
i dont think its ziegler
if anybody its gonna be wuertz and i think hes happy just taking a stacked bullpen into the season and then if we go south we can trade pieces then. there really isnt many upgrades over kouz
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
