Comparing Big Apples To Small Oranges

by Nico on Dec 9, 2005 8:15 AM PST in News

The flurry of activity in the last 72 hours gives us an insight into how different teams are approaching this off-season:

The Blue Jays, formerly owners of a very modest payroll, appear to be darn serious about joining the ranks of the "AL East Goliaths" not soon but now. Whether or not you like each move they've made, adding A.J. Burnett, B.J. Ryan, and Lyle Overbay--and spending top dollar to do so--signals a seriousness the Yankees and Red Sox can't be too thrilled to see.

The Red Sox, meanwhile, have sent a clear message that the Boston team which takes the field in 2006 will not resemble too closely the team which won the World Series in 2004 or the team which settled for the Wild Card in 2005. Gone are Renteria, Mueller, and Millar, in limbo are Damon and Ramirez, in the rumor mill are Foulke and Wells, and so on.

The Marlins have announced to their own fans, and to the baseball world in general, that they have the courage to embarrass the entire franchise, and all of baseball in the process, by making available for trade even the "Fire Sale" sign that hangs on the clubhouse door. Pathetic.

But most intriguing to me is the Yankees, whose approach is...? It's interesting to watch guys with the stature of Burnett, Ryan, Overbay, Renteria, Soriano, Pierre, and Wilkerson, change teams and the Yankees have added virtually no one. (In Algebra, you learn two basic formulas. One is the quadratic equation; the other is that "signing Mike Myers" + "offering Bernie Williams arbitration" = "adding virtually no one".)

Options still exist for the Yankees, such as the Johnny Damon sweepstakes, or second-tier pitchers like Jarrod Washburn who, while not exceptional, could still upgrade NYY's rotation. But so far, two unusual things have happened to the Yankees: they have been rejected by free agents and they have declined to spend "whatever it takes" to improve their team. Did the Yankees, despite their 787-trillion dollar TV deal, actually lose enough money last year to make George Steinbrenner feel frugal? Can George Steinbrenner actually accept the thought of going 8 years without a World Series title and building for a season other than "the next one"?

The A's, rich in starting pitching, have shelled out "real money" to a free agent starting pitcher and the Yankees haven't. The A's are in the driver's seat, with a solid roster and extra trading chips and to date, the Yankees have done nothing to address two glaring needs: starting pitching and centerfield. Oakland is winning free agent bidding wars and the Yankees are getting rejected.

Who woulda thunk it?

Tweet Comment 82 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Teams

My guess is that the Blue Jays dealings really do not frieghten either the NY or Boston. They may have a good solid team, but NY and Boston are teams that want to spend the money to have the best team in baseball. If they reach their goal it does not matter what the other teams do.

As for the Yankees, I think it has to do with several factors the biggest being the weak free agent crop. They have been burned the last several years going after the percieved best available pitcher (Pavano, Wright, Brown etc.) and probably feel that Burnett is not much better then those guys. Two I think there resources are finally reaching their hieght and that they ned to only spend money to address their weaknesses (CF) and maybe a big name (Clemens) Three most of the real big names are the result of trades and they just do not have a lot of tradable commodities.

Bob

ogallalabob

by ogallalabob on Dec 9, 2005 8:36 AM PST reply actions

I'm not surprised by the Yankees

Every bubble bursts. Real Estate did in the 80's, Gold did it in the early 80's, the Japanese Stock Market did it in the early 1990's, our Stock Market did it from 2000 - 1001, and the Yankees are bursting now.

People seem amazed that they lost money last year, up to $85 million by some reports. They're not making any big moves because they CAN'T. They absolutely can not do anything because their bubble is about to burst (or has burst). Few remember any more how horribly pitiful the Yankees were from the mid-80's to the mid 90's because they've done so well for the last 10 years. Well, now is their time to burst. Every team has cycles.

Payroll is too high, the players are aging quickly, the minor league system is in ruins, and it might not be long before we see a Yankees psuedo fire sale. The Yankees are in TROUBLE!

Hard work never hurt anyone, but I'm not taking any chances.

by Alameda Greg on Dec 9, 2005 8:50 AM PST reply actions

Historical perspective

Living on the outskirts of the NYC media area (I'm near Philly, but can listen to NYC sports radio), I've been able to hear the (re)humbling of the "there's something special about the Pinstripes," "Steinbrenner is the best owner because he refuses to lose" Yankees fans. These assertions were taken as God's own truth after the last Yankee WS victory -- conveniently forgetting, as you point out Alamedagreg, the years from 81-95 when George presided over a directionless symphony of underachievement. The last few seasons have made even Yankee fans doubt this stuff -- they still believe that the Yankees deserve to win every WS, but they don't think it's literally inevitable any more.

What's crashing now is the core of Yankee players who were developed in-house (Jeter, Williams, Posada, Rivera, the now-absent Petitte) -- Rivera is still great, Jeter is pretty much what he's always been, but the others are fading or gone and aren't being replaced. If Wang and Cano become superstars, which is very doubtful, they'll be fine. Otherwise, the Yanks will have to ween themselves off the FA market and get back to developing their own All-Stars, which is the only proven way to build a long-term winner.

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

by Nick on Dec 9, 2005 8:59 AM PST up reply actions

come on lost money

Steinbinger wrote himself in for $60 mil as a consulting fee. That getting chalked up in the loss column is well... creative

by NYC on Dec 9, 2005 9:01 AM PST up reply actions

It isn't that the Yanks...

are losing money, it's that they have to pay 80+ million in luxury tax which goes to other teams so they can spend more. I hope the Yanks spend another billion on overpriced talent, that means more for the rest of us.

"Yes. Good place. They don't throw things. The fans just yell, 'You suck.' " --Ichiro, on Yankee Stadium

by AgentProvocateur @ Athletics Nation on Dec 9, 2005 4:23 PM PST up reply actions

Toronto going to make it interesting

at least in the short term.
Runs Scored Runs Allowed +/- Team A 775 705 +70 Team B 910 805 +105 Team C 886 789 +97

Team A is not very far away from competing with the Teams B and C. And Team A has added a solid starter, a relief ace, and a solid firstbaseman. Team B added a solid starter, but downgraded or will downgrade at third base, shortstop, centerfield, and perhaps first base. Team C hasn't done a damn thing except grab a LOOGY.

It's going to be an interesting division next year.

Copernicus felt the same way about the geocentric crew.

by salb918 on Dec 9, 2005 8:51 AM PST reply actions

i don't think team B

the red sox, are done quite yet though. they have made decent moves so far, and the blue jays have made very good moves that should make them a solid team for the next few years.
it looks like the yankees really might be in trouble!

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

by xbhaskarx on Dec 9, 2005 10:07 AM PST up reply actions

Yankees

The Yankees aren't finished yet either. Their core of position players (Jeter, A-Rod, Giambi, Sheffield, Matsui) is aging, but is still probably the best lineup in baseball.

They'd be foolish to think that Chacon and Small will repeat their success, but they'll manage to piece together a rotation somehow. If they've really figured out that when no truly great pitchers are available it's better to try to find someone on the scrap heap than to throw $60 million at the likes of A.J. Burnett, it only makes them more dangerous.

"Don't go getting all Alexander Haig on me, either." - Billy Beane

by andeux on Dec 9, 2005 11:36 AM PST up reply actions

What the Marlins

have done is a disgrace. Selig should be stepping in, invoking the "best interests of baseball" powers but he won't. Two owners have won a world series in Miami, and both turned around and dismantled the team. I understand they might need a new stadium, but they need a committed owner as well. He has no business being in baseball. The franchise is an utter joke.

by IndianaAsfan on Dec 9, 2005 10:03 AM PST reply actions

I don't mind what the Marlins did, If they do it

again before these new players can make a difference, then I willhave a problem with it. The Marlins got rid of mostly old overpriced players, and are now like the A's when they got rid of Canseco, McGwire. Young and talented, they will struggle for a while but should get it together in 3 or 4 years.

by theblackpearl on Dec 9, 2005 10:13 AM PST reply actions

Yeah ...

while I have serious questions about their ownership, if they weren't going to be able to afford to keep more or less the entire team together it doesn't make sense to pay for the leftovers.

In sports, you're either competing or you're not. If you don't have the talent to compete today, there's no reason to sacrifice the future to fight for .500. If the Marlins have figured out a way that they can build a Wild Card World Series winner once every half dozen years or so but that is completely unsustainable beyond that, well good for them, that's a hell of a model. The team was not going to compete for the next couple of years so any player that was not going to be a useful part of the 2008 team offered the team very little - except what they could return in players who might be useful in 2008. They've even made some reasonably good trades.

Their owner is a dick, don't get me wrong, but aggressive and continual rebuilding is almost exactly the philosophy the A's follow as well.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 9, 2005 10:32 AM PST up reply actions

The difference being...

...the A's are constant buyers and sellers to be a consistent contender, while the Marlins buy, then sell, then buy, then sell.

The A's are in the car able to use cruise control at 65 mph on the Interstate. The Marlins are in the car stuck in stop-and-go traffic. Vrroooom...screeech! Vrrrooom....screech!

AN Member Location Surveys: Results | Take part

by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Dec 9, 2005 2:23 PM PST up reply actions

well ...

I'd say it's worked pretty well for them. They'll likely be a contender again by the time they're moving into their new home in ?.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 9, 2005 3:14 PM PST up reply actions

The difference

is the use of your word "likely." They WERE contenders before the trades, even if they didn't resign the newest Burnett. They ELECTED to remove themselves from contention for the 2006 season as retribution. That should not happen.

by IndianaAsfan on Dec 9, 2005 5:26 PM PST up reply actions

Well

They did the same thing after 97 and won it all 6 years after that.

That's more than most teams can say.

Please, Billy, make it Hurt so good.

by As Man on Dec 9, 2005 9:26 PM PST up reply actions

This is where

philosophical differences come into play. I say a team that has been in contention in September seven years in a row, and in the playoffs 4 of those years, has done better than a team that has won a WS, but has also been mostly a pretender/mediocre, over a seven-year period. However, many would disagree with me.

Nico

by Nico on Dec 9, 2005 9:36 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah, but

Wouldn't you like to see the A's win the WS one time soon? I'm sure the answer is yes. The flip side is what would you give? I'd hate to be a Marlins fan (I think they do exist) knowing that management has said "we're not even going to try to win this year." But they can take comfort knowing that their team has won more WS than either Boston or Chisox in the last 87 years. So what would you be willing to endure in exchange to see the A's win a WS this year?

by guapobob on Dec 9, 2005 10:01 PM PST up reply actions

Maybe one rebuilding year,

but not more. I like going into a season knowing there's a chance. Being in the race in September a special rush. Being in the playoffs is awesome. I wouldn't give those things up for more than a year just to be the team that happens to get hot for two weeks at the right time. Which is what I think the WS ring generally boils down to.

Nico

by Nico on Dec 9, 2005 10:42 PM PST up reply actions

That's just the thing

they weren't going to be contenders. They were going to lose AJ to FA and they almost definitely were going to need to cut additional payroll - specifically Delgado (who they probably never intended to keep past '05). At that point they're probasbly still a .500 team, but they're not legit contenders.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 10, 2005 1:01 PM PST up reply actions

So...

losing a .500 pitcher was enough to keep them from being a contending ballclub? I don't buy it. The reason they might have needed to cut payroll was their fan base never believed they were going to be there for the long haul, and thus refused to support the team. So, now we're in a chicken or the egg situation. Does the lack of attendance justify the fire sale, or does the lack of attendance stem from ownership's obvious cost-conscious stance? I don't advocate either position, but the situation is a joke and the owner is a joke. I happen to think that since the fire sale didn't happen until AFTER the referendum was defeated, it is prinicipally retributive in nature.

by IndianaAsfan on Dec 12, 2005 2:17 PM PST up reply actions

They were barely contenders to begin with

and they were losing a good pitcher and their second best offensive player and had no ready replacements. Yes, absolutely that would make it very unlikely that they would have really contended in 2006.

I agree that ownership is a joke and Miami fans should stay home and that this is probably done partially with underhanded aims. That said, from a baseball standpoint it's not a bad collection of moves.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 12, 2005 5:30 PM PST up reply actions

I still disagree

the only player they had to lose was AJ. So, I don't get where the second best offensive player comes from. They didn't trade Delgado until AFTER the referendum.
Also, "from a baseball standpoint" implies it is not debatable. Nothing could be further from the truth. The only way these moves are good "from a baseball standpoint" is if these prospects work out. Remember Todd Van Floppel was once a "can't miss." Prospects are prospects for a reason.....Getting rid of that quantity of major league experience - I'd like to have seen ONE proven major leaguer to be convinced it was a good baseball move.
Once again, we agree to disagree (at least from my end).

by IndianaAsfan on Dec 12, 2005 6:44 PM PST up reply actions

I'll agree to disagree

but I'd like to offer some clarification first - with Delgado's greatly inflating contract and natural increases across the roster, the only way they could have kept him was to cut significantly elsewhere or significantly increase the budget. Since the first option is self defeating and the second is unrealistic, given the present conditions in south Florida I don't think there's any way it's sensible not to trade Delgado.

You're right that there is no such thing as a can't miss prospect but with as many good prospects as they acquired, the odds are tilted in their favor of a couple of them working out.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 12, 2005 8:02 PM PST up reply actions

The Marlins "fire sale" might not...

be really that bad. They are getting quality prospects in return. Neyer addresses the Pierre trade in this recent column:

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/columns/story?columnist=neyer_rob&id=2253699

Also, Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez are top flight prospects from the Red Sox farm system.

This "fire sale" doesn't seem as bad as the one after the 97 WS, and they were able to win another championship only 6 years later. It's a rather unorthodox baseball practice to purge a team in this manner, but it has worked before for them.

Granted, this undoubtedly has a lot to do with the desired new stadium/move than sound baseball personel management.

by mattcschmidt on Dec 9, 2005 3:14 PM PST up reply actions

Yes

No team w/ Dontrelle Willis and Miguel Cabrera will ever be able to be written off, and now the Marlins have one of the best minors in the majors due to their hording of prospects. All of these guys have very legit chances at being starters barring injury, and since ownership felt that it A) could not win in 2006 and B)could not win in 2007, well... The NL East is a very strong division, and if ownership fells that this team as it is cannot contend, why NOT blow it up??? In 2008 the landscape will be very different, and the Marlins will be sittin very pretty come then...

by Alon on Dec 9, 2005 4:05 PM PST up reply actions

Come on...

If Chavez isn't protected on the A's, with more proven hitters, then what is Cabrera? You really think anyone will pitch to him?

by IndianaAsfan on Dec 9, 2005 5:21 PM PST up reply actions

The A's

have never rid themselves of two of their three best starters and seven positional starters in the same year. To compare what the Marlins are doing to what Beane does is to seriously underappreciate Billy Beane.

by IndianaAsfan on Dec 9, 2005 5:23 PM PST up reply actions

I said it's similar

specifically, the difference is that they are consistently aggresively REBUILDING and the A's are continuosly aggresively RETOOLING. There are very important differences but the key concept is the same - not trying to hang on when the team is becoming unaffordable and, thus, unsustainable.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 10, 2005 1:05 PM PST up reply actions

Delgado

What Florida is doing is not rebuilding because they have to, they're doing it because it sends a message that they're unhappy with the city and they're doing a drastic sell-off of players to prove a point that can not be made otherwise: "we can't compete unless we have a new stadium and people actually come to our games. Unless we start generating more revenue we can not affort great players."

However, by trading Delgado one year after signing him just to cut payroll was a low ball move and players might think twice before signing with Florida next time...

by dpetri2000 on Dec 9, 2005 4:06 PM PST up reply actions

Delgado's Contract...

was backloaded and suggests that the plan was to pay for one year (potentially the best he has left) and then move him when his value relative to his pay would fall. Makes sense to me.

by Richard Wade on Dec 10, 2005 1:30 AM PST up reply actions

Beckett is old, and overpriced?

Come on. How old and overpriced are Castillo and Pierre? Lowell and Jones may be older and overpriced, but they will not have 7 of the eight positional starters back from last year, and two of their three best starters....This is nothing like the A's trading McGwire. They have totally dismantled their roster when they had a chance to be competitive. All in the name of retribution for not agreeing to fund a new stadium. You think the trades coming a few days after the referendum is mere coincidence?

by IndianaAsfan on Dec 9, 2005 5:20 PM PST up reply actions

The Yanks

As a Yankee fan with great appreciation of this site and Billy Beane's handy work, I think I can offer a different perspective. I think we would all be pretty naive to believe that the Yankees lost that much money last season with a mammoth TV network and drawing over 4 million fans...sorry I just don't buy it.

I know there is deep-rooted hate for the free-spending Yankees, but there are many phallicies with the above rant. I don't need any witty algebra equations to know that it is only December 9th.

The Yankees have been rejected by exactly one free agent - BJ Ryan. And that was because he wanted to close (understandable). They refuse to deal Cano (smart move) and Wang (eh), which is why they lost out on walking DL trip Josh Beckett, Juan Pierre, etc.

They really have no place for AJ Burnett, and they knew someone would overpay for him (hello, toronto). They tried the Esteban Loaiza experiment a couple years ago and that didn't really work out for them. To be honest, i don't see too much out there on the free agent market that piques my interest and I think the Yankees feel the same way. Sure they are threatening to go into next season with Bubba Crosby in center, but I would be shocked if he was in center at the end of the year.

Cashman came back on the understanding that he got more control. Hopefully, he is not going to spend money for the sake of spending money (so far, so good) or to keep up with the competition. He let Gordon walk because he wanted to close, but brought in Kyle Farnsworth (not sure he is the best fit in the big city, but he has great stuff). Cashman is playing the market (although I wonder how long he can hold off George's itchy trigger finger)...Patience is a virtue, we'll see if it pays off

by rhodehead on Dec 9, 2005 11:21 AM PST reply actions

Yankees Laying Low

I have a feeling they're just flying under the radar right now and wouldn't be surprised if they pull off something big a bit down the road (before Spring Training)...Just a like two years ago when all anyone could talk about was the Red Sox/A-Rod saga and that trade's ultimate demise, followed by the Yankees emerging with the A-Rod trade around Valentine's Day.

Those Yankees are sneaky (and ruthless).

by kaiser on Dec 9, 2005 11:37 AM PST up reply actions

Bah...

They can have phoney baloney A-Rod, they'll never win a championship as long as he's there.

"Yes. Good place. They don't throw things. The fans just yell, 'You suck.' " --Ichiro, on Yankee Stadium

by AgentProvocateur @ Athletics Nation on Dec 9, 2005 4:17 PM PST up reply actions

What kind of logic are you employing?

As long as the Yankees have one of the best players in baseball they'll never win a championship? Curious.

by Richard Wade on Dec 10, 2005 1:32 AM PST up reply actions

It isn't about logic

it's about history. ;)

"Yes. Good place. They don't throw things. The fans just yell, 'You suck.' " --Ichiro, on Yankee Stadium

by AgentProvocateur @ Athletics Nation on Dec 10, 2005 8:38 AM PST up reply actions

Good points

If Cashman is running the ship (as opposed to Steinbrenner), then the relative quiet coming out of NY makes more sense. Cashman, of all people, isn't going to do something just for the sake of doing something. He's probably looking both short and long term in order to fix things.
--
Pascal

by mickelsp on Dec 9, 2005 11:38 AM PST up reply actions

Cashman

In my opinion, Brian Cashman is one of the top 5 GM's in baseball... The list is pretty fluid, but it certainly starts concretely with:
#1. Billy Beane

The next four are more debatable, but I believe they go as follows:

#2. John Schuerholtz
#3. Theo Epstein
#4. Brian Cashman
#5. Walt Jocketty

Sure, you could say Cash and Jock are just given money, but the reality (as we're finding out with Steinbrenner's Yanks), is that money does not mean success... Which, obviously, you can take to mean that Cashman must have done something right for those years of dominance to have existed, and it's very possible that the Yanks would have been even more successful if not for Steinbrenner's "itchy trigger-finger." Now that Cash has the reigns, I think we will in fact see the Yanks perhaps lull a bit this year, and then come out dominating in 2007 once Cash can get some of this year's and 2006's draftees into the Majors.

Jocketty is a far more shaky choice, but I think that, again, any GM that can get his team consistently deep into the playoffs with two consecutive 100 win seasons must be doing something right. Sure, BB as of right now got by far the better end of the Mulder deal, but that's why BB is #1.

This could make for an interesting diary, and these are only my preliminary choices... If anyone wants me to, I'm willing to do some intensive research of MLB team stats and put together a more formal list of my top-5 GM's that AN can bash and mock as they see fit

Interest?

by Alon on Dec 9, 2005 4:15 PM PST up reply actions

Bashing and mocking?

I'm willing to do my part.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 9, 2005 4:33 PM PST up reply actions

Sweet

I'm ready to hear it and cry in a little corner with a comical triangular hat...

But anyway, any GM's I missed out on?

by Alon on Dec 9, 2005 5:46 PM PST up reply actions

Well, technically...

...Theo isn't "in" baseball anymore. But even if he were, I'd take Walt down a notch or two and slot in Bob Melvin. Pujols aside, the Cardinals' long-term future isn't nearly what the Brewers' is, and Melvin's put together a team that could be very competitive for a while in a year or two (assuming he doesn't mortgage everything to make a premature push this year or possibly next). He's certainly not perfect -- Danny Kolb again? -- but he's turned that team around the way teams like the Royals can only dream about.

username

by spal on Dec 10, 2005 11:17 AM PST up reply actions

Well, he probably needs

a longer track record of success to really be considered for the top spots ... but Kenny Williams has had a pretty impressive year.

I'd just go ahead and include every GM with at least 3 years in MLB plus Theo and DePo for kicks. The group is small enough that it should be doable.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 10, 2005 1:10 PM PST up reply actions

Blinders aside

Schuerholtz is #1.

14 straight play-off trips earns him that much.

I don't hate, I just respond aggressively to stupidity

by grover on Dec 9, 2005 10:28 PM PST up reply actions

This

in a division containing the losingest franchise of the 20th century -- my very own Philadelphia Phillies. In general, it isn't like the Braves have had a ton of competition for the crown of the NL East until, potentially, this year. I'll do more intensive research later, but for now it's bed time.

by Alon on Dec 9, 2005 11:11 PM PST up reply actions

Ken Williams

has done a great job in Chicago.

give him his props!!!

by GrewUpAtTheColiseum on Dec 10, 2005 11:03 AM PST up reply actions

Good counter-arguement

But the farm system is depleted and the big league roster has some serious holes. It's going to take some serious wheeling and dealing (and a lot of cash) to get things fixed.

I don't hate, I just respond aggressively to stupidity

by grover on Dec 9, 2005 11:44 AM PST up reply actions

implicit Burnett/Loaiza critiques

Yeah, Cashman isn't currently throwing away any money on old, erratic, or injury-prone pitchers, is he? The Yanks' rotation going into '06 sure does look young, healthy, and consistent.

@('.')@

by monkeyball on Dec 9, 2005 11:51 AM PST up reply actions

Fantasy Fallacies

I know there is deep-rooted hate for the free-spending Yankees, but there are many phallicies with the above rant.

I just think the Freudian phallic misnomer is ironic. I dunno, I think Cashman is lookin' pretty gunshy for any risky deals now. Its probably safer to be patient with your own talent than bringing in seasoned players that bring with them, higher expectations. Could it be the pressure cooker they created in the Bronx is blowing its seals? Isn't there a downside to assuming your rightful place on top of the Sporting World, only to be disappointed by players cracking under the pressure.

Its quite interesting that successful starters like Small and Chacon, were pitchers with nothing to lose, thus, no pressure. But even the can't-miss studs like the Big Unit showed up a little flaccid.

ProActiv Solution: It moisturizes my situation, perserves my sexy. ? -P. Diddy

by Dig the Long Ball on Dec 9, 2005 12:27 PM PST up reply actions

Phallicies

I saw that too... I guess too much talk about getting that "big bat" this offseason.

by OaktownTribesman on Dec 10, 2005 10:54 AM PST up reply actions

I'll be brutally honest:

When the A's gave Kotsay an extension, it gave me an extension.

Nico

by Nico on Dec 10, 2005 10:56 AM PST up reply actions

Or perhaps they're willing to

write off this season so they can cry poverty and get some sympathy under the next CBA ...

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 9, 2005 3:16 PM PST up reply actions

No A's action!

No Yankees action, yeah, but what really blows my mind the fact that there's been almost no A's action! I guess Billy acts when he wants to, but with the A's overload of phenomenal pitching in such a pitcher's market, I almost expected to see us end up with Manny, Bradley, Johnny Damon and Miggy too. The Rangers, desperate for pitching, dealt Soriano for Brad Wilkinson plus a minor league pitcher, and we're sitting placidly by, trying to come up with the right contract for the Big (AKA "Always") Hurt?

I'm ready, Billy: let's see the wheelin' and dealin'!

by BerkeleyDawg on Dec 9, 2005 12:11 PM PST reply actions

Thomas??

I haven't heard this discussed: Who's our competition for the Big Hurt? And Piazza?

Seems like the big eastern teams should be able to match our offers, and would be willing to add an extra bat, even at a risk.

Are we offering something other teams aren't or is the demand that low?

"I'm so green and gold that I hang on every pitch, not just every game." - Lew Wolff

by BleacherDrummer on Dec 9, 2005 12:22 PM PST reply actions

From yahoo sports

Frank Thomas, DH/1B (Athletics, Twins, Orioles, Blue Jays) - The White Sox on Wednesday cut ties with Thomas, who has 448 homers in 16 big league seasons, all with Chicago. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Thomas' representatives have met with Minnesota and Oakland at the winter meetings.

As for concerns about his health, Thomas says hogwash. "I'm ready to go," Thomas told the Chicago Tribune. "I didn't like the reports that said I was at risk." In his last injury-free season (2003), Thomas hit 42 homers and drove in 105 runs.

ProActiv Solution: It moisturizes my situation, perserves my sexy. ? -P. Diddy

by Dig the Long Ball on Dec 9, 2005 12:29 PM PST up reply actions

Why is Billy talking so much?

Now, I despise Jerry Krause, but one thing I respected about him was that you never heard any leaks or peep from his office about what the Bulls were doing on draft day. Then, he would bust out a Will Perdue pick on us. Well, I can't figure out why Billy would be so open about signing Frank if it is so far away from happening. Wouldn't other teams be interfering just to make things harder for the A's.

I wonder if Billy received a verbal commitment from Thomas and thought by spreading the word that it would cement his signing even more. Otherwise, its unwise to broadcast your intentions until they are final, isn't it?

ProActiv Solution: It moisturizes my situation, perserves my sexy. ? -P. Diddy

by Dig the Long Ball on Dec 9, 2005 12:51 PM PST up reply actions

Exactly

It leads me to believe that it's pretty much been a done deal and should be announced soon.

Either that, or Billy didn't think he could conceal rumors, so he figured publicizing it outright would show more commitment to Team Thomas.

"I'm so green and gold that I hang on every pitch, not just every game." - Lew Wolff

by BleacherDrummer on Dec 9, 2005 1:13 PM PST up reply actions

or ...

... just to throw it out there, it could be the equivalent of the Wells-for-Duke "deal": deliberate disinformation spread by Beane to (a) camouflage his own intentions and/or (b) do a favor (i.e., increasing the apparent interest in Thomas) for Tellum -- the agent for both Thomas and Zito.

@('.')@

by monkeyball on Dec 9, 2005 2:09 PM PST up reply actions

Hard to tell.

I assume there's a reason BB's talking about it -- either it's pretty much a done deal and so he might as well quell the rumors, or it's a smokescreen. Or both.

Or maybe he's just bored and is messing with other GMs' heads.

"Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic." -Robert S. Wieder

by Kyli on Dec 9, 2005 2:13 PM PST up reply actions

Also

Everyone knows that Beane is looking for an extra bat. By saying he's willing to get that bat via FA he shows no weakness when talking trade with other teams.

I don't hate, I just respond aggressively to stupidity

by grover on Dec 9, 2005 3:30 PM PST up reply actions

Yes

good call...

I mean, at this point can we really be ridiculously upset with anything BB does? Even if we are, like those (anti)Loaiza enthusiasts, can't we assume there's some ulterior motive we don't yet know about?

My bet is that this is like the time discussed in Moneyball when Beane spread to other GM's that he essentially had a player before he did so that other teams would take their offers away and focus elsewhere (was this for Rincon? Durham? I don't remember...)

by Alon on Dec 9, 2005 5:50 PM PST up reply actions

if the Marlins are having a fire sale....

...can they send Miquel Cabrera our way...

by littleA on Dec 9, 2005 12:32 PM PST reply actions

Or, maybe they sign Nomar

And trade for Miggy. Play them all in the infield at the same time and pitch the ball low and away.

ProActiv Solution: It moisturizes my situation, perserves my sexy. ? -P. Diddy

by Dig the Long Ball on Dec 9, 2005 12:32 PM PST reply actions

No problem

It's interesting to watch guys with the stature of Burnett, Ryan, Overbay, Renteria, Soriano, Pierre, and Wilkerson, change teams and the Yankees have added virtually no one.

Is that a problem for the Yankees? Off of that list, the only player I'd want is Pierre. I might have wanted Renteria a few years ago -- but not if I had Jeter.

by socal on Dec 9, 2005 1:46 PM PST reply actions

I'd take a couple more...

Wilkerson is good, and if I could get Ryan for less than the Blue Jays coughed up, I would.

Go A's -- Nebraska

by Ryan Armbrust on Dec 9, 2005 3:18 PM PST up reply actions

Wilkerson

is possibly one of the most underrated players in MLB... classic OBP guy destined for half the salary of the guy he was traded for, beneficiary of home park extraordinaire, Mr. Alfonso Soriano...

I think it was Rob Neyer on ESPN.com that wrote a very interesting article on some of the Winter deals (insider only)...
The meat of the article basically said:

Cubs were stupid enough as is for signing Pierre as a 1 year fast, subpar hitting and fielding CF until Felix Pie is ready. To add to that is the fact that they gave up, he says, perhaps 15 years of quality young pitching, with 3 guys all capable of making good major league careers (Nolasco being the cream of the crop)
Padres were even more stupid for getting a backup catcher for Mark Loretta, who has 71 win shares over the past few years compared to Mirabelli's 13... Plus, the Pads only save about $1.6 M... In the baseball scheme of things, this really isn't that substantial
And, of course, the Rangers pulling a coup by getting Wilkerson and a couple middling players in exchange for Soriano, when Wilkerson alone is better than Soriano, numbers/defense included... Wilkerson's SLG is lower, but obviously he's been hitting in the most pitcher friendly park in the league, and will now (barring trade) be headed to the most hitter friendly park in the league. OBP: Wilkerson: .371
Soriano: .325

That's the Rob Neyer article... at least the gist of it

by Alon on Dec 9, 2005 5:57 PM PST up reply actions

The one that stunned me

was Loretta for Mirabelli. It's one of those trades that if someone on AN proposed it, other users would--correctly--chastise the idea as unrealistically inequitable. Bizarre.

Nico

by Nico on Dec 9, 2005 6:03 PM PST up reply actions

Who would like that deal?

Mirabelli is the kind of player only Plaschke would like.

by socal on Dec 9, 2005 8:06 PM PST up reply actions

DJ Chat

Dan Johnson is available for a chat at the A's mlb.com site at 3pm PST

"I'm so green and gold that I hang on every pitch, not just every game." - Lew Wolff

by BleacherDrummer on Dec 9, 2005 2:30 PM PST reply actions

Yankees Haters!

It's easy to rag on the Yanks because their lack of movement this off-season. But just remember, eight of nine starting fielders/hitters are returning, the five guys in the rotation are back, and we still have Mariano Rivera.

Starting pitching? Says who? Randy-Moose-Pavano-Chacon-Wang. It may not be the A's starting rotation, but it's definitely solid enough, considering the lumber in the Yanks lineup. And I know what you all are going to say: Randy's washed up, Moose sucks, Pavano had one good year, Chacon was a fluke, Wang isn't solid enough. And my rebuttals: Randy - remember Clemens's first year in the Bronx. Moose - history of being solid, even with a 4.30 ERA could at least be serviceable. Pavano - chances are, he was battling through shoulder trouble all year before he finally succumbed in July. Let's see how he handles a healthy year. Chacon - curveball pitcher in Mile High = disaster. Curve ball pitcher in Yankee Stadium = solid #3 starter. Wang - I wonder why everyone is asking for him as part of any trade with the Yankees.

Don't underestimate the power of continuity. The Yankees went through a lot last year, and overcame odds to win the AL East after being down so late. Now if they can just land some bullpen help...

by PinstripePowerhouse on Dec 9, 2005 2:52 PM PST reply actions

de-buttals

Clemens did have a rough first year in the Bronx. But he enjoyed the distinct advantage of not being 42. His k/bb dropped dramatically too.

Moose doesn't suck (though he's never been as good as his rep) but he is 37 (Happy Birthday) coming off two consecutive injury riddled mid-4 era seasons.

Pavano ... yeah, lets see how he handles a healthy year. Umm ... oh yeah! I remember what's wrong with him.

Chacon's 1.25 k/bb rate is pretty much terrible. He has poor control and can't strike anybody out.

I don't wonder why everyone asked for Wang - there's almost no one else worth asking for. Though I'm not surprised that no deals got done, demand clearly wasn't that high.

The power of continuity? Well, you guys really have a lot going for you. But only two regular players are young enough that they can be reasonably expected to improve and most of the team is old enough that they can be reasonably expected to fall of significantly or miss significant time to injury. Enjoy your continuity.

Check out some awesome music ...

by devo on Dec 9, 2005 3:28 PM PST up reply actions

I, for one, would never EVER say

"Wang isn't solid enough"

@('.')@

by monkeyball on Dec 9, 2005 3:42 PM PST up reply actions

gee, Yankee Haters on what, Athletics Nation?

Yes, PP, the Yankees will still be good in 2006. They will still dominate the AL All Star lineup. But, you are posting on AN. Do you expect us all to fawn over George's collection of HOFers?

Don't you realize the unmatched joy A's fans would have winning the WS next year? What emotions will the Yankee fans go through... Relief. When you are expected to dominate, and you don't, its a letdown.

ProActiv Solution: It moisturizes my situation, perserves my sexy. ? -P. Diddy

by Dig the Long Ball on Dec 9, 2005 3:46 PM PST up reply actions

Question

Does he travel the web looking for people that hate the yanks? No i'll bet he's a closet A's fan.Sounds like my brother and father they are both Yankers fans. Thats why i'm not. I despise them. How will the yanks aquire any bullpen help if they have no bargining chips? At least that they'll trade.

by sctr76 on Dec 9, 2005 7:07 PM PST up reply actions

The doctor is IN

Sounds like my brother and father they are both Yankers fans. Thats why i'm not. I despise them.

So, tell me how you feel about your mother... :)

by OaktownTribesman on Dec 10, 2005 11:01 AM PST up reply actions

Not so fast, OTribesman--

Are you a real doctor, like Dr. Phil, or are you one of those imposters?

Nico

by Nico on Dec 10, 2005 11:05 AM PST up reply actions

Lineup Protection

It appears to be an article of faith among some here that Chavez needs lineup protection to achieve more with the bat. Bill James probably destroyed that idea 15-18 years ago with his study of Dale Murphy and Bob Horner. This was the perfect situation for such exploration because Horner missed 50-60 games almost every year and terrorized NL pitchers the rest of the time. Murphy's BA/OBP/SLG were almost exactly the same whether Horner played or not. When he played Horner always batted behind Murphy, fourth.

by MT Head on Dec 10, 2005 12:12 AM PST reply actions

Situations change

Fine, there was no "line-up protection" in the Horner/Murphy scenario.

When Chavez feels like he has to carry the team on his back he presses. (Note, this is different from when he's on a hot streak and IS carrying the team.) When he presses he struggles. Therefore it makes sense to create a situation where Chavez does not feel like he has to do it alone.

I don't hate, I just respond aggressively to stupidity

by grover on Dec 10, 2005 12:52 AM PST up reply actions

Protection

Subjectively, it appears that Chavez presses, though I am less confident in supplying a reason for it. The pressing appears to manifest itself in a strike zone coterminous with the park size, height and width.

But, he led the league in walks in '04, despite missing 5-6 weeks of the season. The only real missing-in-'05 useful bat available in '04 was Durazo. Other than that, Swisher, Johnson, Ellis, Payton, and (God, the pain of saying it) Kendall appear to be a collective improvement over Dye, Hatteberg, Scutaro, Byrnes, and Miller. Or, is Durazo the protection?

Why would he have felt and performed so differently in '04? I know Fosse and IdiotRoye, like "DamnYankee" one word, talked about his pressing in '05, but I don't think the case is proved.

by MT Head on Dec 10, 2005 4:30 AM PST up reply actions

Coterminous!

That's awesome!

I can't remember what I was going to say, but I assure you, it was brilliant!

by oblique on Dec 10, 2005 11:09 AM PST up reply actions

Awesome

Not sure whether your comment was meant to be pejorative (he strikes again!), but suggest that 8-9 years of university avoidance of work will yield something despite your best intentions.

by MT Head on Dec 10, 2005 7:55 PM PST up reply actions

Yankee's Duh; A's Yea = :-)

Thank You Bill...

Go A's

by NomAd on Dec 10, 2005 2:13 AM PST reply actions

Yankees making the right moves

As a Yankee fan, I'm quite happy that Cashman is standing pat.

The Yankees had three areas going into this off season that needed attention: Centerfield, the bullpen, and the bench.

The Yankees have and are continueing to address the bullpen. Farnsworth isn't going to match Gordon's production, but he's a good bet to be a very good reliever. Mike Myers beats every lefty we've had in the pen in years. Cashman is probably going to pick up one more cheap right handed reliever, and fill the remaining spots with Tanyon Sturtze, Aaron Small, and Jaret Wright. It's an improvement over last year, and cheaper too.

The bench? Kelly Stinnet is a big improvement over Flaherty. Recent talk has the Yankees using Bernie Williams, Bubba Crosby, Eduardo Perez, and Miguel Cairo to fill out their bench. It's not great, but it's an improvement.

Center field? The Yankees aren't going to make any stupid decisions. Even a full year of Bubba Crosby is an improvement over 2005. We may see a Bubba/Kevin Thompson platoon... which again will blow out anything that we got last year.

The Yankees have some extremely promising prospects in the pipeline. We have:

Eric Duncan: 1b/DH. 20 years old in AA. Didn't do great, but his peripheral statistics were excellent. He absolutely destroyed the AFL this off season, posting the second high slg% in league history. He'll start the season at AAA. ETA: Mid/Late 2006 depending on performance.

Philip Hughes: RHSP. 19 years old in high-A. Had an excellent year, with an ERA under 2 in low-A and performing well in high-A. He isn't even throwing all his pitches yet. Yankees expect him to become the next Curt Schilling (crazy power/control combination. Was pitching 97 in high school and didn't walk 1 person all year). ETA: Early/Mid 2007. He'll start the season at AA.

Tyler Clippard: RHSP. 21 years old in High A (ended the season with one appearance at AAA). 3.18 ERA, 147 innings, 169 K, 34 walks. Starting the season at AA. ETA: Spring training 2007.

Matt DeSalvo: RHSP. 24 years old in AA. 3.02 ERA, 149 innings, 151 K, 67 BB. Starting the season at AA. #2 on Yankee call-up list.

Sean Henn: LHSP. 24 years old in AAA. .71 ERA in 25 innings in AA, had a bad callup straight from AA to the Yankees, then returned (after some arm problems) to post a 3.23 ERA in 86 innings. Struck out 64 and walked 27.

J.B. Cox, RHRP. 21 years old went straight to High A after being drafted. 2.60 ERA in 27.2 innings. 27 K, 9 BB, 1 HR. Starting the season at AA. Is extremely polished. ETA: Mid-2006 (but will be given a shot in spring training to make AAA or the big leagues right away).

Josh Schmidt. RHRP. 22 years old in A ball. Utterly, utterly dominant. 33 innings, 47 K, .27 ERA. Will start the season in High A... and move to AA when J.B. Cox moves to AAA.

Others (not as close to the majors) include Austin Jackson, CJ Henry, TJ Beam, and half a dozen others.

Not too many position players... but a whole bunch of excellent pitching prospects.

by Yanny on Dec 11, 2005 5:58 PM PST reply actions