Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: MLB postseason scores, schedules and blog coverage Bar-right-arrows

Go The Distance

Oakland_tiny by Blez on in News

No, I’m not referring to some cryptic Fields of Dreams line that’s going to get me united with my Dad from the great beyond (damn that movie for making me cry every single time I watch it).  I’m talking about Billy Beane and his systematic disassembling of this roster.

The further deconstruction of this team continued yesterday with the A’s letting Esteban Loaiza jet for Southern California and the LA Dodgers. There was quite a bit of (at times) heated discussion yesterday over whether Beane let Loaiza go for nothing in order to have an under-the-table agreement to get someone like Andy LaRoche on the cheap during the offseason knowing that there was no way that LaRoche would pass through waivers.  I personally think that Beane will probably wind up getting someone from the Dodgers this upcoming offseason, I’m just not sure who it will be.  I don’t anticipate it being anyone of great value because it's obvious that the A’s are just trying to dump salary right now.

But Beane shouldn’t stop until the team is really gutted of its higher priced players.  I mean seriously.  I never thought I’d say that, especially with a team that went to the ALCS last season, but Beane is at his very best when he’s trying to unearth players that no one else wants or believes is for real.  Witness Jack Hannahan.  This is a guy who can clearly hit.  Yes, he’s only played 16 games with the A’s and small sample size and all, but this guy almost has as many walk off hits as Eric Chavez has now for his career.  I’m not about to pronounce him the second coming and frankly, his defense is a little scary over there especially after watching Eric Chavez man the hot corner for so many years.  But Hannahan is proving that there is life A.C. (after Chavez).  I’m not willing to bank on it because we don’t know enough about Hannahan long-term to know that he’s going to be a good ML third baseman.  The thing that the Hannahan experiment (and Chad Gaudin before that) is proving is that Beane can be an absolute master when he lifts up the rocks to see what he might find underneath.

I think the A’s clung to Jason Kendall in fear that they wouldn’t have anyone to replace that “leadership”.  Never mind the fact that the offensive production out of that spot was a meager .542 OPS.  Kurt Suzuki has put up a .791 OPS in August.  Course Kendall that idiot has a .919 OPS in August.  But that’s not important.  I’m just glad that we’re turning the page on these things.

But don’t stop with Bradley, Kennedy, Kendall and Loaiza.  Go the distance.  Piazza (although he’s gone after the year any way), Chavez, Kotsay, Dan Johnson and Crosby should all be considered candidates for the clean sweep.  I mean if you’re going to start over then really start over.  We know what to expect from those A’s.  Let’s see what these A’s can do.

As an aside, but relevant to this discussion, I imagine that the A’s really want Rich Harden to come back for September because they need to figure out whether or not Harden will ever be healthy enough to be productive.  Or maybe they’re just trying to get some trade value generated for him going into the offseason.  Regardless, they need to figure out what they have so they can plan accordingly for the rotation for 2008.

But the A’s have essentially cleared out a ton of salary by dumping Kendall, Kennedy, Loaiza and Bradley.  The only problem is that only Loaiza had a contract that would’ve brought him back next year so it’s essentially cost cutting for this season alone.  Guys with the bigger and longer-term contracts haven’t really been moved and it’s probably making them much hard to move.  Still, it would be nice if the A’s continue to just push forward and decide to give younger guys more opportunity.  Perhaps the team can continue to unearth gems.

So just do it, Billy.  Go the distance.

0 recs | Comment 151 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

agreed on everyone ... except DJ

And possibly Crosby.

DJ's still cheap, he can always draw walks with a little bit of power, he plays a more than adequate 1B (I think the jury's still out whether his or Swisher's complementary defensive shortcomings are worse), and he still has options. Once Barton's up next year, warehouse DJ in Sacto as a backup plan.

And Crosby's still a relative bargain and plays excellent defense. Improve the lineup significantly in other areas to where Cros is batting 8 or 9, and he's totally worth hanging on to.

'Course, if someone backs up the Brinks truck for either of 'em, they're welcome to 'em -- but is that really gonna happen?

Nothing beats first hand experience ~ grover @('.')@

by monkeyball on Aug 30, 2007 9:07 AM PDT   0 recs

DJ is out of options...

...thankfully. They can't store him in Sacramento (or Stockton).

And really now, for three years running it's been the same deal with this guy: a very hot streak at one point, followed by months of weak grounders to the right side, called third strikes with runners on in scoring position, and walks. Walks aren't bad, but they don't drive in runs unless the bases are loaded.

DJ is the epitome of a AAAA player.

by Dr Pez on Aug 30, 2007 9:22 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

whoops

Thanks for the correction.

In that case ... might as well DFA him, eh?

Nothing beats first hand experience ~ grover @('.')@

by monkeyball on Aug 30, 2007 9:26 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Release him...

...I can't see why another team would give anything of value for DJ now. Maybe a bottom feeder would sign him as a free agent, but that's it.

In 2007 Carlos Pena finally has become the player that he was advertised to be, what's five years among friends?

by Dr Pez on Aug 30, 2007 9:32 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He's not out of options

He used options in 2005 and 2006. He still has one remaining.

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 9:32 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I wish he'd take the option of...

...hitting consistently.

That'd be a good option for him to use.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:31 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Awesome.
So it goes.

by jeepers on Aug 30, 2007 4:48 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't think Barton will be ready for next year.

His OPS is around .830 right now. I'd like to see Swisher at first with a still-cheap DJ as backup/PH.  This would free up room in the outfield to either add a free agent bat or at least give guys like Denorfia and Snelling a closer look.

by scromulus on Aug 30, 2007 12:12 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Proposed New Rule

The A's have to dump anyone that is 30 or older as of January 1.  The only real losses would be Duke and Ellis.  I like both of them, but Duke has a 70-year-old woman's hip and Ellis is replaceable.  

When asked about the decisions to dump Kotsay, Chavez, Duke, Ellis, Calero, Scutaro, DaVanon, and Embree, Forst can say "we're just trying to make room for the kids".  

Signatures? We don't need no stinking signatures.

by jubjub on Aug 30, 2007 9:10 AM PDT   0 recs

not Ellis! OK I admit he's my favorite

A's player.  But I think Ellis is one of those players who adds far more to the team than the numbers show.  I would keep him, unless of course someone offered an unbelievable deal.

It ain't my money, but I say let's get the boys together and take another shot.--Swish

by alamedaman on Aug 30, 2007 9:14 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I like him too

but a rule is a rule <strict catholic upbringing rears its head>!  

Signatures? We don't need no stinking signatures.

by jubjub on Aug 30, 2007 9:19 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Curse of the bobblehead!
"Just because the horseradish is a cultivar of different color and geographic origin doesn't make it less of either." - monkeyball

by McFood on Aug 30, 2007 12:54 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Ellis stays

Defense and an ok bat...he adds a lot by saving runs.

by IM4Oakgal on Aug 30, 2007 1:09 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

"Oh, Mark...

...is your palmflower flashing?"

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Aug 30, 2007 6:26 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

perfect

I'm putting my Ellis bobblehead in my model of the Lincoln Memorial (for safety) as we speak

'I have a theory about Randy Bell, but it betrays such an abject lack of faith in humanity that I cannot voice it.' ~FSU

by LAXile on Aug 30, 2007 11:39 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Harden has already shown us he can't go a full

season, or even close to it.  It's a sad thing, but he's Mark Pryor or Kerry Wood--great promise but consistently on the injury list.  But of course that is no secret, so his trade potential is greatly limited by that.  Let him go if you get something worthwhile, otherwise he's going to be our Kerry Wood for a number of years.

It ain't my money, but I say let's get the boys together and take another shot.--Swish

by alamedaman on Aug 30, 2007 9:19 AM PDT   0 recs

I agree, coming back in September

will tell the A's nothing about Harden in 2008 (they did this last year).

by OaklandSi on Aug 30, 2007 9:56 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Might it not

make him more tradeable in the off-season?

"The worst day on a ball field is better than the best day in any office." - David Wright

by kkdaz on Aug 30, 2007 10:02 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Not after several years of injuries.

Right now, he's got pre-season 2006 Frank Thomas value.

Well, not that little, but close. Might as well hang on to him, see if he can string three months together, and if he does, break the Mets' bank.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:33 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

LaRoche

I agree with those who think letting Loaiza go so easily to the Dodgers might lead to some quid pro quo down the line ... but to imagine that the quo is going to be Andy LaRoche is pure let's-trade-Crosby-for-Pujols type fantasy.

Maybe Loaiza is the favor that opens the door to further trades with the Dodgers, but he's not the trade itself.  If we want LaRoche, we're going to have to give up something valuable for him, and Loaiza isn't it.

"Ten times thy self were better than ten Hattebergs" -- Monkeyball, channeling Shakespeare

by iglew on Aug 30, 2007 9:20 AM PDT   0 recs

No one's suggesting

that there's going to be a LaRoche-for-cash deal or something stupid like that in the offseason, only that this might be part of the deal. The other part consisting of players who won't clear waivers.

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 9:36 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

You know, Crosby for Pujols would be awesome.

That said, Crosby for Jeff Reboulet would work for me.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:34 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

How about

Crosby for a new trainer?

by ozzman99 on Aug 30, 2007 2:03 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Crosby for a new pair of trainers?
I quite like those Reebok shoes.
The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 2:49 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

You think someone

would give the pair for him?  I was hoping to get one, preferably the left for me, and maybe ask for a POSTBNL (pair of socks to be named later).  I want some of those '70's basketball player jobs.

by ozzman99 on Aug 30, 2007 2:51 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

YES! But wait on Ellis

The A's have an option on Ellis for '08.  Take it and then trade him before the deadline.  He'll be 31 years old at that point and will have probably peaked.  Let some other team take diminishing returns from him and the A's receive a prospect of some kind in return.

Dump Crosby.

Finally let go of Chavez.  Love the guy, but he can't stay healthy, doesn't hit all that well, even when healthy, and probably won't get any better the higher the odometer gets.

I forget what Duke's contract situation is, but with the emergence of so much pitching talent this season (thanks to so many injuries), I'd count him as expendable since he could net the A's a fair prospect in return.

Psalm 150:6

by bzn5150 on Aug 30, 2007 9:25 AM PDT   0 recs

Not emerging talent in the BP

Seems like the Pen has been a wreck many a time.
Duke used to be the guy going 3 innings in extras, or bridging to the closer.  Him healthy saves 15 important runs a year.

by MobiusKlein on Aug 30, 2007 1:38 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm shocked we couldn't get more for Loiza

at this point in the season.  The guy looks great obviously in his first two starts, and what an addition that would be to a team in the hunt.  And of course he has a good career record, so it's not like he's a flash in the pan.  But, obviously Bean is the man here--I'm sure there is something behind all of this that we don't yet know.

It ain't my money, but I say let's get the boys together and take another shot.--Swish

by alamedaman on Aug 30, 2007 9:25 AM PDT   0 recs

25 teams passed on him

He was passed on by contending teams with starting pitching needs. That tells me that the Dodgers' willingness to take on  his salary was the best offer out there.

by NoeValley on Aug 30, 2007 10:33 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

25 teams passed on him, then he passed at 155mph.

Slightly tipsy.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:35 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

good point. this whole process is very much

a free market.  smart GM's who do this for a living decided that they didn't want to give up key prospects to have Loiza for a pennant run.  he is just not worth as much as I thought,,,

It ain't my money, but I say let's get the boys together and take another shot.--Swish

by alamedaman on Aug 30, 2007 10:44 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

You should start a diary.
"Just because the horseradish is a cultivar of different color and geographic origin doesn't make it less of either." - monkeyball

by McFood on Aug 30, 2007 12:56 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Keep Chavez

get rid of Kotsay.  

The A's, as of right now, are already way under budget.  They don't need to drastically shred salary anymore and rid themselves of decent players that are overpriced.  They do need to rid themselves of dead weight that have no future (Kotsay).  

Take a look at the 2008 Payroll.  You'll see that they are already way under budget.  The A's have a free $20M they could spend, if they want, and they could use it all on just one rental.

  1. Eric Chavez, 3B: $11M
  1. Mark Kotsay, CF: $8M
  1. Mark Ellis, 2B: $5M
  1. Rich Harden, SP: $4.5M
  1. Dan Haren, SP: $4M
  1. Bobby Crosby, SS: $3.5M
  1. Nick Swisher, OF/1B: $3.5M
  1. Alan Embree, RP: $3M
  1. Kiko Calero, RP: $2M*
  1. Justin Duchscherer, RP: $2M*
  1. Joe Blanton, SP: $1M*
  1. Chad Gaudin, SP: $1M*
  1. Huston Street, RP: $1M*
  1. Dan Johnson, 1B: $1M*
  1. Rob Bowen, C: $0.4M*
  1. Kurt Suzuki, C: $.38M
  1. Travis Buck, OF: $.38M
  1. Jack Cust, OF/DH: $.38M
  1. Andrew Brown, RP: $.38M
  1. Santiago Casilla, RP: $.38M
  1. Jay Marshall, RP: $.38M
  1. Jack Hannahan, 3B: $.38M
  1. Donnie Murphy, IF: $.38M
  1. Daric Barton, DH/1B: $.38M
  1. Lenny DiNardo, SP: $.38M

----------------------------------
Total Payroll: ~$54.7 Million
2007 Payroll: ~$74.0 Million

  • = arbitration elligible, estimated contract

 

Yeah, Chavez is the highest paid player, but it does no good to trade him now or in the offseason when his value is at the lowest.  He still has a few years left on his deal, so there's plenty of time to move him.

Kotsay, on the other hand, has no value and you can't see his value really improving.  He's not going to hit .300 again, he's not going to provide great defense again, and his back is going to continue to flare up.  Get rid of his $8M ASAP, leaving you with $28M you could or could not spend.  

Get Mike Cameron and Tomohiro Nioka (only if the A's think they can contend in 2008) and call it an offseason.  

by black beane and rice on Aug 30, 2007 9:36 AM PDT   0 recs

I notice that Scutaro isn't there

it's likely that they won't re-sign him -- but at this point we certainly don't know that for sure.

also, I'm wondering why both Barton and DJ are on that list...and Marshall may well get the minor league time he needs in 2008, since the A's won't be obligated to keep him on the 25-man roster or risk losing him.

by OaklandSi on Aug 30, 2007 10:00 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

picking nits

Barton will be there.  Whether or not DJ will be there is another question, but it's not like the A's are going to bring in someone that costs a lot more than him.  Just using him as a space filler.

Same with Marshall.  The A's might go with another LOOGY (Flores perhaps), but it wouldn't be someone detrimental to the payroll.  

As far as Scutaro goes, he'll probably get somewhere between $1M-$2M.  They have no need for him.

by black beane and rice on Aug 30, 2007 10:22 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Why are you so sure Barton will be here?

He's fallen off quite a bit since his hot July. He's only 22 and looks like he could use another year in Sacto.  I'd like to see Swish at first next year, but at this point I'd still take DJ over Barton - not that DJ inspires me with a great deal of confidence, but at least he's capable of putting up a 900 OPS in AAA, something Barton is still quite far off of.  I wouldn't be opposed to trading Barton if we can package him with one of our albatross contracts.

by scromulus on Aug 30, 2007 12:28 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

again, picking nits

either Barton or DJ will be here.  Personally, I'd prefer having both here.  Billy Beane, on the other hand, would probably love to get rid of DJ and give Barton a chance.  

Either way, we're talking about the difference of a million dollars and nitpicking over which minimally paid players will be on the roster clearly wasn't the point of my message.

by black beane and rice on Aug 30, 2007 12:57 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you here

but pairing prospects with albatross contracts and, thus, giving away talent to save money is exactly what pathetic losing franchises like KC and Florida do. I do NOT want the A's to start emulating those models.

I'm not opposed to trading Barton in principle, but I would be implacably hostile to the notion of trading him just to be rid of Kotsay's salary.

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 1:40 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Explain KC

by Huskerland A s Fan on Aug 30, 2007 1:55 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

KC is loaded with talent

by Huskerland A s Fan on Aug 30, 2007 1:58 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

All the pieces just don't quite fit together yet

Just like Oakland now.

by Huskerland A s Fan on Aug 30, 2007 2:01 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Swisher is a better first baseman.

Barton is currently posting a line of 292/390/442/832 with 9 HR.  The OBP is great and the rest is not bad, and as has been oft said, at 22 he has time to develop.  Nevertheless, there's no guarantee he'll develop power or that he'll become the type of "pure hitter" (whatever that is) for which we're all hoping.  

Because FA prices are so high, high level prospects are more valuable than ever, and fewer teams are willing to let theirs go.  Its possible Barton could be worth more in a trade than a Loaiza or even a Crosby or a Chavez to a team looking to get young and cheap.  We already have Swisher to play first.  It might make sense to deal Barton for a prospect at non-premium offensive position (ie centerfield) considering he's not as good as Swisher and possibly not even as good as Johnson.  Alternatively, dealing him as part of a salary dump would free up more payroll to pursue a CF or SS.

I don't think such a move would turn us into a KC, as we currently have two 1Bs above Barton on the depth chart.  One is pretty good and the other is passable.  Which KC/Florida deals are you referring to specifically?  

by scromulus on Aug 30, 2007 3:03 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I was kind of thinking of the Lowell/Beckett deal

Obviously Beckett by himself was more than good enough to obtain even highly touted prospects. They probably could have gotten more out of Boston, but they had to get out from under Mike Lowell's contract (in their minds).

Again, I'm in no sense against trading Barton per se. But I don't see why he's in any kind of conflict with Swisher, whose offense is a lot more attractive in RF (where it's excellent) than at 1B (where it's merely somewhat above average). That's a false dichotomy. The A's need players who can HIT, and as many of them as possible. Not more of these iffy-offense-good-defense types like Kotsay and Crosby. I'd much rather he be traded for someone like Wlady Balentien or Nate Schierholtz than another one of these glove dudes like Jacoby Ellsbury.

And people need to get over these romantic notions about "payroll flexibility." Payroll flexibility is only an asset if there's something worthwhile to spend your money on. This upcoming season, which is the only one in which Kotsay's contract is even relevant, there isn't. (A-Rod excepted, and they already have enough money to sign him if they really want to.) I don't want to trade Barton away to sign a new CF. Free agents are expensive disasters when they don't work out. Even someone like Grady Sizemore would be a huge risk, and the available crop has no one even close to his level.

The A's burning talent to get rid of Kotsay's contract is akin to selling that talent off, which is the absolute last thing they should be doing. "Investing" that $8 million in a cheap Daric Barton for 6 years is an infinitely superior idea to cashing it in.

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 3:51 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

The Sox gave up Hanley Ramirez in that deal.

The guy who's better than Jose Reyes, but never gets talked about.

So it goes.

by jeepers on Aug 30, 2007 4:52 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

True

but irrelevant. The Marlins could have gotten even more.

Besides, top prospect or no, nobody at the time knew how good a hitter he was going to be.

He gets talked about less because he's more one-dimensional (and doesn't play in New York). All the traditionalists love Reyes because he steals a lot and plays great D. Hanley is a pretty lousy shortstop defensively.

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 5:16 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

One dimensional?

.331/.388/.557 23 HRs, 42 SB

He's a butcher with the glove, but he has every dimension covered on offense.

"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback

by devo on Aug 30, 2007 7:01 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Probably better suited to play another position

He seems like a BJ Upton-type guy who'd be better as an outfielder. 42 steals says he's obviously pretty fast. But I really haven't seen him play enough to get a read on what ails him defensively.

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 10:51 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

They did

They also got Annibal Sanchez in that deal, who was a stud until he got hurt this year.

"May our feet be swift. May our bats be mighty. And may our balls be...plentiful."

by nothinlikethetown on Aug 30, 2007 9:34 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I love Scoot but he is good as gone

next year.
I can't remember him making as many errors as he's made this year. And at $2.2m, he can be replaced with one of the youngsters.

I think religion is a neurological disorder that prevents people from thinking on their own.--B. Maher

by sf drift king on Aug 31, 2007 1:14 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Chavez needs to go

The A's just cannot afford to pay $11 million to a guy who is a below average hitter and perennially (yes, I think we can say that now) injured, great glove or no.  The A's will never have a good offense so long as Chavez is the best hitter in the line-up.  And if he gets paid $11 million we just have that much less money to find a couple of guys who are better hitters.

by oakfan2000 on Aug 30, 2007 10:07 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

what you dont seem to understand

is that, for next year at least, the A's can in fact afford to pay Chavez $11M and go out and sign a couple of bats with the $20M free money they have.  And that's assuming they don't increase payroll.  

Use one more year to see what Chavez can do.  The A's can afford it.  His value is already as low as it can be, so why try to get rid of him now when you can afford to see another season of him?

by black beane and rice on Aug 30, 2007 10:24 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

If pressed between paying that money to Chavez...

...or going out and getting a second free agent power-hitter, I'll take the latter option.

Hell, I'd give that money to Bradley before I'd give it to Chavez. At least with Bradley, when he's actually healthy, he can hit a walk-off.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:39 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Hahaha

Nice try.

by Dusty Baker on Aug 30, 2007 4:29 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Chavez' value has reduced every year since 2003!

Holding on to him for another season to 'wait for his value to rise' is like holding on to the six condos you bought and renovated last October because 'the market is down'.

It ain't getting any less down any time soon.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:37 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Thank you Tom Vu.
"Just because the horseradish is a cultivar of different color and geographic origin doesn't make it less of either." - monkeyball

by McFood on Aug 30, 2007 12:59 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

problem with trading Chavez is

that we'll likely have to pay part of his salary.  I can't imagine any team taking on a long-term contract for a below-average hitter with a bad back.

That said, the best thing that could happen is for the Yankees to lose A-Rod and need a 3rd baseman.

"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 Aug 30, 2007 10:12 AM PDT   0 recs

Hm

Can Shelley Duncan play third?

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 10:21 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

They were content with Aaron Boone...

...my guess is they'd be content with DJ playing there.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:40 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm talking about for the A's

i.e. indirectly suggesting a Duncan-for-Chavez swap.

by PaulThomas on Aug 30, 2007 10:53 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm saying DJ for Duncan as a swap.
Throw in Chavez as a PTBNL, because he sucks ass.
The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 1:42 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Chavez for Alex Gordon

by Huskerland A s Fan on Aug 30, 2007 10:19 AM PDT   0 recs

Kansas City's Golden Boy is exactly

how Chavez started out with the A's.  

by Huskerland A s Fan on Aug 30, 2007 10:30 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

My Two Cents

With a limited budget, in a pitchers park, it makes sense to concentrate on on pitching and defense at the sacrifice of some power, like Beane always does and tried to do this year.  But, the A's can't afford to sacrifice  defense for power.  That's where they went wrong this year.  

The A's can do well with a number of inexpensive low VORP hitters with strong defense and mediocre offense as long as they have a couple of power stars that don't hurt the defense.  Last year Frank Thomas carried the load, this year injuries destroyed the plan, but it was very close.  

I don't think the A's are that far away from having a successful team.    

by photonload on Aug 30, 2007 10:30 AM PDT   0 recs

what's so great about slashing payroll?

We're all thinking along the same lines I think.  The ship sailed and we're looking at how to get good again inlight of this roster overhaul.

As black beane and rice pointed out, Kotsay is the real dead weight remaining.  Harden, Cros, and Chavez are maybe making more money than we'd like given their likely performance going forward, but it's not tragic by any means.

So,how much salary are you willing to eat on Kotsay? Is there another overpriced player we have to take instead of Kotsay?  Do we really want to pay him $8M to sit on another team's bench?

And then?  This year's free agent crop is pretty lackluster.  Jones or Hunter?  Will there be a trade made to acquire a good guy but at a high salary number?

But this isn't the NBA.  Teams can spend what they desire.  There is nothing wonderful for me as a fan about the A's cutting payroll.  I don't get a rebate on game tickets I purchased, nor do I get a discount on my mlbtv subscription.  

I don't care one whit whether they make a profit or not.  To me the A's are a public resource like the park system, whether they run on budget is only abstractly interesting.  

It's fun and all to watch Cust, Hannahan, Suzuki, and Dinardo do well.  But it's a lot more fun when they are surrounded by a few great players.  

We already went through the romantic period during and after college where we lived on pasta and slept on the floor.  It was fun.  Now it's time to be adults and not nickel and dime everything.  

We mailed in the season when we DFA'd Milton.  We really are not getting anything back for our paying Kennedy, Kielty, Kendall, Bradley, and Loaiza to participate in pennant races.  The on field product has suffered.  Fine.  But fine for this year only.  

by jakarta on Aug 30, 2007 10:33 AM PDT   0 recs

But here's the thing with cutting payroll.

When you're replacing those guys with kids/AAAAers like Suzuki, Hannahan, Cust, Gaudin, Braden, Brown (x2), Lugo, Casilla, Dinardo, Lewis, Marshall, Myer, Robertson, Windsor, Bowen, Murphy, Furrymaniac, DaVanon, Denorfia, Snelling, Putnam et al... the chance that four or five of those guys will step up Gaudin/Cust style and be the new Kotsay/Chavez/Piazza is better than average.

And when they do, and you've got bulk payroll space, you can go sign one or two killers to sprinkle among them and contend for several years.

As opposed to running guys like Loaiza and Kotsay out there, just because we're paying them, and not discovering those gems until they're another few years older in contract terms... I know which option I prefer.

The Kendall Shift: 6 infielders and 2 catchers.

by Ozzz on Aug 30, 2007 10:46 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Oz, have you looked at this year's FA class?

There's one offensive player who's worth signing -- and he may not even be available, and if he is, he'll be ass-expensive.

There are no "one or two killers" available.

If you're counting on Beane signing some FA bats that will actually produce .850+ OPS, you're gonna be mighty PO'ed next year -- either b/c Beane doesn't sign anyone, or b/c the guys he's likely to sign put up shitty numbers and/or spend most of the year on the DL.

Nothing beats first hand experience ~ grover @('.')@

by monkeyball on Aug 30, 2007 10:53 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

We don't need no stinking free agents!

We have Cust! Piazza didn't do anything for us and neither did Loaiza. I say stick with Barton and Cust. Definitely let Kotsay go. Figure out what's wrong and fix it with Buck. I have good hopes for next year, but I'm overly optimistic.

by A'sfansince1970 on Aug 30, 2007 10:59 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I think Oz's model is the way to go.

The A's don't need an 850+ OPS player. They need 600+ OPS players at SS and CF.  I think a combination of Murphy along with one of Rowand, Fukudome, or Jones would do wonders for the A's offense.  Also this dude named Barry Bonds should be available.  If the rest of the league shuns him, the A's might be able to get him for a reasonable price (at the expense of fielding Cust). If the A's could get Bonds + an 750-800 OPS outfielder (Snelling and Denorfia could also be possibilities) then I our offense would be in great shape.  

by scromulus on Aug 30, 2007 12:49 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs