Yesterday: End of an Oakland Era
Yesterday, all our troubles seemed so far away...
The Original Oakland Big Three are no more. It's the end of the Beatles of the East Bay. We're left with Harrison, Starr and McCartney to toe the slab.
Tim Hudson was a horse for the Oakland Athletics. A .700 winning percentage. A smaller man who worked hard on his craft, honed his pitching and made the best hitters in the American League look silly.
And now, he is in the National League, pitching close to his roots with the Atlanta Braves.
As I predicted, Billy Beane made a move when he felt the time was right.
I'm not shocked by the move because the A's got a good mix of players in return. Charles Thomas had a solid rookie year, despite his overmatched look in the playoffs. Juan Cruz is a solid bullpen addition to set up for Dotel. And Meyer is the gem of the deal. A top pitching prospect who is major league ready.
Who knows whether the quality of the players Billy is getting in return will match even a single season of performance from Tim Hudson, but the truth is that Billy could not wait until March 1st or even until the season started. Why? Because he could not take the chance that Tim Hudson would get hurt again and we'd lose a star, stud pitcher for nothing but draft picks.
Were there better deals out there? Only Billy and the rest of the front office knows. You never really know if Edwin Jackson was discussed until Billy himself says it.
The reality of our fandom is that this team needs to be a chameleon, adapting in order to survive.
But I will say once more that I am sad to see the end of an Oakland era. The Big Three are no more. The Fab Four never really had a chance to materialize.
I'll change and adapt with my team. No throwing the green and gold out for me. My daughter will still be at the Coliseum with me next season. And the season after that.
It doesn't mean that I'm not devastated to lose a talent like Tim Hudson. I just need to realize that instead of Hey Jude, we've got something else.
0 recs |
167
comments
Comments
Blez--this one does hurt
I love the A's and I hope that the "grit" from Kendall can make him a leader in that clubhouse, or we're in trouble.
by runtru1 on Dec 16, 2004 3:06 PM PST 0 recs
ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
by ucla kid on Dec 16, 2004 3:07 PM PST 0 recs
i dunno
3 unprovens for huddy? how is that any better than unproven draft picks AND huddy for one more run?
by pseudokiwi on Dec 16, 2004 3:08 PM PST 0 recs
It's not
by RichardP on
Dec 16, 2004 3:15 PM PST
up
0 recs
comon now, look at it objectively
that is brutal. and wrong.
kenny williams still had fouke for one year and he traded him, strait up for .... Billy Koch. We don't get Hudson after next year. Too much money. Too much money for a 29yr, soon to be 30yr old pitcher, who breaks down occasionally.
We got 3 good players in return. Scouts and statheads like all three of the players. Thomas is dynamic. 4 triples in 238 at bats last year? he hits lefties and righties. He might not get any better, but he won't neccesarily get worse either. and a .813 OPS outfielder whose fielding (.993, RF 2.22) is superb. Oh yeah and he's cheap.
Dan Meyer has never posted an ERA higher than 3 in professional ball. Interested? He gives up a home run every 12 innings. Still not interested? go take a look at greg maddux's Minor league stats. then compare them with Meyer's. then get back to me on why you are not interested in the guy. Oh yeah and he's cheap.
Juan Cruz. Did someone say something about a reliever? hes only 26, has electric stuff. Oh yeah and he's cheap.
Anyone who says this is a bad trade needs to take a deep breath and come out of their Tim Hudson shrine and move to Atlanta. Beane diversified his assets because he was forced to. and because the market for quality starting pitching is so scarce (read, the whole dodgers tangent) he made a killing. we cheer for the organization, but I know that I will be cheering for all three of these guys to keep it up and make Billy look brilliant.
now here is my prediction, soon we'll be singing bye bye byrnesy.
by BaseballTao on
Dec 16, 2004 6:22 PM PST
up
0 recs
Objectively speaking
by grover on
Dec 16, 2004 6:31 PM PST
up
0 recs
you expect more?
you can't trade tim hudson for barry bonds. and even then, he would want a new deal closer to Arod's ridiculous fee. we got 3 players who can play in the big leagues. and for better or worse, and each of them will get better or worse, they fill holes on the squad for next year. we will be deeper. we will be better. and most importantly we get to keep those assets for longer than 2005.
by BaseballTao on
Dec 16, 2004 6:37 PM PST
up
0 recs
Back up a step
Thomas is a 4th OF. He played well in his big league debut but what happens when the league has a book on him? Look at his minor league numbers. What do you see based on his past performance that makes you believe he's capable of being a starting outfielder? Because I don't see it and I've got a very good imagination.
by grover on
Dec 17, 2004 6:05 PM PST
up
0 recs
Even though I said I was ready for this...
by BillybUcko on Dec 16, 2004 3:08 PM PST 0 recs
Meyer may be the gem of the deal,
Cruz had a good year with the Cubs, then utterly collapsed, and then revived again under Leo Mazzone. Curt Young is no Leo Mazzone.
Thomas is worthless. I mean that literally: he's the kind of fourth outfielder you can pick up for near the minimum any time you want.
Without having any more inside information than anyone else, I can say with complete confidence that there was one better deal out there: keep Huddy, watch him light up his contract year, and take a shot at winning the damn pennant. The draft pick we would have then gotten wouldn't be as valuable as Meyer, Cruz and Thomas, but it wouldn't be substantially less valuable, either.
by jrbh on Dec 16, 2004 3:08 PM PST 0 recs
I can't believe that after watching Kielty &
IN HIS ROOKIE SEASON.
I truly think Billy also feels the risk of Hudson getting injured is high. So why not add three parts, addressing three specific needs on the team (a young pitcher, bullpen help and an outfield prospect who had a very good rookie season) while you still can.
by Blez on
Dec 16, 2004 3:13 PM PST
up
0 recs
i wouldn't say worthless...
by pseudokiwi on
Dec 16, 2004 3:17 PM PST
up
0 recs
Agree
by kaweahkaweah on
Dec 16, 2004 3:19 PM PST
up
0 recs
Too many words ....
What that should have said is, "he's a pitcher, and all kid pitchers are suspect."
Huddy's not a kid, Bazito's not a kid, Mulder's not a kid ... and they all struggled last year. Who struggled the least? the "kid pitcher", Rich Harden.
A draft pick (actually, two) would have been enormously less valuable. Even for the most effective teams, most draft picks are busts. Of the two picks we'd have gotten, it would be considered an above average draft if one of them ever got a sniff of the bigs. We've got three guys who are ready to contribute at the big league level - two of them with the potential to be stars.
Thomas won't be a superstar, but he did post an OPS of .813 as a rookie. That'd damn impressive. He's also started to develop a power stroke lately. He's a great addition.
As far as Cruz utterly collapsing - he was 22!!!! Twenty friggin two. Now he's twenty four (his 2005 age) and has a 3.99 era in 275 ML innings. What's not to like about that?
by devo on
Dec 16, 2004 3:20 PM PST
up
0 recs
Cruz's age
by Patrick on
Dec 16, 2004 3:25 PM PST
up
0 recs
Cruz
by grover on
Dec 16, 2004 3:55 PM PST
up
0 recs
just cracked a nice cold beer
i believe oakland goes to atlanta next yr.
expect an ass kickin'.
by bigelephant on Dec 16, 2004 3:10 PM PST 0 recs
The A's Will Be in Atlanta
by jrbh on Dec 16, 2004 3:12 PM PST 0 recs
How Many Albums
There's a reason John Lennon is the idol.
The A's are not the same.
I'm going to the liquor store.
by jmoney on Dec 16, 2004 3:13 PM PST 0 recs
inevitable, i suppose....
Charles Thomas did have a good rookie season (as my good friend Hubie Brown would say, "ya gotta like the upside on this kid") and using Cruz as a bridge to Dotel is an improvement over last season...though I don't know if Octavio can reach the shutdown ability of Izzy, Foulke, etc.
Can someone give me a few details about Meyer? Is he on a par with Harden and Blanton regarding, ahem, "upside"?
by bakedzito on Dec 16, 2004 3:15 PM PST 0 recs
More Blanton then Harden...
Harden is going to be one of the 5 best pitchers in baseball in 2006, and the best in 2007, bar none. This kid is special, and he's 22 years old. He's at a different level then the other two.
Btw...this is the second Dan Meyer the A's have had. The first Dan Meyer was a first baseman that came over from the mariners in the mid 1980's. He had calcium deposits in his neck and was always twisting and adjusting his neck in the batters box between every pitch.
Drove me nuts.
Let's hope this Dan Meyer works out a bit better. :-)
by nodaclu on
Dec 16, 2004 4:07 PM PST
up
0 recs
the original dan meyer
John Schuerholz looking like the front-runner for executive of the year...the thing that gets me is, the POTENTIAL of the three players gotten in return does not exceed Hudson's ability. Why couldn't Ricciardi have pulled the trigger on Hudson for Vernon Wells? (Rosenthal of TSN said Beane offered any of the Big Three for Wells and was denied...if I'm Toronto, I trade Vernon Wells for Tim Hudson or Mark Mulder, and as an A's fan I'd be much happier with Wells than a Mazzone reclamation project, a glorified Dave Roberts, and a pitching prospect who needs to be "able to command the fastball"...stop the Greg Maddux comparisons when that's the scouting report.
Fuckin' A, the Braves have quite a 1-2 punch in the rotation now
by Cutthemullet on
Dec 16, 2004 9:57 PM PST
up
0 recs
Hudson in Toronto?
- Hudson pitching half his games on a fast carpet would get ugly fast. He no longer strikes much of anyone out, and inducing a ton of ground balls at the SkyDome is a good way to start giving up 11 hits every 9 innings.
- Toronto won't be able to sign him to a long contract, partly due to reason #1. What is one year of Hudson worth to Toronto when they'll get steamrolled by NY and Boston anyway? He gets them from 79 to 84 wins? So what?
- Wells is still largely potential: he's 25, has had one tremendous season and 3 slightly-better-than-average seasons. He's more of a sure thing than the prospects we got from ATL, but partly due to that we weren't gonna get him (and his 3 pre-FA years) away from Toronto for one year of Hudson giving up groundball singles to left and right start after start in the SkyDome. As far as Zito or Mulder are concerend in this trade, we'd have a gaping hole in the rotation this year without one of them, and and even bigger, cavernous hole in 2006 when Hudson signs with ATL as a free agent.
by Nick on
Dec 17, 2004 8:21 AM PST
up
0 recs
Dave Roberts???
As a rookie Thomas hit 7 homeruns and posted an .813 ops.
So, umm, what the fcuk are you talking about?
All pitching prospects, except Mark Prior and those who don't actually have a fastball (would you prefer some of them?) need to be "able to command the fastball" ... though it is suspicious that nothing you quoted put in doubt his current ability "to command the fastball." He's a good of a AAA prospect as you'll find.
Cruz isn't a Mazzone reclamation project. He had a combined 3.7 era as a rookie and a sophmore. He had an attrocious third year and he bounced back in his fourth. That's a pretty solid developmental curve. He has a nasty fastball and we've got him locked for the next three years for cheap.
by devo on
Dec 17, 2004 9:21 AM PST
up
0 recs
calling me out
Now we turn to "what the fcuk are you talking about"...I have way too much pride not to respond to this. Granted, Cruz is no Scott Kamanickei (I may not even be close with the spelling, but I tried)or even, gulp, Chris Hammond (true Mazzone reclamation projects), but the guy's career was starting to parallel that of a former Brave top prospect: Bruce Chen. Let's just say if he has another year like the previous ones, instead of praising the development curve, we're thinking up humorous ways to say he's a bust. Let's face it, Mazzone as your pitching coach is a variable that must be controlled for, reverse-Coors Field-style. I twice saw Cruz get shelled at Wrigley, so maybe I'm also biased by anecdotal evidence, but the stats support the skepticism. But as my buddy pointed out, he can at the very least be a valuable bat off the bench. Wow, did I dare tell a joke, Devo?
Now to ex-Buffalo Bison Dave Roberts. Key word in there was glorified. Always seems to get overlooked. If you don't believe me, explain to me how Glorified G is not one of 33 songs on Pearl Jam's greatest hits. Anyway, clearly, Dave Roberts' lack of power is so extreme that he should not be compared to anyone except for like Otis Nixon. But were he to start, Charles Thomas would be one of the lightest-hitting OFs in the league. Obviously your reading is not sophisticated enough to sense a bit of healthy embellishment to further my point.
As for Meyer, I assumed from context you could deduce that "needing to locate his fastball" was an area that needed improvement...I also quote, uh, something I read, maybe on ESPN, maybe not, that said reviews around the league on Meyer are decidedly mixed.
Finally, inspired by a headline I saw back in the day when the Buffalo Sabres stole Alexei Zhitnik from the LA Kings:
Atlanta 7, Oakland 0
Cutthemullet 7, Devo 0
if you want to dispute either of those find me compelling evidence that trading for pitching prospects is ever a rational decision...I would like to see an analysis of all established star-for-prospect X...I'd estimate the amount of trades where production by the prospect(s) exceeds that of the star at around 10%. Pure guess, but you would think it would have been studied by now.
by Cutthemullet on
Dec 17, 2004 2:51 PM PST
up
0 recs
one other note
by Cutthemullet on
Dec 17, 2004 2:56 PM PST
up
0 recs
Your reply to Devo
As for Meyer:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=1948458
BA has said his control is top-notch. "Command of his fastball" is not an issue. As for the "mixed reviews" about two weeks ago I read in the SportingNews that one player personnel type wouldn't trade Baltimore's Erik Bedard for anyone on Oakland's pitching staff. You'll find mixed reviews on just about every player.
by grover on
Dec 17, 2004 3:08 PM PST
up
0 recs
cutthemullet...
by bigelephant on
Dec 17, 2004 6:06 PM PST
up
0 recs
ahh the hits keep coming...
losing 4 straight Super Bowls, losing 4 straight 1st round playoff series 3-2, No Goal, Forward Lateral...as a sports fan, I cannot win.
For the record, in every post of yours I've read you come across as a complete idiot. It's OK for you to post, but don't let me see you.
See if you figure that one out. Crack open a cold one and salute yourself if you do.
by Cutthemullet on
Dec 17, 2004 7:24 PM PST
up
0 recs
Now we probably know...
Of course I'll continue to root for my beloved Oakland A's. But I am very sorry to see Huddy go. I hope the A's don't come to regret this one.
by OaklandSi on Dec 16, 2004 3:15 PM PST 0 recs
Trade sucks
beane better spin this around in july for something.
by suggy on Dec 16, 2004 3:16 PM PST 0 recs
Par for the course
I am no expert and am going with my faith in BB on this one. Who knows, maybe this isn't the end of this transaction. All I know is that BB has been more right than wrong.
Good luck to Tim. The Braves are getting a great pitcher, competitor and person. I am still very proud to be a fan of the Green and Gold.
by RudiFan on Dec 16, 2004 3:19 PM PST 0 recs
Hear hear!
by Jeff in Seattle on
Dec 16, 2004 3:22 PM PST
up
0 recs
Wow
by tulanite on
Dec 16, 2004 3:56 PM PST
up
0 recs
Moneyballs, Good luck Huddy
It is time to gamble and replace the core with young cheap studs.
For Tim Hudson he is going to a great team, close to home and he gets to hit and run the bases - which he loves to do - it is good for him. It is good for the A's cuz they only see him if they make it to the WS and the odd interleague game. He is probably an instant favorite to win the NL Cy Young
by Aparicio11 on Dec 16, 2004 3:20 PM PST 0 recs
Funny You Should Bring Up TLong,
He has occasional power, but nothing that allows you to put him anywhere near the middle of the line-up.
Except for one oddball year (2003) in the minors, he's never walked much, he's not good enough to play CF, he has a certain amount of speed which he's never learned to turn into stolen bases, and the managers of the teams he's played on don't seem to think he can bunt much, either.
And you have to wonder about his ability to handle pressure: he was strictly deer-in-the-headlights in the playoffs this year, and in almost exactly 500 professional plate appearances in 2004, he had one (1) sacrifice fly.
So, yeah, I think he's worthless. Not in the literal sense: the guy is good enough to make a major league roster. Only a tiny percentage of guys who ever pick up a glove can do that. But in major league terms, guys like him are a dime a dozen. He brings the A's nothing they couldn't get easily elsewhere.
by jrbh on Dec 16, 2004 3:25 PM PST 0 recs
I was going to mention that too...
But then he fell apart, for reasons I'm not sure of.
Still, I think it's the usual path for players to get better as they mature beyond their rookie year, and though Thomas is a little older than most, I think it's a harsh decision to write him off as a scrub immediately. Though I think it's equally foolish to presume he'll be a superstar. He did put up solid numbers, and who knows, if given a role here, he'll do well.
by Trocmagic on
Dec 16, 2004 3:32 PM PST
up
0 recs
Thanks Rob Neyer on your assesment of Chucky T
Chucky T is much more patient, is a good guy to have in the clubhouse, based on Bobby Cox's comments. He has above average speed, plays very good D, and will probably develop more power. Give the dude 500 AB's and he might suprise people with better than Byrnsy numbers. He my post .290+ avg with 15-25 homers and 80rbi. He will have a better VORP than T Long too. Barf. I'll take that over what has been in the outfield the past couple of years.
He HATE's ME, because I'm Joe Morgan's #1 A's fan. Long live the greatest 2nd baseman maybe ever.
by Misfit on
Dec 17, 2004 8:45 AM PST
up
0 recs
How do you come up with this stuff?
by grover on
Dec 17, 2004 2:54 PM PST
up
0 recs
the talking prospect handbook
by Reg on
Dec 17, 2004 4:42 PM PST
up
0 recs
Talking?
Grover are you talking to yourself again?
Seriously, though. I'm a lot more optimistic about, well, everything that has to do with the A's than most everybody, Grover included ... and that holds true in regards to Thomas.
He does make a good point, though, that his OPS was inflated because of all those IBB, I presume because he was batting 8th, and they wanted to pitch to the pitcher with two outs and runners on. His OPS would have been quite a bit lower if you took those out. (About 50 points)
His career k:bb rate in the high minors and the fact that his upturn in production started in 2003 - plus his spectacular defense, and, apparently great clubhouse attitude - makes me optimistic.
by devo on
Dec 17, 2004 4:49 PM PST
up
0 recs
I'm trying to keep an open mind on Thomas
But to give him a starting job outright? No way.
by grover on
Dec 17, 2004 5:22 PM PST
up
0 recs
Totally reasonable ...
by devo on
Dec 17, 2004 5:24 PM PST
up
0 recs
I would
Besides, Swisher is still a rookie and he did struggle a bit against RH pitching. Thomas the 4th gives the A's a little cushion in case that continues to be the case.
by grover on
Dec 17, 2004 5:37 PM PST
up
0 recs
Is Brynes on the way out??
Will Thomas take Byrnes' place in the OF at lower cost? Should the A's pony up to keep Byrnes??? What does AN think??
by jschreib59 on Dec 16, 2004 3:26 PM PST 0 recs
pitches per start
by MooseKnuckle415 on
Dec 16, 2004 10:42 PM PST
up
0 recs
Rudifan said it all.
by mitche82865 on Dec 16, 2004 3:26 PM PST 0 recs
Amen to that!
by baseballgirl on
Dec 16, 2004 3:34 PM PST
up
0 recs
Which World Series....
Before you jump all over me, I'm a huge A's fan. Part of the original AN. I'm even a Hudson fan.
But the truth is that, the formula and personnel wasn't getting it done.
Time to move on. It's sad to see Hudson go. But its time to turn the page.
by nathan. on Dec 16, 2004 3:29 PM PST 0 recs
You know what?
I will miss Hudson, but he is not the perfect player that everyone is making him out to be. Do not forget either the re-occuring injury or the infamous bar brawl in Boston.
I will toast to Hudson. Thanks, Bulldog; there's not many better.
And I look forward to the new design of the A's with Mulder and Zito getting back on track.
by baseballgirl on
Dec 16, 2004 3:41 PM PST
up
0 recs
nothing to show?
That's not nothing. I'm afriad we may learn the true meaning of "nothing" in 2005.
by matthias on
Dec 16, 2004 3:49 PM PST
up
0 recs
hmmm
by pseudokiwi on
Dec 16, 2004 3:54 PM PST
up
0 recs
What is that based on?
by Patrick on
Dec 16, 2004 3:54 PM PST
up
0 recs
No...
With the "Big Four"...
And lost the season-ending series to the Angels...with the "Big Three"
by baseballgirl on
Dec 16, 2004 4:15 PM PST
up
0 recs
"Nothing" was LAST year
by baseballgirl on
Dec 16, 2004 4:15 PM PST
up
0 recs
100% Agree with Nathan and BBgirl
by ak_A on
Dec 16, 2004 7:13 PM PST
up
0 recs
Let's Hope We See Him in the World Series...
We will never forget Huddy's mental toughness, but concerns about his durabilty have been an issue. I don't think the A's perceive they have room to allow for a player, that if they invest largely in, to be a question mark in terms of durability. So whom do they keep of the BIG 3, Zito leads the way in terms of health, and if he rights himself this year, he may be the one.
PS this brings back that sad childhood memory the day I opened the Sports section and read "Jackson Traded from A's to O's". Damn that hurts!
by Gerard on Dec 16, 2004 3:29 PM PST 0 recs
History
by PhillyAs on
Dec 16, 2004 4:24 PM PST
up
0 recs
george kell
by vk on
Dec 16, 2004 4:48 PM PST
up
0 recs
Hell yes,
by PhillyAs on
Dec 16, 2004 5:12 PM PST
up
0 recs
the only way beane....
by bigelephant on Dec 16, 2004 3:30 PM PST 0 recs
Hudson like Hunter leaves A's in tough situation
Did we just revert to late '70's form due to cash crunch? No new ballpark on horizon, selling off good, key players for nothing, owners who make questionable player decisions...is Finley still lurking around at the Colisuem?
by Morada Mudshark on Dec 16, 2004 3:32 PM PST 0 recs
Check Huddy's ERA in September...
Hudson - 6.23 over 39 IP.
Zito - 4.54 over 37.2 IP
He was not a bulldog over the last month. He was anything but.
Post All-Star - Zito had a 4.32 ERA compared to Hudson's 4.28.
I love Hudson, but he wasn't the bulldog down the stretch everyone thought he was.
by Blez on
Dec 16, 2004 3:45 PM PST
up
0 recs
Nope, Harden was...
No matter how great Hudson is/was, it was pretty obvious that he was shot by October. A major-league season wears on everyone, but particularly a smallish pitcher who has to use every ounce of every thing from his body to be effective.
I think BB believed with all his heart that the Big 3 didn't have the right mix of "it" (whatever you determine "it" to be) to ever get past the first round of the playoffs. Last year made it even more obvious that this core wasn't going to make it all they way to the series. After 5 years of that, it was time to shake it up and move in a slightly different direction.
The kind of guys that BB is bringing in are "gamers", hard nosed guys with a bit of a chip on their shoulder. Yes, I know Hudson was one of those guys, but there was already a replacement with "guts" just waiting in the wings.
Rich Harden, we can't wait to watch you blossom into an absolute star, with bulldog guts and determination to boot. :-)
by nodaclu on
Dec 16, 2004 4:17 PM PST
up
0 recs
so he had one bad september
by jnutts on
Dec 16, 2004 6:28 PM PST
up
0 recs
Apparentley you didn't see his Wed. night start...
Don't over-exaggerate


