I'm shocked at the turn around here in Athletics Nation. How did I become the pessimist of the bunch? I mean, heck, people are even calling me out for it in the DLD. Believe me when I say this, no one is happier that the Oakland Athletics have started as strong as they have, pounding on good teams like the Indians and Blue Jays.
So here I am to say, I don't expect this to last. For one thing, Dana Eveland is relatively new to the major leagues and brand new to the American League. Greg Smith is brand spanking new. Just like with hitters, advanced scouts will be watching these pitchers, planning a better approach for any future games. Young players like Buck, Barton and Suzuki will likely be prone to inconsistent play as the league learns how to pitch to them and they make adjustments back. And, as we've already seen, the A's have obviously done something to really tick off the Baseball Gods because they're losing not only players like Harden and Duchscherer to injury, which was to be expected, but they're also having guys like Ryan Sweeney go down when he was having a healthy offensive run. On top of that, the Angels still haven't had John Lackey for one single inning yet.
Don't get me wrong, I said at the beginning of the season that I expected these A's to be better than most of the "experts" predicted. I'm kind of surprised that they've played pretty damn good baseball so far just simply because I felt like their schedule out of the gate was extremely difficult. Boston, Toronto and Cleveland with a trip to Japan in there? Now they go face the team with the best record in the AL and former A's Nick Swisher and Jermaine Dye.
A couple of the things that have impressed me the most about this team is how well it has played defense and the game calling behind the dish.
The A's have turned the most double plays in baseball with 20 already. And maybe the stats aren't going to show it, but I think they've been really great in the field. I expected to see a bit of the bad news bears out there just because the A's have so much youth on the field and it hasn't really been that way so far. The middle infield has been stellar in Crosby and Ellis and defense up the middle is obviously key, but I've been pretty impressed with the A's all over the field.
I also mentioned this in a game thread, but Kurt Suzuki's game calling has been just stellar and a big reason why I think the A's staff has been so good this early. You can tell that the pitchers just trust whatever Zook throws down. I think he's come very far in a very short time frame.
Regardless, for the reasons I mentioned above, I don't expect the A's to continue to be so amazingly stellar. I really, really hope they continue along this path, but salb and company have taught me that I can't assume much from small sample sizes. I don't like being the wet blanket because that just isn't my nature, but I guess that's my role lately. Go ahead and dry me off.
0 recs | 118 comments
I agree with you
OaklandSi - April 13, 2008
If we didn't have to throw Gaudin out there...
every 5th start, we'd have the best record in baseball. Don't worry... another AL Central team who no one predicted finishing higher than 3rd in their own division, another series win for us.
FoolshGame22 - April 13, 2008
Yeah
Blame it on the guy who pitches half the season needing surgery (last year), then comes off the DL a week early this season... Well done.
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
How I'm dealing with this season
My whole approach to this season has been to try to focus on each game as its own thing, not worry about the season standings at all, and see how the guys who are actually considered part of the team's future are doing.
Taking off the rose-colored glasses, there is simply no reason to believe that this team is going to be a serious contender just because have won some games in April. The A's rely on a bunch of young and/or unproven players, injury-plagued and/or inexperienced starters, and hope.
I'm happy for the good start, because it's been a pleasant surprise. But let's not get too excited, because we all know the 8-20 stretch is coming. And then everyone will moan that the team has no power, crappy defense, and pitchers (and hitters) who have been solved by other teams' scouts.
Maybe the A's get really lucky, but this team wasn't built to win this season. It is populated by a lot of guys we probably won't remember much by 2010.
I am kind of excited about those Stockton pitchers, though.
bear88 - April 14, 2008
The A's ain't gonna win the AL West, anyway ...
... unless Lackey and Vlad each misses at least half the season. (Not that I'm arguing that if both do, the A's necessarily will win the division; just that I think that's the absolute minimum decline in the Angels' capacities it would take.)
Harden might make 5 more starts for the A's in '08. I wouldn't anticipate Duke making more than 10-15 starts total. Gaudin's probably gonna be wildly inconsistent (emphasis on "wildly") all year. Eveland and Smith likely will suffer some rookie troubles. The A's pen could end up being a liability instead of a strength.
Crosby will likely regress to somewhere just a skosh better than what we've seen at the plate from him the last 2 years. Chavvy's career could be over. Cust's 2007 could have been a one-time freak of nature. Barton could plateau at Hatteberg level. Buck could be the outfield version of Harden. Emil Brown could get 500 plate appearances. Mike Sweeney could get 500 plate appearances. Mark Ellis could be traded.
But I still like this team for 84 wins (with a double-Gonzalez-inspired amazing run in July-August, which carries the team through 2 key departures at the trade deadline; and then a rookie exhaustion/"mental toughness"-deficient fade in mid-August and September).
monkeyball - April 14, 2008
I'd give straight-across odds on that bet
That is, I think it's more likely that the A's win the division without your condition being met than with it. So the bet would go: If A's win the division and Lackey and Vlad did indeed each miss at least half the season, you win; if A's win the division and either Lackey or Vlad player more than half a season, I win; if the A's don't win the division at all, nobody wins.
Like you, I don't expect the A's to win the division, but there are many strange and various things that could occur that might make it happen, and together they outnumber the one specific possibility you name.
iglew - April 14, 2008
I'm new...
what does DLD stand for?
speedchaser9 - April 14, 2008
Dance, Lisa, Dance
Or could be Daily Link Dump. Yeah, that's it.
67MARQUEZ - April 14, 2008
And as to what it is...
It's a fanpost - one of those postings accessed along the right side of the main page - meant as a daily clearinghouse for gossip, rumors, late-breaking news, and other net links of interest to the an world. It was originally conceived so people didn't have to create lots of individual fan posts - with fewer fanposts, each one stays on the main page longer, while we viewers can turn to the dld for a quick overview of a's land. Should you want to create your own dld, please be advised that you are required to mention that it used to be a lot easier to insert links and fancy visual effects before the recent site redesign.
Hot Cup Joe - April 14, 2008
Posts like that one should be a part of an AN FAQ somewhere.
mikev - April 14, 2008
There is a FAQ somewhere
but no one can find it since the site redesign.
Englishmajor - April 14, 2008
Ooh! Actually it's on the front page now!
ANcillary Terms
I just didn't notice it since the typeface is so small.
Englishmajor - April 14, 2008
I wish that would go away,
since none of the links work properly any more.
See my note on the real thing here.
Poppy - April 14, 2008
On the positive side, new format-wise:
People have been enjoying your terrific, highly recommended fanshot for going on two weeks!!!!
mikeA - April 14, 2008
I just wish the search would work.
Especially since Sickels' site was converted to the new format and it broke the search over there.
It's caused the site to go from one of my most frequently used baseball sites to one of the least used.
mikev - April 14, 2008
Into the dryer with you
(ha)
Blez, you non-believer. Where did we go wrong with you? And now you're calling on small sample size? Don't you know pennants are won (and lost) in the first two weeks? Have my own posts taught you nothing? Well, I hate to throw facts in your face, but you've left me no choice:
1973: the A's started 5-8. They sucked, man! It was a fluke they won their second straight Series that year!
1977: just like this year, an 8-5 start. Print those playoff tickets! Oh, they finished 63-98? OK, then how about:
1978: 10-3. Now THAT was a great team! Better than '77, that's for sure. Yep, I checked: a whole five games better.
1983: What a year! 9-4 after 13 games. But what I remember most is the playoffs. Because we weren't in them. You kind of have to win more than 74 games total to qualify.
1984: Again, 9-4! And we did win more than 74. We won 77. So there.
1986: 8-5. La Russa took over in mid-season, and we went...76-86.
1987: 3-10. How that team managed to finish .500 is beyond me.
1988: 7-6. What a mediocre bunch that was. Couldn't even beat the Dodgers in the World Series.
1999: 6-7. That team could barely win 87 games. Sad.
2000: 5-8. Those guys had to wait until the last day to clinch the AL West. Just awful, man.
2001: 3-10. I didn't even bother with baseball for the rest of the season. They finished 14 games behind Seattle! Ok, so they still won 102 games. Semantics.
2003: 7-6. So they won their division again. Big deal.
2006: 6-7. I told everyone that they'd be lucky to win 94. I was right (93-69). Or could be they were just unlucky.
Although some years held to form, it is obvious that 13 games does not a season make. And although my "faith" tells me the A's should win the West every year, the reality of it all (not to mention the examples above) says Blez is probably right.
Well, hell. I guess I'll have to do something else with the money I was going to use on playoff tickets.
67MARQUEZ - April 14, 2008
defense
I am worried about the OF defense when Cust plays though, he seems to have a lot of trouble cutting off balls in the gap, which to me indicates poor range. Is M. Sweeney's bat really worth having Cust in the field?
sardonic - April 14, 2008
Is M. Sweeney's bat really worth having Cust in the field?
Prob not. Once Carlos Gonzalez is up Id like and Out Field of R. Sweeney/Gonzalez/Buck.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
What is the cutoff date...
For this year not affecting CarGon's arbitration status?
notsellingjeans /Paul Thomas / salb & Company: What day will the A's bring CarGon Up?
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
I read somewhere that the Rays.
brought up Longoria a few days ago, since we spent enough time in AAA to grant him an extra year of control. So the same should apply to CarGo. It was in my fantasy notes on my ESPN league.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
I don't know what day they WILL bring him up
I will say that the day they SHOULD bring him up is not earlier than June 1, because Sweeney and Denorfia deserve long looks and he still has plenty to work on in AAA. He is not, despite the strange affections of some ANers, going to be a panacea. The team will likely be worse in the short term with him in the lineup than out of it.
A player has to spend 21 (consecutive?) days in the minors to not get credit for a full season played in the majors. That would have him in AAA until April 21 at the extreme earliest.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
Longoria, who will make his major league debut..
for Tampa Bay on Saturday night, stayed in the minors just long enough to delay his arbitration eligibility one more season, the St. Petersburg Times reports.
Spin: Although Longoria was very impressive in spring training, the Rays sent him to Triple-A Durham to start the season. After an 0-for-14 start at Durham, Longoria had gone on a 5-for-11 run just prior to his callup. According to the report, Longoria did stay in the minors long enough (13 days, two more than necessary under the rules) to insure that his eligibility for free agency, even if he doesn't return to the minors later this season, should be delayed an extra year, until after the 2014 season. The Rays said that wasn't part of the rationale for initially sending Longoria down, but whether it was or wasn't, they'll now reap that benefit.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
The fact that the first statement
is quite obviously not correct (he would be a Super Two and eligible for arbitration in 2011 if he was not sent down between now and then) makes me question whether this author actually knows what he's talking about.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
I dont know the rules well on this..
but Im just reporting what I read. If its wrong then its wrong. But I figured it was valid since it was reported by the St. Petersburg Times.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
Plenty of beat writers don't know the ins and outs of the rules
Heck, Susan Slusser, who pretty much everyone respects, wasn't aware of the existence of "optional waivers," which is a squirrely rule involving trying to send down players with more than 3 years of service time to the minors.
This is a more important and frequently invoked rule, but I also have less trust in the source...
I think part of the problem here is that the actual MLB rulebook is so long, arcane and hard to get access to that virtually no one in the biz has actually read it cover to cover.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
Back to my post above about..
an out field of R. Sweeney/Gonzalez/Buck. I envision that in July. Not May, just to clear things up.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
It wouldnt suprise me at all if he was wrong..
but the club still called him up. So that also lead me to believe it was true. However since you inform me the report may be wrong, I assume Longoria is only up for a few weeks till Aybar comes back off the DL.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
"optional waiver"
are "optional waivers" the same thing as being "out of options"? Nothing bothers me more than the general misconception that the number of times a player is option to the minors is a finite resource.
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
ok ok
lots of things bother me more than that misconception. im being melodramatic
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
No
A player is out of options when he has spent parts of three or, in a few cases, four seasons on a team's 40-man roster without being on the 25-man roster or the DL.
Optional waivers come into play, theoretically, when a team wishes to option a player who is NOT out of options but IS more than three years removed from his first major league appearance. Think Bobby Crosby-- he's never been sent down, but he first appeared in September of '03. Those players have to clear waivers-- not the normal outright waivers that guys who get DFAed have to clear, but rather a special weird kind of waiver that's more like what MAJOR leaguers have to clear to be traded in August. It's revocable; if you try to option Crosby down and someone claims him, you can pull him back.
We noticed this and asked Susan about it; she confessed confusion and asked a front office source, who basically replied that in practice no one ever actually claims anyone off these waivers anyway, so it's not a big deal.
And the number of times a player can be optioned to the minors IS a finite resource, or to be more exact the number of "option years" that a player has is a finite resource. Certain kinds of players, especially your 7th starter/long relief types, become much less useful once they run out of options and have to actually take up a big league roster spot all the time.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
ok so "optional waivers" is...
...the same waivers people stick their whole roster on in August for trading purposes?
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
No... but they work exactly the same way
The difference is that in August, players get claimed all the time (Joe Kennedy, Esteban Loaiza, etc.) while apparently almost no one is claimed on optional waivers.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
What I read
was that while he would be a super-two, and therefore eligible for an extra year of arbitration (read: four years of non-slave wages instead of three), it would give them the extra year of club control. Don't know if that's accurate or not.
jeepers - April 14, 2008
I agree 100%
I'd like to see Denorfia and (R)Sweeney get plenty of playing time too... Although with the tight quad it might be academic, maybe CGon should get a quick look now--Start for a week and if he sucks send him back down for a couple months--But I don't mind being patient as I don't think anybody will be a significant upgrade over anybody at this point.
People shouldn't forget that Ryan Sweeney is a year removed from being the White Sox top position prospect and still very young. Denorfia is a classic Billy Beane type. Buck has the best major league track record of those 3, but I'm not 100% sure he even has the most upside, so I wouldn't be surprised to see Buck being the odd guy out when everything is done shaking out.
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
What makes you think..
Buck will be the odd man out? He had a bad slump but busted outta it very nicely.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
I don't "think" that he will
I don't think that he will, his slump has nothing to do with that assessment. It was simply that when things shake out, it wouldn't shock me if Denorfia and Sweeney turn out better major league players than Buck, because those guys have nice potential too. If anything, its optimistic--I'm saying Buck is an 800+ OPS guy that gets on-base, and he could be the odd-man out of the equation. That's good news, not bad news, or bashing on Buck in any way.
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
Sounds fair.
But I just think Buck is all around better than Deno. Sweeny if he develops power could be better than buck.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
The cutoff date for arbitration:
It's intentionally tricky/vague to try and discourage teams from blatantly jerking with players, I'd imagine. Basically, if a player finishes in the top 17% of "service time days" for all players with 2+ years of service time but less than 3, he'll be arbitration eligible.
There are 186 days in a major league season (IIRC), but a "full season" is considered 172 days for counting purposes. So by keeping Longoria down just long enough, the Rays ensured that he'll finish the year with something like 171 service time days - just short of one year. This means that, years from now, he'll have 5.171 days of service time - making him one DAY shy of free agency...but in actually, giving the club an additional full year of club control. (Players aren't FAs until the season after they reach 6 years).
Back to arbitration: You can't say exactly what DAY to call up CarGon and avoid him reaching arbitration status because of that 17% rule. But from Keith Law and Cot's, "The historical cutoff point for Super 2 status is 2 years, 128 days of service, though the requirement has been as high as 2 years, 140 days."
So you can see how you can't narrow it down to a specific date. To be safe though, you could guarantee that if you called him up in mid-June he wouldn't ever be a Super Two. If you called him up in early June he might be, and if you called him up in mid-May he'd certainly be.
But, we know for sure that Longoria will be a Super Two. In fact, after the 2010 season, he'll probably have the most service time of any player with between and 2 and 3 years of service - because he'll have 2 years, 170-171 days (2.171).
I'll re-post this at the bottom of the thread too.
notsellingjeans - April 14, 2008
Altho Its not likely to happen...
why cant it? I mean why couldnt we get a little luck on our side for once. Stay in contention till Gio/Carlos come up, weed out the slackers by June and go on a run with a health Harden/Blanton and Chavy being Chavy. Its not likely but it could happen. And thats why we are fans, you never know.
Syphon - April 14, 2008
I don't even want to know how you got your blanket wet, but
Gio is green and gold jesus, and will save us all!
tresselfan - April 14, 2008
"people called you out in the DLD?"
Foolsh, the most insane regular poster on AN since oaktoon left, called you out, not the whole DLD crew!
salb918 - April 14, 2008
I dunno about the pessimistic look
they've gotten close to nothing from Cust, BigSweeney, Hannahan, and not so much from EBrown. Maybe the pitching won't last, but I wonder if some of the bats might not come around. And maybe CGonzalez might really be good in CF when MiniSweeney and Denorfia cool down. Still early, but still looking good. Hell with small sample sizes. For this year, the small sample size is all we've got.
closetasfan - April 14, 2008
Emil Brown
Am I the only one who thinks Emil Brown is worth every penny this year? I think Emil Brown has given us a little bit more than "close to nothing", hasn't he? He looks really comfortable at the plate, making great swings... and he has played pretty good defense.
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
Brown is a useful 4th OF
He's gotten a couple big knocks, but overall you don't want him playing every day. He's best at what he did in Cleveland--Pinch hitting vs a lefty and then coming into play defense for Cust.
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
I was just arguing the point...
that the A's have rec'd "not so much" from Emil Brown. He has helped significantly in almost half of the teams wins - 1 in Japan and 2 games vs. CC Sabathia.
I agree that Emil Brown is a 4th Outfielder Overall, but he should be the Starting LF or RF vs. all lefthanders.
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
Well, he's been pretty bad...
.231/.268/.359 is pretty bad, and as for helping the team win, he's also hurt in some other games. Second-to-last on the team in wpa. I don't have a problem with Brown really, but he hasn't been good.
mikeA - April 14, 2008
OK
But those bad numbers aren't even close to nothing. :) Anyways, I'm just trying to give Emil Brown some some love.
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
those numbers below replacement, so they are worse than nothing
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
Really
Smartass. You need to check yourself.
Another big RBI by E. Brown tonight. How many games has Emil "Below replacement level" Brown helped us win now???? 4? I mean, seriously. Enough with the E. Brown bashing. The guy is helping this team in key areas - RBI situations and Defense.
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
That's 4 games E. Brown has contributed in a big way.
.318/.348/.500 - Emil vs. Left-Handed Pitching is pretty damn good... Another couple huge hits tonight. .444/.545/.778 w/ RISP this season.
Keep throwing Cust/Sweeney - LF/DH vs. Right-Handed Pitching. Emil should continue to Platoon in LF w/ Cust.
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
Billy is smart...
We Trust In Billy!
FoolshGame22 - April 14, 2008
I had this same thought over the weekend.
Usually, when a team is playing much better than everyone thought, you can pin it to something specific: a player or two hitting out of their mind, the SP's throwing 7 shutout innings every night, something.
But when I have thought back over the last week, I can't think of anyone who made me say "wow-there is no way they do that again..."
For every Smith that regresses some, there should be a Cust who starts to come back around. And while I am not sure this means we are playoff bound, I do think it confirms what a lot of folks thought-we are going to be a fair amount better than the "experts" predicted.
5Aces - April 14, 2008
Timely hitting is the culprit.
Unlike years past, the A's are hitting with RISP and with 2 outs. That won't continue, however...
salb918 - April 14, 2008
Maybe the coaching staff is just emphasizing clutch more this year.
Though I always thought of grit and clutch as being equal components of a harmonious whole, and Kendall and Kotsay are gone, so ... gosh, I'm at a loss.
74mk - April 14, 2008
Don't worry
Denorfia has enough grit, hustle and scrap to make up for both of them.
I mean, sure his faceplant yesterday cost the A's a run... but by the McCarver Theory of Grit Equivalency, one grass stain is worth at least two clutch hits.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
firejoemorgan.com
clutch/grit
see: http://www.firejoemorgan.com
:-D
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
he was kidding...
mikeA - April 14, 2008
im such a sap
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
What that + the game threads prove
is that most people will complain about lack of clutch hitting/leaving guys on base, regardless of how the team is doing it.
mikeA - April 14, 2008
without base clearing HRs
the a's are just gonna be leaving lots of guys on base this year.
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
hrs are a bit overrated
Look at the white sox last year, 2nd in AL in hr, last in runs scored. The Angels didn't hit many home runs last year and had one of the best offenses. What was the difference between the teams? The Angels actually got on base.
Cheezombie - April 14, 2008
HR > 2B
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
obp>hr
Cheezombie - April 14, 2008
high OPB = prerequisite to leaving lots of guys on base. am i missing something?
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
sorry i wasn't referring to leaving guys on base
but successful offenses aren't necessarily the ones that hit home runs.
AL 2007
top 4 teams in runs scored=Yankees, Tigers, Boston, Angels
top 4 teams in obp=Yankees, Red Sox, Tigers, Angels
top 4 teams in hr=Yankees, White Sox, Devil Rays, Rangers
The number 1 priority for offense is to get on base, hr=secondary priority.
Cheezombie - April 14, 2008
preaching to the choir :-)
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
yea yea
but seriously, hrs are overrated, and the stats don't lie
Cheezombie - April 14, 2008
It shouldn't bug me
but it did. "Now they go face the team with the best record in the AL ..."
Seeing as they're only percentage points better than us, you're technically correct, but that's just being a wet blanket for "wet blankets" sake.
You made great points to be sure, but you could write the same thing about Chicago .... A's sweep two.
Vacafan - April 14, 2008
I approve of this wet blanket
For all the reasons outlined by Blez. I can't wait for July to roll around and for teams to come calling for Street and Blanton, maybe even Harden!
grover - April 14, 2008
Well, let's see
I figured the team was a 79-game winner with no contributions from Harden, but he did make a couple of starts.
They're about 2.5 wins ahead of that 79-game pace and Harden will probably show up for another cameo, so right now I figure 82-80.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
sounds about right
I was a little more optimistic and pegged them at like 82, but I probably threw some bias in there too. I just figured they were a little better than last year when they were roughly a 78-79 win team. And was hoping with a few breaks they could finish 6 games better than run differential instead of 6 games worse, which would put them in contention for a division title.
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
Meanwhile, the Devils are down two games to one.
ArakSOT - April 14, 2008
Marty will save the day...
tresselfan - April 14, 2008
Don't get me started on that
The Devils finally got some lucky breaks last night whereas I thought they outplayed the Rangers all three games. Lundquist was just in the Devs heads. I wish they didn't have two days off until the next game!
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
I hate seeing Gomez
wear that hideous sweater..
tresselfan - April 14, 2008
I have a Devils Gomez jersey
and he was always one of my favorites. I just can barely stomach the sight of him now. He makes me want to throw up in my mouth a little bit.
The Devs definitely do need to get another scorer or two this upcoming offseason. I'm fine with their defense, especially with Oduya and Martin coming along so nicely, but they need a pure scorer to help the team out. One of my favorite teams of the Devils was the 2000 Cup team because of the A line and then Gomez and Mogilny backing it up. That team could play D with the best but also score in dynamic fashion.
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
How 'bout them Sharks?
3 goals in less than three minutes, and then zilch
ArakSOT - April 14, 2008
I watched that game and that hit by Sarich
was absolutely Scott Stevensesque. Just absolutely brutal. That could've turned around that entire series, much like the hit on Kozlov in 95 sealed it for the Devils and the hit on Lindros in game 7 of the 2000 Eastern Conference Finals nailed down that one.
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
That Lindros hit was one of my favorites ever
He was notorious for skating across the middle, head down, staring at the puck...
tresselfan - April 14, 2008
There are so many Stevens hits
it's hard to pick one. But I loved the one where he hit Ron Francis and Francis basically was so punch drunk that he couldn't skate back to the bench. It's number four amongst these clips. But man, Stevens was a monster. Half of those clips, you can see teammates helping their players back to the bench.
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
It sure seems like that was "the moment" for this year
when the Sharks suddenly and irrationally decided that they couldn't possibly win.
The 2 OT game in Edmonton in 06... the late game-tying goal in Game 4 of the Wings series last year... and now this.
Seems like it wouldn't be a Ron Wilson team without a psychic collapse in the playoffs.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
Blez, you're being a good parent
You gave us the big cardboard box to play with out in the back yard, but you're reminding those of us who are busy attaching wings and wheels to it that it is just possible that our spaceship may not in fact fly to the moon. Fair enough.
But since nothing we as fans think about the team makes any difference to the ultimate outcome anyway, I think we might as well enjoy our time in this beautiful spaceship.
Englishmajor - April 14, 2008
I will ride around in that spaceship with you!
Man, I hope that thing FLIES!
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
Clay Davenport thinks we're an 83 win team. Angels 87.
Actually he thinks we're an 80 win team, which is 3 games ahead of where it's supposed to be at this point in the season. A's supposedly have a 35% chance to win the division. I think there's plenty of hope and PECOTA seems to agree.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_oddspec.php
Not one of Blez's most stellar pieces.
WaddellCanseco - April 14, 2008
Note the "average wins by position"
For AL West, it's 93 wins, which means that the simulated pennant winner wins about that many games. So it's not good enough for the A's to simply be an 87-win team, which is the Angels mean projection. They have to be better than the Angels/Mariners+whatever luck they run into.
salb918 - April 14, 2008
The A's don't have to win 93 games. They only have to win one more game than the 2nd place team.
That may be more or fewer than 93, but I'm guessing in most simulations it was substantially fewer, given the averages for the 4 teams..
WaddellCanseco - April 14, 2008
Reminds me of the joke about the old man, his wife and the grizzly bear
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
The question there is:
are they projecting Harden and Duchscherer? I bet Clay Davenport the man doesn't think they have a 35% chance at the playoffs...
mikeA - April 14, 2008
In addition to those you've commended . . .
. . . for their defense, how about Daric Barton? We were at the Cleveland game a couple of Saturdays ago and saw him make a very nice, very smooth pickup of a hot smash down the first-base line. Then I heard (but didn't see) the 3-6-3 DP yesterday that Korach said Barton was spectacular in starting. Has anyone seen him enough to weigh in on his defense (can't have a small sample size, can we?)? Seems pretty strong to me based on what I've seen and heard so far.
camperdog - April 14, 2008
Currently his eleventybillion Ks are outweighing his defense.
But it was sure nice to see him hit that opposite field 2-run single over the weekend.
mikev - April 14, 2008
Barton
I've seen Barton miss an easy pop-up by Mike Lowell, adding a couple more stressful pitches to Joe Blanton's Night (vs. Boston on Opening Night in Oakland). Then, I saw Barton bobble a "routine" DP vs. Cleveland, helping Cleveland win that game. He seems to be getting more comfortable at Firstbase, but he still makes me very nervous over there.
Colorado Fan - April 14, 2008
Popup vs Cleveland
He dropped a popup a good defensive 1B wouldn't miss vs Cleveland too.
The fact that he's making great plays, but botching some too actually leaves me with optimism. Don't forget he was a natural catcher (although a bad one) and, this is coming out of my ass, didn't they try him in OF before 1B in the minors when looking for a position for him?
Hopefully with more maturity we see more of the solid/great plays and fewer of the bad ones. Tejada used to be like that too, and eventually matured into an excellent defender .
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
at least for the a's (tejada)
i haven't followed his defense much, but i think it has decline sharply since he left?
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
Third base
It wasn't a pretty sight.
Tejada's D has dropped off, but not by as much as people think. He's still a league-average defender.
PaulThomas - April 14, 2008
Blez, you spent too many years on the east coast...
...seduced by Red Sox Neurosis ( a mental condition that still pervades that part of the country).
These A's are young, infused with enough experience, and have some excellent pitching and defense. THAT, will carry this team far.
I remain hopeful that Harden and Duke will contribute to b/w 50 - 66% of their collective starts this season. And you will be able to ride a southern california wave all the way to the AL West title. Hang on Dude, it's gonna be fun!
Gerard - April 14, 2008
I've been optimistic in the past
so it's not like I haven't felt good about the A's chances before. And hell, I'd love to be wrong about this...
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
.500+ team
I honestly think they A's will finish above .500. I'm not sure where that will put them in the division but I think rumors of their demise have been greatly exaggerated.
jasonh - April 14, 2008
2005 Redux
85 wins or so this year, a commendable feat in the eyes of the Eastern Bloc Experts who predicted a long, painful season. I'm still stuck in 2009 mode, where everything I see now translates to salivating about the competitive teams that will be fielded in the near future.
A Gonzalez/Sweeney/Buck outfield? Yes, please. Blanton, Duke, Eveland, Gonzalez, and Smith in the rotation? 10-4. If they magically find that rarest of Oakland creatures-- an impact right-handed bat-- that's a scary team.
For now, though, I'm content to see development rather than W's.
Joey C. - April 14, 2008
+1
Syphon - April 14, 2008
That's how I've been approaching this season
And I don't want to let myself get optimistic about the team until they're consistently competitive for a while.
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
Enjoying the ride
I'm just enjoying the 8-5 start and the fabulous pitching. It doesn't matter that I think we'll end up a few south of .500, as long as we're winning right now and have some scary potential for the next few years, I'm going to enjoy it. I love watching the young guys succeed.
JJ - April 14, 2008
They're young, but they can still pitch.
And any team that can run out five solid starting pitchers--which we can still say even with Duke and Harden out--is still going to sniff competitiveness, no matter how much they suck at hitting baseballs.
jeepers - April 14, 2008
How are the A's doing it? A few MVP performances, that's how
Overall MVP: Bobby Crosby, holy carp!
Pitching MVP: Dana Eveland
If someone had told AN that 2 weeks into the season Harden and Duke would be out, and Cust would be in miserable slump would any of us thought the A's had a chance? no.
If Cust can find his stroke, If we can get 30 starts out of Ducharden...
Keep it up Dana and BoCroz
ChadGod - April 14, 2008
Don't know that Cust will find it
Everyone knows not to throw a fastball at him. So they give him curves and sliders and we have to sit and cringe. Maybe the Cust experiment needs to end if by Mid-May this continues.
HRH - April 14, 2008
Cust has always been streaky
I think he's pressing right now, especially in RBI situations. He's not dumb, he knows he's going to get a hell of a lot of breaking pitches. He'll eventually lay off, take even more walks, and wait for the occasional 3-1 fastball grooved down the middle. I don't think his stroke is the problem-- it's his patience.
Joey C. - April 14, 2008
Who peed on your blanket?
Why, with the blank canvas of a new season, take such a pessimistic view of the future? Sure, the guys you mention could wear down and have mediocre years, but they can just as easily have a magical year and overachieve. I don't know about you but I think they are going to be much better than expected...I since the first week of spring and this start has done nothing but buoy that OPTIMISM....signed, Mr Dry Blanket
OptimistPrime - April 14, 2008
Poppy - April 14, 2008
LOL
Tyler Bleszinski - April 14, 2008
I'd much rather be an A's fan feeling optimistic after a good start
than a Tigers fan who is wondering why his team can't seem to buy a win.
I've always liked the fact that being an A's fan does not come with a lot of expectations. We feel great when we win because a lot of times it is unexpected and when we lose in years like this year, we can say we are rebuilding and mean it.
I likes me my A's!
oaklandSMASH - April 14, 2008
Tigers lineup most overrated lineup ever. Still can't believe people were predicting 1000 runs
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
I thought their lineup was solid
Granderson, Polanco, Magglio, Cabrera, Sheffield - that's a solid 1-5.
I've never been as high on their pitching as it seems like everybody else always is. Verlander is the only starter they have that's above average.
mikev - April 14, 2008
gotta be solid 1-9 to score 1000 runs
Make no mistake, their hitting should come around and they should still sport one of the better lineups, enough to overcome the bullpen injuries and the shaky starting (Somethings not right with Bonderman, Rogers is ancient,etc)
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
ugh need an edit function
meant for the enough to overcome part to be a question:
"but enough to over come the bullpen injuries and shaky starting?"
mrrickyg - April 14, 2008
Bonderman = overrated
I know he's still only 25, but he's been in the pros for 5 years and has a total of one season with an ERA+ better than 100
mikev - April 14, 2008
Just enjoy the ride
We lead the AL in wins a couple weeks in. Watching the kids grow into their own before your eyes is priceless.
whaxed - April 14, 2008
The Bad News Bears
WON!
"Fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee..." Go boys, Go!
149 - April 14, 2008
ergh
Float... float like a butterfly. I hate Mondays.
149 - April 14, 2008
Arbitration cutoff/Evan Longoria/Carlos Gonzalez
I posted this above too but it's buried in 15 replies and a few people had asked, so...
The arbitration "cutoff" for becoming a Super Two arbitration-eligible player is not a specific day. It's intentionally tricky/vague to try and discourage teams from blatantly jerking with players, I'd imagine. Basically, if a player finishes in the top 17% of "service time days" for all players with 2+ years of service time but less than 3, he'll be arbitration eligible.
There are 186 days in a major league season (IIRC), but a "full season" is considered 172 days for counting purposes. So by keeping Longoria down just long enough, the Rays ensured that he'll finish the year with something like 171 service time days - just short of one year. This means that, years from now, he'll have 5.171 days of service time - making him one DAY shy of free agency...but in actually, giving the club an additional full year of club control. (Players aren't eligible to become FAs until the season after they reach 6 years).
Back to arbitration: You can't say exactly what DAY to call up CarGon and avoid him reaching arbitration status because of that 17% rule. But from Keith Law and Cot's, "The historical cutoff point for Super 2 status is 2 years, 128 days of service, though the requirement has been as high as 2 years, 140 days."
So you can see why you can't narrow it down to a specific date. To be safe though, you could guarantee that if you called him up in mid-June he wouldn't ever be a Super Two. If you called him up in early June he might be, and if you called him up in mid-May he'd certainly be.
But, we know for sure that Longoria will be a Super Two. In fact, after the 2010 season, he'll probably have the most service time of any player with between and 2 and 3 years of service - because he'll have 2 years, 170-171 days (2.171).
*This is less of an issue with a player like Coco Crisp (who was a Super Two once) than it is with Evan Longoria or Ryan Braun, though. Crisp wasn't considered one of the top 10 prospects in the game when he came up, so it was a bit of a surprise that he did as well as he did. Perhaps the Indians gave little clock to him ever being a Super Two, because they might've thought they were bringing him up as a stopgap solution, and would send him down again eventually. For mediocre prospects, teams probably don't give as much thought to their arbitration clocks...because you can predict that a mediocre prospect will get sent down at some point again anyway.
With a Longoria or a Braun, you pretty much know that the moment they hit the bigs, they're gonna stick - so you can plan out their MLB service-time from the point of their callup.
We could debate if Carlos Gonzalez falls into the category of those latter two. I don't think it's guaranteed that he'll be ready to be called anytime before mid-June, and I don't think he presents the upgrade to us that Braun did to the Brewers, so there's less to gain from rushing him. And even if CarGon does come up at some point this year, he could also find his way back to AAA again, which would make a lot of our Arby Clock/FA timeline discussions moot.
notsellingjeans - April 14, 2008
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.