Why is Beane sitting still?

by McP on Jul 29, 2007 2:10 PM PDT

I have to trust he knows what he's doing, but ...

Down 6-0 already, the A's once again are demonstrating they have no consistent ability to be on the field with other major-league teams. It's time to shake things up: the playoffs aren't going to happen in 2007. The veterans on this team are too comfortable, and they're not leading. I would rather see rookies hustle and lose than this roster of stiffs lolly-gag through another listless loss.

2007 is over, Mr. Beane. Shake up your roster; ship out whatever commodities other teams think you have and start playing for 2008. Why are you waiting? You're smarter than this. And fans should expect more from you as well, rather than lauding you for past actions. After all, you're only as good as your last game, and this version of the A's reflects poorly on you, Billy.

[P.S. -- I know I wrote this before, but the primary reason the A's made the playoffs last year was their abnormal record against Seattle. Looks like THAT one reversed itself pretty easily ...]

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Trading Deadline

July 31st

by Colorado Fan on Jul 29, 2007 2:07 PM PDT reply actions

and its the 29th, and no trades thus far.

by Zonis on Jul 29, 2007 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions

No need for the diary.

by Colorado Fan on Jul 29, 2007 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions

mainly

because nobody wants our players because none of them will really make a difference.

Some interest in Piazza, but as plan C for the Angels. Hardly any interest in Kennedy. Kielty is not going to help anyone win. Haven't seen much on Embree, but he might interest a few clubs. But, given the imbalance (correction?) in value between veterans and prospects, our veterans don't look so hot.

I think we'll dump a couple of players, but nobody on AN will be happy with what we receive in return.

Signatures? We don't need no stinking signatures.

by jubjub on Jul 29, 2007 2:21 PM PDT reply actions

At this point

I'm almost more interested in freeing up the slots on the 40 man than I am in seeing who the A's get in return.

key word = "almost"

Yep. Warm and fuzzy... that's me.

by grover on Jul 29, 2007 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions

I wonder how it works for budgeting

if Beane can trade Piazza for nothing and save the $3MM or so remaining on his contract, does Lew allow us to bump the payroll next year by $3MM? If Beane doesn't get any "credit" for coming in below budget, then I'm not sure I would trade him unless we get at least one usable player in return.

Signatures? We don't need no stinking signatures.

by jubjub on Jul 29, 2007 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions

You sir

have inspired my next diary!

Yep. Warm and fuzzy... that's me.

by grover on Jul 29, 2007 8:37 PM PDT up reply actions

how aMUSEing

Signatures? We don't need no stinking signatures.

by jubjub on Jul 30, 2007 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions

The A's have all winter to reshape the lineup.

Billy usually makes trades in the December time frame. Everyone wants change now, but I don't think you will see the same team in ST, as you will to end the season.

by theblackpearl on Jul 29, 2007 2:34 PM PDT reply actions

If he's going to make a trade...

...it should at least be for someone who can help here over time.

And no, "the team is helped by being rid of so-and-so" does not count.

Bottom of the 9th - Baseball photojournalism by James Venes

by Flashfire on Jul 29, 2007 4:53 PM PDT reply actions

Today was HOF induction day

rarely is a deal published on this day so as not to distract from the ceremony. Not that the A's would be in the middle of anything significant anyway, but any trade the A's make will be so minor as to be lucky to even make ESPN sportscenter. The simple fact is that the A's have few players any other team covets, and certainly none we could afford to get rid of.

by china bob on Jul 29, 2007 5:28 PM PDT reply actions

Market for Shannon Stewart?

With Beltran now having a rib problem that might be very severe, could the Mets want Shannon Stewart?

the problem is not "too many left handed hitters" but "too many suck handed hitters"-Zonis

by ohad on Jul 29, 2007 5:51 PM PDT reply actions

I heard a rumor

that the Cubs were willing to part with Matt Murton for Jay Payton. If this is the case they would surely do the same for Stewart which would be an awesome move for the A's going into next season.

by pinkfloyd @ Athletics Nation on Jul 29, 2007 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions

Why would they surely do the same?

Stewart and Payton are two totally different commodities. Stewart's a good-hitting, high on-base guy with limited baserunning skills and mediocre fielding. Payton's an average hitting hacker who can steal some bags and plays a good LF. Their skill sets, apart from being outfielders, don't overlap all that much.

It can be hard to wrap one's mind around the fact that what we consider a good player, like Jack Cust, is viewed as mediocre by many teams' front offices. I think the Cubs probably will view Payton as the better player. I'm not certain I agree with them, but what they think controls what player the A's can extract.

by PaulThomas on Jul 29, 2007 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions

The rub is that

Felix Pie got hurt, so they have Jacque Jones (67 OPS+) in CF. Stewart is a better hitter than Payton, but he can't play CF.

by mikeA on Jul 29, 2007 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions

Kotsay can play center

Send him to Chicago to be with his pal Kendall

by jpl on Jul 30, 2007 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions

I like the idea of opening up space on the 40 man

roster. Let's get a look at Piedra. He's maintaining a .370 average at Sacto.

by boilerdan on Jul 29, 2007 6:24 PM PDT reply actions

Maintaining a cat-like state of readiness

I hope you packed a lunch.

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 29, 2007 6:53 PM PDT reply actions

there are guys teams would want

the question is, can we get any decent prospects in return? piazza, stewart, and embree would all be enticing to any contender. dj might interest someone as well, even though he's in a major slump right now. for any of the first three, i think we could get something decent...not a blue chip prospect, but somebody who could be a contributor soon. dj, not so much, though he does have a decent OPS. overall, though, if we do trade anyone, we're not getting a daric barton-type player in return.

"welcome to ME, motherf*^*er!" - tim hudson

by guy incognito on Jul 29, 2007 7:39 PM PDT reply actions

there is no need to get anything great

take a risk on some player with a huge upside and downside. All the players up to trade Kennedy, Stewart, Piazza, though not DJ are not even conceivably in the teams 2008 plans. May as well get something for them, really anything. No point in letting them all walk if you can get ANYTHING for any of them.

"Just looking at Lackey's face, you just want to beat him" -Ray Fosse

by marco magic on Jul 29, 2007 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions

You're overstating

Piazza, Stewart, and Embree are not enticing "to any contender".

For starters, Piazza isn't useful to any contender in the NL. He's also not useful to any AL contender that already has a DH who is as good (or nearly as good) as Piazza. That only leaves a couple of teams.

Similar story for Stewart. He's not a great defender, so he's only interesting for his bat, which is good but not great. (Yes, the best hitter on our team is merely decent for the rest of the league; that's because our offense is atrocious.) So he's only of interest to a team that has a weakness in LF, RF or fourth outfielder. And for the few teams that do have that need, Stewart isn't the only available option.

I'm surprised we don't hear more about Embree. He does seem like a logical trade. It's pretty easy to insert an upgrade into a bullpen. Embree is playing well, and he's not an important part of our future plans.

"Ten times thy self were better than ten Hattebergs" -- Monkeyball, channeling Shakespeare

by iglew on Jul 30, 2007 2:09 AM PDT up reply actions

I don't think that just because we haven't seen

a flurry of moves means that Beane is doing nothing. Trades take time, if we had more attractive pieces, we'd likely not be in this position as well as the factor that is the HOF inductions today.

We've already traded our starting (rightfuly or not) catcher and cut a starting outfeilder. We've also dumped a player that's been around for a couple of years and are trying out a couple of the kids that might be a factor for years to come. Beane has NOT been stagnant. I could see another trade and MAYBE two before the deadline, but I do not envision any huge ones. More important (as has been pointed out above by others far more intelligent and in the know than I) will be who gets the tryouts in the next couple of months and how they fare.

But, it'd probably be best to take a deep breath and not worry too much. Eventually we will know what's been in the works. While I'm not a Beane apologist, I have a lot more comfort with him working behind our organizational curtain than most other GM's (so long as he's VERY careful about dealing with Atlanta).

by StewFan on Jul 29, 2007 7:44 PM PDT reply actions

Not to mention that this is a negotiation.

BB can't just trade away players if he's getting nothing in return for that player. It's a poker game and you can't go "all-in" when you have a pair of 6's. He has to consider type A/B free agents because they bring draft picks that might help strengthen the organization moreso than obtaining another Charles Thomas. There are some strong cases for salary dumps, though.

Tara Reid - "I make Jessica Simpson look like a rock scientist"

by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 29, 2007 8:12 PM PDT up reply actions

Exactly.

If we had a great hand, we wouldn't be selling as much, but since we have a mediocre hand, there's more gamesmanship to the trading. Have to make someone else believe we have something they want and pump them for as much as we can.

And these rules still apply (albeit as secondary motives) in pure salary dump trades. We got a couple of things in the Kendall trade (not top prospects, but at least organizational fodder). At one point I remember thinking I don't want a bag of balls for him... I'll take either a bag or some balls, the buyer can choose which. I liked Kendall, but thought his value was zilch, especially to a contender (if you're looking for a catcher, you're probably not in the races). Luckily(?) Barret and Zambrano got punch happy. Trading someone of actual worth has got to be more tricky than allowing the Cubs give us something for Kendall ('whatcha got lying around? How about that catcher and a low minors arm? Cool? You've got a deal").

by StewFan on Jul 29, 2007 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions

I think it's very tough to analyze who is more

desperate at the deadline too. Does BB really gain a noticeable edge over the guy looking for a player or does the trade partner see that he has no choice but to make a trade. If it's the former than we might see some quality come our way. However if it's the latter than I would assume BB would be hesitant to make a deal. There are two ways of looking at "fair value" and I'm sure each negotiator differs on that opinion quite a bit.

The best case scenario is to see the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets with missing holes because their fans expect them to do everything in their power to "go for it" every year. They have the ability to replace any player lost in a trade by "outspending" other teams for a FA the following year.

Tara Reid - "I make Jessica Simpson look like a rock scientist"

by ohtobe21likehuston on Jul 29, 2007 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions

I agree, and that's probably why

these things can move very slowly (and many more deals don't get done than actually do go through). I think that if you're ever 'forced' to make a tade, you're screwed and that convincing the other end of the trade equasion of the fact that you would be fine not making a deal if it isn't a beneficial one is a BIG part of any trade and what each side gets in any deal.

My Kendall quip was largely in jest. I know Beane would have been okay with keeping him (although it was better to get Kurt some MLB playing time) and that this probably played a role in what we got from the Cubs.

I am happy we got something for him in addition to the chance to try out Suzuki.

by StewFan on Jul 29, 2007 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions

pretty much agree with you

The players we wish Beane would trade aren't very attractive to other teams....and the players that other teams would likely give up something the team really needs are players that the A's also need for next year and beyond.

I think if Beane had hopes by late June for this season, he might not have DFA'd Bradley, and he wouldn't have let Kendall go just yet (at least, he would have required a better return for both).

It's certainly possible that Beane could trade some valued players for some substantial returns (for example, for Blanton), but that would depend more on the desperation of the buyers.

The A's have been in the postseason or with a good shot at it every year since 1999. That's a pretty good run. I'm ok with rebuilding. My main concern has been some questionable moves over that past few years that added payroll based on past performance, along with a serious depletion of the pipeline. Hopefully that will be fixed in the next couple of years.

by OaklandSi on Jul 30, 2007 5:17 AM PDT up reply actions