Stockpiling Assets: The New "Moneyball"
by cuppingmaster on Feb 21, 2012 6:09 AM PST
Email
Print"Boring" is certainly not the adjective one would use to describe the A's offseason. From signing Manny Ramirez yesterday, to trading away Gio Gonzalez, Trevor Cahill, and Andrew Bailey, and then signing Yoenis Cespedes, the A's have not failed to make waves in the baseball world. As dwishinsky pointed out in his post on Sunday, however, it's easy to lose sight of a real plan through the forest of moves made. Today, I submit my view of The Plan.
First, let's assume that the A's do indeed add a reliever (Koji Uehara? Mike Gonzalez?) and the signing of Cespedes goes off without a hitch. Also, let's not look at the roster coming out of Spring Training, but at the 40-man roster as it would be around May 30th, when Manny is due to have served his 50-game suspension. The 1B/OF/DH situation will look something like this
Oakland:
Ramirez - DH
Gomes - DH/OF
Carter - DH
Reddick - OF
Crisp - OF
Cespdes - OF
Smith - OF
Allen - OF/1B
Barton - 1B/??
AAA:
Taylor - OF
Cowgill - OF
Mitchell - OF
Ka'aihue - 1B/DH
The distribution of the names isn't necessarily important so much as the overall number of bodies. That's 13 names for 6 (3 OF, 1DH/backup IF-OF, 1 backup OF, 1 1B) spots in Oakland, all of whom need truly need playing time to be valuable assets.
The bullpen is also going to be interesting. Let's break that down, too:
Oakland:
Balfour
Fuentes
Uehara/Gonzalez
Blevins
De Los Santos
[loser of 5th starter job: Ross/Godfrey]
AAA:
Carignan
Norberto
Devine
Cook
[NRIs]
It is not as pronounced here, but again -- the A's have more than enough bodies to fill the roster spots available. What's more, of this bullpen group, Balfour, Fuentes, and Uehara/Gonzalez have enough of a track record to make them tradable assets.
As Rany Jazayreli noted back in December, trading away prospects is a new market inefficiency. This forces Beane to be more creative in how he acquires cheap assets. With Gonzalez, Cahill, and Bailey now gone before their arbitration years began, and frankly, no other young stars that another team would want, Beane has turned towards acquiring cheap free agents to a) fill out his roster and b) become tradable assets that can be used to acquire younger talent. Indeed, I would submit that Beane is no longer viewing his roster as a way to construct a baseball team, but as an indirect holding zone for future, riskier minor league talent.
As Jazayreli also noted, as teams have decided to horde top prospects, the return for established stars has been diminishing. With Beane having no ability to move the market himself, one way to increase the potential "hits" in baseball prospecting is to simply increase the number of minor leaguers he acquires. The best way to do that, then, is to buy relatively undervalued current MLB players, then trade them for more numbers of (but lower-graded) MiLB prospects. Consider the following acquisitions this offseason:
Gomes - 1 year/$1M
Ramirez - 1 year/$500K non-guaranteed
Ka'aihue - ~ League min (trade after DFA)
Colon - 1 year/$2M
Crisp - 2 years/$14M*
*Some people may argue that Crisp will not be worth his contract; I would argue that his surplus value is simply not likely to be as high as the others. There are also unsubstantiated whispers about this being a move to placate union cries of team frugality.
For an investment of ~$18M (about 3.6 WAR or so of current market value), the A's are seeking to find a group of prospects (or, ideally, one star) who can produce more than 3.6 WAR of value over his A's career. Given that low bar for success in coming out ahead, this seems like an ideal under-the-radar strategy. In essence, Beane is indirectly buying risky minor league talent (rather than risky major-league talent)
What's more, if those MLB players happen to produce better than expected, this can only increase their potential return.
Do I think this strategy is likely to work? In the short-term, since the likelihood of all 5 players above plus Balfour and Fuentes (who I did not use above) being busts is low, I would say it has a reasonable chance of being successful in being able to acquire some risky prospects. In the long-term, however, the combination of trading away young stars pre-arbitration and attempting to partially make-up for that lost talent by buying tradable MLB players is a vicious cycle of baseball mediocrity. It is unreasonable to expect to build a blueprint for success when the most promising players are traded away before their peak years. What the A's have now, and what Beane is attempting to build, is a blueprint of a blueprint.
116 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don't see most of those guys being attractive trade targets to any other teams.
Crisp and Smith are the two players that I think could yield some players.
I think the ability to sign Cespedes came as a surprise, and that’s why we have a surplus of players. Beane acquired Smith, Gomes, Crisp, and Reddick before he knew he would have a $36MM man in the outfield. In hindsight, trading Bailey for an outfielder AND signing free agent outfielders wasn’t necessary.
by DDroney on Feb 21, 2012 6:57 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
They have to produce
Obviously, if Colon makes 10 starts pre-ASG that’s not going to cut it. Same with Gomes and others; else, this gamble will not pay off.
I view Cespedes as a guy the A’s would want to keep around. I tend not to think he will be traded if he becomes good.
"I'll guarantee this: The A's will have a better season in 2012." - George Zimmer
Co-host of @TarpTalk, an Oakland A's podcast: tarptalkpodcast.wordpress.com
by cuppingmaster on Feb 21, 2012 7:26 AM PST up reply actions
everyone keeps talking about him leaving when the new park opens
to which i have two objections:
1)This actually is the whole point of a new stadium: whatever your feelings about ownership’s true motivations, you couldn’t sell MLB on “we need a new stadium so we can milk more money out of this kind of operation.” You sell MLB on “we need a new stadium so that we can throw off the constraints of small market-ness and play on equal footing with the other teams.” Part of that is keeping (where possible) your franchise players, something we haven’t been able to do.
2) If you’re Yoenis — and you move to the US but have to play at the Colosseum — I’d imagine that four years of internal hype and build up to a new state of the art facility makes you excited to play there at least a little bit.
FIRE ILIKEIKE
Colon won't bring back much, but if he can produce like he did last year with the Yankees, he'll be a "warm" commodity
He’ll simply be a bridge 5th SP to get a team through to the playoffs, but a lot of teams need that each season. I don’t see why he couldn’t net a B- and a C+ prospect if his April/May/June is like last year’s.
I think the question we have to ask here...
Is the goal to be the most efficient team out there? Or is the goal to win a championship?
BB is a great CEO, he has proven he can run the leanest operation with max output like no others in MLB. However, can he win championship? As an A’s fan, I want to know that! I believe the owner is probably the one to blame but it’s just frustrating. If we are going to rebuild, we can’t have all these people and not give them playing time to prove themselves. Our infield is super weak, I see no solutions at SS nor 3B.
You're creating a false disjunction between efficiency and championships
We need to be efficient in order to win championships. Don’t blame the lack of a championship on a desire for efficiency. Efficiency is a means to the end, and I think Billy knows that.
I also disagree that SS and 3B are problems. Question marks yes, but I don’t think they are truly weakness. I’m higher on this team than most, but I think under a best case scenario, we could be a mid-80’s win club.
John 3:16
"If they want to pay me like Mike Gallego, I’ll play like Gallego." - Rickey Henderson
by A'sFanDFW on Feb 21, 2012 8:05 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
And dunk him in coffee?
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
Roache?
How many high power, high K corner outfielders do we need? And please, no more pitchers, we need hitters. I think college infielders are a good target this year.
Nolan Fontana would be a good pick with one of the sandwich picks we have. We’ve had success with SS from the University of Florida before.
As far as I'm concerned
They can have as many high power high K hitters they want, provided they are “35 HR 170 K” rather “18 HR 205 K” types. College ranks are crappy this year, I don’t see any position players who might justify #11 pick besides Roache and Piscotty (Zunino and Marrero, but they will go in top 10), although somebody might have a major breakout season.
I love rebuilding.
by John of Gaunt on Feb 21, 2012 11:40 AM PST up reply actions
Zunino would be amazing
if he somehow dropped to 11. Diekroeger is another interesting possibility, but evidently his swing is ugly right now and he’s for sure moving off SS in the pros Maybe he’ll be there at 34. Piscotty is a local guy, went to Amador Valley HS, would likely only need one or two seasons in the minors and is high probability. He’d be a good fit, but… Stanford hitters… yikes.
Diekroeger
He’s not a top 50 pick for me right now. Athlete, not a ballplayer and he’s already 21, skills should start showing by now (although Stanford coaching is probably not doing him any favors).
I love rebuilding.
by John of Gaunt on Feb 21, 2012 11:49 AM PST up reply actions
That's what struck me about him
He looks like he could be Evan Longoria or Cal Ripken, but his game is ugly. Probably has something to do with Stanford.
Piscotty is an A's fan too
saw him at games when he was in high school a ton. great great kid.
I like this Piscotty idea the more I think about it/the more I read about him
I’d love Piscotty at 11, Nolan Fontana at 34. With just a little luck, there’s your starting 3B and SS for the 2015 Athletics.
thing is
you don’t draft for need, unless the guy’s a SURE fire thing to make it to the bigs and stick
you draft the best talent there is on the board, which at #11, is most likely to be roache or beck
fontana might even be there for the second round since he’s a very light hitting ss (although for team usa, he played 2nd base)
piscotty has been hot, granted, but he has to put up some really good numbers to jump roache and beck (if they’re still available at that moment). and even then, he’d have to jump past guys like mike wacha, brian johnson, and kyle zimmer
Snoochies
The A's reached for Jemile based on not really need,
but for the sake of variety back in 2008. Remember Brett Wallace was considered a better prospect, but the A’s didn’t want to overload the system with no field sluggers. Similarly, the A’s are strong at pitching and outfield in their minor league system, along with youth on the ML roster, right now. However, we have no decent infielders anywhere in the system except Jemile Weeks. Right now the A’s need infielders.
And I’m not convinced Roache is better than Piscotty anyways. The college corner outfielder thing is risky in such early rounds, BA just had a thing on this. If you’re taking Roache at 11, you’re betting he’s gonna REALLY hit, which I think is questionable given his contact ability. Piscotty brings plus contact, plus approach, and some defensive value.
Whether Piscotty is better than Beck or Gausman is a different question.
As for Fontana, sure he’s light hitting but his plate discipline and contact abilities are through the roof. If he can couple that with plus defense at SS, you’ve got a major league starter. Plus he’s “scrappy” as hell, like the infield version of Colling Cowgill. I have a good feeling about him.
Depending on his season, there's a good chance we could get him with Willingham's sandwich pick
Or, if we get lucky and nab one of the extra first round picks.
Actually, I was considering seeing a Stanford game, too. I have 2 roommates that played with him in middle school/high school summer leagues, and they wanted to say hey. They’re pretty hyped to see him drafted.
and if you go see a game, go on a Friday night.
They play Rice in a few weeks in Palo Alto, and Appel is really worth seeing.
On the flip side of your argument
Do championship teams lead to a high correlation with high efficiency teams?
I do not have an answer for this but my gut feeling is no. Maybe we can go back to all the WS winners and divide their WAR by team salary. If there is a high correlation then “Efficiency is a means to the end”. If not, I can’t agree with that statement.
You're kind of setting up straw men here
In your experiment a high correlation would mean that efficiency is ALWAYS a means to an end. But as I understand it the argument here is that, in our SPECIFIC case, efficiency is the means to the end.
Obviously the yankees dont have to be efficient to win championships, but the A’s do.
FIRE ILIKEIKE
Agreed - I don't care if the Yankees or Phillies can win without efficiency
We don’t have those resources. Our only chance at a championship is to be phenomenally efficient. With limited resources, efficiency is the only option.
John 3:16
"If they want to pay me like Mike Gallego, I’ll play like Gallego." - Rickey Henderson
The same concerns of
too much depth were articlated last year. Moscoso was #9 on the SP depth chart. Let’s not get ourselves into a twist trying to figure out why Beane would stockpile so much “talent” as it were.
As for Beane’s prowess, there’s a number of teams which have managed to perform at .500 or worse for 5 consecutive years; we should be hesitant to laud Billy overly much.
Also, Slusser suggests this morning that Cespedes may arrive in OAK around the same time as Manny,
so perhaps the April/May OF is Smith/Gomes, Crisp, Reddick, with Cowgill as the 5th OFer, Taylor and Cespedes at AAA. Not so overcrowded.
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
This is most likely.
Manny will play in AAA for a bit right after his suspension. Then when he finally comes up it will before before the Trade Deadline and Smith/Gomes would be trade bait by then since they will have got a good amount of playing time while Manny was out.
by Mike Siegel on Feb 21, 2012 10:43 AM PST up reply actions
I meant he'll arrive to camp about the same time as Ramirez
Cespedes will be on the Opening Day roster, from everything I have heard.
Any word on whether Reddick is in the mix for a starting position?
With Crisp’s salary, I figure he’ll be given a starting spot for most of the time. Ditto with Cespedes. That leaves Gomes, Smith, Reddick, and Cowgill for the last spot.
I think the most likely initial outcome is supposed to be:
LF – Crisp
CF – Cespedes
RF – Reddick
DH – Smith/Gomes
Of course that would push Carter out of DH, but we’ll see what actually happens.
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
My money is on Allen and Smith getting traded
Beane’s “less than 50% chance we add someone before opening day” quote is pretty noncomittal. Less than 50% is still a pretty big chance that someone is getting shipped out and someone else is brought in.
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 6:03 PM PST up reply actions
Guesses change every day
Kila gets DFA’d and the A’s try to sneak him through when Cespedes is ready. It’s spring training and he has to be on someone’s major league roster.
I’d love to see the A’s trade Smith/Gomes together.
Yeah, I was hoping NYY would target Smith
for a B prospect or a couple B- guys. Not especially expecting that after they just signed Ibanez. I supposed they still could; they’re OF is good but shallow, and they still need a capable DH. Anybody else looking for a LH outfielder?
OH! I totally didn't get that. Sorry.
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
no problem
when I re-read it after I saw your post, I thought, “Whoops, that wasn’t very clear.”
I like the real way better -- can't wait to see Mr. Cespedes in OAK!
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 see this year as this.
It’s going to be a Fun year. I have zero expectations. We’ll get to watch some young hitters & pitchers compete – Parker, Milone, Peacock, Reddick, Weeks, Sizemore, Chris Carter, De Los Santos, Carignan, and Cook. We’ll get to watch guys like Suzuki compete knowing he has to produce or his replacement (Norris) is ready to take over in late 2012-Early 2013.
Then in late May, Manny will be on the scene. I believe this only happens if the AAA-Headed Monster of Carter/Allen/Kila don’t step up the the challenge. Cespedes is going to be really interesting to watch. He will probably go on some hot streaks, some very cold streaks, hot, cold, hot, etc… Hopefully Manny and Co. can teach him how to play the game at this level. Manny is a “genius” hitter. If he can spread his wisdom to some of the younger players, I am all for it.
So, this year and next will help keep offense talents in the minors,aka delay service time – Michael Choice, Grant Green, Michael Taylor… plus there has got to be another gem in the Farm somewhere, anywhere… someone step up, Please.
Go A’s!
for the fist time
in a long time, I feel pretty good about this coming year. Probably due to the low expectations coming off last season. While this team certainly is not an elite team, I think they will be a team others do not look forward to playing. A 500 finish seems reasonable now.
An over abundance of assets for a particular position is really not a problem. I don’t understand all the hand wringing over it. It is a long, very long season. Unexpected opportunity will present itself (an injury, even to other teams which suddenly increases the value for your assets). I’m quite certain all GM’s look at this not as a ballclub, but as a portfolio.
slide! jeremy slide!
by elephantman on Feb 21, 2012 8:31 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree
I also think Billy is doing te right thing by forcing the young guys to compete for spots
“no scholorships” is how I think Forst put it
As a fan it will be interesting to get to know all the new guys and see who rises to the top. I just hope they don’t all horribly suck.
by Oaktown Shutout on Feb 21, 2012 10:37 AM PST up reply actions
Great way of putting it.
I’m quite certain all GM’s look at this not as a ballclub, but as a portfolio.
Especially regarding minor leaguers this really is a portfolio. I think the Nationals GM had some comments after the Gio trade that basically said, I don’t really care much about prospects, I put a lot more stock in who can help me now at the big league level. Given the Nationals’ position, I agree with that stance in his case. He basically did not value certain assets (i.e. Cole/Milone/Norris/Peacock) as much as he did Gio with a few years of team control. Beane valued them higher.
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 11:23 AM PST up reply actions
Pitchers are overvalued
BB’s recent actions reflect this.
The reason pitchers are overvalued is that every team can use an above average pitcher. There’s always a #4 or #5 that can be knocked off the rotation. Position players are not nearly as liquid an asset. For example, I don’t expect the Angels to be looking for a 1Ber anytime soon.
Also, pitchers don’t have a peak like a position player does. The most likely thing to happen to any pitcher in any following year is that he will be worse. Yes, they may hone their craft as they age, but they also get hurt and this more than offsets it. There’s a decent chance that the new staff of younger guys will be just as good or better than the outgoing crew. There’s no reason to keep an about-to-get-expensive staff together unless you are within striking distance. The A’s were not.
BB has no way of getting an established franchise lever hitter to Oakland so he has to be creative. Taking a lot of longshot bets is a viable strategy especially if the sure-things are not available. The reason we have all these players is that we have a lottery ticket type player and an insurance type. If the lottery ticket doesn’t pay off then there’s a passable player to take the spot. Cespedes is really an expensive and developed prospect – like signing a FA out of AAA.
Cardenas!!!! WoooooooooooooHOOOOOOOOO
so Billy's plan for 2014-2016 is to be in...
It's just more exciting with Billy Beane running the team.
by ru155 on Feb 21, 2012 8:52 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
"They shouldn't have put him in the water if they didn't want him to make waves"
Someone got paid to write that.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
Well said.
Especially the part re: pitchers’ most likely future (taking into account injury and everything else) is decline. I agree that this may explain part of Beane’s thinking.
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
A couple of points of possible disagreement
Billy wants to win this year. I think we all need to realize that there is the possiblity that BB simply cannot ever stomach a full rebuild. He doesn’t want to be the Houston Astros or the old Devil Rays for 5 years. He wants to compete, and he has to do so on a budget. That’s why he made these moves – getting the most wins out of his money this year without sacrificing future assets.
These guys are worthless as trade bait. We’re never going to get anything for Gomes or Smith. Nobody else wanted Manny, that’s why we got him for league minimum on a minor league deal. If they didn’t want him for a no risk contract, they won’t want him in the future.
John 3:16
"If they want to pay me like Mike Gallego, I’ll play like Gallego." - Rickey Henderson
agreed
Cowgill, Gomes, Smith, Allen, Ka’aihue etc. These guys could be good, or they could perform like they have in the past: done O-K or well for a short period, but never completely break through.
They’ve been passed over by other teams and any value we get out of them will be on the field. I think the guy most likely to develop will be Smith, but other clubs are wary of busted goods and small sample sizes.
It's just more exciting with Billy Beane running the team.
Oakland A's!
We could be good.
2012 Slogan
by Oaktown Shutout on Feb 21, 2012 10:39 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
In response to – “We’re never going to get anything for Gomes or Smith. Nobody else wanted Manny, that’s why we got him for league minimum on a minor league deal.”
IF… they hit the baseball, we will get plenty of return.
slide! jeremy slide!
Gomes and Smith are absolutely trade bait.
They are going to both get a good amount of playing time while Manny is out. They had interest form other teams before they signed/ were traded to the A’s. If they put up decent numbers they will be trade-able come the deadline, that would make room for Manny to arrive.
by Mike Siegel on Feb 21, 2012 10:46 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think other teams were that interested in Gomes
otherwise they would have offered him more than a million dollars
John 3:16
"If they want to pay me like Mike Gallego, I’ll play like Gallego." - Rickey Henderson
Smith will have better value than Gomes for sure.
Gomes did put up 14 HRs in 311 ABs last season though. So if he does the same for the A’s he will have a little value.
by Mike Siegel on Feb 21, 2012 11:25 AM PST up reply actions
some teams are interested in Smith
They were interested when Colorado was avidly shopping him. I still think Smith makes a lot of sense with the Braves. He could get traded before the season starts.
We didn’t give up nothing for Smith, we gave up two starting pitchers that have had modest success at the big league level. Apparently no other team could match that package.
Of course, the O DOT CO is not really the place to build value on hitters. Also, the worst thing we can do for Smith’s value is DH him full time; if we do that, I think that will be a sign that Beane is basically just trying to win this year and not really thinking of Smith as an asset to trade. When we acquired Smith we only had one OF position filled (Reddick) so I think pre-Cespedes Beane was thinking that we need a decent OF just to field a team.
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 11:40 AM PST up reply actions
He'll play OF as well.
He will play some OF and DH while Cespedes gets MLB ready. Then all at once Smith will be traded, Cespedes will become the full time OF and Manny the full time DH.
by Mike Siegel on Feb 21, 2012 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
Yummy!
Interesting how Peacock is 29 slots ahead of Gray. Milone no longer qualifies, or didn’t make the top 100?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
He only made like 5 starts
So I guess he still qualifies, but scouting-focused analysts will never give a guy like Milone any respect until he has few solid major league seasons.
I love rebuilding.
by John of Gaunt on Feb 21, 2012 9:32 AM PST up reply actions
I am most intrigued with Milone at the moment.
He’s had a consistent minor league career with 3.1 ERA, 8.1 K/9, and 1.5 BB/9. His 9.7 K/BB ratio last season led all eligible starting pitchers in all of AAA. Only one other qualified pitcher below age 25 had above a 2.8 K/BB ratio in AAA last season (Zach McAllister of Cleveland with 4.1 K/BB). Furthermore, Milone’s career minor league K/BB ratio is 5.5, in over 500 innings. Only 5 qualified starters had above 4.5 K/BB last season in the majors: Halladay, Haren, Lee, McCarthy, and Kershaw.
by chrisatsac on Feb 21, 2012 4:19 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
Milone qualifies
He didn’t make the list, obviously. He didn’t make a single top 100 that I saw.
Green or Norris don’t appear either, two guys who have made other top 100s.
Surprised about Norrs, but I guess a .215 minor league BA scares off old-school scouts
I can better understand Milone (25, throws 88) and Green (questions about performance/position).
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
Norris was #72 last year and #38 year before
BA started cooling off as batting averages dropped, even if he improved his defense and maintained impressive power and plate discipline. Green really has no business being in anyone’s top 100 after the position change and a poor year in Midland. I was surprised to see Goldstein is still bullish on him.
I love rebuilding.
by John of Gaunt on Feb 21, 2012 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
Also surprising to me is Choice so low, Cole so high
I’d flip them.
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
(Not that I'm down on Cole, just surprised he's ahead of Choice)
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
Green & Norris make the BP list
Norris is at #96 and Green at #100 (but the list was compiled without the three Cuban players — Cespedes, Soler & Grandal) so Norris would be at #99, and Green at #103. Cespedes would be at #20.
They obviously need to pay more attention to the AN community prospect lists
John 3:16
"If they want to pay me like Mike Gallego, I’ll play like Gallego." - Rickey Henderson
The uncertainty of what?
Grandal was drafted out of college, has played two years in Cincinnati’s system, and was traded to San Diego in the Latos deal. BP has him 38 overall. Soler and Cespedes weren’t ranked because they neither of them had been signed by the time the list was published.
Then who knows....
My guess was that he decided not to rank any of the imports.
Well they hadn't signed yet. He can't rank them if they haven't signed.
I’m not sure why he didn’t rank Darvish.
Of course he can rank them (unless he's afraid of the rank police)
There are purists who refuse to call Cespedes and Darvish actual prospects. Maybe he’s one of them.
If the player is a FA and haven't officially signed with a team, I'm
pretty sure they aren’t considered professional players. If you start ranking non-professional players (I don’t want to necessarily call them amateurs), you’d need to start considering high school and college players. There’s also the outside risk that Soler decides not to sign with an MLB organization and goes back to Cuba or something. Then he’s not an MLB prospect.
Then the list would be slightly inaccurate
As it is now.
A little more looking
The list is dated February 13th, which is the day that Cespedes agreed to a contract with the A’s. The BP list COULD have included him, or better yet, the list could have been revised to include him. It also could have included Yu Darvish. Concepcion doesn’t make his top 100 so that doesn’t count.
The question isn’t why he didn’t include Cespedes. It’s why he didn’t include Darvish.
Kila will be up and Carter will be in AAA to start.
This is because Carter hasn’t hit his service time limit yet, so he is under team control indefinitely with no arb in site yet. Kila already has his arb and team control countdown going. We can wait on Carter, because as soon as we bring him up and he hits his games and/or at bat limit number then the clock starts ticking for him. So we may wait until a little into the season to try to maintain longer team control, and if we wait even longer in the season then we could possibly maintain a further Arb eligible date.
Have we learned nothing from the Jake Fox/Eric Patterson debacle?
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
apparently not.
I hope that we just put the best team on the field, options be damned. There’s a reason Kila was available to every team in MLB.
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
The difference ....
Is that Fox and Patterson could both play (poorly) multiple positions, which Kila cannot. Having those two on the team at first wasn’t that bad an idea. But it became clear pretty quickly that neither were major league players, yet the A’s held on to both of them for weeks past that point.
If Kila’s not hitting, he should be gone before May.
Unless
He never hits, not even once. But does draw the walk in over 50% of his plate appearances. I could live with that.
I couldn't
On a team with low batting averages and minimal power, a walk is overrated.
Random question
Was looking through some A’s trade history and came across the Kouzmanoff to Colorado deal. That was for a PTBNL or cash and I don’t see any Baseball-Reference note on the resolution of that deal. Are we still owed a player from Colorado? In this, the year of AAAA-talent running amuk, do we get to add yet another name to the list?
Also, here's a tidbit from my trade research:
Sometimes we forget how good Beane is at scrapheap dealings. Remember how we had a black hole of suck at 3B for years until Sizemore came along to give us some hope. How’d we land Sizemore? It started by claiming a player off waivers from the San Francisco Giants!
We picked up Rajai Davis as a waiver claim in 2008 from those territorial rights jerks across the Bay. Davis was a good fit and we signed him to a contract in the 2010-2011 offseason. But then Beane swung a deal for David DeJesus.
With Crisp and Sweeney also on the roster, Davis was no longer needed. So we shipped him to Toronto for Danny Farquhar and Trystan Magnuson.
Then, Toronto decided they wanted Farquhar back and we swapped him for David Purcey.
Purcey had a great start to 2011. Sizemore was struggling in Detroit. Beane dealt from a position of strength (bullpen) to nab for us what turned out to be our promising 3B starter in 2012.
In summation, and I realize this is an oversimplification, you could say that picking up Rajai Davis is what solved our 3B conundrum.
I Think I Posted Something Like This Somewhere
Basically:
- Davis is drafted by the Pirates in 2001
- In 2007, Davis is traded to San Fran (with Stephen MacFarland) for Matt Morris
- In 2008, Davis is claimed off waivers by the A’s
- Davis is then traded to Toronto for Magnuson and Farquhar
- Farquhar is sent back to Toronto for David Purcey
- Purcey is swapped for Sizemore
It may actually be thanks to Matt Morris. Funnily, Davis was traded and struggled in Toronto. Purcey, a nobody did alright for Oakland and then was traded for a lousy second baseman, Scott Sizemore. Sizemore comes out and performs for the A’s.
by Sean Fortuna on Feb 21, 2012 12:03 PM PST up reply actions
Sizemore wasn't a lousy second baseman.
He was a fairly decent prospect with a long track record of posting good lines. The worst wRC+ he ever posted in the minors was 122 which was in 2007. The only knock on him was that he was a little old in prospect terms. Detroit gave him a little over 200 plate appearances and he didn’t do much with it, and they were A) in playoff contention and didn’t want to waste time letting a 2B adjust, and B) desperately seeking LHP relief help.
I think this was a case of Beane being smart rather than lucky.
Don't think Sean's post necessarily implied Beane was lucky
But it is interesting that at every point on that particular trade chain Beane appears to have won each trade. Lucky, or smart? On the Sizemore move I definitely vote for smart. Beane took advantage of a team in a certain situation where he could extract good value. As for Purcey, he only pitched 12.2 innings for us and looked great. Then was horrid after the trade, more in line with his career norm. So maybe a bit of luck there that Purcey was the guy Beane convinced Detroit to take what with the hot start.
Fair enough
He really did suck in his Detroit debut, SSS though it was:
143 AB of .224/.296/.336
Anyway, fighting over subtle meanings of internet posts is crazy. In any case, I still agree with you. Sizemore trade is a deserved feather in Beane’s cap.
I See Your Point
And checking out his minor league stats, I see that he actually was a solid young player; I didn’t know that. I just don’t believe that Detroit felt that he was anything more then a backup second baseman who was hitting .220 in limited big league time. But I may be wrong.
And I didn’t say Beane was lucky; I think he just bought and dealt players at the right times to maximize his winnings. Rajai was a fast outfielder who was able to provide solid D, decent hitting and speed. Purcey pitched all of 12.2 innings for Oakland, and then Beane traded him seeing that the Tigers needed bullpen help and had a young second baseman who could play third for Oakland.
by Sean Fortuna on Feb 22, 2012 8:14 AM PST up reply actions
Oooh, I like that four-headed nickname
Much better than McPhoxez or whatever it was from 2009.
"I'll guarantee this: The A's will have a better season in 2012." - George Zimmer
Co-host of @TarpTalk, an Oakland A's podcast: tarptalkpodcast.wordpress.com
by cuppingmaster on Feb 21, 2012 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe KilAllBartCars will work better.
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 12:55 PM PST up reply actions
If Barton doesn't get in the way,
that ball rolls all the way to the RF foul pole.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Feb 21, 2012 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Dammit I want to see this guy!
Susan Slusser@susanslusser
#Athletics still waiting on visa for Cespedes.
by Billy Frijoles on Feb 21, 2012 12:58 PM PST reply actions
all these moves feel like the plan B talked about by Wolff
Something to the effect of if we can’t get a stadium deal, we’ll have to make moves to get butts into seats this year at the Coli.
This sure feels like that.
No stadium. Bah.
I've had that thought, too
Blah
"I'll guarantee this: The A's will have a better season in 2012." - George Zimmer
Co-host of @TarpTalk, an Oakland A's podcast: tarptalkpodcast.wordpress.com
by cuppingmaster on Feb 21, 2012 7:17 PM PST up reply actions
I've wondered about that
But in that case they wouldn’t have traded away the established players. I have to think trading Gio, Cahill, and Bailey is a sign of the “full rebuild” that was “plan A.”
It feels to me like plan A was on and then something happened
Remember the leak the As had a deal to announce and now they don’t? Maybe something changed.
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
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Barry Bonds thinks it will be ‘very sad’ if he doesn’t get into the Hall on his first try
- Chris Johnson’s glove webbing had a Spidey sense at Coors Field — for one play, at least
- Jonathan Lucroy breaks hand after suitcase falls during search for sock
- The Juice: Long Adam Dunn homer punctuates Chris Sale’s 15 Ks, Mark Trumbo goes deep after Jered Weaver goes down for Angels
- Leyland begs media to make umpires ‘accountable’ for bad calls (VIDEO)
