The Big Picture
Well, after a loss like this, it's tempting to look for easily identified, "personal" narratives: Giambi once again returning to torment the A's, A-Rod and his continued hot streak (or, alternately, Huston Street and his continued dominance of A-Rod), Crosby's continued shaky D, the Geren Blowing Out His 'Pen Before May Watch, the Shannon Stewart Offensive Death Watch, the Jason Kendall Offensive Coma Watch, the Joe Torre Finally Using Mo Rivera on the Road in a Tie Game Watch ...
But I think this loss fits into a larger pattern, more significant and telling: that the A's offense simply isn't very good, and will continue to not be very good, barring the addition of 2 or more above-average bats.
The starting pitching, 'pen, and defense are all relatively deep (even with the injuries) and reliable. And those 3 factors alone will ensure that the A's remain competitive in most games.
But the offense that can't deliver a knockout blow to Darrell Rasner and Brian Cashman's motley crew of replacement-level relievers is an offense that won't boost the team appreciably above .500.
Yes, to be sure, 12 games is awfully early in the season to be writing the epitaph for the A's offense. It's also a little early for an oaktoonish dash for the liferafts.
But my preseason prediction that the A's would be outperformed offensively by the Giants is looking like a pretty safe bet so far.
0 recs |
115 comments
Comments
I agree
the A's couldnt hit water on a boat. Shannon Stewart really needs to go he sucks he is taking the spot of someone else that is perfectly capable of going 0 for 5 with 2 GIDP'S.
by 3Chavy3 on Apr 14, 2007 11:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Is it time to look at Buck as lead-off man?
Granted, he struck out a lot in his first few games, but he managed two walks tonight, he can steal, he's showing some patience, and when he hits them, they stay hit.
We threw Street in as closer early on - should we do the same with Buck in the #1 spot?
by Ozzz on Apr 14, 2007 11:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
normally I'd say no
but frankly, I can't think of a better alternative...
by OaklandSi on Apr 14, 2007 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
by 3Chavy3 on Apr 14, 2007 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's so funny
I was going to post a diary about this last night but I was pretty frustrated once the game ended, I just went to bed. Buck is perfect for leadoff. He has a very good eye and isn't really one to hit a home run. I know there is a school of thought to protect a rookie and not ask too much of them, but he seems ready for it.
The only problem is that then you're dealing with death at the bottom of the lineup.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Apr 15, 2007 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why not....do it! what the heck
jeez-lu-eeeze, having the yanks tied for that long with hittable relievers tossing against us and we come up zip.
by ak_A on Apr 15, 2007 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone know what time...
Duke is going to hooters tomorrow?
by iloveoakland on Apr 14, 2007 11:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
One hour after
the end of the game, I think ... which means a 4-hour game with the Yankees ;)
by streetfan on Apr 14, 2007 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am so tired
of looking at the Yankees! That's 24 innings of Jeter and Cano :(
Can we please make it a short game (and a win!) tomorrow?
Time for a new team... let's beat the Angels!
by streetfan on Apr 14, 2007 11:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"safe bet"
must mean something different than it did the last time I looked it up.
by mikeA on Apr 14, 2007 11:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
it must mean
"NOT a very safe bet at all".
but hey, they a's offense may be missing DJ, kotsay and bradley, but the giants have been without mike sweeney almost the entire month, leaving them with only seven lousy corner infielders on the roster.
by xbhaskarx on Apr 15, 2007 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
not to mention abt players in decline ..
DJ, Kotsay and Bradley - along with Chavez, Kielty, Swisher, Crosby, Ellis, Stewart, Kendall, Scutaro etc - are not at the age most would consider to be where players are in decline. Now, I know that A's fans here on AN have issues with ALL of the above players {esp Crosby} but I'm just saying, statistically speaking, the Giants players are older and more toward the declining years statistically. One expects our players to eventually hit at their career levels when healthy, over the course of a long season. Small sample size and all - stats don't always bear out - but I think we have more hope on our side due to the age factor alone. :)
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are we so bad that we need to use the Giants as
the benchmark whether our offense/team is good or not?! Sad...
And as far as the A's players mentioned above, Kotsay and Crosby are definately in decline, not to age but to bad backs (which never get better). And Bradley will never reach his enormous potential due to the inability to play through minor nagging injuries which most MLBers can withstand without taking every other day off.
by Bacon on Apr 15, 2007 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i was quoting a guy from the SF Chronicle
.. {can't remember his name} .. he was on the Marty Lurie show Wednesday .. he said he felt confident the A's would eventually start hitting, but not so confident with the Giants because of their age .. and yes our offense looks anemic right now but I didn't start the discussion about comparing us with the Giants, {i think} monkeyball did and the others here picked up on it.
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, the only people predicting the Giants to do
well are the Giant fans. Everybody else (ESPN, SI, Sporting News, Fox Sports, etc.), is predicting them to finish at or near the bottom of the NL West.
by Bacon on Apr 15, 2007 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, the giants are terrible
my wife is a loyal giants fan and I try not to hurt her feelings but they are a very bad team IMHO .. even bad teams can beat you so let's not take them lightly in interleague, heh
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It occurs to me...
We might need to include oaktoon and all derivatives there of into the ANcillary Terms. A refference like monkeyball's might confuse the newer members.
Yes, oaktoon's spirit lives on. But only because Blez was too cheap to perform a proper exorcism!
by grover on Apr 14, 2007 11:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I am not usually superstitious
but Bobby Crosby seems like a JinX! It really bothers me to see him bauble balls. He is out there for his defense. What happened to his sure glove?
by IM4Oakgal on Apr 15, 2007 12:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
and when they zoomed in on his
face after each gaff.....you could see the pressure.
by ak_A on Apr 15, 2007 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was my pressure,
comma blood, circa rising.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 9:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
27 hours, 24 innings
I wouldn't jump off the boat and look for a life raft just yet.
Yes, the A's went 12 scoreless innings against the Skanks after being up 3-0, but splitting the first two games isn't the end of the world. It's great to see competitive baseball in front of sellout crowds two nights in a row.
I reveled in Damon's O-fer today, and Giambi's struggles until Inning 13 came around. Abreu and Jeter have been quiet on both nights, and the 4 Yankee errors were a kick.
But the A's offense has a major hole in the 7-8-9-1 area. Kendall and Crosby and Stewart stink. That's hard to work around. It's time to fit Crosby for a Rivercat uniform and call up Furmaniak.
Blanton went 110 or so pitches, and was unfortunately tagged for 3 runs, leaving with the game tied, but he battled. The A's relief did well also, until Lenny DiNardo gave up the Giambi BALCO bomb. What can you do?
And the Kid can play. Everybody loves Buck. It's just too bad he pulled a Melhuse and ended the game with the bat on his shoulder. Couldn't play the hero two nights in a row.
Back to it in about 13 hours. Go A's!
by louismg on Apr 15, 2007 12:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
C'mon... Furmaniak???
He's got worse contact issues than Crosby and he's not even the starting SS for the River Cats. Donnie Murphy's holding down that job.
by grover on Apr 15, 2007 12:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anybody...
You can try too. Furmaniak... Murphy... ??? I'll suit up!
by louismg on Apr 15, 2007 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I never thought I'd say it but...
I wish Kotsay and DJ were here to help these bums...
by OaktownRajah on Apr 15, 2007 12:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hard to disagree
Part of me just wants to look ahead. I didn't have high expectations for this year anyway. So here's looking a bit ahead.
The A's desperately need some guys to develop and they absolutely need to go out and get a big bat--and yes that means spending. There's just no other way around it. A replacement needs to come in for Kendall, and an outfield spot, and for another DH/OF. Honestly, hope for the A's likely lies in Buck, Barton, and Suzuki being above average, plus one slugger (not a one year DH-rental) being brought in. We don't have that this year, so this year is going to be about hoping we can milk something out of Kendall/Stewart/Johnson/Crosby/Buck/Kielty. So far it hasn't been too promising.
That said, the development of the pitching is a true positive. Haren and Blanton and Gaudin have all been better than I thought they'd be. If they are all at some level above average for the future, and you add Harden (assumed healthy), well, that's a terrifically solid young rotation.
But yes, the writing is once again on the wall for the A's--just like two years ago when we all watched in agony as Scott Hatteberg took so many meaningful at bats: We have to spend money and bring in somebody who can hit the fucking ball.
by RLangford on Apr 15, 2007 12:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
yes the offense blows
Wonderful seats tonight (113/22) but not such a wonderful result. I hope we don't need 15 innings to get them tomorrow and Richie can saw off the bats in their hands with some Canadian fire. I'll be in the RF bleachers, come say HI!
by emperor nobody on Apr 15, 2007 12:27 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Offensive Rankings
Firstly, when I checked yesterday the A's led the AL in team ERA so the A's don't need a Yankee type offense with their pitching.
Secondly they were eighth in batting average. So if they are middle of the pack in BA why is the offense so anemic?
It's power, the A's rank second to last in slugging percentage and that's a huge problem. Billy Beane calls power the "great equalizer" and there is a reason for it. On a VERY good team with a team BA of .300 on average only 1 person will get on base per inning. Now lets say you only hit singles, the chances of getting 4 singles and knocking in a run is about .0081%, or if you have good situational hitting only only need 3 singles .027%. Now if the hits are doubles, it would only take 2 hits and have a .09% chance of happening. A home run would have a 100% chance of scoring a run.
Now the odds I used are a bit oversimplified, but they show my point. The more power in the hit, the more likely it is you'll score on less hits. This is why the A's aren't scoring and leaving so many people on base--the A's are hitting for so little power that it's EXTREMELY unlikely they they will get enough hits to get someone home on a regular basis.
Will, this continue? Probably not. Two-thirds of the team is slumping and those that aren't are not hitting for power. Eventually Piazza, Chavez, Bradley, Swisher and hopefully Buck will start hitting for power on a regular basis. Kendall will end the year hitting near his career average of .300 and Crosby will come around in a few weeks once his "spring training" period is over. The A's will be fine, but for now the lack of power is hurting them.
by Threepwood XX on Apr 15, 2007 12:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
check your math...
Probability 4 consecutive singles:
.3^4 = .81%, not .0081%. (you need to account for the x100 of the %)
More complicated, you don't have to get consecutive hits, since there are 3 outs to play with in in the inning. It could be H-O-H-O-H-H, or some other combo. (the actual probabilities are in some binomial equation that I am too lazy to work out.)
But even given singles only offense (not even counting walks, sac flies, moving more than one base) the odds are not as grim as you estimate.
by MobiusKlein on Apr 15, 2007 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stats
Your also right that getting three hits in an inning isn't as bleak as .81%, but I was illustrating a point that with power it becomes more likely that you will score. I didn't feel there was a need to calculate anything too complicated.
by Threepwood XX on Apr 15, 2007 1:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have to get math right
I'm doing my taxes. AT 2 KCUFing AM.
by MobiusKlein on Apr 15, 2007 2:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Update
Thanks to tonights game, the A's are now second to last in baseball in batting average and LAST in baseball in slugging percentage.
Ugg.
by Threepwood XX on Apr 15, 2007 2:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But!
Are they still leading in hitting into double plays?
by grover on Apr 15, 2007 8:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Luckily, no
thanks to Kendall popping up that bunt last night instead of Kendalling.
by mikeA on Apr 15, 2007 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The law of averages
typically will put a team who lost the previous night as the winner the next but, time to rant: the bullpen is tired, Stewart looks lost, Crosby needs a defensive mentor, Scutaro has lost his spark, and one more thing our offense sucks because we don't have an offensive spark like Payton or Thomas, there I said it.
by doublehustle22 on Apr 15, 2007 1:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Piazza
by Threepwood XX on Apr 15, 2007 1:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope Kendall has a "typical"
offensive year, although -- given his age and how much he has caught -- further offensive decline wouldn't be a surprise.
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in earlier years Scutaro
needed regular playing time to show that "spark" (although he hit some pitches on the screws last night, just hit them at someone).
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
was this in texas?
just one of those games... 4 errors by the yankees and a's can't score in 12 innings... giambi homers?
hey geren! piazza's been in the nl his whole career, he knows how to bunt!
never seen a game with so many strikes called balls.
by rickmonday on Apr 15, 2007 1:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
in Spring training Geren was quoted
as saying that Piazza was the best bunter on the team, but that he wasn't looking for his cleanup hitter to do much bunting.
In any event, all the players should practice it, and it should be considered in strategic situations -- and if the player at bat has proven to be able to bunt.
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
trade for offense
jonny gomes, lastings milledge, matt murton, wily mo pena, marcus thames, kevin mench... plenty of slugging outfielders warming benches out there
by johnjahafanclub on Apr 15, 2007 1:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Trade what?
Even if we got a power hitting outfielder, where would he play once Kotsay gets back? Kotsay and Bradley will spend regular time in the outfield and Buck is currently leading all regulars on the team in slugging percentage.
If we traded for a power outfielder we would send him to AAA until someone got injured or we trade Kotsay/loose Bradley during the off-season.
by Threepwood XX on Apr 15, 2007 1:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Get real
Gomes hasn't hit in a year.
The Mets still want Haren, maybe Harden, for Milledge.
The Cubs want to trade Jones so they can play Murton MORE, they aren't likely to let him go cheaply.
Wily Mo had a nice little partial season last year but for his career he's got a 260/314/478 line to go with 380 K in 1110 AB. That's not the kind of consistent hitting the A's need right now.
Marcus Thames might make a nice platoon option but the A's need a whole lot more than that. Detroit is already worried about about its power situation (they have Sean Casey at 1B after all) so they're probably going to price Thames as if he's a full time player.
Mench crushes LHP and that's about it. Isn't that why we're paying Kielty $2.1 million?
by grover on Apr 15, 2007 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jonny Gomes saves the drowning babies
that Shannon Stewart drops in wells.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
*drops
Don't you mean he is standing in front of the well and attempts to throw the babies to their mothers, but the babies don't travel as far as he had anticipated?
by mikeA on Apr 15, 2007 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, I forgot to mention
that Stewart, being more than 2 feet away from the well, can't possibly throw the baby himself and so he tosses it to Crosby.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
to Crosby...
who shatters on impact.
by grover on Apr 15, 2007 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The difference between this year and other years
As you all well know, the A's usually start off poorly. It seems that year in and year out, the A's are supposed to do well, and yet, through at least the first two months of the season, they have a losing record, and just do not seem to have the talent of a ballclub that is going to win its division. This has happened in Oakland basically every year since 2000.
But I feel there is a difference this year. Now, to start things off, I have been a hardcore A's fan since I was 6 years old, in 1988. Every day that year I would wake up and check out the sports page in the Chronicle and the Tribune and see how the A's had done the day before. In some ways I was a bigger fan than my father, who had introduced me to the A's. Growing up in Oakland at that time, it was very easy to become a huge A's fan, as there was no football in town, so the A's were the biggest sports team in the East Bay easily. They got the most coverage. And winning 100 games per year was the icing on the cake: not only were they the most popular team in town, they were one of the top 5 teams in any sport. It was very easy to become an A's fan in the late '80s. However, unlike most people who did become a fan during that period, I STAYED an A's fan after they stopped going to the post-season every year. They sucked in 1993, and yet I saw A's games in Boston and New York in 1994, and I attended the last 5 games of the strike-shortened 1994 season at the Coliseum. In fact I attended 20 or more games at the Coliseum every year from 1996 to 2000, no matter how many games the A's won in those years. I was a fan of the OAKLAND ATHLETICS. I wanted the A's to win more than anything, and thus I was willing to put up with horrible A's teams for years, just because I wanted the A's to win. If they were nowhere near the pennant race, I would scour the League Leader stat categories for Oakland players, just so I would have SOMETHING to root for. If the A's weren't going to win even 75 games in a season, at least I could root for Matt Stairs to hit .315.
Now then, all that said, let's try to grasp my reasoning for sharing all that with you. In my 19 years as a hardcore fan, I have never seen an A's offense as pitiful as this. Now, to be fair to the 2007 A's, I have witnessed two (possible) steroids era's in Oakland, the first with Canseco and (probably) McGwire, and the second with, probably, Giambi (and possibly Tejada, if not others). Obviously, it's not fair to judge one offense who (apparantly) doesn't take performance enhancements angainst another who (apparantly) did take performance enhancements; however, that is why I stated that I have seen 19 years of A's offenses. No matter what anyone on the team was taking at whatever time, it's been at least 20 years since the A's offense has been so lackluster.
Now, you can talk about small sample size all you want. I know it's only been two weeks. I know two weeks over the course of an entire baseball season mean extremely little. The only difference, for myself, is: THIS TEAM REALLY SEEMS LIKE IT HAS NO REAL ABILITY TO SCORE RUNS! With every other A's team, even the ones who got off to really slow starts, at least you could see the ABILITY or the CHANCE that they could put it together within the next month or two. With this team, the only way I could see them really picking it up is via Divine Intervention. They have a few quality players, but in general, this team is not hitting right now because it CAN'T FUCKING HIT. They are weak and can barely hit home runs.
Now I'm not saying I don't trust Billy Beane anymore. I DO trust Billy Beane. But I also have come to understand his transactions over time, as well as his constructions of ballclubs for a given year. What I took from his very light offseason was: we can't afford shit, here is my best attempt to stick my finger in the dike. The new Players' Agreement (or whatever it was) helped the players and not the owners, as is always the case. I really, truly believe Beane did the best he could, but I believe he was dealt a 7-2 offsuit this year, and we will see the consequences over the course of 162 games. The pitching is great but the offense is CRAP, so we'll be lucky to get more than a few games over .500.
This is my belief, but I hope I am proved wrong. I also think Beane's old well of mid-season mega-help has dried up, thanks to opposing teams' GMs wising up, so I can't really envision an A's team that gets much better than this in 2007. I think the A's will end up at about 84-78 this season.
But good lord what I would give to be proven wrong (in a great way) this season.
Also, I am drunk right now, and am hoping this all makes sense to all who read it.
by Philip Christy on Apr 15, 2007 1:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow, a diary within a diary.
Cool.
by luvsthecurveball on Apr 15, 2007 2:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least we not outscored 18-1 in last two games!
You think our offense is bad, look at the Angels the last two games in Boston! Keep your chin up! :)
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 7:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, considering the two no name pitchers we
faced (at home nonetheless), I'd say our offense looks worse than the Angels.
And no I'm not an Angels fan, nor am I a fan of averaging 3 runs a game vs. AAA pitching.
by Bacon on Apr 15, 2007 7:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
they're both very bad right now
.. both the A's and Angels offense look bad .. I was just trying to offer philip some hope! .. we played a comparable "eastern power" {yanks} and didn't get stomped like the angels have the last two games in boston. In fact we are even with the bronx bombers in runs scored the last two games. And it isn't only because of our pitching, the Angels are supposed to have better pitching than us according to all the media pundits who pick them to win the division. You know, Kevin Kennedy et al referring to the Angels as the "class of the west" before yesterdays' game on Fox. :)
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 7:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But we faced pitching (Igawa, Rasnthar) that
has no business starting in the majors, while the Angels faced Schilling and Wakefield. Big difference in quality.
And to your "class of the west" point, that ain't saying much considering the teams that make up the west.
by Bacon on Apr 15, 2007 7:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed the west looks really weak
.. but as the Cardinals showed last year, you can win the weakest division in baseball and still have a chance ..
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 7:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
a lot of crapshooty things need to fall your way
such as facing the Mets with a decimated pitching staff, followed by the Tigers whose young pitching staff had a major defensive meltdown.
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way ..
Rasnthar I agree with you, he was a spot start due to Pavano being hurt, but isn't Igawa supposed to be part of the Yankees' regular rotation? Are you saying the Yankees' rotation is that bad? Didn't they pay a lot of money for Igawa {not as much as Dice-K for boston but still a lot of money}?
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 7:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Igawa is their fifth guy, or when Clemens gets on
board, long relief. As far as baseball salaries go, they didn't pay him much ($4mm/year). So basically, they're number 5/long reliever held our starters to 3 hits over 5+ innings while matching up well versus our number 1 (Haren).
That probably doesn't bode well for this team (the A's) to go deep into the playoffs.
by Bacon on Apr 15, 2007 7:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what kind of logic is that
the yankees paid a lot of money for igawa therefore he must be good?
by xbhaskarx on Apr 15, 2007 7:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No I was just saying that igawa
.. is not a spot starter .. he's part of their regular rotation .. now, that said, I think I'll leave you guys to wallow in your negativity. Honestly why do you bother to be A's fans if you're going to be constantly negative about the team? It gets old ..
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I apologize if stating the truth/obvious is being
too negative and not worthy of being a fan. From here on out, I'll be a "true" fan and only state my fantasy scenerios for the A's and their players.
Thanks for pointing out my inadeduacies.
by Bacon on Apr 15, 2007 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is no problem with realism or objectivity
But it isn't against the law to try to say something hopeful and positive? That is what a fan like myself tries to do, to offer encouragement - only to be constantly shot down by your negativity and sarcasm. And yes it does get old. If that offends, so be it.
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frankly, I find relentless positivity
in the face of all reasonable evidence to get old at least as fast. Fortunately, we're not suffering from an oversupply of good news. ;)
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Apr 15, 2007 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not guilty of relentless positivity
I admit the A's offense sucks right now. What do you guys want to do, just give up? Toronto, Boston, NY, plenty other teams showing better offense right now if you want to root for them. Our lineup is what it is. I will let you sourpusses alone now; and yes it does get old.
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We just want changes, Randy. We just want
changes.....
by Bacon on Apr 15, 2007 8:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
me too
.. it just seems the A's go through this year after year .. if we want a first half team, I guess we root for Detroit, heh - I'm sorry to make personal comment I don't want to do that fellow A's fans.
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
5-7
I'm pretty happy with our record so far...and guess what, we haven't started hitting yet. The bats will come alive in June - Shannon Steward and Crosby will start to play better (after long layoffs).
I'm am super happy about our starting pitching. Haren/Blanton/Harden/Gaudin is awesome.
2007 AL West Champs! Believe It.
by Colorado Fan on Apr 15, 2007 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How to say this?
Back in the winter I wondered whether 2007 might be a different kind of year for the A's. The ballpark situation makes it especially unwise for the team to plan very far ahead, the need for local attendance is even less than other years, and the Angels are developing a frightening amount of young talent. 2007 hasn't been a rebuilding year, exactly, but neither has it been the "kick out the stops, this is our big chance" season that 2006 was.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Apr 15, 2007 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
2006 was {to me} disappointing ...
.. because of all the injuries endured the whole year, including Chavez' unproductive offense .. even in postseason {ellis breaking his thumb, crosby hurt, d'Angelo Jimenez our backup because Perez broke a finger last day of season, etc}
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually, the A's payroll is up quite a bit
and I see no evidence that the A's aren't planning as far ahead in their baseball operations as any other year. Nor has there been a change in the "need for local attendance" (??).
I think the A's minor league system got decimated quite a bit in the past few years, and they are trying to restock (looking ahead like they always do, on pitchers and outfielders) while trying to remain competitive. They're spending a big chunk of change on veterans, if you check out their payroll. They've also rolled the dice on some players with questionable health. The market got really overpriced, with teams paying ridiculous amounts of money for players that aren't really that good. I'm glad that the A's have avoided that mostly, but the depletion of the farm system plus the loss of legitimate stars over the past few years has to have some effect.
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A's 2007 Opening Day payroll:
$73,866,940 (not including the $5.5 million the Pirates are paying towards Kendall.) This is up over $10 million from last year's Opening Day payroll.
A link everyone needs to know.
by grover on Apr 15, 2007 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Payroll not up as much as revenue is
The team continues to operate on a year to year profit.
As to less need for local attendance, that's pretty obvious, isn't it? The healthy fraction of Oakland fans they don't expect to follow them to Fremont are no longer a priority (3rd deck, fewer $2 Weds, family pack now only for field level, etc etc ad nauseum).
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Apr 15, 2007 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the third deck was also tarped off
last season, before the planned move to Fremont was announced.
And I wouldn't assume that the healthy fraction of Oakland A's fans who won't be travelling to the planned Cisco Field are mostly those who used to sit in the third deck.
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
take a look at payroll figures, by the way
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take a look at the revenue figures, by the way
Oh, that's right, you can't, because MLB guards those like the crown jewels. Most agree, though, that revenue was through the roof--witness the offseason FA spending silliness--and that was before the lucrative MLB extortion plan vis Direct TV and Comcast.
A's payroll went up...big deal. Their revenue went up even more. The offseason moves or lack thereof suggest a team keeping as many roster options open for a few years from now as possible, rather than spending the money they have on contention in '07. I'm not even saying that's wrong; just that, given even less of a need to placate Oakland fans than before, it suggests a fiscal plan geared more for '10 than '07.
And you're fooling yourself if you don't think there's a correlation in the owners' minds between small capacity and no BART access and the portion of the current fanbase they don't plan to cater to in Fremont. Or do you think Cisco Field will be full of $2 Wednesdays and family packs? I'm not saying that's good or bad (though I have opinions, obviously). I'm just saying that's the apparent mindset of Wolffish...and why wouldn't it be?
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Apr 15, 2007 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think placating Oakland A's fans
has been the priority of the ownership, well before Fisher/Wolff. I doubt it figures much for many baseball owners.
I don't know what I've ever said that would lead anyone to think I expect the planned Fremont ballpark to have family packs or anything else to make going to the game affordable.
I also would be very surprised to see the team change its practice of depending more on its farm system and exploiting undervalued players, regardless of any move. After all, the Oakland A's are, and have been, very profitable for its owners. So I think fans who expect a huge payroll increase and more signing players to huge contracts because of a move to Fremont are, indeed, fooling themselves.
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
by the way, I'm off to
hop on BART to the coliseum to see today's game.
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I enjoyed reading your thoughts...
but I don't agree. There are several players on the team who have had decent hitting seasons before. It is not out of the question for them to do it again...none are so old that that is an impossibility.
I do think that this team is a less capable than teams of the past. I think that we better get used to that for a few years. I am hoping once they get the new stadium that they decide to start it off with a bang by offering a bigtime team. I have a feeling that's the plan.
by IM4Oakgal on Apr 15, 2007 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cold day, cold bats
Nobody was hitting well today, not even the mighty Yankees. Blame it on the weather.
The solution to 7-8-9-1 problem is real simple: Milton Bradley and Dan Johnson need to get healthy enough to rejoin the lineup and Buck needs to bat leadoff. Then the only weak hitters we need to worry about are Kendall and Ellis, both of whom are capable of batting .300 or close to it.
We've got a bunch of guys hitting well below their career averages right now, and I don't understand why that is. Sure, baseball is a streaky game, but there seem to be an awful lot A's slumping right now.
We're just lucky to have some truly extraordinary pitching and defense, or the cost of all those slumps would be a lot higher.
by BubbaDude on Apr 15, 2007 2:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Two more things
Why not play Melhuse as often as a normal backup catcher plays? He's not that much worse than Kendall defensively, and he's a helluva lot better offensively. They used to say that Kendall is important because he handles the young pitchers so well, but Haren, Blanton, and Loaiza don't need that much coddling. And Kendall could use a little rest himself. Catching 24 innings in two days has to take a toll on a guy.
Crosby isn't worrying me yet because of his lack of spring training time, but in another week or two I do expect him to start hitting or look for work elsewhere.
by BubbaDude on Apr 15, 2007 2:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
melhuse
a better hitter than kendall??? please, not even close. melhuse is a horrible hitter. he had that one year, 04 i think, where he hit like 10 hrs, but he's got a career 241 ba and 296!!! obp. melhuse is not the answer. kendall will end up hitting 280+ with a 370+ obp.
by Backspin on Apr 15, 2007 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Melhuse...
has never played regularly. He is capable IMO of hitting well. He has long ball capabilities too....but he doesn't call a game half as well as Kendall. and Now that Kendall is actually throwing some people out I am Loathe to see Beane play Melhuse in his place.
by IM4Oakgal on Apr 15, 2007 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't think
there's anyway melhuse could ever be half the hitter kendall is. if you look at his numbers he's actually of of the better hitting catchers to play for a long time, maybe ever. obviously he has no power these days, but he did hit 295 with a 367 obp last year. melhuse could get 600 abs a year and he'd never touch either of those numbers.
by Backspin on Apr 15, 2007 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
melhuse is bad defensively
i don't know how well the #s bear this out, but he was horrible in the second game of the series at the big A on defense.
meanwhile, for all of the crap JK gets here for his hitting, he's been fantastic on defense, .500 on throwouts, etc.
it's the same deal we make with chavez (and crosby when plyaing). A+ defense, C- batting, though JK can be a quality singles hitter.
by notah8er on Apr 15, 2007 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two things:
First, the A's are averaging 3 runs per game. The Giants are at 2.8. So at least we're not THAT bad!
Secondly, the A's production from the first spot in the lineup is amazingly bad. It seems whoever hits there is destined to go hitless. I mean Oakland A's batting in the lead off spot are hitting .145/.175/.182!!
This offense is not going to play this badly for the entire season,its just not possible. However, untill some of these guys start coming around, I'm not really sure what the best course of action is.
by SuperBean on Apr 15, 2007 3:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and if you couldn't guess...
Yes that is the worst OBP from the leadoff spot in the entire MLB. However, on the bright side, it's not the lowest OPS! Colorado's leadoff men are down at .338 to our .357(Yes, that's OPS, not OBP or SLG).
by SuperBean on Apr 15, 2007 3:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
not hitting
We have all seen this before, but it is our brain dead approach at the plate than continues to amaze me.Not hitting is one thing, but just simply wasting at bat after at bat just kills me. And this is not new, it has been a pattern for several years, but we seem to be able to struggle through it and win our share of games. We need to learn how to convert those at bats into productive outs, move some runners along and at least get the bunt on the ground when the situation dictates.
Lets go A's
by skeeter1 on Apr 15, 2007 5:26 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Last Year what hurt us in May was ..
.. all the injuries to our bullpen. We had the Sacramento RiverCats bullpen last May. If we can avoid similar problems with the pen this year, it {and the starting pitching} is the one strong suit we have that can keep us from falling too far behind while waiting for the offense to pick it up. The A's offense, for whatever reason, are always a bunch of "grinders" who don't get going until the weather gets warm and the season gets into the "grinding" phase where the opposing pitchers start to tire a little bit. Marty Lurie has likened the A's to "grinders" for several years now, and he is right. Also it seems, because of Beane's frugal ways {and I know he has to be that way because of our tight budget}, we usually get some reclamation projects like Frank Thomas or Shannon Stewart - guys who we picked up cheap because they had been injured and relatively inactive the previous year or two. It takes guys like that about 150-200 ABs to get going, hence they will likely not produce in April-May. It surely takes patience to be an A's fan! :)
by Randy Bell on Apr 15, 2007 7:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well said!
I have learned to take April and May lightly after the last few years. It is still great watching Kendall throw out runners and seeing Buck develop and Swisher start to get better at bats, etc.
by fridaynightfan on Apr 15, 2007 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to early for an oaktoonish liferaft dash
Of course, next week's not to early to crown the A's a championship threat, either.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Apr 15, 2007 8:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Douchiness is undervalued
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Apr 15, 2007 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lost in the shuffle of hitting disappointment
is the fact that if you look at the last three series--Angels, White Sox, Yankees--the A's have played a truckload of exciting (if frustrating) games: close, tense, see-saw, weird, memorable. Frustrating? Oh yeah. Dull? No.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 9:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
and if that continues, i will
reschedule my retreat at the zendo from August to May.
by ak_A on Apr 15, 2007 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely
Somehow, I wasn't even that disappointed by last night's loss. They've battled valiantly, game after game. And it's only 12 games into the season. No need for despair just yet.
by Ray of Lite on Apr 15, 2007 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except Tuesday and Wednesdays games
against the Angels: We do need dis pair.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
not yet
But this is becoming a pattern, the Yankees pitching is not that good if we can’t score of Darell Rasner then we are not going to score of anyone. The only reason why we were able to score was because the Yankees can’t play defense, and even then our offense couldn’t capitalize. I would be willing to bet that we could have 4 outs an inning and we still wouldn’t score enough runs.
by 3Chavy3 on Apr 15, 2007 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not Really...
Some of the games were exciting, especially Friday, which was great. But a lot of the games have been dull. Day to day it's hard to tell the difference, but over a course of many consecutive games one can tell the difference between a pitcher's duel and a game in which one team just can't hit.
by solotar on Apr 15, 2007 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How will everyone feel about the A's offense when
Kotsay returns to the field
by 3Chavy3 on Apr 15, 2007 10:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It will take Kotsay awhile....
to start hitting after a long convalescence don't you think?
by IM4Oakgal on Apr 15, 2007 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
I am just reaching for optimism.
by 3Chavy3 on Apr 15, 2007 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
his defense will upgrade the outfield at least
and I think a pain-free Kotsay can certainly be an upgrade offensively from Stewart/Kielty
by OaklandSi on Apr 15, 2007 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mike Rouse starting for the Tribe today.
FYI.
by capper3 on Apr 15, 2007 10:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Stop yer blood clot cryin'!
to borrow my grandpapy's term.
you win with pitching and defense. we know this- the A's start off every year not swinging the bat well and to a man, with the exception of Chavez, they urn it around. Last year everyone with the exception of Swisher got off to a crappy start as well. In April of '06, Big Hurt batted .190, Bradley was .246, Crosby .215, Kendall .240 and while I wasn't part of the Nation then, I'll bet you all were bitchin and moanin then just like you are now.
I compare this group to last year's Minnesota team who's offense could be likened to the proverbial one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest last year in the first half. Torrii Hunter hit .189 in April, Morneau (as in MVP) hit .208. Tony Frigging Batista was carrying the team! But you know what, folks stepped up.
As long as pitching and Defense remains strong, the A's will be there in the end. Even if they are .500 at the break (another A's tradition) there is no reason for alarm.
It could be worse: we could be the Giants with a bunch of over the hill players, no bullpen, crappy defense, no prosepects for the future, a lazy short-sighted GM living in the past and a pitcher we overpaid for by app. 70 million dollars.
by incarnate on Apr 15, 2007 11:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
addendum
those Twins averages are for the month of April, and turn has a t before the urn.
by incarnate on Apr 15, 2007 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh good--I thought the urn
was to contain the ashes of hope for our offense. Pitching and defense wins over hitting and hitting. That's why the A's finish ahead of Texas every year.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chavvy on Offense
Does AN now take it as a given that Chavvy can't hit? Because even though last year looked like same old Chavvy to me, we were advised that one injury or another limited his production. But now he's healthy, right?
So if Chavvy hits and Bradley hits, that would make a big difference...
Count me among those who believe, though, that Chavvy should always bat 8th in the line-up.
by solotar on Apr 15, 2007 11:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I take it as a given that even
in not reaching his potential, Chavy hits 30 HR with 100 RBI when healthy and 20 HR with 80 RBI when not healthy. Most seasons in which he has put up excellent numbers his Aprils have been worse than this one--which has just been so-so, not bad. He's a worse hitter than he should be, but a better hitter than most fans probably realize.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ridiculous
chavvy should never bat 8th in this lineup. i think he is a perfect number 5 hitter. c'mon, if healthy the man is a good for 30 hrs, 30+ doubles, 100 rbis and an ops up near 850. that is solid production. and i don't think its "not living up to his potential' either.
i think any team would take that any day from a first round high school pick.
by Backspin on Apr 15, 2007 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To me, the "not living up to potential" part
is that he has never learned to take the outside pitch consistently to left field (with power), which could instantly elevate him into David Ortiz level greatness. I think Chavy could hit .280-.300 against LEFT-handed pitching. But as is, he's still no slouch.
by Nico on Apr 15, 2007 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
same thing every year
The A's do this every year, it will be ok. Remember last year and DJ's record no hit streak??? This isn't that bad!
The games are exciting and close, very entertaining to watch, even if they are also a bit frustrating. The offense will pick up eventually, no way all of these guys (i.e kendall and stewart especially) don't start approaching their career numbers soon.
Lets win the series today, then rest up for the Angels.
by dbuzi123 on Apr 15, 2007 11:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 



















