We help you now, you help us later...

if the Dodgers won't give up anything good now, I've little doubt that the A's can get something good in the offseason, especially given what the free agent class looks like.

Letting Loaiza leave for no return is nothing like Finley's attempt to sell Blue, Fingers and Rudi for cash...just to cite one obvious example of Finley skinflintery.

Oh wait.

1. Hunter - would fit very nicely into the organization, but will probably get a better deal somewhere else

2. Jones - see #1

3. Fukudome - just think of the slams we can come up with when he screws up

4. Linebrink - coming off rough season, maybe we can get him cheap to sure up the 7th inning

off the top of my head would be something like Bonds for $10 million + Rowand/Fukudome for $9-13 million. I think Meyer or Braden can probably put up similar numbers to Loaiza, but it would be nice to have gotten something in return - even a low level relief prospect.

I say we should sign that Ellis guy.

would actually make sense.

Just socks and underwear.  Now go eat your mush!

Yes, signing A-Rod before jettisoning other players would limit Beane's negotiating position (other teams would then know that he had to get rid of one or all of those players), but if the objective is mainly just to dump salary -- well, they could ultimately just be DFA'ed. Or traded for peanuts.

I also don't think you'd have to get rid of all three -- Crosby is relatively affordable and plays excellent defense (he could stay at SS while A-Rod sticks with 3B; heck, Crosby could even be converted to 3B), and Kotsay is coming off the books after '08 (heck, he could conceivably retire this offseason if his back is bad enough).

Really, Chavvy is the only one who would have to go in an A-Rod scenario.

is that we have the money now, without dumping any of those guys. Given the substantial upgrade from A-Rod, I'd be comfortable going into 2008 with Denorfia, Snelling and Kotsay competing for PAs in center and I doubt we're ready to give up on Crosby yet, so it wouldn't leave us with any real (unavoidable) holes elsewhere.

Our rotation should be good to very good, our bullpen could be anywhere from solid to spectacular, depending on health and Garcia/Brown's ability to throw strikes.

With the exception of CF and SS, our team is decent in every position, so there aren't really any holes to fill.

We have the money and the only other big money free agent I'd have an interest in would be Rowand but he wouldn't have anywhere near the impact that A-Rod would. I can't think of any better way to spend that money. (except, perhaps, if we could get Beltran from the Mets)

in 3 years. Assuming, of course, he opts out of his contract this year.

It also makes baseball sense and works financially over the next couple of years. You only need to get into the marketing angle for justification in the out years.

NO way No way No way No way... There is NO FUCKING WAY that A rod is going to play for the Athletics next year, or ever for that matter. That shit just does not happen with his agent.... A rod is going somewhere very high profile for a ton of cash. My best guess would be as much as I hate to say it, I think he will be an Angel by the start of the 2008 season....

are poison...Haha, love that rationale.

but I'll take his "pathetic" paycheck over mine any day........

He's about to win his 2nd MVP in 3 years and he's single-handedly slugged his mediocre team into playoff contention.  The Yanks would have been DOA in April/May if it hadn't been for this guy.  Remember when Giambi was a stud??  Remember Big Frank and Big Mac??  Isn't it great to have a bigboy in the middle of the lineup?  Man I wish we could somehow sign this guy.

you have to be selected to the national baseball team for the netherlands.

Eric Chavez, although he has a Hispanic name and heritage, comes from a family which is very assimilated -- he doesn't speak Spanish at all, etc. Years ago some reporter called Chavez "not very Mexican", which is basically a factual statement. That became a running joke in AN, and we often refer to Chavvy as being "not Mexican enough" in various humorous contexts. XBox's comment that Loaiza is "too Mexican" was just a reference to that, not meant as any sort of ethnic slur.

Your screen name is unfamiliar to me, so I'm guessing you're new around here. There's a lot of running jokes that don't really make sense if you're not in the loop.  I guess this is one of them.

I'm bothering to explain all this only because I can see how you might think it was an offensive remark, and I'm trying to assure you that it really wasn't.

He's probably not a great guy, but that's going to far to say that he had a sex change.

Rich Harden, Brad Halsey, James Simmons, whatever.  

The hidden genius I think behind the move is that the money that was supposed to be used for Loaiza next year can be used for other things, like a bat that can hit ML pitching, or extended contracts to our current players for the future.

Basically gives the A's more flexibility, instead of spending 10% of your payroll on an aging average injury riddled starting pitcher.  But that's just my opinion...

To be honest, I was hoping to see Loaiza on the freeway so I could race him, but I guess he won't be around too much anymore.

get rid of Loaiza's contract as it means more money for offense? And as for the pitchers you mentioned (all of whom would earn about 1/15 what Loaiza is owed), I'm willing to bet either Braden or Meyer is capable of besting Loaiza's career 4.6 ERA and .284 BAA next year. And if they don't, I seriously doubt it will be the difference between the A's contending and not contending.

making this move today and I have already said that I wasn't necessarily against it in the off-season.  Why did we make the move now and how did it benefit our team?  I guess that question needs to be answered as much as why 25 teams passed on him.  

Are all of the teams that passed on Jack Cust suddenly right for doing so?

determine his market value.  I'm afraid that most people around here just automatically agree with whatever BB does even when it doesn't make sense.  It's kind of scary.

the team if that is the case?  He never pitches.

There's surely no point in just spending willy-nilly on the meh crop of free agents.

And they've already passed up the chance to break slot on draft bonuses.

And while a few guys are up for arby raises and extensions, (a) those would likely have happened anyway, and (b) there are a few guys (Scutaro for sure; Ellis, debatably) who probably aren't worth their due raises.

So -- where would this good-faith '07-08 offseason spending happen?

Otherwise fans might misguidedly show up at the Coliseum

...or maybe it was beneficial to your position this time!

It's not a sunk cost.  Sunk costs are costs that are already paid, whereas Loaiza's 2008 salary was going to be paid in the future.  My whole point was to argue that people weren't taking into account the opportunity cost of NOT trading Loaiza.  

As far as the contention that we could have gotten something, who knows.  But, two points:

1. When do you think Loaiza would have more value a)now - to a team in the middle of pennant race that needs starting pitching now and is willing to take a risk in hopes that his first two starts represent his "true value" or b) the offseason - when there is less pressure to "win now" and take risks in the short-term?

2. Given that he's 35, coming off neck and knee surgies, and generally been a not great pitcher when healthy, it's much more likely that he would have pitched poorly the rest of the year than he has to date.  So, by not trading him now for nothing, you're betting that he'll pitch well the rest of the way, so that you can get something.  That bet could go the wrong way and you're stuck with him.      

As far as who could replace him?  I'm sure that some combination of warm bodies could replicate his 4.50-5.00 ERA in the 5th spot.  By mid-season, it will probably be Simmons.

but what about just using one of the plethora of AAAA arms we have in his place and saving the cash?  I get that you're saying he's cheap relative to the insane prices that arms went for last offseason, I would just think that we could duplicate or exceed his expected performance for less money.

Things could get ugly.

It's a fair point. My only point is that if Brian Sabean can get something in return for Matt Morris, I'd expect Billy Beane to be able to get something for Esteban Loaiza.

EVERY DAY! So reliable! I'm telling you, good riddance to bad rubbish!

but trading pretty much anyone on our team not named Haren or Blanton for LaRoche would be a bit more than favorable.  

I think a lot of people will be disappointed when there isn't a second deal.  But, then again, people probably won't notice and it will just fade into memory.  

I don't think Billy ever cared about appearances.  Maybe he just doesn't care period

It's not like it jeopardized the return on his investment.