Roy Oswalt = opportunity

by dougald1 on Feb 9, 2012 6:06 AM PST

As I sit here in front of my computor and read what happen in the Baseball world over the last 24 hour on mlbtraderumors.com I see an opportunity for the A's. This opportunity is named Roy Oswalt.

Roy wishes to pitch for the Cards or the Rangers. But both those teams do not need him, and thus have made low offers to Roy. The next team on the list, is the Red Sox. Who themselves have a self imposed cap on what they want to spend. Thus again Roy gets a low offer. The Reds and Phillies have kicked the tires, but have to move a pitcher to clear money and space (Blanton, Bailey).

Roy started the winter looking for a rumored 3 years and a maybe 10 million a year. Then he said he would sign for one year. It appears he only has offers in the 5 to 7 million range.

This is the time for the A's to make a big push for Oswalt. If the A's came in with a 2 million signing bonus and another 6 million in pay and say reachable bonus of 2 million. We might just get him. While some A's fan might say that he does not want to come to Oakland, that is nice money and well over what others seem to be offering. "You want to go to Texas, well take 5 million less!"

There are some good reasons for adding a Oswalt. The most important, is the ability to flip a very good stater at the trade deadline. Teams in the hunt, come June or July, might pay a few nice prospects to get a number one or two starter. While teams like Boston, Texas and the Cards might look today like they are set in the rotation, come June, their world has likely changed. Oswalt has been a stud for years, with only last season being a year he did not make 30+ starts.

Adding Roy, also pushes back one of the Parker or Peacock kids back to AAA for a few months. Which would likely help the kids development, and save the A's a year in sevise time.

Roy will/should understand that he is here for half a season. He will go to a playoff contender. Oakland is a stop on the way to his future team. And he will be well payed

I have written about this idea in the past, but with all the teams that Roy wants to go to, dragging their feet, this is a very nice opportunity.

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Wishful Thinking

As much as I would love Oswalt on our team it won’t happen. Where he’s at in his career and age, he has strongly expressed going to a contender. That’s why the Rangers, Cardinals, and Red Sox are the front runners for him and whoever offers him that $7mm high will land him. All 3 of those teams will most likely make the playoffs and possibly go on to win the WS. That is what he want’s more than money. He wants to be on a good team surrounded by above average players and coaches. Unfortunately at this time the A’s are not that team.

Even if we offer him the 6mm plus 2mm, that still wouldn’t cut it for him to go to a team he has no interest in. We would have to offer him 9mm+ for him to even look our way. Even if we give him an extremely high offer there is still no guarantee he will sign as he might be more interested in a championship rather than the money.

On top of all that. They A’s do not have that type of money to spend on one player, not 9mm or even 6mm for that matter.

It’s sad but true. Maybe in a few years when we are in the new stadium and Oswalt is at Colon status, then we can have him in the green and gold.

by Mike Siegel on Feb 9, 2012 10:40 AM PST reply actions

Wishful yes

Is it wishful thinking yes, but can it be done…..yes again

You have two issues that would be problems. The first is money. While the A’s are at say $50 million in payroll and do not want to go up much more, are they likely to keep all they contract they have? Come July 31st, will Colon, Balfour, McCarthy and Fuentes be gone? In all likelyhood, two or three players will be moved. Just trading two of the four listed in July would likely save 3 to 4 million. If Oswalt is traded, and that is the point of signing him, the A’s would only pay half his pay. The money is there.

The second point is Oswalt and what he wants. He has not signed. All the front runners are not making much effort to sign him. I would guess he would understand that if he signed with the A’s, he would keep bags packed. The A’s are not going to trade him to a non playoff contenter.

Oswalt can get money and be on a contender. He just will have to wait for the contender part to come in July.

by dougald1 on Feb 9, 2012 12:22 PM PST up reply actions

He would be foolish to assume that the A's will trade him.

That may be the plan if the team signs him, but it was also the plan with DeJesus and Willingham last year and Sheets the year before. The pitching situation in Texas or St. Louis isn’t the only thing that can change.

If Mike is right and winning is more important to him than money then taking half as much money is the way to go. I know he would have to eat baloney and mac’ & cheese all year, but he’d survive.

by rudirules on Feb 9, 2012 2:15 PM PST up reply actions

world change

With the new free agent compination system, the A’s would not offer arbitration to Oswalt if he was with the A’s for the full season. The three players were not traded for three different reasons. DeJesus was playing poorly but still got the A’s a comp pick as a type B. Willingham played better and got the A’s two picks as a type A. DeJesus and Willingham would have been traded if they were on the A’s this year. But last year the picks were better than what was offered in trade for them.

As for eating baloney, seem like he went from wanting 3 years and 30 million Nov 30th to today when he can sign for 5 million with the Cards. Scott Boras would laugh

Sheets got hurt. I agree that if Oswalt gets hurt, he will not be traded. Not sure Oswalt or his agent are pushing the, “if I get hurt” aspect.

It seems like Oswalt and his agent, screwed up. If they wanted Texas or St. L, they kinda waited to long. Or overpriced themselves. If he wanted to be a winner, he likely could have stayed in Philly, and Philly could have flipped Blanton. Not so easy to flip Blanton this late in the winter (Blanton is hard to flip anyway, likely put out your back)

by dougald1 on Feb 9, 2012 5:01 PM PST up reply actions

I'm still on board with this idea.

It makes more sense to me that signing Manny or Magglio.

I don’t think we can put ourselves in a position of promising Oswalt, either officially or unofficially, that he will definitely be traded. Among other things that would destroy our bargaining position with other teams. But surely as part of the negotiations we could point out the reality that if he performs well he’s likely to attract trade interest in July and it would fit the A’s general plan to trade him for prospects.

Sometimes contracts have a clause that the player is paid extra if he’s traded. Could we perhaps turn that around and make a clause whereby he’s paid extra if he’s not traded?

Difference of opinion among my community is a sign of the bounty of God.

by iglew on Feb 10, 2012 2:21 PM PST reply actions

It seems like a no-brainer

As does Manny. At the beginning of any season nobody is out of the realm of possibility of contention. Adding an Oswalt could be crucial should they luck into being in the pennant race, or provide the possibility of flipping at the deadline should they not be. He would apparently be around the same price as Sheets was last year and he’s a.) better than Sheets and b.) not coming off a catastrophic injury. 1 yr $10m can not hurt unless he goes down for the year like Sheets (worst luck possible can’t happen to the A’s every year, right?).

Ramirez makes sense for the same reasons (and way cheaper prolly).

Jeremy was safe. He jumped over the tag.

by mrrickyg on Feb 12, 2012 8:55 PM PST reply actions