a fan base that WANTS its team to lose 120 games.

Whether Beane trades Street and/or Blanton for more prospects, it still makes sense to put out a competitive team in 2008. None of the new guys are ready and one-year acquisitions will not keep them from advancing when they are ready.

This is an entertainment venue. While it's all well and good to shoot for playoff contention and a World Series every year, it's also important to put an entertaining team on the field, one which has a shot --- even if only a shot --- at winning every game. I have no interest in going to 30 or so games a year, paying a lot of bucks, to see a crappy, boring, sucky team every time out. I did that in the mid '90s, and did it in the late '70s too.

Yes, I know the 2008 A's will most likely not be a good team, but that doesn't mean the team should offer every contender a free winning streak.

So yeah, sign Bonds. Beane should use some bucks saved from Piazza and Stewart and Swish and get a couple of one year deals with folks who can help the team in 2008.

Lets say we get Bonds for a low number like $10 million/year for two years. (I don't think he would sign for that amount). What is the upgrade between a 43 year old Bonds vs Jack Cust?
Who has the edge in various categories:
Health: Cust
Potential to do improve their performance over the next few years: Cust
Attitude: Cust
Defense: Cust (talk about on the horns of a dilemna)
Post Steroid Power: pick em
OBP: Bonds
Average: Bonds

I think given a full season that Cust could have an OBP of around .400 and a SLG of around .500, with no hassles.
Bonds could beat that, but then he could get hurt and only play 70 to 120 games, too, (with Cust as the backup).
If we sign Bonds, we put Cust in the outfield, which slows down the long term outfielder evaluation process.
Bonds is an asshole, and could have a negative effect on the rookies.

Finally, and I think most importantly, the difference between reasonable contracts for Blanton and Ellis (Blanton for four years, Ellis for three years) is probably covered by what we would have to pay for Bonds, I'd rather use the money to keep those two guys longer term, don't forget if we sign them to good, long term contracts we add value in case of a future trade.

I disagree. Who is going into the outfield to be evaluated in 2008? Denorfia? He'll get his at bats. Sweeney and Gonzalez should both start the season in AAA, the former to get his power stroke, the latter for seasoning.

My guess is that if the A's don't sign Bonds and assuming Kotsay doesn't return to his glory years, you'll see Cust in the outfield, and a rotation of players as DH.

So in essence Bonds will probably be taking DH time away from Murphy and Hannahan, two guys who don't really figure into anyone's future.

As for spending money on Ellis and Blanton long-term, that's future money, not what's currently in the budget. The team isn't about to save money this year so they can spend it next year or the year after.