2012: A Look Ahead
by notsellingjeans on Feb 21, 2011 10:00 PM PST
Email
PrintZiPs, Marcel, CHONE, and CAIRO all project the world will not end in 2012. With the world's fate secure, here's some analysis and predictions about the A's front-office decision-making a year from now.
Rule 5 Protection:
In 2010, the A's had a large crop of youngsters that needed to be protected from the Rule 5 Draft. Josh Donaldson and Eric Sogard were added mid-season due to injuries, but they would've needed to have been added at the end of the season anyway. Once the season ended, five of their minor league teammates - Adrian Cardenas, Michael Taylor, Corey Brown, Sean Doolittle, and Trystan Magnuson - joined Donaldson and Sogard on the 40-man roster.
This year's crop? It's much smaller. First-time Rule 5 eligibles after the 2011 season will be guys who were drafted out of college in 2008 or high-school draftees from 2007. Since Tyson Ross came up last year, the only obvious candidate that I can see is 2008's No. 12 overall pick, Jemile Weeks.
A Bevy of 2012 Draft Picks
The A's entered this most recent off-season with a protected first-round pick, and that gave them the luxury of pursuing a Type A free agent while sacrificing only the No. 75 overall pick (their second rounder). Alas, the Type A free agent they signed was only reliever Grant Balfour and not a star, but at least the team grabbed a slightly-below market value talent that improves the team.
The downside is that the 2011 draft might be thin for the A's. The A's first three picks in this year's draft are #18 overall, #105, and #136. Ouch. It will be tough to produce a great yield in next year's draft with such a glaring paucity of high-end picks.
But the 2012 draft will provide some unique opportunities. Josh Willingham and David DeJesus finished the 2010 season hovering on the borderline of Type A status, based upon Eddie Bajek's reverse-engineering of the Elias rankings (courtesy MLBTR). Willingham was one of the last Type A qualifiers in the NL, and DeJesus narrowly missed Type A qualification in the AL. With a healthy, career average season by their own standards, both players may qualify as Type A FA's after 2011. Given the horrible upcoming FA market, and Willingham and DeJesus' reasonable 2011 salaries of $6M apiece, one can safely assume that both players would decline arbitration offers after a healthy 2011 given the overwhelming likelihood that they will command multi-year deals on the open market.
If this happens, I would advocate the A's allow both players to walk, even if they were key contributors in a 2011 A's playoff run.
By letting two Type A FA's walk, the A's would be setting themselves up for an outstanding 2012 draft - six of the first 80 picks (including the No. ~20-to-25 overall, after winning 85-90 games in '11; four compensatory picks combined for DeJesus and Willingham; and their own second rounder at pick No. ~80).
Contrast that haul with the 2011 draft, in which the A's will only have one of the first 100 picks. And keep in mind that this franchise needs to churn out major leaguers in the draft annually in order to succeed on its current budget. Having six of those top 80 picks in 2012 makes it more likely that the A's will hit the lottery on the elite, 4-WAR-a-year talent that they so desperately need to find in the draft.
DeJesus and Willingham aren't the A's only free agents after 2011, either:
*If the team declined Wuertz's 2012 option for $3.25M, he would likely qualify as a Type B, and he would also yield a draft pick. But given the explosion of the reliever market this off-season, Wuertz at $3.25M for 2012 looks like a safe bet.
*Mark Ellis ($6M) and Hideki Matsui ($4.25M with incentives) might be brought back in 2012, despite being on the wrong side of 35. But I don't think either will be offered arbitration, because it would increase their 2012 salary and both players, if they return, would come back at reduced rates. No draft pick compensation here.
*Coco Crisp provides a great example of the flaws of the current compensation system. Even if he has a good, healthy year, Coco very likely won't be a Type A or B, because the stats Elias uses for outfielders don't include defense or stolen bases. Instead, Coco gets lumped in with the 1b/OF/DH group, and gets rated on the following five stats: PA, AVG, OBP, HR, RBI. Coco doesn't shine in any of those areas, and thus he rated a paltry "44" on the Elias 100-point scale after 2010. I would expect that he doesn't qualify as a Type A or B after 2011. But he is still an invaluable part of A's going forward, especially given the lack of internal CF candidates. He likes Oakland and seems like a great fit here. I hope the team re-signs him to a two-year, market-level deal after the season or extends him for a similar term at some point in the middle of the year.
Free Agents, and Filling from Within
Next year's free agent list is very uninspiring. Thankfully, the A's will have practically their entire pitching staff returning under contract in 2012, with the exception of Harden and McCarthy. The continued growth of Outman, Tyson Ross, Blevins, FDLS, and Magnuson should help bolster this group even further.
On the offensive side, I would advocate the re-signing of Crisp in CF. But what about the losses of Willingham and DeJesus, and possibly even Ellis and Matsui?
I think that the budget might dictate that these holes are filled internally for the most part, and that might not be a bad thing.
My predictions/wishes:
*Chris Carter takes over in left field in 2012, after a full year in Sacramento chasing flies. Hopefully he looks like less of a drunken sailor out there after getting 140 more games under his belt.
*Michael Taylor has a rebound year in 2011, and positions himself to compete with Sweeney for the RF job in 2012. At the worst, he's the platoon guy/4th outfielder.
*At second base, I'm content to let Ellis walk after 2011 if he's producing 1.5 WAR at age 35 for $6M. I think the money could be better spent on long-term extensions for Barton or the non-Anderson SPs. In 2012, I could see a Spring Training battle royale between Sogard, Rosales, Weeks, and Cardenas. One of those four dudes will to be ready to take the bull by the horns by then. It's a metaphor, but it'll really happen though.
*The one free agent splurge? I'd love the A's to take a multi-million dollar gamble on a return to health for West Coaster Grady Sizemore. I think that 2011 will be a recovery year for Sizemore, as he tries to regain his form coming back from the microfracture surgery that wiped out his entire 2010. He won't cost a draft pick, because he won't accumulate great statistics over the 2010-2011 seasons. But the upside might be there as he returns to health in 2012. I don't see him returning to a high level as an everyday CF, but I would want the A's to sign him with the intention of getting him 500 at-bats in left field, at DH, and as a backup CF to Crisp. Sizemore would help compensate for the team's lack of left-handed hitting with the departure of DeJesus and the departure or decline of 38-year-old Hideki Matsui.
That would create an offense that looks like this:
C: Suzuki, Powell
1b: Barton
2b: Cardenas, Sogard
SS: Pennington, Rosales
3b: Kouz
LF: Carter
CF: Crisp
RF: Taylor, Sweeney
DH: Sizemore
Lots of L-R flexibility there, lots of positional flexibility, and very good defense. What are your thoughts?
226 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I could look it up, but you might have the answer at your fingertips...
How many of the current A’s position player starters were drafted higher than #18?
"... and A-Rod is forced to admit that Dallas got to the Hall of Fame before he did." - en
None
Pennington and Barton were the only first round draft picks to my knowledge.
Even a blind squirrel is right twice a day.
So, this is not such a disaster, after all...
we’re guaranteed a position player draft pick better than anyone on our current roster. Score!!!
"... and A-Rod is forced to admit that Dallas got to the Hall of Fame before he did." - en
by FoolshGame22 on Feb 21, 2011 10:31 PM PST up reply actions
What makes you think they'll draft a position player?
The A’s desperately need to restock on pitching prospects. Besides Ross, Krol and de los Santos, pretty much all of them are wildcards or fliers or relievers. That said, drafting the best player available always seems to make the most sense.
well, maybe it is just me...
but, it is my humble opinion that they need hitters more than pitchers in the next 5 years. I mean, you can never have too much good pitching and all… and I also agree with your implication that Beane will is best at drafting pitching… he hasn’t been all that great at drafting extraordinary hitters during his tenure. In fact, he’s been downright horrible at it. Maybe he should employ a few AN’ers, who clearly have the ability to project better than he does.
"... and A-Rod is forced to admit that Dallas got to the Hall of Fame before he did." - en
by FoolshGame22 on Feb 21, 2011 11:53 PM PST up reply actions
IMO, you shouldn't draft based on the needs of your major league team.
Even still, after Cahill, Anderson, Braden and Gonzalez, they don’t have a lot of internal options. Not good ones anyway. Injuries scare me, and they should scare you, too, since pitchers deal with injuries so often. It’s probably best to have a good balance of pitching and hitting prospects as often as possible.
It’s not really warranted to blame Beane for being “downright horrible at drafting extraordinary hitters.” First off, who really is good at drafting extraordinary hitters? It’s easy when you have a surefire guy to pick, in ilk of a Strasburg, a Harper, or an Upton. Guys like Pujols, drafted in the 13th round, are extremely rare. Furthermore, if you want to fault Beane, you have to realize that the rest of the scouting department is also responsible, as well as the entire development program. He was GM when they drafted Swisher and Ethier, and was asst. GM when they drafted Chavez. They haven’t been “downright horrible,” but yeah, they’ve had much more success with pitchers.
I'd tell you who was pretty good at it (drafting extraordinary hitters)...
but, I’m afraid I’d give away my magnum opus post on AN.
We do agree, however, that if Strasburg were available at #18, I’d be on board with drafting him.
"... and A-Rod is forced to admit that Dallas got to the Hall of Fame before he did." - en
by FoolshGame22 on Feb 22, 2011 12:28 AM PST up reply actions
It particularly makes sense right now since the A's don't really have any good prospects anywhere...
I’d hardly let B-grade guys stop me from taking the guy I think is the most talented.
"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.
Weeks probably has a better chance to be the 2B than Cardenas, but otherwise it looks fine
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 22, 2011 12:23 AM PST reply actions
Does Cardenas profile better or 3b, or are you saying that Weeks is simply a better bet going forward?
My thought was that Cardenas will have nothing to prove at AAA by 2012, whereas Weeks will still be gaining some seasoning at that point (and have all three options remaining).
I was guessing that Weeks would be the “shuttle guy” that year, jumping up to the bigs in case of injury multiple times during the year.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 5:23 AM PST up reply actions
I'm thinking Cardenas makes a better 3B and Weeks will be a better player, but you
could be right that 2012 is the year when Cardenas holds the 2B till Weeks or Green is ready.
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 22, 2011 5:51 AM PST up reply actions
That's my thought.
And I have Kouz making ~$5.75-6M to be the starting third baseman in his final year of arbitration in 2012.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 5:56 AM PST up reply actions
Why rid of Ellis?
I think it is important to have a veteran on the club and our team is very young. Ellis was a 3.2 WAR player last season. The Fans at Fangraphs project him to be a 1.8 WAR player in 2011. Assuming he falls to a 1.3 WAR player in 2012 when wins ought to be worth roughly 5.2 to 5.4M why not resign him and have him be the bridge to Weeks or Green?
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
I'm skeptical that he will hold up physically for two more seasons, but we'll see.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 6:03 AM PST up reply actions
Even as a backup
I think he could be a leader, though he is a quiet, lead by example type.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
You really don't want your INF back ups to only play 2b.
There aren’t enough positions on the roster to have a player that cant play SS or 3b and couldn’t hit enough to be a replacement level 1bman. You have to have flexibility or being a bench player doesn’t make sense. Ellis will either be the starting 2bman or will not be on the team, and thats the way it should be.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Feb 22, 2011 9:16 AM PST up reply actions
yeah that is a good point
I just hate the idea of having a team with little veteran leadership.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
By then, several guys
(Cahill, Anderson, Gio, Barton, Bailey) will have joined Suzuki and Braden as players with enough tenure to potentially act as leaders. Or Beane can sign John Jaha.
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 2b you mean DL then yes, I agree that Weeks projects better.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Feb 22, 2011 9:10 AM PST up reply actions
12/21/12
Is the supposed end of the world. Note even the Mayans will impede the 2012 season. I am pretty sure that CHONE’s 2013 projections will assume about 50% of major league rosters will consist of replacement level apocalypse survivors and/or zombies.
Dude, the A's lost Vin Mazzaro, Justin Marks, and Corey Brown. The future is GONE!
GONE, I tell you. Let’s not even entertain the idea that the A’s won’t suck in 2012 and beyond.
by AgitationStation on Feb 22, 2011 12:34 AM PST reply actions
If the A's future
depended on Mazzaro, Marks, and Brown, I’m not sure it’s gotten much worse.
by el generico on Feb 22, 2011 1:25 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I also think something definitive will happen with Donaldson before 2012
He won’t repeat AAA Sacramento for the third straight year, right? By next year, he either:
a.) usurps Powell as the No. 2 catcher
b.) plays his way into a starting ML gig, and the A’s trade him or Suzuki (far more likely Donaldson, IMO)
c.) flames out. This scenario involves him being at AAA Sac for the third year in a row, and burning his last option year as the injury “shuttle up/down” catcher.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 5:26 AM PST reply actions
Maybe but there isn't really a ready replacement till Stassi in A+ ball. They may need Donaldson
to be the AAA catcher for 3 years. I guess Ortiz is an option but he has to stay healthy.
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 22, 2011 5:53 AM PST up reply actions
I like his bat a lot,
but even I have to concede that Ortiz simply does not look like a player who can handle catching at a major league level. He’s probably ticketed for left field at some point.
"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.
Sizemore doesn't make sense
Sizemore has a very affordable club option (8.5M) if he returns to form, Cleveland will pick it up and if they choose to move him will trade him at a heavy price. If Sizemore has a crappy year in ‘11 they likely wouldn’t pick up the option, but then Oakland would be gambling on a guy who has had three straight bad years (doesn’t seem wise). Also, Grady is an amazing fielder, makes more sense to have him in center and move Crisp than the other way around, but if you are going to use Sizemore at DH, it makes even less sense in my mind, because DH’s are so cheap and easy to come by, you can get a fairly serviceable one at a bargain basement price, whereas you’re going to pay Sizemore in part for his defensive abilities and then not use them. Can’t see why a Sizemore coming off three years of disappointment would then turn around and sign onto hitting in the cavernous Coliseum. I think if he ends up anywhere due to his own decision, it is Seattle his hometown.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Yeah, this came up maybe a month ago around here
Sizemore doesn’t have a clear path to an A’s future for the reasons you mentioned. But, that said, if he’s mediocre in 2011, I wouldn’t mind picking him up cheap for 4th OF to compete with Taylor. If he sucks, well, he’s 4th OF; if he’s any good, then we’d have a mega steal on our hands.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Feb 22, 2011 7:23 AM PST up reply actions
After what will be three straight seasons of medicore though
Don’t we start getting into the territory where it is obvious what was once there is now gone? (Though I am sure we can find an example of a guy who was good then long medicore, then good again – Bobby Crosby maybe? ;) haha )
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
It depends on his defense
If he’s mediocre with the bat, but still remains a good defender (definitely a significant question after the surgery he had), you can’t really go wrong with a one year contract for anything less than $7M.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Feb 22, 2011 8:20 AM PST up reply actions
I think he is going to be one of those weird players
Either he does well, then doesnt become available til 2013 anyhow, and gets a big huge unaffordable contract. Or… he does crappy, yet I still think will have an inflated “potential” type contract. I mean if you could get him for $7M yeah, why not right? I just don’t see that happening. I think he’ll be overpriced for us either because he is good, or simply overpriced.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Good points, I forgot the 2012 option for Sizemore.
Well then my best guess at the 2012 DH is an aging left-handed hitter, with Matsui as the most obvious choice if he doesn’t collapse next year in Oakland.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 10:52 AM PST up reply actions
I think Carter is probably Matsui's heir apparent, ultimately.
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
"Ultimately" is implicit in the term "heir",
Utlimately, he would be Matsui’s successor; he’s the heir right now.
And as long as I’m being pedantic, I should point out that Carter is the heir presumptive, not the heir apparent.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
As soon as I saw the first sentence,
I already knew the second one was coming… though, maybe that’s just because I had inheritance on the brain after spending (okay, wasting) half the morning reading about the house of Habsburg.
"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.
Reading about the Habsburgs
is never a waste of time.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
If you're bald, there is no hair apparent.
Pedantic that, you pedophile.
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
Frigging LOL Nico!
Nice one bud…
:-)
"You're early, but hang around; we'll have a fight for you sooner or later."
-John "Blue Moon" Odom
Mccarthy does not have to be a goner after one year
One of the perks in signing McCarthy is the fact the A’s control him for 2 years. If he gets injured again then the team team can DFA him or not tender him a contract for 2012. If he succeeds and puts up good numbers as a Fifth starter the only roadblock is an arbitration hearing. And with his body of work he will not command much in arbitration.
by three team parlay on Feb 22, 2011 8:21 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
Unless you can get 3+ starters out of Carter Taylor Sweeney Weeks and Cardenas there is no way the A's will compete in 2012
The A’s did not set up this run well at all.
You don't need a religion, you have the A's. - My girlfriend
by designatedforassignment on Feb 22, 2011 9:25 AM PST reply actions
No way?
It doesn’t seem out of the question to extend Crisp and DeJesus. Then you just need to fill 2B and LF.
by Glorious Mundy on Feb 22, 2011 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
Also, just the general concept of
something completely unforeseen happening. “Not obviously projectable from what we know” does not equal “no way it can happen”.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
So we're depending heavily on the unforeseen? Brilliant!
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 22, 2011 12:36 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, the ever-popular "let's get really lucky" strategy
I have to say I’m not a fan.
"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 got me through high school..
"As the tag line of my favorite dirty joke would have it: 'Keep your hat on. We could wind up miles from here.'" ~Kurt Vonnegut, Hocus Pocus
I think it's more of a "let's see how 2011 turns out" strategy
Instead of assuming that after 2011, we have absolutely nothing to work with.
I never said we're depending on it.
I was just rejecting the categorical “there is no way” statement.
But I’ll go farther than that. DFA says there is no way the A’s are competitive without getting 3+ starters out of Carter, Taylor, Sweeney, Weeks, and Cardenas. The A’s might well not be competitive anyway, but DFA is saying that if the A’s are competitive in 2012, it is 100% necessary that at least three of those guys are starters.
I disagree. I say that if the A’s are competitive in 2012, there is somewhere between 30% and 60% chance it happens without three of those guys being regular starters. (Exact likelihood to depend on how “starters” is defined.)
The point being I’m not just nitpicking about the absoluteness of the “no way” phrasing; I genuinely disagree with the sentiment. I am mostly in agreement that the A’s probably won’t be competitive, but among the future paths where it does happen, I think a significant amount of them do not require three starters from among that crew.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I assume that he is taking as a given NSJ's asserted strategy to not re-sign DeJesus and Willingham
and, in effect, not counting the possibility of competing by extending those guys because NSJ has already proposed a plan which would exclude that option.
I could be wrong there, but I don’t think I am.
And I think he’s basically right— how likely is it that the A’s compete outside of either of those scenarios? Who exactly is filling the holes?
"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.
nsj's strategy also assumes the a's sign sizemore
which prob wont happen, but if youre goign to accept his other assumptions, you should do so for that one as well.
and this whole discussion here forgets green and rosales, who are probably more likely than anyone on that list other than carter and maybe sweeney to be mlb starters by 2012.
so yeah, the a’s need 2 out of 7 well regarded mlb ready or close to mlb ready players to develop into starters. doesnt seem that far fetched.
not to mention the possibility that outman or ross or devine or dls breaks out and enables the a’s to move surplus pitching for offense.
They're not really well regarded players
Check out the failure rates for even top 100 guys in the recent post over at Royals Review. Then imagine those even higher because most of these guys aren’t top 100 (Carter and Green are squeaking into the back end)
It’s not exactly optimism-inducing.
"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.
depends on how you define well regarded
semantics i guess.
but add sogard and laroche to that mix and you have 9 guys with a range of risk/reward profiles from which to pick 2.
green and carter have been consensus top 100 prospects the last two years. sweeney, laroche and rosales have already been average or better at the MLB level. cardenas and taylor were top 100 prospects in the recent past. weeks was picked 13th overall and, despite his injury issues, still draws praise for his ability. sogard has glasses. all are on the upside of their careers.
and, fwiw, green is BA’s # 63 and Keith Law’s #58, so its not really fair to say hes squeaking into the back end of the top 100.
Eh, one of the major points of that post was that there's little difference between #40 and #100 anyway
Odds are that either of them will fail.
I don’t understand what relevance having once been a top 100 prospect is if you aren’t one anymore.
"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.
One of our second-base prospects will pan out, that's a fairly safe bet...
Because we have about 5 candidates there who are “Bs”.
My real leap of faith, and the one that you and DFA rightfully disagree with me on, is that both Carter and Taylor pan out for ’12, in right and left field.
I’m admittedly overly optimistic that they will both pan out.
My stance on Willingham and DJJ is this:
If either one earns Type A, I’d like the A’s to collect the two picks.
If either one earns Type B, I don’t mind the A’s signing him/them.
And Crisp has virtually no chance of reaching A or B status, which is why I’m certainly ok with the team extending him.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 5:47 PM PST up reply actions
"B"ish, I should say. B- included.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 5:47 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think it's likely that the A's bring back all three of
De Jesus, Crisp, and Willingham either. If I had to pick 2 of the three, though, I’d go with Crisp and Willinghsm, all things being equal. Crisp, if he stays healthy is still the best CF option the A’s have at the moment, and Willingham, health permitting as well, has the power right handed stick we so desperately need to try and keep around.
I’d like to see Taylor bounce back and bring it LF and Carter as the DH/ 4th/5th outfielder in 2012, sans eternal optimism.
Great post NSJ and rec’d as well! Go A’s!
M-Rod
"You're early, but hang around; we'll have a fight for you sooner or later."
-John "Blue Moon" Odom
Why would you want the A's to not re-sign the guy who's clearly and obviously the best of the three?
"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.
+1
""Expelliarmus!" said Eckstein, attempting to knock the bat out of Matt Kemp's hands, just before Kemp laced a single to center." -Ken Tremendous
Because of the draft pick compensation, and/or because he'll be the most expensive.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 24, 2011 2:44 AM PST up reply actions
I'd rather have the talent in Oakland
Than waiting on it in Burlington & Burlington.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Are you expecting draft pick compensation in 2012?
Many of us aren’t.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Oops, nevermind.
I just saw your answer on this point down below.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Kinda what NSJ said and also...
and maybe it will work out that way, maybe it won’t. Hell, maybe Beane will sign all three to extensions, I don’t know! I like Crisp in CF defensively and his bat was starting to look good last year for stretches in the season.
Willingham has the most power of the three so I’d want him as well.
DeJesus is probably the most all around, rather well rounded, of the three but I also think he will indeed cost the most of the three. If he has a stellar season and has not signed an extension before the year is over then he is more than likely to test FA. Which does not bode well for the A’s. I guess I’d be good with any two of the three, honestly. I was just going by the “if I had to decide between two of the three” question.
Go A’s!
"You're early, but hang around; we'll have a fight for you sooner or later."
-John "Blue Moon" Odom
I don't think it's likely that the A's are competitive either way
But it could come from any of the guys already in our system getting unexpectedly good, or from acquiring (by sign or trade) someone entirely different that we’re not even talking about.
Basically DFA is looking at one relatively likely possibility (ie, substantial contribution from the most obvious candidates) and over-weighing it relative to the multiplicity of relatively unlikely possibilities.
We could do a partial analysis of this by looking at past teams who were not expected to contend but then did. Did the contention happen as a result of the most likely prospects coming up and playing well, or did it come from unexpected things off the radar the season before? I guess that many times it’s the latter.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Also, I was not assuming DeJesus and Willingham gone.
Nor necessarily kept either. I wasn’t accounting for that either way.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Yeah when you look at it...
it does come across as a bit, this year or bust.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
We can pretty easily match the current roster
If Carter and one of the 2B are ready by 2012. They replace Willingham and Ellis and save the team about $11M which they can use to resign Crisp and Dejesus or upgrade with some other RF. We can replace or resign Matsui easily for $5M or less.
The pitching staff would be about the same with Outman being the 5th starter. Bullpen will be similar or cheaper if we lose Wuertz.
I don’t see why we can’t perpetuate the current talent level for 2-3 years or even improve if we are lucky. This would have to go horribly wrong for the team to get worse.
The $11M will be more than eaten up just by salary raises for the huge number of arbitration-eligible players on the current roster
In point of fact, it’s highly questionable whether the A’s could even retain the current roster for one more year, much less actually spend money on upgrades.
And pointlessly blowing $10M of the 2012 budget on mediocre relief pitching certainly didn’t help matters.
"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 you're exaggerating the arbitration eligible problem
First off, Jackson’s $3.2M, Harden’s $1.5M and McCarthy’s $1M also come off the books next year, so that’s another $4.2M to play with (I’m assuming they’re all replaced with players earning roughly the minimum). Add that to the hypothetical savings from Willingham and Ellis, and you have $15.2M. If Wuertz goes, that’s another $2M in the pot, for $17.2M.
- Kouzmanoff – earns $4.75M; will be Arb 3 in 2012. He’s unlikely to be due much of a raise ( <.5M), and if his performance declines he’ll be non-tendered.
- Braden – $3.35M; Arb 2. Add up to $1M.
- Sweeney – $1.4M; Arb 2. Unlikely to increase much as a 4th outfielder. Add <.5M.
- Breslow – $1.4M; Arb 2. Add maybe .5M.
- Zeigler – $1.25M; Arb 2. Add <.5M.
- Devine – $0.5575M; Arb 3. Could go up 1M if he has a good and healthy year.
- Bailey – $0.435M; Arb 1. Add 3M.
- Barton – $0.41M; Arb 1. Add 2.5M.
- Cahill – $0.41M; Arb 1. A fair amount depends on how he pitches this year. But let’s add $3M, a bit more than Braden got this year.
- Outman – $0.41M; Arb 1. Even if he’s good and healthy, it’s hard to see him adding more than $1.5M, and that’s probably too generous.
- Rosales – $0.41M; Arb 1. Backup infielders come pretty cheap. Add $.5M.
Add it all up, and the arbitration increases total about $14.5M. That assumes all the arbitration eligible players stay with the club in 2012, and have relatively healthy and productive years in 2011; the actual total will probably be lower.
Assuming all the arbitration players come back in 2012 (fairly unlikely), and Willingham and Ellis leave, that’s only $0.7M to re-sign Crisp and DeJesus with very modest raises. It increases to $2.7 if Wuertz also leaves. However, since the A’s payroll is also likely to increase a bit, in either scenario there would probably be enough money to re-sign Crisp and DeJesus (unless they make unreasonable demands).
I do agree that, based on the above scenario, upgrades from outside the system would require one or more arbitration/post-arbitration players to be traded or non-tendered.
As for the money spent on Fuentes and Balfour, I’m not nearly so pessimistic. The contracts are below-market compared to similar relievers elsewhere, and the A’s clearly upgraded the bullpen (quality and depth) in the here-and-now. If the A’s turn out not to be a playoff contender this year, one or both of them can be traded for prospects (relieving next year’s possible cash-crunch even further).
by andyinfremont on Feb 22, 2011 6:28 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with you
But if Wuertz is even average his option will be picked up. I think itd take serious injury for them to turn that down
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Wuertz is a bargain
I mainly included him because DrDoom raised the possibility. I do think at least one of the veteran relievers will traded or allowed to walk between now and the 2012 season, both for budget reasons and to make room for younger/cheaper talent. But there may well be better options for that than Wertz (if he’s healthy).
by andyinfremont on Feb 23, 2011 1:05 AM PST up reply actions
Whoa
Kouzmanoff will likely cost $7M or so next year, Braden probably at least $5.5M and maybe more than that (perfect game whoo whoo whoo). So, really, I’m right— the “free” money is devoured by arb raises.
DeJesus is probably looking at $9-10M a year going forward. Crisp’s salary depends on his health but is probably at least $7.5M or so. That’s a yawning hole in the team’s budget. “Chasm” might be a better way to put it. And forget Willingham, Matsui, or Ellis— those guys are completely implausible.
Fuentes and Balfour are near-worthless generic bullpen arms. Yes, the A’s spent (or, more accurately, wasted) less money on their near-worthless bullpen arms than most did (though far more than the Rays did for what are basically comparably good players, which speaks volumes in its own right), but the fact that I only threw $50 rather than $100 down a mineshaft doesn’t make the fact that I just threw $50 down a mineshaft any less idiotic. It’s highly dubious that anyone would want to assume Fuentes’s foolish contract, and the fact that the A’s might theoretically get a prospect for Balfour is rather moderated by the fact that, well, they already gave up a prospect (to the Rays— I’m noticing a theme here) to land him in the first place.
"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.
Nonsense
Your numbers are inflated on both Kouz and Braden. If Braden were going to get a “boost” for having a perfect game, it would have been for this year’s contract, not next years. And if Kouz is really in line for $7M (which he isn’t), he’ll be traded or non-tendered, unless he has a great year.
$9M for DeJesus might be about right, but Crisp won’t likely command $7.5M given his injury history. Regardless, that’s still only $5M combined for the two of them beyond what they’re earning this year, which is fairly easy to make up depending on how all the other pieces fall.
On Fuentes and Balfour you’re just wrong. But I know from your other posts that you have a blind spot on this issue, so we’ll just let their 2011 performance decide the matter.
by andyinfremont on Feb 23, 2011 12:59 AM PST up reply actions
And I think your numbers are too small.
Arbitration salaries generally follow a 40/60/80 rule, where the first year, you get 40% of your free market value, bumping up to 60% in the second, and so on. For second year arby players, that means they get an average of a 33% raise for their third year. For Kouz, he just came off a poor year, so lets take that down to 25-30%. Still getting $6MM minimum. Braden had a great year, so he’ll probably get upwards of 40%, which comes closer to $5MM.
And why would he not get a raise hike due to the perfect game this year? That happened last season, so his agent is going to use that as leverage this year.
$6M is an appropriate guess for Kouz, I agree with Dan.
$5M was too low, $7M too high.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 5:51 PM PST up reply actions
If your numbers happen, it likely means a lot of these players
underperformed and/or were injured in ‘11. Which kinda sucks anyways cause, you know, it means ’11 wasn’t a competitive year.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 23, 2011 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
Go look at the other free agent center fielders for next season
Then tell me that Coco Crisp is not going to get $7.5M from someone if he has a semi-healthy and useful season. (And if he doesn’t, then relying on him in 2012 is not exactly great strategy…)
"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.
this
and the a’s have no real solutions internally, unless sweeney somehow regains full health or weeks or green is able to make the transition.
see my comment above
about Crisp, and then Willingham.
But I strongly disagree about PT’s assertion that the A’s wasted money on bullpen arms this off season. Depth is never a bad thing to have on this team, especially considering we already know that Harden and Wuertz are already hurting going into camp.
And I’m, totally cool with adding Balfour and Fuentes with the money Beane had to spend still after striking out on Beltre fiasco.
Peace…M-Rod
"You're early, but hang around; we'll have a fight for you sooner or later."
-John "Blue Moon" Odom
me too
i think the pen would actually look pretty weak in 2011 without the additions, and the moves better prepare the a’s to explore deals for bailey next offseason (or at the deadline should the a’s fall out of contention).
I agree with you that $7.5M is a good guess on Crisp, assuming he plays 120 productive games this year.
A lot of people thought that was a bad signing two years ago, but that was a very good move. Having the option year for ’11 worked out extremely well.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 5:55 PM PST up reply actions
That's also why I only see the team signing Crisp amongst the three pending FA OF's
Signing two of three is going to be at least $16M per.
I think they’ll sign Crisp, bring back Matsui for $4M, keep McCarthy…factor in the arb raises for all the pitching, Barton, and Kouz, and that’s probably near the team’s spending ceiling.
If money remains I’d rather it went to extending Braden, Gio, Cahill, or Barton, rather than to Willingham or DJJ.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 5:59 PM PST up reply actions
Can't say as I see much difference in how it would affect extending players
It’s pretty much funny money regardless— the team will never be able to afford to keep even a minority of those guys into free agency, so given that you know you’ll be trading them away when they get expensive, who cares? Sign the extensions anyway.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Arb #'s Look Accurate, Disagree Re: Fuentes and Balfour
I think Fuentes and Balfour really help us change the length of the game, which I think is important with a young staff that you a) dont want to burn out or b) dont want to have get shelled on an off night. I think they are good pickups and are undervalued compared to other relievers (though I feel relievers are overvalued as a whole). But to call them “near-worthless generic bullpen arms” is a stretch. Balfour has been a real shut-down high pressure guy, and Fuentes has an All-Star Game and closing experience. While I think both ASG and closing experience are indeed overrated, they also don’t go to mere “near-worthless generic bullpen arms”.
I think the arb numbers look a bit more realistic though. They dont look at sabermetrics and from that standpoint Kouzmanoff is the “I lead in HR guy” and Braden’s consistency I think will benefit him too. He seems to be the type of pitcher who always does reasonably in arbitration
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
If Kouz leads us in homers again this year we really are screwed
Either that, or he will have had such a good season that he’s worth $7M. Assuming he doesn’t have a crazy good season with the bat, wouldn’t he have a tough time getting a big raise in arbitration given that so much of his value is tied to his defense?
by Glorious Mundy on Feb 23, 2011 9:51 AM PST up reply actions
Players almost always get a sizable raise
$7M would imply Kouz does very very well this year. If he does the same or worse, then he might make under $6M.
But also
I think arbitration just looks at baseball card stats. So if he does stuff like start in 150 games and hit 20-some-odd home runs with 80 or so RBI with a .260 average, he likely has no problem getting a decent number in arb. He’ll get a raise no matter what, but he doesnt have to do much to make it significant so I’m with you there Dr Doom
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
.260/20/80
Would be in my “very very well” category. I’ll gladly play $7M for that and well above average defense.
Your first sentence doesn't square with your next two.
The first sentence is the correct one. A season in line with Kouzmanoff’s career numbers will easily net him $7M.
"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.
So the whole 40/60/80 thing is meaningless to you?
You don’t have to overstate a point to make a point. Kouz will make closer to $6M.
And who really cares? Either way we can afford him. And we can afford most everyone else even if Crisp and Dejesus necessitate something like 3/24 on new deals. If we can’t get them, we take picks and sign a free agent or make a trade. There is a lack of CF options, but Sweeney is possible and so is a trade of some low minors talent in light of the draft picks we will be getting from the exiting type A’s.
Seriously, set up some parameters for a bet and we can see how this plays out.
In what way did I say the 40/60/80 thing was "meaningless"?
If he gets the same raise next year that he did this year (which basically means having the same season this year as he did last year, which was pretty lame from an arbitrator’s standpoint), he’ll get $6.4M. If it’s boosted slightly by circumstance or having a relatively “good” (to laymen) season, it will be closer to $7M. That’s pretty likely, given that his career “classic numbers” (HR per season, RBI, etc.) are better than his 2010 numbers.
There is essentially zero chance that he both gets an award under $6M and is also actually worth a roster spot on a notionally contending team.
I’d be more hopeful about “a trade of some low minors talent” if I actually thought the A’s had much of anything… I don’t know, I guess maybe Yordy Cabrera might fetch something? He ain’t going to land you an MLB center fielder worth a damn on his own, I can tell you that much.
And, yet again, I’ll emphasize that “taking picks” is a highly questionable strategy in light of the upcoming CBA talks and the open ridicule of the compensation system that has been going on over the last few seasons by both players and owners. Who exactly is the constituency that wants to keep that rule? No one, that’s who. Everyone realizes it’s a really stupid rule that annoyingly interferes with efficient player markets while doing little or nothing to promote competitive balance or suppress salaries. The only way it sticks around is if there’s so much acrimony and/or inertia in the talks that the only option is essentially extending the current CBA virtually unchanged. Billy Beane certainly doesn’t think that’s likely; he believes that trading draft picks is going to be implemented.
"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.
Is that on record, or are you surmising?
The part about Billy Beane believing that trading draft picks is going to be implemented, I mean.
(As I’ve said many times, I agree with you 100% about the compensation picks scheme getting dumped.)
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Billy said in a recent interview that he would be in favor of it.
I disagree with the point that no one wants to keep draft pick pick compensation. Everyone wants it revised, sure. But it is a benefit to ownership as a salary suppressant and they’d be stupid to simply give it up for nothing.
If you can think of a concession the players will make in return, such a world draft or salary slotting, that’s fair.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 24, 2011 2:49 AM PST up reply actions
I still don't think you're trying
Choice, Krol and a bunch of other guys have no value?
The A’s signed Kouz at 4.75… it wasn’t arbitration. It was probably slightly above expectations. And 6.4M is closer to 6M than 7M so you agree with me.
I know TINSTAAPP and all that,
but wow, I’m imagining how barren our AA-AAA starting pitching looks if Krol is shipped out.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I understand you are trying to make a point by exaggerating
But c’mon… This isn’t hard.
We can do everything andyinfremont says. Maybe the overall cost ranges from his numbers to $5M higher, but its all within our budget. Kouz is closer to $6M than $7M and Braden will be closer to $5M.
We also can pull off bullpen trades or not pick up arbitration eligible players that don’t perform.
We aren’t likely to make a big FA splash beyond resigning Crisp and DeJesus or someone similar, but maintaining the current talent level for another year seems pretty easy if you are trying to be objective.
We have the financial flexibility to pay Conor Jackson $3.2M to be a 5th OF… I’m not worried about affording arbitration raises and retaining players that will be borderline type A and thus not in high demand.
If DeJesus tears it up and we can’t afford him, that changes things, but at least we would get draft picks and we could look elsewhere for a cheaper RF option if Taylor isn’t ready and Sweeney isn’t the answer.
2012 is going to look a lot like 2011, just with a couple more young guys in the mix.
Even if Carter and a second base prospect is fully ready to start in 2012 (which is a stretch),
it’s an even bigger stretch to expect them to become 2-3 WAR players right off the bat. Therein lies the problem: you need a lot of luck to get Willingham and Ellis’s production from a couple of rookies.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 22, 2011 7:11 PM PST up reply actions
Rosales should be an option to start at second in 2012.
Weeks and cardenas are expendable because of Rosales and Green coming up in a couple years.
by gratefuldude on Feb 22, 2011 10:03 PM PST up reply actions
Rosales isn't really a prospect
He is 28 years old, and in 2012 will be 29. He is a utility guy – thats his lot in life.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
why?
he plays good defense and can hit. he was worth 1.6 WAR in 80 games as a 26/27 year old last year. seems very plausible he could be at least a 2 WAR second baseman.
Because long-term he isnt the answer
But he is very versatile and suits the backup role very well. So why make him a starter and inflating his price, when the long-term goal is to make him a backup?
Now if you say he should eb the starter, is he really better than Grant Green or Jemile Weeks? Theres little upside, hes gonna go into the downside of his career…
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Assuming he plays as well as he did last year...
(big assumption?)
… then why would the long term goal be to make him a backup?
With the Reds in 09
In a very similar number of PA’s he was a -0.3 WAR player. .213/.303/.317. Now his BABIP explains it to a large degree (.246). But last year his BABIP was .335 and suddenly he is a 1.6 WAR player with a .271/.321/.400 slash line. I would be SHOCKED if his BABIP is .335 so I expect him to hit .255 to .260 or so. So, I think it is a big assumption…
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Especially not with a 25% K rate...
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 23, 2011 8:34 PM PST up reply actions
if he hits .255-.260 and play defense like he did in 2010
instead of like he did in 2009, hes a 2 WAR player.
You project both of them to be 2-3 WAR players in 2011?
That is fine, but that bodes well for this year.
Some people like to expect regression from everyone in 2011 and then in the same breath say we can’t replace the lofty WAR expectations in 2012. I’m not saying you are one of those people, but I just want to be clear on the expectations here.
I would expect maybe 2 WAR from Carter and 1 WAR from a 2B in 2012. Its a slight downgrade, but on the other hand they will be healthier and there will be some upside we don’t have in 2011.
So yes, we lose a win or two there. The hope is you gain it from development elsewhere. Or more likely the reality is that Ellis and Willingham age and would likely not be worth 2-3 wins in 2012 anyways so is there a net downgrade in talent at all or just the natural attrition all teams need to expect.
Projecting two players who have averaged 2-3 WAR for their entire careers
for 2-3 WAR next season is hardly unreasonable. In any case, those are hardly “lofty” expectations. It has nothing to do with “boding” well for this year either. Players who are roughly average aren’t the major driving forces behind playoff bound teams.
Projecting anything other than slightly above replacement level performance from Carter and [hypothetical 2nd baseman] is ridiculous. Very few prospects project to be league average right off the bat. Fewer still, project to be average with the amount of defensive and offensive issues Carter has. It’s hard enough projecting top 15 prospects for league average performances in their initial campaigns; a prospect like Carter who is on the latter third of top 100 lists, if not left off entirely, is completely negligible. And of course, the hypothetical 2nd basemen we have is an even worse prospect.
Of course, everything can change this year. Carter can find a magic glove that transforms him into maybe a -5 fielder, along with hitting the same as he did in Midland ‘09 in Sacramento, making him a top 20 prospect. Perhaps Weeks can not only stay healthy but actually produce as well. Or perhaps Cardenas improves his defense, recovers from the wrist injury, and hits at his previous levels in AAA. But the chances of all of that happening are slim. Which is everyone’s point: it takes an insane amount of luck to get that “best case scenario” to come to fruition.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 23, 2011 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not disagreeing with you
I also see them as 2-3 WAR players. I was more alluding to the 2011 pessemists that are also pessemistic about losing the 2011 players in 2012. They can’t have it both ways and I didn’t want them using the same analysis as you.
That said, Willingham and Ellis in 2012 probably aren’t as good as they are this year. The gap between them and a prospect a year from now will be smaller. That means more for the organization to overcome in the long run, but also means the “sky is falling” fear some have over losing Ellis and Willingham is probably unwarranted… especially given their cost.
Carter is a crapshoot… he could be 2-3 WAR or he could be 0 WAR. We have to roll the dice though if he performs this year and I will be happy with that. If he sucks this year we need to look elsewhere, but I think we can find a 2 WAR LF pretty easily.
As for 2B, I only expect 1 WAR in 2012 but I am optimistic for more. We have so many options, I am hopeful at least 1 of them will prove to be a solid regular major leaguer… My money is on Sogard, but there is always the chance Cardenas or Weeks surprise. And, worst case, Rosales can be pencilled in for 1 WAR at 2B pretty easily.
Tell that to Adam Dunn
Adam Dunn had average fielding when he first came up, but still. He’s had 3 seasons with about -15 UZR and 2 at -30 or worse, and has been worth positive value. Of course, I don’t expect Carter to hit 40 homers like Dunn, but with what he’s capable of, I don’t see how league average is hard to believe. Especially with another year in the minors.
Adam Dunn had two years straight of > 1.100 OPS in the minors before being called up at age 21.
Check out his age 20 and 21 years; he was ridiculous. Not only did he hit for vastly more power, he also walked at a higher rate and struck out less (yes, less) than Carter. When he came up, he hit .262/.371/.578, for a ridiculous .397 wOBA. Is it possible that a rookie could put a line like that? Sure, I never said it wasn’t. Would anyone project it? Not likely, unless they were indeed putting up numbers like Dunn did in the minors, which Carter isn’t.
Chris Carter is 24 and most recently hasn’t even cracked a .900 OPS in AAA. He’s not even close to the same caliber of a hitter as Dunn. The fact that delusional A’s fans are even mentioning such a marginal prospect in the same breath as Dunn is ridiculous. It’s similar to the Daric Barton = John Olerud comparisons. Sure they may share the same skillset but one is so much better at those skills that it becomes a completely inadequate comparison.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 23, 2011 4:03 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I meant more with the high-power high-strikeout low-average profile with the comparison to Dunn
The point is, it’s not ridiculous to expect a 0 WAR rookie season from Carter.
It looks to me as if the A's made moves to set up a run.
But the moves just didn’t happen to work out. It seems to me like sure fire prospects and high draft picks are a lot like lottery tickets- sure your odds of hitting a jackpot increase with the more you have but no matter how many tickets you buy your odds of winning still aren’t ever that good. I mean a year ago Michael Taylor was a can’t miss pro and was destined to be our power hitting outfielder, and now- bleh. I think when your plan involves heavily relying on home grown talent your plan will often be subject to a lot of seetoldyaso’s in retrospect. So I wouldn’t say that the A’s didn’t set up this run well I would say that as of now they haven’t hit any jackpots with the position player lottery picks.
But also, anyone worth their salt will tell you that the baseball landscape will be drastically different next year, so projecting into the future with any degree of certainty is foolish. Some unexpected players will blossom and other “sure things” fade.
I for one am hoping that Kouz is this year’s Bautista.
I don't think Michael Taylor was ever a "can't miss pro"
Then again, I’m not sure I believe such a thing exists. Maybe a half a dozen per season, but in general, no.
How many prospects who currently have zero major-league time would you characterize as “can’t miss”? I’m sure it would be fewer than 10 for me. And Michael Taylor was never a top 10 prospect. At this best, he was … what, about 25?
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
Yeah, that phrase really has no application
Brandon Wood missed. And if a shortstop with a career OPS in the minors of like .950 (and plenty of praise from scouts) can miss, spectacularly, in the majors, then really there’s no such thing as a guy who can’t miss.
"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.
Todd Van Poppel was can't miss!
Then he missed.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
I look forward to seeing Mike Trout and Dustin Ackley miss.
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; / Our meddling intellect
Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:— / We murder to dissect.
I think Ackley will
Because the M’s are going to rush him. The Halos are playing smart with Trout
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Will MISS that is.
wanted to make that clear
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
That's the point.
I don’t think anybody is “can’t miss” either. Top 10 prospect lists are probably full of more future insurance salesmen than they are future all stars. I was responding to DFA’s claim that the A’s didn’t set up for this run very well. I think they did a lot of work and acquired a number of highly rated prospects (whatever that means) and in fact they did hit on a number of pitchers. Obviously the hitters (so far) haven’t panned out as we would like. I don’t think this is indicative of the A’s inability to plan it is simply a fairly predictable outcome of any plan that relies on getting rich by playing the lottery. But I also don’t blame the A’s, we can’t afford to buy talent so we need to rely on prospects (duh). But sometimes (a lot of times) your best prospects simply don’t cut it in the bigs.
True, but the A's also blew it by not making the team bad enough to get any high draft picks,
by pointlessly squandering talent on renting Matt Holliday, and by unnecessarily wasting the service time of key players such that they are now significantly more expensive than they needed to be.
"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.
Certainly that is true in hindsight.
In hindsight, I would’ve rather they had an entire staff of Livan Hernandezes and Brett Tomkos the past two years while CarGo played AAA ball with Cahill and Anderson.
But I also know that thousands of A’s fans were very excited the day we acquired Matt Holliday.
You are better at delayed gratification fandom than most fans, players, or front office people.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 6:05 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe so, but I would hope that Beane, of all people,
would have the tenure and political capital to not make unpopular moves simply for the sake of shoring up his own power base within the corporate organization.
"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.
Er, sorry
The opposite. Popular, but foolish moves.
"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.
Beane stated in an interview that Lew "wanted a winner"
I don’t think Beane really had a choice to say “No Lew, it is isn’t time to have a contending team, be patient for a year or two”. The owner wanted to be aggressive to make the playoffs again, and paper that roster had potential enough to give it a try.
As a long time season ticket holder and irrational fan of wanting to see a good team on the baseball field, I hold no sour grapes on the attempt to compete with the Holiday trade.
Sure he had a choice
He could have said “no, and if you don’t like it, fire me.” And Wolff would have, I guarantee you, backed off. Particularly if Beane explained that they expected to actually be a pretty good team in a couple of seasons. (Which would indeed have happened; absent that trade, the A’s would likely have won the West last year, or at least made it a race to the final few yards. Hell, they might have been the ones acquiring Cliff Lee at the deadline.) Wolff’s not some tantrum-throwing unreasonable dimwit like the Steinbrenner Bros.
"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.
right, but hishnik's opinion is more important than yours...
because he’s a longtime season-ticket holder. He the person that the franchise needs to appease.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 24, 2011 2:52 AM PST up reply actions
I agree with PT that the Oakland FO did iteself a disservice with jumping the gun from rebuild to contend
But at the end of the day perennial losers cause apathy and attrition to casual fans who grow tired of seeing a losing team on the field.
One team that suffered from this I would argue; is the Expos. I think the fan base had to many years in the wilderness to enjoy the rising of young stars Pedro Martínez, Moisés Alou, Cliff Floyd, Mike Lansing and Jeff Fassero. Not to mention the lackluster ticket sales when Montreal was off to a 74-40 start that year.
Highly recommend the viewing of "triumph & Tragedy: The 1994 Montreal Expos, that touches on this.
Kouz has to hit .300 to be considered a decent hitter.
His BABIPs was .270 last year, bump that to .320 and suddenly he looks like a contributor. A lot of him is luck-related. His defense was great and saved so many runs though, he cant hit that UZR again but I dont think he’ll be far off it. He’s a top defensive 3B in the game and needs to hit 7th or 8th instead of 4th and then people will figure it out.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
Why would you bump it up to .320 when his career BABIP is .287?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 22, 2011 7:11 PM PST up reply actions
He's saying that would have to happen for him to be a contributor,
not that he expects it to happen.
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
They did hit a jackpot with their position player lottery picks
His name is Carlos Gonzalez.
Except, they lost all patience and made a dumbass trade for Matt Holliday.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Obviously in hindsight that was a stupid trade.
But at the time although I thought it was short sighted it did give me hope that maybe the A’s would make a playoff run. CarGo’s home/away splits do concern me, I think if he was in Oakland we’d be looking at maybe a 360-370 wOBA season in 2011- granted I’d take that from a young decent fielding outfielder in a heart beat, but I’m not like zomgcarlosgonzalesbestestevers.
The worst thing about that trade
is that it didnt stop the haters writing “A’s are a team of nobodies!” even when they traded for Matt Holliday. That’s the worst thing about this, cargo would hit like 15 HR in Oakland he’s massively overrated and wouldnt be good away from Denver.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
It is shocking
He has 33 home runs in his career in Denver. 18 elsewhere, despite one of his years (albeit far from a full one) not even being in Denver.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
this is a must read post if you want to discuss carlos gonzalez
the artist formerly known as inbillywetrust
by stm72 on Feb 23, 2011 1:33 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
That is an amazing article.
It’s actually one of the articles that got me hooked on this site for good.
Don't you dare use the phrase "hindsight" to me in connection with that trade
It was morbidly stupid from day one and I said so— from day one.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Hindsight hindsight hindsight!
There!
But seriously, I was excited about the A’s that year, and I was excited about that trade. I guess perhaps I was most excited about the fact that Bobby Crosby wasn’t going to play much. I liked our opening day lineup and was hopeful that Giambi and Garciaparra still had something in the tank. Obviously they didn’t and obviously now (in hindsight) it was a bad trade. Maybe if Holliday had gotten off to a hotter start that season wouldn’t have ended up the way it was? Who knows? HINDSIGHT.
I want to reiterate...
That at the time I thought it was a lot to give up for the short term. But I justified it to myself that, like the Milton Bradly/Ethier Trade, it would be worth it if the A’s made the playoffs. The didn’t and it wasn’t.
But I think myself and others were genuinely excited about the A’s chances that year. And I think there is value in making a trade if it makes your fan base excited about your team.
Trading Mike Napoli for Vernon Wells is something that's probably going to make the majority of your fanbase "excited" as well.
But it sure as hell shouldn’t be something that you should do.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 23, 2011 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
Really?
I don’t think anybody is really excited about that. As far as I could tell Angels fans were throwing themselves off of cliffs.
My point is that the information was perfectly well out there
People around these parts just chose not to process it because they were ideologically blinded to the facts by homerism. Beane screwed up, it was a screwup that was obvious (to someone who knew what he was looking for) from the moment that deal was reported, and it made a hash of the rebuild in a bad way. To attribute failure to “bad luck” is simply to ignore the cloying residue of bad design in the air.
"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 am an A's fan.
And I do in fact root for the A’s to win games even when they play against better teams.
I will (dejectedly) recognize the Giants as the 2010 world champions even though I think they probably had the 5th or 6th best team in the league.
Ultimately I think there is room for homerism and facts.
To be clear, I’m not defending the trade as a good trade. I didn’t think it was good at the time. I did think it had the potential to have a short term benefit, and the fact that it didn’t reach that potential isn’t proof that that potential never existed. Look, I think it’s really really easy to say “look, we obviously didn’t make the playoffs, obviously we never would, obviously that trade was stupid”. We didn’t make the playoffs that year not because of Holliday, we didn’t make the playoffs because we gave up a lot of runs. Maybe Beane should’ve known that we weren’t going to lead the league in ERA until 2010? But who “knew” that? Did you? Was that information readily available?
Ultimately I think the worst part of the whole Gonzales/Holliday/Wallace/Taylor era is that by all measures it looks like we ended up with the worst player of the four (not like we were going to end with Holliday or anything). But picking which from a handful of prospects is going to “make it” is a very dicey proposition. It does seem like luck more than anything else, at least to me. And also who knows, I for one am not ready to say that Gonzales is a better player than Wallace- I think it’s way way way too early to tell. They are probably both better than Taylor, but again we won’t really know the real answer for a few years and when we do it will be easy for us to look back and see who the better player was- in hindsight.
Maybe the worst thing Beane did was to have these guys all come through our organization so that we would forever be able to compare the last guy in our musical chair to the 2 or 3 guys that were just replaced.
I'm not even looking at Wallace or Taylor or whatever
Yes, right now the trade looks like more of a disaster than it did at the time. I don’t care about that. My best guess— as of December 2008 or January 2009, I don’t quite remember— was that the trade was going to end up costing the A’s, on average, wins valued at something on the order of $30-50M.
Now, well, it looks more like $100M. So that sucks, and it’s clearly close to the worst possible of the conceivable outcomes from the trade (with the opposite end of it being a gain of $5M or so), but it’s basically irrelevant because that really is hindsight.
I actually disagree that Wallace is better than Taylor. Wallace looks like a bust at this point, maybe even more so than Taylor. He hasn’t hit (or, especially, walked) like anyone’s expected him to.
"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 will congratulate you on your prediction abilities.
It was a bad trade at the time. It is a worserer trade now. I also don’t think folks (myself included) who thought “We got Holliday, maybe we can hang around in this division” were wrong/bad for thinking that.
Ha, I hadn't read down this far yet when I replied above.
Sorry. :)
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 6:06 PM PST up reply actions
Just as trades are no longer just about the level of talent but their accompanying salaries (see: Wells, Vernon). There also is the component that is the PR move and Holliday was a good get in that sense. To a large part of the fan base that was tired of seeing the big names leave year after year landing a very big star was a big deal. I was excited about the trade, I don’t mind trading prospects because so often they don’t pan out, though I didn’t think there was a hope we re-signed Holliday I thought it made us a competitive club in a rather weak division. I was wrong – and hindsight is 20/20. But every trade looks much different the day it is made than 5 years down the line. So while I think some trades are a bit more consensus building WTF?‘s like the Wells one, there are a lot that aren’t so clear cut and I don’t think the Holliday deal the day it was made was so clear cut and unanimous in either the approval/disapproval camps.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
by dwishinsky on Feb 23, 2011 8:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Will Kouz return in 2012?
I suppose there aren’t any big 3B on the free agent market next winter (Aramis Ramirez being the main exception if the Cubs don’t pick up his $16 mil option), but if the A’s make the playoffs in 2011, there’s even more incentive to upgrade at our weaker positions to ensure we’re solid all-around. Plus, we tried very hard to get rid of Kouz this winter. Why wouldn’t it be the same next winter?
These clothes are good enough to drink in, and so be these boots, too.
I don't see why the landscape of available 3b would change though, either
For the same reason Kouz ended up sticking around this offseason, I could see him lasting through 2012 in his final arb year as well.
The 10 or so third basemen in MLB who represent a clear, obvious upgrade over Kouz are so good that they are entirely ungettable.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
ten or so?
I think that number is higher than that. 11 guys had a higher WAR than him in 2010. And I think its safe to say his WAR goes down in 2011 with a return to average fielding, which means the likes of Michael Young, Mark Reynolds, Brandon Inge, Pablo Sandoval, Aramis Ramirez all leapfrog him (though some of those guys will need bounce back seasons too). I just am not a believer in Kouzmanoff. Maybe its just I don’t like his approach at the plate. I want someone else.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Those guys don't represent a clear, obvious upgrade to Kouz.
Not when you factor in health and salary.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 11:39 AM PST up reply actions
His health is not perfect.
But yes, his salary for his level of “production” can’t be beat. That is certainly true.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Kouz's future in Oakland is going to determined this year
If he plays nearly the same defense (some regression being kept in mind) and hits league average (again, no small feat), I’m betting he gets locked up semi-long term. I get the sense we tried so hard for Beltre because the other options simply don’t look good for awhile.
!#%&$#@&%&% antioxidants! - pam
needs moar bacon
by cuppingmaster on Feb 22, 2011 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
Didn't Kouz set a national league record for defense by a third baseman in 2008?
How come it is safe to assume he can drop off so much more in 2010?
by gratefuldude on Feb 22, 2011 10:07 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not even sure what this means
“Record for defense”? There’s no stat called “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.
I am sure its a reference to the error-less or error few 2009
I am only pretty on the outside
dannycakes can also be called "hipsterbot"
Meh.
Lots of L-R flexibility there, lots of positional flexibility, and very good defense. What are your thoughts?
This lineup is worse defensively and potentially a lot worse offensively than 2011’s. You’re counting on minimum of 3 breakout years in AAA for that lineup to project better than the one here this year. The window with this pitching staff is now. Trying to pick up handfuls of supplemental rounders in order to retool for 2016 would be a flat out waste of everyone’s time.
I agree with this
Entirely apart from the issue of whether supplemental draft picks will even exist in 2012 (I think the answer is no), I can’t imagine how it could be a good idea to dick around with them instead of extending players who are both available and reasonably good. The choices are pretty much re-sign those guys (possibly excepting Willingham, who I don’t see aging well at all) or let them all walk and blow up the rest 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.
They only really need to re-sign Crisp. Crisp or DeJesus.
Left field is very clearly being set up for Carter, for better or worse. Willingham will be offered arb, draft picks will be collected, and he will be allowed to leave.
I don’t think DeJesus is a good fit in right field long-term. His arm doesn’t profile well there. Whereas Sweeney and Taylor fit very well in RF. That’s two decent options for ’12 in right.
As far as I’m concerned the only gaping hole is CF, which will neccesitate signing one guy between Crisp or DJJ. The budget will allow for that, even with the arb raises.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 6:52 PM PST up reply actions
Cut to the end of 2011
A’s had one or more of the “5th SP” guys pan out, lets say Ross & Outman both impressed the hell out of everyone and elbowed their way into “rotation regular” status. Cahill has again thrown up a sub 3.50 ERA (But with a 4.25 FIP) over 200 IP.
Trevor Cahill for Brett Gardner who says no? Dude could certainly be plugged into CF for a long long time here and he has on base skills. He’s wasted in LF for the Yanks, he really is a superb outfield defender.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
As an A's fan, I'd hope that neither team says no
Contributor for Big Cat Country
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it.
Formerly Gallagher's Watermelons and Player To Be Named Later
by CaliforniaJag on Feb 24, 2011 7:09 PM PST up reply actions
I'd say "no".
"You're early, but hang around; we'll have a fight for you sooner or later."
-John "Blue Moon" Odom
What if Crisp continues to prove that he's only capable of playing ~80 games a year?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 22, 2011 7:12 PM PST up reply actions
Then signing him to an extension won't be cost-prohibitive.
His warts are what make it a possibility that he signs in Oakland.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 7:35 PM PST up reply actions
Ok, but 80 games of an old, hobbled Crisp + whatever replacement level chaff you throw out there for the remaining 80 games
isn’t gonna contribute to, and may in fact hurt, chances of competing in 2012.
If the plan is to sacrifice 2012 for the sake of maximizing draft picks, that’s fine, although I don’t really see the point. If the plan is to continue competing for 2012 and beyond, then it makes more sense to resign someone like DeJesus or Willingham or, in all likelihood, both may need to be resigned. But trying to compete in 2012 and maximizing draft picks as well does not seem to be an attainable goal.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 22, 2011 7:50 PM PST up reply actions
Chris Carter fielding LF acceptably is pretty much in "ice skating on a rainbow" territory
as is Michael Taylor doing, well, much of anything at this point. My opinion of him dropped like a lead balloon when I realized the extent to which TotalZone panned his defense in prior years (roughly -5, in corner OF, per year, and it’s not like he got rave reviews out there this year to make up for it). I’m not sure I’d even have him in the B range anymore.
Sweeney is already a known medivac case and him and Crisp combined are lucky to produce one full season.
One competent outfielder out of that motley crew is probably less likely than zero. Asking for two is little more than asking to lose baseball games.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
That's why I'd re-sign both Crisp and DeJesus
Now you just need one OFer and a good backup (which you already have in Sweeney). Buy out either Cahill or Gio’s arby years and go from there.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I dont understand DHing Sizemore and playing Carter in LF
Seems very counterproductive.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
Keeps Sizemore healthy, allows Carter to maximize his potential as a player.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 6:49 PM PST up reply actions
Carter is bad in the field though, he's just going to be another Cust out there
and broken Grady could probably still hold down a league average LF.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
Broken Grady could definitely be league-average or better in left...
until he breaks again.
But Grady’s dead to me now, I had forgotten the 2012 option.
Literally, I think 95-100% of the 2012 team is already within the organization. If they make free-agent signings after this season it will be to bring back their own FAs.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 22, 2011 7:38 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed
I mean really, Willingham, Crisp & DeJesus are the only FA OFs the A’s would want unless Beltran is miraculously healthy and would want to play LF, even then I like Willingham more going forward.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
Its funny we basically do not have an outfield for next year.
You gotta think that if we end up with a SP surplus that Beane will make a trade for someone, either for 3B (Wright?) or any OF position. I can see if Willingham OPSs 850 this year that he will be bought back on a 2 year deal or something, he doesn’t appear to have a huge market. Same with if Crisp plays 140+ games, you gotta bring him back if he’s healthy because we aren’t playing with a stacked deck with our farm. We really are praying on a Taylor breakout year at this point or else its Cody Ross-ville.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
What starting pitching surplus?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Feb 22, 2011 7:13 PM PST up reply actions
I'm sure there are still teams that primarily look at stats like ERA and wins when they evaluate a pitcher
It only takes one.
Contributor for Big Cat Country
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it.
Formerly Gallagher's Watermelons and Player To Be Named Later
by CaliforniaJag on Feb 24, 2011 7:10 PM PST up reply actions
Wright is wrong
No way he is coming to Oakland.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
DeJesus resigning is pretty much an absolute must-have at this point
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
That team sucks.
""Expelliarmus!" said Eckstein, attempting to knock the bat out of Matt Kemp's hands, just before Kemp laced a single to center." -Ken Tremendous
Yes, you have rather pinpointed the dilemma
Give jobs to sucky but cheap players, or pay money you don’t really have for guys who aren’t that great.
People ask me why I am so pessimistic. And yet when someone actually takes the time to try to sculpt a roster for next year, well, most of them get pessimistic too.
"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.
Eh, well it's not really something I'm going to worry about until next offseason
I’m not the one running the team haha
""Expelliarmus!" said Eckstein, attempting to knock the bat out of Matt Kemp's hands, just before Kemp laced a single to center." -Ken Tremendous
try it for texas
theyve got an $87M payroll this year
~ $60M will be due to hamilton, beltre, cruz, young and kinsler
scott feldman will begetting $6.5M to ptich for someone else
mike napoli will be making $8M or will be DFAd
all star ss elvis andrus will be due for a big raise
ditto david murphy and most of the bullpen (either through arb or options)
theyre committed to torrealba for $3M
cj wilson will be a FA commanding $15M/yr
brandon webb will either be making big money as a FA or have shown himself to be done
they still wont have a catcher or a cf
the only milb players who could reasonably be expected to contribute are relief pitchers (unless you really believe in martin perez).
who will fill the gaps? will derek hollands arm fall off? can neftali feliz start? will the league catch up to colby lewis’ cutter? can hamilton, cruz and kinsler stay healthy?
They can easily hit $100M at this point, no problem
The Rangers have much more reliable cash flow than the A’s.
"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.
"easily" seems like a stretch considering this year is only the third in the last 10 that they've topped $70M
the point remains though. even at $100M, i’m not sure they can afford to resign wilson or webb (let alone both) and they have huge question marks at c and cf.
But I have constructed a roster for '12, allowing for FAs to leave, and I am not pessimistic.
While I agree that most people are pessimistic about that roster, I am not.
How you feel about that roster above depends upon how you feel about our top prospects. If you think Taylor, Carter, and all 4-5 second base candidates suck, then yes, pessimism is logical.
But most people were pretty excited about those guys exactly one year ago. Then they all had bad or unhealthy years. Maybe this year will be different. If they all have crappy years again, yes, then I will be as pessimistic as you currently are.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 23, 2011 6:13 PM PST up reply actions
The 2011 one or the 2012 one?
The 2011 one is good, the 2012 one doesn’t have an outfield.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
2012
""Expelliarmus!" said Eckstein, attempting to knock the bat out of Matt Kemp's hands, just before Kemp laced a single to center." -Ken Tremendous
Having an OF of Jackson-Sweeney-Taylor is pretty scary, agreed.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
True, though the A's seem to think he's worth about a bazillion times more than anyone else would
so I have no doubt they could resign him if they wanted to…
"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.
Jackson, I'll have you know, showed up in the best shape of his life this spring.
;)
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 24, 2011 2:55 AM PST up reply actions
I love how every year there are like 25:1 reports like that
I feel bad for the poor guy who shows up like 2 lbs over. Smith showed up looking great, adding pure muscle! Johnson is lifting cars in the parking lot and only eating leafy greens! But Williams, Williams looks a bit flabbier. Not too happy with Williams.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Joba?
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
What about Kubel?
As a free agent in 2012 I have to think Minnesota is running near their natural salary cap. Kubel has hit very well at the Coliseum as well. His WAR is low due to abysmal fielding but he’d be some pop in the lineup as a DH
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
I think they need outfielders, not more DHs.
It's because he derived his torque from the buttocks -- cityplANner
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 22, 2011 10:34 PM PST up reply actions
The free agent market is essentially worthless next year.
Any moves that will keep us contending by bringing in outside players (read: brings us a new outfield) will be achieved via trade or by Michael Taylor doing the reverse of his 2010. The only FA’s we would be interested in are Willingham, Crisp & DeJesus. I actually half expect Billy to sign these guys to multi-year deals this year. The pitching & defense are win-now so we might as well keep this squad in tact for the next 3 years, subbing Matsui for Carter at DH in 2012.
Buy some class, act like you've been there before.
I agree with Crisp and DeJesus not high on Willingham
Willingham is in for a big time decline.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
Trades...
You bring up a good point. In a worst case scenario where we cannot afford to retain Crisp and DeJesus or none of the prospects are ready to take over any of the open jobs, we can always make a trade to plug up the holes. We will have prospects of value even if the AAA crew doesn’t pan out.
It may mean 2013 or 2014 will be ugly but if Billy is starting a run in 2011, he isn’t going to abandon it in 2012.
If anyone thinks our roster at this point next year will be materially more than a couple wins worse than the 2011 roster projects right now, I will gladly put up a few bucks on a bet to be resolved at that time.
Well, sure, but it ain't going to happen by letting all the good players walk and praying like hell that you can replace them all and still collect draft picks
"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 that is why we won't do that
What are you even talking about? Do you realize what comment like that do for your argument as well as future arguments you want to make? You are better than this.
We won’t let everyone walk. Some will walk. Some will stay. 1 or 2 might even get a multiyear deal. Some will be replaced by prospects. 1 or 2 remaining holes may need to be plugged by a free agent or trade and we will have the flexibility to accomplish this.
Will we turn this into a 90 win team on paper next year? Not likely… at least without a lot of luck. Is that what is needed to make you happy? Somehow I doubt it.
I know you think we are bad this year. Is your point that we will be significantly worse next year or just that we won’t be any better? I’m having trouble figuring out your pessemism relative to your previous pessemism. Is it just that you are pessemistic about everything and isolating 2012 isn’t the point? Or are you particularly pessemistic about 2012?
You see this thing at the top of the page?
Sometimes referred to as “the original post”?
It proposes a plan under which the A’s would deliberately not re-sign key elements of the 2011 team, instead hoping to accrue compensatory draft picks and to replace their production with prospects. I am arguing that that is a silly and massively counterproductive strategy. I’m not sure what you’re arguing about, but it evidently isn’t the topic of this post.
I don’t think the A’s are “bad” this year. I think they’ve got a small chance of making the playoffs and will probably win 81-85 games, with a more or less steady decline going forward as the team gets more expensive and cannot get equal production for equal cost. It may be possible to stave off that decline for a year or two by borrowing heavily against the future farm system.
"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 prefer to refer to it as the really big post that sometimes has pictures!
But yeah I agree. I don’t think we just stockpile high schoolers. I think thats a bad strategy if you can get real life MLB ballplayers to play on your club. 0.1 WAR is worth more than the 0.0 MLB WAR you get for four years waiting for someone to get to the show. We can’t let this pitching cohort go by without going for it.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
I see value in a perpetual 80-85 win paper team.
That team has hope in spring training, annually.
I think the team has made a conscious decision to avoid boom-bust cycles of 90-95 paper wins, followed by 65-70 paper wins. I think that, coupled with the stadium situation, the fan base (and by this I mean their best paying consumers, not their best analysts like PT) is extremely intolerant of cellar dwelling, a la the mid-90s.
Beane often mentions in interviews the impact those seasons had on him.
The Oakland A's: If you have a no-trade clause in your contract, we're in it.
by notsellingjeans on Feb 24, 2011 3:00 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I absolutely see value in that too.
I just don’t see getting those high draft picks as necessary to meeting that goal.
Visit my blog the Todd Van Poppel Rookie Card Retirement Plan!!
See I don't disagree too much with what you say here
Instead of 81-85, I say 84-88, but the rest is fine. Yes, an equivalent team next year might be more expensive. If we are unlucky we might have to trade prospects to tread water for a year or two. But I think we will do what we need to do to stay competitive through 2013.
Your hyperbole seemed to indicate a huge dropoff… I think the issue is you hate the idea of a perpetual slightly above .500 team. You want all or nothing and we clearly aren’t on that path.
And as for the original post
He says to sign Crisp so your overstatement is still an overstatement. He only differs from most of us in that he wants to let DeJesus walk and sign Sizemore. I disagree with that.
I made it clear I wanted to retain DeJesus and you responded to me… So it is you that is confusing your frame of reference.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
Related FanShots on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
