2+2=?

if the Yankmee's DO go ahead and get Kearns, and we can get Kearns from the Pigmee's, I think we would get a lot better.

Sanders will get that slow transition start. He's slumping right now, and its more likely he will follow the Kotsay/Kendall first month or two slump then the mid-season trade play.

No Reggie. I just wouldn't be able to take that. He'd be the worst of Karros and Justice all in one package. Say it ain't so, Billy. Say it ain't so.

that's the big piece that can bring a useful bat.
throw in byrnes and one of the second baseman, plus maybe a prospect...

With the whole Chavez/Tejada argument still going strong, many people keep pointing out that one reason why Chavez was kept was because he was younger, and they thought they had more productive years left in him.

That being said, if they traded for Sanders, it would be a short term fix for a long term problem - but technically, the long term problem doesn't really even exist. While Sanders could [could, not would] bring better power numbers to the A's for this year, most likely he won't be playing professionally for that much longer - do we really want to pick up his paycheck for the time being?

We are all counting on the players hitting better as a team still, right? Or are we so desperate for results NOW? Honestly, Sanders' numbers don't look that hot to me; Byrnes is certainly capable of putting out similar, or even better, stats. Making this trade would definitely upset fans, especially since Byrnes, as streaky and as unpredictable as he is, is quite an eccentric character. I think many fans have a love/hate relationship with him while feeling indifferent about other players.

Plus, two words: Learning. Curve.

is still playing well. For at least a season he may be a better outfielder/batting option than some of our present outfielders. He's also good at hitting with RISP.

Has anyone noticed that the teams Sanders plays for get to the world series? obviously, it's not all due to him (perhaps he's got some playoff karma or something?). My guess is that he is also good with the other players in a variety of ways.

If he comes cheaply, why not?

By the way, how would Kearns (who is currently batting in the los .200 and is rarely healthy) help the club now? His "potential" (love that one!) for the future might be high -- but if all we are concerned right now is the future, we shouldn't be crying over the A's offensive woes.

...its really no contest- i'ii take reggie everytime. lets not embellish byrnes' worth here. reggie is 37, with 257 career homers who will play a steady but not spectacular LF/RF. one interesting note; reggie seems to hit better against righthanded pitching. reggie can be plunked into the 4 hole and let him swing away....i say do it.

 

in byrnes the yanks will get the legitimate center fielder they need...

(please no one dispute this in case george is reading)

But please not for Reggie Sanders.  He is a guy you could have got as a FA a number of times....Hes a journeyman who is lucky in that he has been on playoff teams.  He doesnt solve any problems in my op.  If we want to get Kearns, fine, deal Byrnes, but I am not a fan of a move for Sanders.

Sanders over Byrnes, but I hope the A's don't trade for Sanders simply because I doubt the A's will make two deals for the same need--meaning if they acquire Sanders they will settle for a "slight upgrade" instead of truly solving the problem.

There are two kinds of problems--fundamental flaws and aberrations. The A's bullpen last year was a fundamental flaw, which is why Beane addressed it early. Kendall and Chavy's hitting problems will largely self-correct.

The A's RISP hitting woes are self-correcting aberrations that need to be ignored. The lack of a RH power threat in the middle of the order is a fundamental flaw, which needs to be addressed.

Getting Sanders would improve the lineup a tad, but fail to solve the problem, IMO. If I'm a righty pitcher, I'll pitch around Chavy or Durazo and pitch to Sanders. Sometimes he'll burn you, sometimes he'll strike out; I'll take my chances. But I wouldn't want to put another guy on base ahead of Paul Konerko, or Vernon Wells, or Pedro Feliz, too often.

Big difference, one move to make. My request: do nothing or else really solve the problem.

I think what we need is a list of right handed corner outfielders in the last year of their contracts.  Then we can see if any of them would be a true fix or not.

Acquiring Jermaine Dye (when he was a "Konerko") solved our problem and allowed us to take off. Playing Dye in 2004 (when he had become a "Sanders") made our lineup better than it is now, and he put up some decent numbers--but he didn't make our offense all that much better overall and Chavy led the league in walks.

I don't think Dotel will be dealt until July, but I think he is going to be the key to obtaining a HUGE bat. Any Byrnes trade is a mental shake up along with some reliable power.

Two ex's of she-who-is-not-to-be-named, head-to-head. I wonder who she's rooting for?

Did you get my e-mail last night?

Calero has issues now with the elbow, Cruz could get well quick, but still needs time in lower leverage situations.  Duke and Rincon are good in the right roles, Street is learning on the job, Garcia is going to be great somday... but isn't yet, Mabeus is struggling down in AAA.

You move Dotel, and suddenly a good pen looks vulnerable.  If pen depth is part of this team's strength, what we can trade from, better to use that depth to pump up everybody's stats and make everybody look better.

Last year, even with Dotel being shaky, he allowed the rest of the pen to settle in to better roles and performance.  

Until we are sure that the pen is deep enough without Dotel, we can't risk letting everyone's value diminish through overexposure.

That said:  if we get a legit stud in return, then we do it.

Here's what I see: a team that cannot win anything.  Not the world series.  Not a wild card game.  Not even the division.  That's our current roster.  It's the worst since 1998.  Our pitching has kept us around .500, but it will worsen as Haren, Blanton, and Saarloos all struggle with learning to pitch in the majors.  The hitting has to get better down the road, but the two will cancel out and we're a .500 team.

That said, I never thought this team was built for 2005.  I think we need to use some of our chips to keep getting prospects.  Right now, the most valuable chip we have is Dotel.  Closers are going down left and right and Dotel  is worth a ton right now.  Might not be that way in July when Urbina and Percival are available.

So, do you trade Dotel for a ML veteran to help stabilize this club or do you trade him for a prospect with huge upside?  I would vote for the latter.  I'd like to see us trade Dotel for Jeremy Hermida.  He's doing well in AA and could use another year in the minors, but will be ready next year.  Can you say LF?  Trade Byrnes and/or Thomas for anything and put Watson in RF until Swisher heals.  I'm not saying sell off the whole team, but use some of chips to get better for 2006 and beyond.  This team cannot win and I'm sure Billy is realizing it.  

Maybe we could trade Byrnes for Cameron?  I wonder if anyone has thought of that?  Maybe I'll start a new diary...

REALITY CHECK ALERT - REALITY CHECK ALERT - REALITY CHECK ALERT - REALITY CHECK ALERT - REALITY CHECK ALERT - REALITY CHECK ALERT -

The 2005 A's are going to battle this year, but this is not the year for a rental player (Sanders).  This is a year to load up for 2006 - 2010.  It will take a miracle to win the West this year.

Dotel & Zito (and throw-ins like E. Byrnes, Durazo, Hatteberg, etc...) will be shipped off before the deadline for some future talent - primarily young power.  

Plus, it's just a matter of time before Beane & Company determine the formula for clutch hitting:  BA + Hits + 2 Outs + RISP - SSS = Clutch Hitting (or something like that)

here's why the sanders trade makes no sense:

1. as jubjub and now colorado fan remind us, this team probably won't win a playoff series and almost certainly won't win a world series.  that's with or without sanders.
   
2. sanders helps the team only this year.  given #1: who cares.  it's a rebuilding year, so let's rebuild.
   
3. he may not even help this year.  he's hitting .228 with a .282 obp and one home run in the last 16 games.  if he was already on this team, he would be considered part of the problem.
   
4. he's in decline: he's 37, devo provides the downward trend in obp numbers above.
   
5. byrnes and kielty, on the other hand, are young. kielty is hitting better already (i won't rub that in too much, kielty bashers) and byrnes is a streaky guy who at the very least is an extremely useful #4 outfielder, pinch hitter/runner, occassional dh.  who's to say sanders would outperform either of them this year?
   
7. if the a's are going to get a non-moneyball player, why not pay more for someone like feliz (if that's a possibility) who is younger and will help beyond this season.
   
8. trading dotel is the best idea.  surely dotel, byrnes, a 2b, and prospects could get us a nice bat (younger and more long term).  if it can't, screw it, there's no need to make a trade.  we all know (well almost all of us know) that closers are overrated.  if calero can't do it, make street the closer.  if he's going to be around long term and this is a rebuilding year, he should be closing by the end of the summer either way.

i'd rather keep what we have than add sanders.  i'll take 26-30 year olds hitting .200 over a 37 year old hitting .220

as nico said above: "do nothing or else really solve the problem."

but he gives the team exactly what they need right now.  RH power in the middle of the lineup.  If you they don't add that factor soon, they may as well have a full fire sale and give up on 2005.  But I don't think new owners are going to want to do that.

People rightly point out that Sanders wouldn't be part of the future of this team, but I don't think Byrnes or Feliz would be either. There are two reasons to prefer younger players:

1. Upside - hitters peak around 27, so if you have a player younger than that who is already producing, you can usually expect him to improve.
   
2. Cost - players are very cheap in their first 3 years, and often still a good value in their 4th-6th years, relative to older players at the same level of production.

Neither of these applies to either Byrnes or Feliz. Feliz is 30, has never been a full-time player or put up an OBP better than .305, and is making $2.4 million this year and $3.6 million next year. He has power, but is vulnerable to breaking pitches. He also plays several positions - all of them badly. Byrnes is 29, makes $2.2 million this year, and will probably be in the $3-4 million range if he goes to arbitration next year. He has had some hot streaks, but on the whole has failed to improve his game, either at the plate or in the field. We've probably seen the best he has to offer, and it was fine when he was playing for the league minimum, but he's just not a player worth paying real money for.

The Dodgers are desperate for a 3rd baseman now that Valentin is out.  I can easily imagine BB inserting himself into a deal to make a 3 way, thereby netting the player he needs/wants.
  Can anybody think of a possible 3 team deal involving the A's, Dodgers, and Team C?

Unlike some ppl, I don't think Byrnes' value has decreased. He's under a micorscope here, and everything he does is magnified. Other teams don't see what we see; they see the spectacular catches he sacrifices his body to make like the highlight on Sports Center a few games ago.

He's still seen as a very popular player w/ a big upside and we better get more than Reggie Sanders if we deal him.

half this site, including blez, seem obsessed with austin kearns whenever there are trade rumors.  i'm just really not seeing the reasoning behind that.  as much as i don't want sanders here, at least he's declining in his mid 30s.

kearns:

avg
.315
.264
.230
.208

obp
.407
.364
.321
.303

slg
.500
.455
.419
.364