http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7...

The Dodgers have added another starting pitcher to their rotation, claiming right-hander Esteban Loaiza on waivers from the A's.

The teams did not complete a trade for Loaiza; the A's simply allowed the Dodgers to assume the rest of Loaiza's contract — less than $1 million this season, plus Loaiza's entire $7 million salary for 2008.

I'm completely baffled.  Why not hold on to Loaiza and deal him this offseason?  Another terrible move by Beane.  Buy High, Sell Low.

It almost feels like Beane & Company have become a "Born Again" Organization.... choosing to keep "Good Guys" who suck (Chavez, Crosby, Kotsay) over "Bad Guys" who don't.

Baffling.

Come on!

We need to figure out a way to get Crosby, Chavez, and Kotsay to start bitching publicly and by name to the press about Beane.

Then, Beane will simply DFA them.

if he had given up 10 runs over his last two starts?  I think people are overvaluing him based on his stats in the last week.

That said, he'll go to the NL and probably pitch very well and everyone will think it was another terrible Beane move.  I guess this means we won't be trading Blanton in the offseason.

Good riddance to the guy and the money he was owed next year.  Bye bye ELo

Yes Loaiza has $8 mil on his contract, but thats actually pretty cheap considering the money that teams are throwing at decent, mid-rotation starting pitchers these days.

Can it be that they just claimed him and agree to work outcompensation later?

BUT...they should have gotten something for him!  He's a starting pitcher who will give you a decent outing most times out and is coming on the cheap for today's market.  And you're telling me you couldn't swing even one prospect from the Dodgers for him?

I wonder where all this "money" we're "saving" is going to go.  Do the new San Jose Earthquakes plan to make a run at Beckham or something?

... and I'm a a free-agent-aholic.

Hi, Billy.

Last night, I hit bottom.

Congratulations, Billy.

My team lost its fifth game in a row, I realized we might finish under .500, and ... < sob > I broke the last chair in the Coliseum.

So, this morning, I woke up, and I went through the roster, and started pouring every bad, expensive free-agent signing and extension down the drain.

the A's are getting NOTHING in return?????

i don't understand!!!

Add me to the list of those who find this move ... puzzling.

Many didn't like this signing in the first place: the A's paid close to market value for an inconsistent averagish pitcher. And in a sense the critics have been right, as the A's have so far gotten only a month or two of effective pitching for their expensive investment.

But since then the price for averagish pitchers has only gone up farther:  Adam frickin' Eaton got more than Loaiza, coming off a year in which he was injured and had an ERA of more than 5. Meche and Lilly got deals for 40% more than Loaiza (and with very risky 5-year commitments). And the Pirates were willing to give up two players for the last year of Matt Morris' contract (more expensive than Loaiza's, and Morris, though healthier, has not been as good as Loaiza since they both signed two years ago).

In these circumstances, one year of Loaiza at $7 Million - even given his injuries and inconsistency - is a low-risk bargain that many GMs should be willing to assume. Giving that away for nothing, especially at a time when Loaiza was finally pitching well, just makes no sense.

We just let him go? Come on, Billy, you're better than this.

Billy had to save money because his subprime adjustable rate mortgage just reset and his payments doubled.  

Assuming a modest increase in payroll ... the team is currently a bit more than $20m under payroll for 2008 with all of the starting positions covered (though a couple of them may not really be covered adequately ...)

With Kotsay coming off the books, we can afford that sum for at least 2-3 years ... which will bring us to the presumed doorstep of the new stadium.

Why not A-Rod?

Some might think giving away Esteban Loaiza for nothing is a bad move, but he's an overpaid average starting pitcher that can't seem to stay healthy or sober while driving. (this move is a no brainer)

We have 4 starting pitchers who project to be better and cheaper than him next year. (Haren, Blanton, DiNardo, and Gaudin)

I'm surprised actually that we were able to give him away without having to pay some of his salary.

That Loaiza was pretty pissed at the A's Brass for making him pitch in 3 or 4 rehab assingments after he said he was ready to come back.  Perhaps there was some drama taking place behind closed doors that we'll never know about..

how much you worship Billy Beane.  We had a #4 or #5 ML starter for next year at a reasonable rate.  Why on earth would you get nothing in return when other teams are struggling to find #2 and #3 starters?

Yesterday someone alluded to the fact that this might be in response to Loiaza speaking out about not returning from the DL sooner.  I thought that was crazy but now that is the only logical explanation as to why the A's would be this stupid.  

Subtract Kendall amd ELo, add Bowen and Colby, and you come up with a pretty robust eight figure sum which is essentially pure profit for Wolffish.  A profit which was already above $15 million for this year.

Not yet Loria with better PR, but damn, they're sure making cynicism feel like insight at the moment.  (and the cherubic smile and tousled hair don't hurt...dontcha just wanna take him home and give him puppy treats?)

would you sign 36-year-old Loaiza to a one-year $7MM deal?  He of the 4.60 career ERA?  He who only had one monthly ERA under 4.90 last year?  He who missed 8 starts in 2006 and 25 starts in 2007?

So, if you think getting rid of Loaiza for nothing was a bad move, you have to believe that signing an old, bad, often-injured pitcher to a big $$$ contract to serve as the team's #4 or 5 starter during a rebuilding year while you have cheap, at-least-as-effective replacements in the minors, is a smart move.

a nice mid-rotation starter.  But is he still?  It took him several rehab starts to get to the velocity he is at now.  I have not seen most of the two games he pitched, but in what I did see he seemed to be working in the high-80's.  Also, although he didn't give up many runs, he struck out exactly FIVE batters in 14 innings.  This is not 2nd half 2006 Loaiza we're talking about.  Now, he could regain velocity either this year or next, but that's a big risk to take when you can get rid of him and his salary right now.  We already have an immovable contract in 08 of 7-8 million with Kotsay, I don't think we want another one.  If he regains velocity, the move will look bad.  If he doesn't, it will look good.  But why risk it?  We have Haren, Harden, Blanton, Gaudin, Braden, Meyer, and Dinardo next year.  And don't forget, we will probably finish in the bottom 15 in the standings, which means we can sign a Type A free agent hitter with all this money being saved and not lose our draft pick.  

I think everyone's pretty much covered it, but for posterity's sake. To shame, Billy. To shame.

I've figured it out.

Sabean throws away a uselss, more expensive starter and manages to get a useful part, while Beane throws away a  less useless, less expensive starter for nothing.

They've switched! We've been bamboozled! It's a Sabeane monster!

that I don't get.

Loiaza claimed off waivers and he is automatically traded?

Stewart claimed off waivers by the Cubs, and nothing happens.

So management decides at that time that they will trade or keep the player once he gets claimed? Did I just answer my own question?

He was hurt more often then not. I'd rather have 10 Guadin's or Blantons to 100 Loiazas. Just not reliable. I'm sure a player to be named will come our way later, or there's another deal we don't know about in the works. Just sit tight before you pass judgment. Haven't you all learned this from being an A's fan?

Could be that he didn't want to slot Loaiza into the rotation in any case because he thinks DiNardo/Meyer will be as good or better, and they're optionless next year.

It's difficult to translate the value of that 7 million onto the field. The FA class doesn't look too hot. It's hard to believe we could get nothing in return, but maybe the discussion went bad prospect/A's pay some of the salary or what actually happened.

This move is surprising and A's fans aren't idiots, we can put together enough skepticism around what might be good and what might be bad about this move (see nearly 200 comments already).  What I'd really like to hear is "Ok, we released two players this year and got nothing in return, but we have did that because of []".  And please let "[]" be something more than "It was better for us".  

Seriously, something real in response from the organization would be great.  This whole "we are poor and we needed to save the money" stuff doesn't cover it.  We're smart enough to know that Loaiza's contract is pretty much league-average for what he provides, and it's not "cheap" compared to league-minimum guys.  But, why the hell not get anything in return?!?  I hate sitting here wondering wtf and losing faith in our team's management.  I just want that feeling to go away and a decent statement would help a lot.  Sigh.

This is all setting up for the signing of A-Rod, which I've been saying for months.  

1. 8 million for Loiaza next year is relatively cheap ... it wouldn't have "broken the bank" by any means ...

2. He pitched his ass off the last two starts ... probably the A's best starter right now.

3. Dumping salary means nothing if you aren't committed to making the team better ... not one move Beane has made this year has made the team better -- not one.

OK, that was interesting.

So that makes 6 players that were pencilled into the 2007 Opening Day roster that have now been cut or given away. In return the A's have eaten all but a couple million in salary and received two bullpen arms in Brown and Blevins.

I'll be honest, I'd expect this from KC or Pittsburgh, not Oakland.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/s...

"Certainly Esteban was making some money next year," A's assistant general manager David Forst said. "But it wasn't as much about salary as about giving guys an opportunity."

Less than one year ago, he was our #2 Starter in the ALDS & ALCS.... and now he's rendered useless?  

I need an explanation from Billy Beane on this one.  Are we getting Andre Ethier back?  

But this season has cooled my sense of entitlement as a fan with the way the franchise is won.  Not to mention the fact that Billy has made head-scratching moves before, only for the reasoning behind them to become clear much further down the road.

I mean, it's Esteban Loaiza.  Who cares?  I'd rather see Dallas Braden struggle with his command and learn from it than watch ELo do the same and drink to forget it.  

Catty.

The Bobby Kielty, I won't bad mouth anyone, or the Milton Bradley and JoKe, this organization is Bush League and racist/cheap road

Loaiza couldn't be given away before he came back from injury. Now that he's had two decent starts, someone was willing to take a chance on his LAIMness. Seems like nothing more than a salary dump from the A's, who most likely feel that his price tag for next year is too high for what he brings to the table. They free up his money for another free agent and give relatively unknown quantities (Meyer, Braden, DiNardo) the chance to show what they're really worth.

My first reaction was to lament the lack of value in return, but only because I had tricked myself into thinking that the A's could get a top prospect for him.  Now that I remember the real Loaiza, it makes a lot more sense.

Bill Bavasi has been a better GM this year.  Get a prospect--any fucking B-grade prospect--for a starting pitcher on the open market.  Don't just give him away for nothing.

I am officially tired of Beane's maniacal ego and insistence on doing unconventional things in an overly affected effort to look smart.  Go away, Billy.