The Latest Thing in Undervalued Commodities

by notsellingjeans on Feb 28, 2007 1:26 AM PST Comment 41 comments

On-base percentage? That's so five years ago.

Flipping a closer fresh off a great year for guys who are cheaper and more valuable? Check.

Hoarding potential starters? Only GMs who live in caves haven't tried or considered the idea.

Players with little major-league service time? Yesterday's news. (Or more accurately, today's news - and therefore, not undervalued).

So what's the latest (and maybe last) frontier in undervalued commodities?

Exploiting the 40-man roster. Update [2007-2-28 20:12:33 by notsellingjeans]: The conversation takes a turn down in the comments section of this diary with a discussion of how the A's should allocate any new additional funds they might enjoy after a move to a new stadium in Fremont. For example, if payroll increased 15 million, should that be spent on a.) one high-priced free agent? b.) more extensions for homegrown guys? c.) international scouting and signing? d.) the draft - picking more guys with "signability concerns"?

Every team obsesses over its 25-man roster. But league-wide, those last 15 spots are almost criminally neglected - littered with frustrating prospects who are four years away from blooming, or grizzled slugs doomed to a lifetime of AAA. And yet in an era where players can no longer take amphetamines or steroids to stay healthy, strong and fresh, the full 40-man roster is more important than ever.

How many teams go a full season without an injury to their 25-man roster? For teams that can't afford stars to be successful, they need to steal Win Shares where they can - at the back end of the roster.
And thus the A's have 30 major-league-ready players, while remarkably still having a lower budget than their competitors. They absorb injuries better than any team in the league because their "replacement-level players" simply aren't replacement-level - they're far better. In anticipation of injuries, they have arguably 15+ pitchers in the system who would be on the 25-man rosters of many other teams.

Examples of how the A's use their full 40-man roster better than any team in Major League Baseball:

Exhibit A:
Chad Gaudin.

The Blue Jays, in their willy-nilly pursuit of free agents in the '06 offseason, needed to clear 40-man roster spots. Knowing this, the A's pounced and became the free beneficiaries of a 23-year-old pitcher who posted a 3.09 era over 64 innings for 380K. They'll have cost control over him for five more seasons.
These are the moves that win playoff berths and contribute to a decade of defying the odds with a lower budget.

Exhibit B(?):
Lenny DiNardo, Scott Dunn, Donnie Murphy.

All three are 40-man roster casualties of teams that didn't have the roster space this offseason.

-Donnie Murphy http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/M/Donnie-Murphy.shtml

When the Royals wanted to make a splash and sign Meche, they needed to open a 40-man roster spot. For petty cash, the A's acquired a second baseman who posted a .313/.523./.885 line at age 22 in AA. He'll be 24 next month, and has plenty of time to develop into a major league player.

-Scott Dunn http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/D/Scott-Dunn.shtml

Courtesy of the DRays, who are short 40-man spots in part because of all the high schoolers they've had to nurse along who aren't ready for the league (but have to be protected on the roster for fear of losing them in Rule V). This 28-year-old posted a 2.73 era in AAA last year while striking out 70 in 66 innings. He has consistently struck out over a batter per inning throughout the minors. Maybe with a great A's defense behind him he can become a slightly-below average MLB reliever. Or he could have a great spring and become a trading chip.
And again, he was acquired for free.

-Lenny DiNardo
http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/D/Lenny-DiNardo.shtml

A roster spot casualty of the Red Sox's off-season largesse, this 27-year-old lefty couldn't hack it in 39 innings in the murderous AL East last year (7.85 era, 2.08 whip). However, he never had a defined role (6 relief appearances, 7 starts), and he was hurt for part of the year. In '05 he had a 3.15 era in 108 minor-league innings as a full-time starter in AAA, and he was lights-out in 8 appearances with the Red Sox the same year (1.84 era, 14 innings).
In an era when a few major league bullpens are lefty-less and Jamie Walker makes 12 million, can a team ever hoard too many potential quality lefty arms on its 40-man roster? Billy seems to have an answer to that question.

Dunn, Murphy, and DiNardo: If even one of these three becomes a major league player, it's a testament to brilliant scouting and management of roster space. All acquired for pennies.

Exhibit C:
Ryan Goleski, Jay Marshall
http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/G/Ryan-Goleski.shtml, http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/M/Jay-Marshall.shtml

The Rule V draft - One man's trash is another man's treasure.

Here's what happens when you're a major league team that doesn't manage your 40-man roster well:

1.Your 40-man roster is cluttered with players who are minor leaguers over the age of 29 (you'd be amazed how many teams have four Hiram Bocachicas on their 40-mans).
2.You have 3-5 Dominicans or Venezuelans who are 23 and have been on your 40-man for 2 years already (for fear of losing the next Johan Santana in the Rule V), yet they're STILL 3 years away from even potentially being a major league contributor. In the meantime, they'll eat up valuable 40-man roster spots - preventing you from acquiring above-replacement-level depth in case of injuries, and also preventing you from dipping into the Rule V draft. Unlike the A's, you rarely draft college players (21-22 year olds) who will have revealed their MLB potential by the time the team is required to protect them on the 40-man at age 25/26.
3. You also don't even leave an open roster spot to SELECT a Rule V draft pick, which would give you the extra time to evaluate him and keep or trade him in spring. Nobody knows why you do this - maybe because you choose to study your team only by reading the wisdom of Ray Ratto's column and the local sports page, or you just haven't learned how to email and use computers yet. Maybe you're afraid of Roman numerals. Again, no one's really sure what you're doing.

In short, you have either no balls or vision, or both, and your last name is Bavasi, Stoneman, or Hendry. Maybe a few others.

Here's what happens when you manage your roster better than any team in the league, and Michael Lewis follows you to the john:

You plan ahead to enter the Rule V draft with not one but TWO extra 40-man roster spots, planning to find hidden gems with meticulous research.
You research every 40-man roster in the league. Then you research every minor league system in the league. Using your own scouting department and metrics, you find the 41st-best player in every major league system (which, in a few cases, is in fact their 30-35th best player and the team hasn't evaluated its own talent well).
In your rigorous analysis, you decide the best unprotected player in baseball is Ryan Goleski. You are almost certain he's a future big-leaguer. So you pay the DRays 100K for the rights to a future major league player - a pittance in exchange for the incredible value of a player's 0-3 service years. And you pounce.
You don't have room in your OF, but you know that if Goleski's hurt, you can use a Rule V loophole to play up his injury, stash him on the DL for a whole year and wait until '08 when three of your outfielders are FAs (Bradley, Stewart, Kielty), and he's infinitely more likely to earn a roster spot.
If Goleski is healthy and productive, and the rest of the outfield is as well, he can be yet another trading chip at the tail end of spring.

For the coup de grace, you'll use your second Rule V pick on a LOOGY - the easiest type of Rule V player to stash for an entire year without stunting his development. If he proves to be overmatched, you can use him to mop up games; if he's decent, you can build his confidence by throwing him only in favorable matchups vs. lefties.
Jay Marshall may only have pitched as high as single A, but he does two of the most projectible things a pitcher can do - he induces a phenomenal number of groundballs, and he has a tremendously low BB/9 rate (8 in 62 innings last year).
Hmmm...undervalued side-armer in the White Sox system with great groundball and walk rates?

I'm experiencing Chad Bradford-induced deja vu, my friends - LEFT-HANDED Chad Bradford-induced deja vu. Except that it's without those silly foreign marks that are supposed to be above the letters in deja vu, because I don't know how to type them on a computer.

If even one of these five new additions to the 40-man roster pans out, the A's will earn an incredible return on their nearly free investments.
It's this type of creative, one-step-ahead-of-the-pack thinking that keeps our favorite team in perennial playoff contention despite their budget.

0 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

déjà vu

I'm ok with exibit A and B ( who were the 2 players that impressed the coaches in the first game?Murphy and Dunn!)
But Goleski has been declared healthy by the team,so I have a hard time imagining him going to the DL,that means that if he stays,either Kielty or Johnson leaves.
The bullpen is already more than full (halsey,windsor,komine macbeth,dinardo,dunn and castilla can come in if a bullpen member goes on the DL)
Unless jay marshall retires all the lefties he's asked to then he's gone.

Of course injuries in spring training could just "solve" the problem,we'll have to wait and see (kotsay's already having back problems for exemple)

by J Rod on Feb 28, 2007 4:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Love the analysis

The point about drafting high schoolers is an interesting one I'd not thought of. This could be support to the point that the whole team gets to the playoffs, however it may also support Beane's critics as the team with the better starting players (as opposed to the best #22-30 players) is more likely to win in the playoffs.

"To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography, and the dancers hit each other." - Jack Handey

by JJ on Feb 28, 2007 7:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I don't know about that last point...

some people will always believe that 2004 25th man of the year Dave Roberts was the player most responsible for the Red Sox winning the World Series that year(yes, even though his one contribution came in the ALCS...)

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Feb 28, 2007 10:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

and, of course...

having a guy like Roberts on your bench as nothing more than a pinch runner is a luxury the A's can't afford. So in that very overblown case it would seem that the Beane critics would either not have any ammunition, or would have to argue the complete opposite point (that depth matters in the postseason, and that the A's haven't had enough of it on their past teams). I'd say that the latter argument has some merit, but more importantly contains the truth that the A's HAVEN'T had depth in the past. The depth the A's have now (on the pitching staff anyway; I'm not very sold on the A's being at all deep offensively, either on the 25-man or 40-man rosters) wasn't there even 2 years ago.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Feb 28, 2007 10:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Building positions of strength

Nice diary. The other thing this approach accomplishes, that is..maybe not undervalued, exactly, but a way to get the most value out of what the A's can afford, is to build positions of strength so that they have a potential advantage in trades with desperate teams later on.

Last year, if player health weren't such a crisis, our bullpen was so deep that we could have traded decent relievers at the deadline. Health was atrocious, and no one was that desperate for relievers, so it didn't work out, but that's part of the risk of the approach. Not every position can be one of strength; Billy uses his roster to fill out a couple of positions that he thinks teams will be desperate for mid-year.

This year, those positions are relievers (potential closers?) and outfielders. Good bets, since those are the two least specialized positions on a roster.

Huh. I always thought that baseball's version of a home run is the motherf---ing home run itself. -FJM

by oblique on Feb 28, 2007 7:47 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

we may have stockpiled a few extra OF's...

but there's no way you can say that the "depth" we have there, if you can even call it that, is at all going to give the A's leverage for making trades. No one wants the guys we have, plain and simple. Relievers are a different story...there's quality in addition to quantity there.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Feb 28, 2007 10:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course, we still need some help in

managing our 25 man rosters (cue monkeyball).

Stat Wonk Futurist

by salb918 on Feb 28, 2007 7:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Hmwuwhuwha! My hair!

... our computers then decode what it is the monkey's intending to do ... @('.')@

by monkeyball on Feb 28, 2007 9:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Good post.

Enjoyed it.

"Yeah, all I could find was Triple-Sec and rootbeer...What?! You mean you had tequila the whole time!?"

by talex on Feb 28, 2007 8:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

diary of the month

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 Feb 28, 2007 9:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

(non-Ghostriding division)

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." --Dr. Johnson

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Feb 28, 2007 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

make up your mind

did you forget your comment in my "fuck the future concerns" diary? Don't tell me NSJ has outdone the 100 or so drunken words I typed in that entry.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Feb 28, 2007 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

your diary won in the BAC > .20 division

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 Mar 2, 2007 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I need some challengers in that category...

when's Blez going to grant Loaiza a weekly "Get Lo" (if we're going to stick with rap song title-takeoffs, like Ziegler's) column?

www.????????????.com...the "launch" is coming soon...or grand opening in brick-and-mortar terms...I'll be all over the DLD the day it's ready.

by Cutthemullet on Mar 2, 2007 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

also...

"Hoarding potential starters? Only GMs who live in caves haven't tried or considered the idea."

Tell me the GEICO cavemen aren't going to be offended by that line.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Feb 28, 2007 10:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Dominicans and Venezuelans

You make some good points, but I can't agree with the degradation of having Venezuelans and Dominicans on a 40 man roster. First, your timeline of having had them on the 40 man for 2 years and them not being ready for 3 more years is way off. Their option years would have expired, and they'd be either on the 25 man or on waivers.

More importantly, one of the reasons the A's farm system has been in decline is a lack of foreign prospects. Not only did the A's get very important players such as Tejada and Ramon Hernandez through international signings, but they also got a bunch of trade chits in Colome, Ortiz, Encarnacion, Vizcaino, German(s), Berroa, and Olivo. Those trade chits (partially) netted the A's Dye, Mecir, Ellis/Damon/Lidle (which led to Swisher), Duchscherer, Bradford, and others.

I wish the A's had more of these players clogging their 40 man roster rather than guys like Murphy and Dunn--who are nice emergency options, but don't have much hope of ever being above average.

by Danny on Feb 28, 2007 9:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Right Danny,

More good Latin prospects is a good thing. It is unfortunate (for us) that many other teams have jumped in to those markets with full entusiasm and therefore driving up the price of talent. It's much more of an open market than the draft is, and therefore the A's are at a magnified disadvantage in making those high profile signings.

However, I believe the point of the diary still stands. Good 40 man roster management is an essential part of being an effective GM, and one area (Harang, Duke, Gaudin, Harville for Saarloos, etc...) where Beane earns his salary.

But having very good/great prospects and more of them is still the ultimate way to build a great team and keep it great.

by jakarta on Feb 28, 2007 9:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't spend enough time on that part

Here's my main point regarding international prospects:
-International prospects can sign at age 16. The Rule V bylaws state that a team has to protect an international player who has been in the system for five years, and protect a U.S.-drafted player who has been in the system for four years, or risk losing them in the Rule V draft.
The teams that sign international guys when they are 16 have to start carrying that guy on the 40-man roster at age 21...whereas a player selected after his junior/senior year of college (21,22) doesn't need to be protected until age 25/26.
Very few prospects are major-league-ready at age 21, 22, or even 23. That means the team is carrying dead weight on its 40-man roster for a few years until they are certain the prospect has MLB potential.
For obvious reasons, a 25/26 year-old is easier to evaluate. By the time a college draft pick needs to be protected on the 40-man roster (age 26), his team knows what they have...and whether he warrants a spot on the roster. He should be in the bigs or close to it if he's ever going to make an impact.
That's one major reason to draft and cultivate college guys over high schoolers and international players.

"Fictional numbers are really effective for making your case." -Devo

by notsellingjeans on Feb 28, 2007 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

great diary by the way

International prospects are only an either/or choice if a team has a limited player development budget. If you are the Yankees or Red Sox, you suffer very little penalty for paying high for as many of the best international guys as you can, AND drafting well.

But you are right that college draftees make 40 man roster management easier. Part of this is the age bias in the industry. Brian Stavisky and Vasili Spanos might generate some interest if they were younger, even though their ceiling were the same. But by being older, they are not as desirable to other teams and do not merit any thought of protection on the 40 man rosters. This is another way to keep a better AAA team with emergency fill-in possibilities and the rare chance of a 26 or 27 year old break through season happening with little to no opportunity cost.

But this is still stuff at the margins. I'll take all the Javier Herreras and Jose Tabatas and Franklin Moraleses we can find.

by jakarta on Feb 28, 2007 10:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

thing is...

How many international prospects actually do sign at the age of 16? Some sign younger (ok, only Adrian Beltre does that, that we know of), Cuban guys (small contingent, admittedly) are always older...I wonder what % of Dominican/Venezuelan/other Latin American prospects actually sign right at that age. We've all heard the stories about a guy being discovered and signed by a scout to a contract for maybe a few grand, or guys who've spent some time in the academies set up by MLB teams in Latin America...still, though, surely some of these guys get signed when they're 18, 19, whatever. Even the guys who are thought to be only 16 sometimes don't have proper documentation and wake up one morning as a 24-year-old prospect rather than a 21-year-old...

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Feb 28, 2007 10:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The A's do sign Latin players

Just check the Arizona Rookee League roster and you will see many free agent Latin players playing for the A's. They come in under the radar because they are not drafted. The A's also have a school in the Dominican Republic.

Jim

by jarforcefatherofforce on Feb 28, 2007 6:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

excellent diary, but

how many games will these guys actually help a team win over the course of a yr? Add up all the potential WS of Lenny DiNardo, Scott Dunn, Donnie Murphy, Ryan Goleski, Jay Marshall and what do you get?

Nevertheless, very good.

"Where you start is not as important as where you finish."- Zig Ziglar

by bigelephant on Feb 28, 2007 9:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

depth trickles down

I think it helps in two ways.

First, none of those guys probably will put up large Win Shares, but they might avoid putting up negative Win Shares compared to their replacements. (I know James doesn't have negative WS, but you know what I mean.) Case in point: Ryan Glynn, who made a large negative contribution in his year here, as measured by WS above bench, winexp or most other measures.

Second, having depth at the AAAA level may help our tempo in developing AAA players. As the diary notes, there is some advantage to the flexibility of having slots 26-40 filled with MLB ready players who can develop in the majors, so we don't have to rush Daric or Travis up.

I loved the diary. It's nice to see all these ideas put together in one coherent story.

by Apricot on Feb 28, 2007 10:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ryan Glynn

is actually an example of why I don't get too excited about the likes of Dunn or DiNardo. While the A's have certainly found some gems with players acquired for nothing (Scutaro) or next to nothing (Ellis, Saarloos, Duchscherer, Gaudin), for every one of them there are several others like Glynn, Harikkala, Roney, Ginter, Dominguez, and Jimenez who turn out to be replacement level or worse.

Beane probably plays the odds a little better than others when it comes to these back of the roster players, but when you're talking about freely available talent the odds are very long no matter who's playing.

In the stands the home crowd scatters For the turnstiles

by andeux on Feb 28, 2007 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

good point

I'm not expecting any of those players to be studs, but if they can be a step above replacement, then that's a good thing. The mythical replacement level player actually has to be dug up... statheads tend to make the assumption that they are piled around like cordwood.

by Apricot on Feb 28, 2007 1:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ginter

Not sure, but i think the A's signed Ginter as a free agent for something around 2 million? maybe im way off, but i think the point of the diary is Beane is literally finding players for nothing, and wether or not they contribute the risk is nothing compared to signing a Ginter.

by OAKobsession on Mar 1, 2007 8:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

worse

To acquire Ginter for the Brewers at that contract, the A's traded Justin Lehr (AAAA reliever, no big deal...maybe the Brewers saw Danny Kolb potential, heh) but also Nelson Cruz, who was since traded to Texas in the Carlos Lee trade last trade deadline and is starting to pan out as a potential impact player for a divisional rival...

www.????????????.com...the "launch" is coming soon...or grand opening in brick-and-mortar terms...I'll be all over the DLD the day it's ready.

by Cutthemullet on Mar 2, 2007 5:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice article and comments

Thought provoking and you make many good points about these players. And comments also make point that 25 man roster also is significant as must be able to option 15 of these players or else lose them. Hopefully a good spring will help the A's make some decisions about what they do with their free agents etc. Lots of thoughts to be considered.

Charlie Brown GO A'S WIN

by Charlie Brown on Feb 28, 2007 11:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Good Job

I think you have tapped into the undervalued commodities well. As long as Beane is a part of this organization, this will be one of his "fingerprints" in terms of his influence.
What's sad about the lack of latino influx into the organization is that I think prospects would be attracted by Oakland's rich past of developing players such as Tejada. Who wouldn't want to "be like Miguel". But the A's have to continue to make the committment to develop those players as before. I don't know if they have closed down their academy in the Dominican Republic.
Big E's point is well taken in that these are marginal players, yet with the potential of having an impact. If successful, Beane's reputation will continue to grow.

"I've been accused of using too many words...I suppose that's like accusing Mozart of using too many notes." Bill King

by Gerard on Feb 28, 2007 11:12 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

See A's notes...

Dominican Academy appears open, since Santiago Casilla was working out there while his Visa issues were dealt with.

by Donner on Feb 28, 2007 3:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The Academy is still open

But it's gotten the short end of the budget the last few years.

Insert new, original, thought provoking sig line (...HERE...)

A's Medical Staff, 2006

by grover on Feb 28, 2007 3:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

True to form for Beane

There's no way we would allow our little green engine to look like big spenders (although it's all relative) in the D.R.
Let's hope they can bring the academy back up to the level and prestige it once had. Donations anyone?

"I've been accused of using too many words...I suppose that's like accusing Mozart of using too many notes." Bill King

by Gerard on Mar 1, 2007 8:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I like this diary, really I do

But I don't think you seriously address the downside to this path the A's are following. Yes, Billy Beane has created depth on the cheap but the chances of any of the players you've named becoming impact players is minimal at best. You knock other teams for protecting 21 year old players who've spent the last 5 years in the minors, but these tend to be players with high upside potential. Sure, sometimes the other teams get it wrong with these "high upside" guys but all you need to do is take a look at the A's 2003 draft class to see that no one gets it right all the time.

DiNardo, Dunn and Murphy all have a chance to be solid role players but the A's are going to win the bulk of their games thanks to the contributions of Chavez, Crosby, Bradley, Piazza and Harden. Those guys have the talent to help the A's get to the playoffs but they also have HUGE question marks after their names. (I know Haren, Street, Duke, Kendall and Swisher are also going to carry a significant chunk of the load but they have fewer question marks than the first group.)

You spend a lot of time talking about how "smart teams" invest in older prospects because they'll have a better read on their major league potential by the time they need to be protected on the 40 man roster and then you talk about Jay Marshall and Ryan Goleski, two players who'll be 24 and 25 (respectively) come Opening Day and have combined for half a season of success above A+ ball. You mock other teams for using up 40 man roster space for guys that are a couple years away from being ready to contribute in the Show but praise the A's for having two guys who are probably not ready for the Show who need to be kept on the 25 man big league roster or lost to other teams!

I think you've touched on a lot of good points but I feel you're too generous with the praise. Beane has a done a great job with his limited means but he's made his share of mistakes and there are holes in the organization.

Insert new, original, thought provoking sig line (...HERE...)

A's Medical Staff, 2006

by grover on Feb 28, 2007 3:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Very true Grover

There are holes in the organization, and I'm probably overly optimistic in this piece.
But I think that given the lack of resources and the inevitable ensuing holes in the organization, the A's strategy to turn away from scouting and signing international prospects is a smart budgeting of our limited money for a few reasons:
a.) We are at an inherent negotiating disadvantage with foreign-born prospects, because most guys want to remain closer to home and in baseball it doesn't get much further away from the Dominican than Oakland, CA. Touted prospects will take discounts to sign with teams closer to home (Miguel Cabrera did this for the Marlins much to Steinbrenner's chagrin), and to stay in more "Latin-friendly" environs (like NY or FLA). With those obstacles, you could almost envision a top prospect demanding extra money on top of the best offer to sign with Oakland, and we never pay $1 to acquire .50 cents.
b.) International players often sign with teams that have an established recruiting foothold in their country, like the New York teams and L.A. do. If the international agents are used to dealing with those teams, that's a tough edge to cut through.
c.) Economics - all other access to players and data being equal, when do the A's outbid anyone for a coveted player?

I wholeheartedly agree that when your team is as successful as the A's and you never have a draft pick in the top 15, your only chance at acquiring very high-ceiling young talent is by mining the international prospects. But I also think that given the budget constraints, the inherent risk of young international players (who's doping? how will they adapt stateside? What will this guy be like after he hits puberty?), and the A's geographic disadvantage makes it a wise move to forego this market altogether.

The real pisser about that philosophy is that we never have very high-ceiling players, which is a constant annoyance of our system. But perhaps it's a necessary evil to avoid the type of terrible sunk cost that torpedoes a string of successful seasons.

My vision for the Fremont A's would be to add 15 million to the payroll, but spend it below the major league level, while continuing to fill the big club with 0-3 year service time players and economical extensions through the arbitration years and a few years of FA for our homegrown guys (Swisher, Barton, Buck types).
I'd try to use that extra hypothetical 15 million that Fremont might yield to do two things:

Become a player internationally and take a 2-million flyer on the next Cabrera, and
Never, ever again have to have a Moneyball draft...and by that I mean, selecting players that we damn well know aren't the most talented at that draft slot (Jeremy Brown, who agreed before the draft to sign for way less than his draft slot would typically get) just because we can't afford to pay them typical first-round/sandwich pick money.

We could use some of that extra money each year to never let another Justin Smoak slip through our grasp, and sign a few later-round guys who fell because of signability concerns (the Red Sox and Yanks are doing a lot of this lately to compensate for their low first-round picks, or not having a first-rounder at all).
The Angels (Jered Weaver) and DBacks (little Drew) know all about the benefits of swallowing hard and drafting a guy who slipped because of signability concerns. I'd rather we used some newfound money and became a player in that market (and potentially get six cost-controlled years of a talented player every once in a while)
than spend 15 million more at the major league level on just one past-his-prime slugger in FA.

"Fictional numbers are really effective for making your case." -Devo

by notsellingjeans on Feb 28, 2007 4:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

a is almost never true

Ok, so Cabrera had options...most guys don't, when they're trying desperately to get out of the poverty of the DR and make their break. They'll sign anywhere. How far is Montreal from Santo Domingo? That distance didn't stop Vlad (and brother Wilton tagged along, too) from signing with the Expos. David Ortiz signed on for the cold relatively obscure locale of Minneapolis...add in Tejada, and there's your top few Dominican players of the last ten years or so...sorry, Hendry, Soriano is not included in that list.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Feb 28, 2007 11:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm going to send Beane some coprolalic verse

... because I think I've discovered the latest thing in undervalued commode ditties.

... our computers then decode what it is the monkey's intending to do ... @('.')@

by monkeyball on Feb 28, 2007 5:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

You've got competition

You've got high-level competition.

Stat Wonk Futurist

by salb918 on Feb 28, 2007 6:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

In the category he's talking about

he's got low-level competition.

In the stands the home crowd scatters For the turnstiles

by andeux on Feb 28, 2007 6:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Monkeyball'll totally pwn that first guy

But that guy you linked's gonna be tough.

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." --Dr. Johnson

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Feb 28, 2007 7:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Great analysis

I really enjoyed reading your post. I concur with many of the points you have set forth and I appreciate the detail you devoted to you post.

One comment regarding the A's drafting high school players. In the last couple of years the A's have moved away from college players and more towards high school players. Seems like the Moneyball concept utilized college players in the annual baseball player draft. I believe the Moneyball book chronicled the 2002 draft, of which, most of the players signed were college players.

by cowman on Feb 28, 2007 9:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs