Fat chance, but only the shadow knows.

1.  His distinction between "being competitive" and "competing" - maybe sort of like the Rangers last year, as they were competitive all year, but in the end, did not compete with the Angels or the A's, and
2.  Barry gone by midseason '05 if the A's are out of it.

I'll tell you this though: the Big Three will ALWAYS be together in Oakland on my ESPN Major League Baseball game for PS2.

Will we ever know what BB told Chavey??

 Just a muse...I don't think the A's will hit that middle ground of "being competitive but not competing," b/c if they're so much as competitive by July 1, I think they will flat-out compete for the division.

 My reasoning? With (presumably) 3 rookies and a "second-half" pitcher (Zito) in the rotation, the A's have a lot of potential to play sub .500 ball the first half, fall out of contention, and be officially rebuilding for 2006. But if they can hang on at just .500 or better until July 1st...

 ...With the young guys probably getting better as the year goes along, with Harden hitting 2 full years under his belt, and with Zito, I think the A's have the potential to play .700 ball the second half (as they did in '01 and '02)--especially if Beane sees a window of opportunity and makes whatever trade might be necessary (e.g., a veteran starter) to put the A's over the hump.

The Angels were the better team last year. How do we know? They won more games than the A's and that's usually a pretty accurate measuring stick! And for all the reasons people can give as to why the A's didn't play as well as they could have (Mulder's mysterious second half, Hudson's injury, Zito's diet problems, plague, locusts, etc.) the Angels had just as many problems. From Anderson getting hurt to Guillen flipping out Anaheim struggled and under-performed as well.

I know a lot of people believe the A's can win 90-95 games next year and maybe they can but that's not the goal. This wonderful run the A's are on has never been about just one year, but subsequent years as well. When you ask about a veteran 4th starter or a one year deal with Ordonez you're asking for immediate gratification and Beane has shown through his actions that he has no intention to make such a sacrifice. Mulder and Hudson weren't traded because of their recent injuries or bouts of inconsistency, they were traded because their immediate value to the A's was less important than the long term benefits their trades could bring.

Beane has chosen to take the A's down a path of uncertainty because he believes it's the only way to achieve real success. The A's current window to win a title has closed, success will be defined by finding another window to open. I agree with his decision. It may not work out but the reasoning behind it is sound. That's why I believe he has to keep pushing further down this path. Zito stays as long as he is needed to shoulder the burden of responsibility and shield the young pitchers. When he is no longer needed for that role consideration should be given to trading him to further strengthen the team. Dotel becomes expendable the day Street or Calero show the ability to handle the 9th inning. Any player who's immediate and projected worth becomes less profitable than his trade potential becomes a canidate to move on.

This quest the A's are on doesn't end in October of 2005, it will have barely begun by then. That is the amazing thing about this team. The true anomaly of years past was not that a small market team could contend, but that its stated goal was to do so. That goal has been modified in 2005 to proving that a small market team can survive and regenerate without suffering through a prolonged drought. To do so means allowing for the growing pains of youth even if it means sacrificing wins.

If the A's win 81 games this year without bringing in veteran stop gaps it means that the goal for 2006 and beyond can return to contending for a championship. Who doesn't want to see that happen?

i'm extremely excited about next year. it will be a year of renewal. anyway, i was getting tired of watching huddy almost win 20 every year and mulder being the best lefthander in the AL.

it don't mean a thang...it just don't mean a thang.

urban does sound down and i think there might be a sliver of resentment in his tone...probably lost two good buddies. one should read his responses as such.

 1. Leaving his changeup up in the zone far more often in '03-04 than in '01-02. If you look back at his starts, rarely was his fastball or curve hit hard, compared to his changeup. His changeup, probably Zito's most underrated pitch, became his mistake pitch.

 2. High pitch counts due to pitches fouled off ('03'-04) instead of swung and missed ('01-'02). When Zito runs his fastball up and in, he gets a lot of swing-throughs; he got away from the "up-and-in" spot with his fastball prior to '04 ASB, leaving his fastball and changeup as pitches hitters could fight off. This led to ABs where the count went something like 0-1, 1-1, 1-2, 1-2, 2-2, 2-2, 3-2, 3-2, result. In this example: nine pitches, and the result on a 3-2 pitch. Cy Young year version: 4-5 pitches, and the result on a 1-2 pitch. Very different!