Imagine playing "musical chairs" at a party, where the music stops and there's an empty chair but nobody standing looking for a place to sit. That's more like the "musical chairs" problem the A's could find themselves with at the one position commonly thought to be over-crowded: 1B.

Brett Wallace? That's the guy who has never actually played over at 1B, the guy who continues to play at the position the A's really need a solution. Sure, he could move over to 1B at some point and stay there, but that's a bit different from saying he's adding to a glut. That's kind of like hearing that someone is from Michigan and replying, "Really? I have a brother who's from Wisconsin."
Speaking of my brother, he and his family had a turkey for Thanksgiving again this year. And as usual, they ate lobster. You see, each year my brother (I'm the normal one), his wife, and their three kids, adopt a foster-turkey -- which is different from a Foster Farms turkey in that these turkeys are neither frozen nor deceased. Tom, as this year's guest of honor was called, was very much alive, trotting around the house while somewhere upstream in Philadelphia a lobster went, "Aw man, really?" to a skilled fisherman. However, as my brother projects to be no more than an average 1Bman, he will no longer be part of this conversation.
Chris Carter? Well, in contrast to Wallace 1B is exactly where Carter has been playing but it seems pretty widely agreed that it's one position where he won't stick. In other words, Wallace hasn't yet proven he can't stick at 3B and hasn't shown he can play 1B, but Carter has shown what he can't do at 1B and it's a lot. LF seems like a good bet, and DH appears to be in Carter's future ahead of "happy 30th birthday, Chris!" 1B, on the other hand, is looking less for Carter like a position he'll play long-term, and more like a place he has stood near for far too long.
Sean Doolittle? Here's a guy who finally has the right combination of "plays the position well" and "might hit big league pitching." However, he now has multiple strikes against his making it as a major league 1Bman. Generally healthy, Doolittle suffered a rather significant knee injury last season, one that could impact him into this year. So before we worry about where he'll play and how well he'll play, we need to wait to see when he can play and whether he can come back at 100%. Then he has to be good enough for the big leagues -- which was never a certainty, just a hope. And then 1B has to be where he lands, and it's not where he was primarily playing at the time he lost a knee.
Speaking of which, I'm thinking of starting a knee replacement company. I'm going to call it the Knee Co. (pronounced "NEE-koh") and...well, honestly that's as far as I've gotten.
All of which brings us back to Daric Barton. A guy who didn't take at catcher, couldn't handle 3B, but has found 1B much to his liking -- so much so that he singles a lot, but then so did Hatteberg -- and now stands as an incumbent who is still young, can field the position well, and was always touted for his hitting.
Could 9 Daric Bartons outscore the 1927 Yankees, or would they just fall off, one by one, into a shallow pool in some Synchonized Swimming nightmare? I don't know. But right now Barton is more than the best 1Bman the A's have. He might actually be the only one.
0 recs | 178 comments
Barton is on the chopping block....
It is time to put up or shut-up!!!
MMunoz33 - November 28, 2009
If none of these options is viable......
then what about trading for the remaining two years of Adam Dunn’s contract? Barton, HRod /JGray, Simmons, for Dunn. I know it’s not fair money wise but what the hell? At least you have yourself a guy that mashes and you still have two years to figure out the 1st base conundrum. Go A’s!
{waits for the “Adam Dunn sucks” mob to arrive….}
mrod - November 28, 2009
Adam Dunn, 2009: 1.2 WAR
Daric Barton, 2009: 0.7 WAR
Play Barton a full season and he’s actually more valuable than Dunn at 1B, especially for $10M less.
mikev - November 28, 2009
I'm starting to come aboard on this WAR
since it seems to place some value on actual worth. and in this economy…
BleedGreen - November 28, 2009
:0)
Any hope for Crosby in those Sabermetrics???
MMunoz33 - November 28, 2009
Theres no hope for Crosby anywhere
even wrapped in bacon and smothered in special sauce.
BleedGreen - November 28, 2009
WAR
What is it good for?
kaweahkaweah - November 28, 2009
Absolutely nothing.
Say it again.
GreenNGoldSooner - November 28, 2009
it again
ChuckBudd - November 29, 2009
What????
Dunn .267 38HR 105 RBI in 2009
Barton career in 678 AB’s .249 16 HR 79 RBI
Barton is more valuable. To the opposing team!
fansince1980 - November 28, 2009
"And now on to the BOTTOM of the 1st..."
Nico - November 28, 2009
No one's disputing that Dunn's better with the bat.
But Dunn was so unbelievably bad with the glove last year that he really wasn’t all that valuable of a player.
danmerqury - November 28, 2009
yeah but if he's playing the place with the least defensive value, 1B,
the damage will be much less than the metrics make them out to be.
1B defense = who the eff cares.
PL78 - November 28, 2009
Nope
It’s that bad.
The only way to limit the damage Dunn does is to cashier his glove completely and restrict him to DH and PH duty. There is no other position at which he will not cost you more runs.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
A run allowed is a run allowed.
It doesn’t matter where on the diamond it occurs. Of course, the damage he’s doing is lessened by playing 1B, but even at that “easy” position, he’s costing his team an unacceptable amount of runs.
danmerqury - November 29, 2009
Unfortunately, we're not playing fantasy baseball.
Guys have to actually take the field.
Well, Dunn shouldn’t, but he does.
mikev - November 28, 2009
its funny because mikev's comparison
is what makes me really hate WAR sometimes.
PL78 - November 28, 2009
Well that WAR factors in his atrocious defense.
He’d be an awesome DH.
travdog6 - November 28, 2009
And I see I've been beaten to the point.
By miles.
travdog6 - November 29, 2009
Adam Dunn is no more a Major League Baseball first baseman than I am
He’s a DH. Period.
The A’s have no difficulty filling THAT position.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
We have an entire AAA team ready for it
and an incumbent we don’t seem to mind losing. Honestly I would not miss Cust at all if we got rid of him, but I will still root for him to succeed elsewhere. Kinda like Matt Stairs. Actually I lie, kinda like someone way less scrappy than Matt Stairs.
BleedGreen - November 28, 2009
Marco.... Scutaro
Blicks - November 28, 2009
How about Chavez at first????
MMunoz33 - November 28, 2009
i dont think
a move to first base will cure his liking to lots and lots of surgeries. i have a feeling he won’t wanna play anywhere other than 3rd and maybe dh
thewhizkid - November 28, 2009
Daric Barton
I’m fine with him being the first baseman in 2010. I think we should give him a chance over the course of a full season to see what he can do. If he doesn’t perform, however, I think this is the final straw.
Rated-R Superstar - November 28, 2009
It just seems upsetting to me
that at only age 24 were already halfway to putting him out to pasture. Something about that just doesn’t sit right with me.
BleedGreen - November 28, 2009
Didn't he already have a full season?
Two seasons ago he had nearly a full season, and it was pretty historicaly bad. If you are going to be the “next Mark Grace” you need to hit for average and play good defense to justify your lack of power. In fairness, Barton’s defefense has markedly improved, but his ability to hit for average has never translated to the big leagues. Young player with old player skills. He may Ben Grieve himself out of baseball.
I say put Powell at first base, or get a stop gap like Troy Glaus. Why can’t Cust play first base. You would think with his skill set (or lack there of) he would try to learn the position.
StewCrew - November 28, 2009
By the time a fly ball gets to Cust in RF, he still seems surprised.
I doubt this would translate well to playing 1B.
Nico - November 28, 2009
LOL....
MMunoz33 - November 28, 2009
Yeah, he'd still be surprised when he realized the ball is in RF.
UncleLeo - November 28, 2009
I say put him at SS
I mean, he’s going to suck defensively no matter where he is, so at least let’s have a 25HR SS and one less hole to fill on the left side of the infield. 111
Nico - November 28, 2009
+1
thewhizkid - November 28, 2009
Cust at 1B
Just because 1B is the easiest defensive position doesn’t mean every defensive klutz can do it. The main reason 1B is accessible to some players who can’t play any other position well is that it doesn’t require a guy to move very far. But it still requires a certain amount of nimbleness and the ability to catch balls. My recollection of Cust in the outfield is that his main deficiency is not an inability to move very far, but rather an inability to catch a ball that’s within reach. Playing 1B would just give him more opportunities to muff a ball coming right at him.
iglew - November 28, 2009
Dude.....you said "muff ball".......
:0
mrod - November 28, 2009
heh heh, heh heh
iglew - November 28, 2009
I'm pretty sure he hit .270 with a .370 OBP last year
mikev - November 28, 2009
It was one fucking season
Why do people crucify him for 1 season? I don’t get it. Especially one when he was unlucky, at least according to BABIP.
hero66 - November 28, 2009
Know what's hilarious though?
The people who want Trevor Cahill to be the #3 starter next year.
mikev - November 28, 2009
What the crap will the rotation be anyway?
Brett Anderson…
Dallas Braden…
a crap load of walks…
Repeat.
jeffro - November 28, 2009
I have hopes for Gio.
He’s great when he’s on. Terrible when he’s not. The hope is that he’ll somehow learn to be on more often.
iglew - November 28, 2009
In which case if he can't make it as a pitcher,
at least he’ll make a helluva kitchen light.
Nico - November 28, 2009
If he could make it as a Giodesic dome
the light would be more consistent than if it were placed above a kitchen sink….
I am struggling with my puns today.
Aufheben - November 28, 2009
I like the Metro as well
But I think a lot of people have put way more expectation that is due. He has not really shown great control at any point. Though, I was a believer in Gio when I was sitting in Penn Station watching him dominate the Yankees last July.
I actually think he and Cahill will make a decent back end of a rotation within the next two seasons. My big question mark is really on two other guys… Mazzaro and Braden. As in, can Vinny throw strikes cause he is as filthy as all get out when he does? And, is Braden really a major league starter in the long haul?
jeffro - November 28, 2009
"than is due"
jeffro - November 28, 2009
Curveball lefties can make or break your team
Gio could fall anywhere on the spectrum from 2001 Barry Zito to 2007 Rich Hill to, um, 2008 Rich Hill.
That being said, I think he’s (overall) a somewhat better prospect than Mazzaro and Cahill. Ultimately I believe he’ll settle in and become a quality SP.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
On what are you basing you belief that Gio will settle?
Personally, I can’t see enough evidence that’d push me one way or another, aside from the hope of a general maturing. Is it more than that?
bobnothing - November 28, 2009
Pretty much my sentiments
Gio has had trouble throwing strikes, but has also struck out a lot of batters.This seems to be his pattern through the minors as well. He could go either way as far as I see it.
Cahill is the same in my mind. He has more than a strike out an inning over his minor league career. His issue last year was being in Oakland when he should have been in Sacramento.
We shall see how it all plays out next season.
jeffro - November 28, 2009
Whether you want to call it luck or lack of composure or whatever,
he’s seemed kinda prone to the big inning so far in his MLB career. (Career LOB% (strand rate) of only 64.7%.) Dallas Braden had similar issues early in his career and ultimately, whether it was regression to the mean or just reduction in nervousness (I suppose a mechanical fix to the stretch might also impact this), he was able to fix the problem.
His HR/FB rate is also outrageously high for his career.
I think both of those are fixable problems and areas where pitchers tend to improve as they gain more experience.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
A 4.42 tRA* as a 22 year old rookie in a 1/2 season isn't bad
True, the range of outcomes is large, but there is lots of reason for optimism.
WaddellCanseco - November 29, 2009
Yeah... I hope you're right.
As I say, I wouldn’t charactorize myself as optimistic or pessimistic on him – at this stage, I feel that just about anything could happen, from unquestioned superstar to, well, learning to play the outfield. ok, maybe not that one.
I’d even go so far as to say this season may still not tell us one way or another – I feel like he could have another couple of seasons of inconsistancy, of brilliance mixed with meltdowns.
Let’s hope it all comes right, though
bobnothing - November 29, 2009
+1
King Richard - November 28, 2009
I love how people refuse to believe Cahill will ever be any good, or will improve
oh geez a rushed prospect had a bad year whoda thunk it?
PL78 - November 28, 2009
and yet, in the same breath, Barton sucks and should be cast aside
at the ripe old age of 23.
mikev - November 28, 2009
normally he wouldnt need to be
but Chris Carter, Sean Dolittle and Brett Wallace all exist. And their bats hit HR’s, Barton’s doesnt.
PL78 - November 28, 2009
Wallace plays 3rd
Doolittle was hurt all year (and is apparently also a good outfielder)
Carter is already talked about as a DH only and is trying to learn left field.
and hey, remember when we had Hatte still and this super awesome 1B prospect that we got when we traded Mulder, and he was the next big thing at first???
mikev - November 28, 2009
Yeah...
whatever become of that guy…
;)
BleedGreen - November 29, 2009
thats wishcasting though
Id KILL to have your above scenario become true, but the odds are we are going to need 1B open for one of those guys. Dolittle plays the OF, true, but where do you put Carter + Sweeney? Having Barton at 1B gives us no positional flexibility, we are essentially locked in with:
1B: Barton
2B: Ellis—>Cardenas
SS: Pennington
3B: Wallace
C: Suzuki
LF: Dolittle
CF: Davis
RF: Sweeney
DH: Carter
And the team has already made noise about not starting Wallace or Carter in the bigs as a DH….so where does that leave Dolittle? Or Cust+Hairston for that matter? These are problems that are right there for us, we dont have 3 years to wait on Carter+Wallace, those dudes are essentially ready-now.
Barton not being in the organization will allow us the ability to move Wallace/Carter/Dolittle/Donaldson around, I have no idea why youre so concerned with keeping Barton here to the detriment of 4 near blue chip (2 blue chips and 2 who are thereabouts) prospects. If Barton was a 3B/SS Id have absolutely no problem keeping him, his bat will eventually come around. Im also a fan of making him our opening day 1B in 2010, but midyear and beyond Id look into dealing him for rotation help. Blocking guys who have higher ceilings than him isnt smart.
PL78 - November 30, 2009
You're trying to create logjams
But you’re using shitty players to do it. By the time all 3 of Carter, Wallace, and Doolittle are MLB ready, Cust and Hairston will be gone and then you’re left with this:
Barton 1B, Carter LF, Sweeney CF, Doolittle RF, Wallace 3B.
Of course, this is assuming they ALL pan out, and it’s seriously starting to irk me that everybody is just going to pencil in Doolittle as a blue chip prospect ready to push Barton out of a job when he’s less advanced than Barton was, nevermind the fact that he just missed a whole fucking year due to injury.
mikev - November 30, 2009
But I don't want this old toy any more.
I want whatever it if you’re hiding in your other hand.
iglew - November 30, 2009
well I personally like Dolittle a lot...
…I dont think “everybody” rates him as highly as I do though.
Its funny, if Barton had missed all of 08 with injury we would all be backing him hard to be at 1B. That year was just so so miserable to watch and we all remember it too well, he’s going to have to really mash in 2010 to get us to forget it.
PL78 - December 1, 2009
Wait, so you're unsatisfied with Barton at first,
and you want to play riskier, worse players instead? I’m not sure I follow this logic.
lenscrafters - November 28, 2009
Older
You forgot older. He wants to replace “old player skills” with guys who are actually just old.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
When people talk about old player skills,
they’re talking about guys declining in their early 30s.
It’s a good thing when guys who are 24 have old player skills… as long as you haven’t signed them to a 10-year contract or something…
Also, the statement that Barton’s 2008 was “historically bad” is frankly an insult to history. He posted a season that was just slightly above replacement level. Jason Giambi’s 2009, to take merely a particularly psychologically “available” one of what have to be 38429 different examples throughout MLB history, was worse.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
I'm definitely not up on any recent research on this
but I do remember Bill James hypothesizing back in the 1980s that young players with “old player skills” (low BA, good BB, good HR, low SB, left side of the defensive spectrum) tend to lose their productivity earlier than more typical young players of equal quality. His original example, IIRC, was Tom Brunansky.
Nick - November 28, 2009
Thome would fall into this category and has been good into his late 30s
D. Ortiz is still good (it turns out). I wonder if it isn’t so much that those players tend to lose productivity early more than others do, so much as when they lose hitting ability they have lost their only ability, whereas other guys can still help on defense, or steal bases, if their hitting goes first.
Nico - November 28, 2009
Ortiz
isn’t all that old, and he sure looked like he was starting to lose it last year. Thome is a good example, though I guess you could have a “HOF-talent” exception for any guideline like this. It would be more useful for someone like, say, Pat Burrell, maybe.
Nick - November 28, 2009
I guess my point is, if Burrell loses a little speed will we notice or care?
Whereas if he loses a little hitting ability, it might be a bigger problem.
Nico - November 28, 2009
Ortiz is probably older than he says
richwol1 - November 29, 2009
Not that it matters
but his BA was .270 last year.
Really, people. Daric Barton is not as bad as you all think he is.
mikev - November 28, 2009
Barton? I thought we were talking about Dunn!
Dunn is like a poster child for “old player skills”. Barton really isn’t — especially since he doesn’t K much or hit that many HRs.
I like Barton, and I’m fine with him having the job next year. I do think we have to remember that he has a track record of being a streaky hitter, and of starting the season off slowly (he’s done this in his last 2 AAA seasons, as well as in his 1 full season in the majors). So we just have to stay away from the panic button.
Nick - November 28, 2009
He also provides a decent player at a position other than 3B or SS,
and the A’s need to focus on the left-side of the infield, rather than fretting about whether Barton is “good” or “ok.”
Nico - November 28, 2009
Staying away from the panic button...
…is of course an AN specialty!
GreenNGoldSooner - November 28, 2009
did you take defense out of the equation though?
Im so sick of hearing about how great Barton’s glove is at a non-premium defensive spot as our team offense continues to flounder and we let an underachieving bat play at the big hitter’s spot.
Barton’s offensive season from a 1B in 2008, was extremely bad. Giambi’s 09 was indeed better. Barton’s young and was rushed ala Cahill (who was also extremely bad in 09) so he deserves another chance, but with the glut of players we have who can (and NEED) to be at 1B, make Barton perfectly expendible, which is a shame, because he’s going to be a pretty good hitter when he’s 28.
PL78 - November 30, 2009
Why would you take defense out of the equation?
That’s like only counting a home run if it was hit to right field.
danmerqury - November 30, 2009
Did I TAKE DEFENSE OUT OF THE EQUATION?
No. I also did not take hitting out of the equation. I also did not judge the players by how famous they were, how many steroids they took five years ago, whose hair looks better, or any other bizarre, made-up, and/or irrelevant criteria. I did not engage in cherrypicking or artificially limit my data sample to make my side of the argument appear credible.
Got any other sleazy, intellectually bankrupt things to ask me if I did NOT do?
PaulThomas - November 30, 2009
lol @ "intellectually bankrupt"
so its not within your means to give an answer to the question of “how good a HITTER is player A?” Youd think something like “He’s got good defense, so he’s valuable” right? That sounds like a politician ignoring the question. Barton was indeed historically bad at hitting while playing 1B in 2008. Defense isnt really in the equation when talking about 1B.
PL78 - November 30, 2009
You might want to stop saying,
“defense isn’t really in the equation when talking about 1B” because it’s just not true. Defense may be more important at SS than at 1B, but it’s hardly irrelevant at 1B. If it were, Adam Dunn would be a better player, Jack Cust would be a lot more valuable, and Chris Carter would have a brighter future.
Defense is important at 1B, just not as important as it is up the middle.
Nico - November 30, 2009
Yeah, that's flat out false.
Defense is absolutely in the equation at 1B. Ask Nationals fans how they feel everytime Adam Dunn fails to snare a ball that would have prevented a run. Like Nico says, Adam Dunn would do a hell of a lot more damage at SS, but you can’t just ignore 1B defense, especially if you’re as bad as Dunn is.
danmerqury - November 30, 2009
Last time I checked, they had a position where players didn't play defense
[looks it up]
Oh, right, it’s the designated hitter position.
It turns out— you might not have known this previously— that players designated “first basemen” actually do, in fact, tend to stand on the field near first base, and occasionally baseballs happen to be hit somewhere in their vicinity, and the good ones like Albert Pujols and Daric Barton happen to pick up a lot of those balls and turn them into “outs,” while the bad ones like Adam Dunn and Jason Giambi let a lot of them go by them for things like “doubles” and “triples.” Surprisingly, this means that their teams allow more “runs” to score, which (because baseball is this weird game where the team with more runs wins) means their teams lose more games than they would if they had certain other people standing near first base a lot of the time.
PaulThomas - November 30, 2009
You had to look that up?
Daniel777 - November 30, 2009
It's in
Bill James’ Baseball Concrete.
Nico - November 30, 2009
I don't know what's worse
PL78 saying that 1B defense doesn’t matter, or PaulThomas having to look up the existence of the DH.
Nico’s nonsensical joke is a distant 3rd. I think all the recent turkey secks™ has blunted his funny bone, so he gets a pass.
Daniel777 - November 30, 2009
PaulThomas - November 30, 2009
Daniel777 - November 30, 2009
hold on hold on
“defense isnt really in the equation when talking about 1B” = “1B defense is absolutely irrelevant”??? Since when do those words equal each other? Oh weight, its just another an old fashioned AN inmature gang up, i get it.
You guys are really twisting my words here. And it sucks. PT’s smarmy, clearly obvious post is based off said twisted word, thus making me look bad. You guys need to really not be doing shit like this. You should apologize…
Back on track, I like the way defensive win shares are weighted, it shows how little value 1B defense has, and how important catcher defense is.
PL78 - December 1, 2009
wait weight wait weight
as you all can plainly see, i do good enough job in making myself look bad on my own :)
PL78 - December 1, 2009
Those two statements look exactly identical to me
If something is relevant, it is in the equation for WAR (well, except non-SB baserunning— not sure why they haven’t gotten it together to add that yet, but anyone can feel free to add it manually, regardless). Good analysts do not deliberately leave relevant factors out of the equation. Saying someone should leave a factor out is saying that factor is absolutely irrelevant.
The statement “1B defense isn’t in the equation” is nothing more nor less than an assertion that it is so de minimis that it’s a waste of time even to consider it. And that is— simply— wrong. It’s not “twisting your words.” It’s what you said. The person “twisting words”, if anyone, is you, in trying to unearth some nonexistent distinction between the two.
PaulThomas - December 1, 2009
again, youre posting something I didnt write
never once did i say "1B defense isn’t in the equation".
I used a qualifyer of “not really in the equation” in terms of overall player value because it does exist, yet its value isnt of extreme importance when taking into consideration how the player helps (or in Bartons 08 case) hurts the team offensively. This is where we differ, apparently. I weight defense as being crucially important at the positions of C, SS, CF & 3B, and its less important than at the other positions, 1B being the least important. Now, you could not be a dick (what a revelation!) and not post some ultra-sarcastic post based off an edited in line my post and instead argue why 1B is important to you, or do what you did, make a really lame and sarcastic post.
AN is just brutal at times like these, cant we just talk actual baseball without being crude? How about asking someone to verify their position if its unclear to you first? Is that so effing hard?
PL78 - December 1, 2009
We ask all the time
and you rarely do it, and at the same time ignore it when the position that proves you wrong is verified.
So, I’ll ask: What’s the point?
mikev - December 1, 2009
But if "1B defense is not really in the equation,"
then what should cause us to think you believe it is important?
For example, when trying to solve x+2y=6 and x-y=3, I consider z to be quite unimportant because it’s not really in the equation. x, on the other hand, is important to me. But then again, it’s in the equations I’m trying to solve so it’s really not that surprising.
By the way, x=4 and y=1. Not just in the equations I used as examples. Always. Now you can solve Algebra, easily!
Nico - December 1, 2009
You asked if I took it out of the equation
and then said it “isn’t really in the equation.”
If you can somehow extract from those two statements the proposition that the speaker believes that 1B defense has any impact whatsoever, you should consider going to law school yourself. Only in the most narrowly technical sense imaginable is the first line of this post true.
I could have not been sarcastic, but that would increase the likelihood of future posters saying things like “did you remove [important factor of analysis] from the equation?” again, so… nah.
PaulThomas - December 1, 2009
i agree fully
This an era where if a guy is not a major league hitter by age 22 or 23, he is a bust. Carlos Pena was a bust to many fans after a month and look at what he blossomed into. Hell Ryan Howard did not come up as a 22 year old. He spent years devloping in the minors. Give these young players some time.
Man Bear Pig - November 28, 2009 via mobile
How many years (and organizations) did it take Pena to blossom?
Seems way more patient than any single team can afford.
UncleLeo - November 29, 2009
Actually, Pena's stats are amazingly good for a player who kept getting dump-traded and/or released
He’s only ever had one season where he had a below-average OPS+, and that was in 37 plate appearances for Boston in 2006. (He did perform poorly for Oakland in the partial season when he was here in 2002, but made up for it with good performance for Detroit.)
I mean, he wasn’t a megastar with the Tigers or anything, but he was consistently a league-average 1B man. I have no idea why they cut him loose.
For a variety of reasons, Carlos Pena is a very poor comparison to Daric Barton.
PaulThomas - November 29, 2009
Maybe teams got impatient...
…because they had higher expectations than “league average”.
I agree that a Barton/Pena comparison isn’t fair. I was addressing the notion that we should have unending patience with Barton (or anyone else, for that matter) because Pena eventually reached his full potential.
UncleLeo - November 29, 2009
Yeah, but like I said, it's an inapposite comparison
With the exception of the A’s, who got Ted Lilly (i.e. real value) for him, none of the teams that dumped Pena should have done so. Teams should have had “patience” with Pena because he was already decently good at baseball, not because he had some kind of untapped Superman inside.
Barton has yet to show that he is good at baseball; the reason for keeping him around is entirely related to untapped potential. (Which is not to say it’s not real— just hasn’t been demonstrated in the majors yet.)
PaulThomas - November 29, 2009
Peña for Lilly
That was the three-way trade where we gave up Bonderman as PTBNL, too, right?
(And if you want to play the game of chaining trades, you could say we gave up Peña for Kielty!)
iglew - November 30, 2009
All trade strings die out eventually
The question is how much value they rack up in the process. That one racked up a fair bit because of Lilly’s good performance in 2002-2003.
Anyway, the full trade was Bonderman, Franklyn German, and Pena to Detroit, Weaver to New York, Lilly, Jason Arnold and John-Ford Griffin to Oakland. Arnold went on to be traded for Erubiel Durazo as part of a bizarrely complex four-player deal (that sub-string died out when Durazo hit free agency), while Griffin netted Jason Perry, who netted Jack Hannahan, who netted Justin Souza.
So actually, that trade string is (albeit by a thread) still alive in the A’s system.
PaulThomas - November 30, 2009
We could trace it backward.
We got Peña from Texas along with Mike Venafro, in exchange for Jason Hart, Mario Ramos, Gerald Laird, and Ryan Ludwick.
I’m pretty sure all four of those guys were Oakland drafts, though, so that’s a dead-end.
iglew - November 30, 2009
I'm curious as to when Mark Mulder's trade thread will end, if ever.
We’ve still got Barton, Anderson, Eveland, Carter, Cunningham, and Wallace. It’s the gift that keeps on giving.
danmerqury - November 30, 2009
same reason why the Twins cut Papi loose
many teams do really dumb things sometimes.
PL78 - November 30, 2009
I guess if the A's are not really competing in 2010 (again)
then allowing Barton the season to show his worth makes sense. Maybe he’ll surprise all of us and bust out with a huge year….I’m just not counting on it. The only reason I suggested Dunn is because of his power at the corner. I know his defense is pretty shoddy but what are the other options out there, besides Glaus, which I would be open to by the way…..
mrod - November 28, 2009
Nat's would demand a lot
They need Dunn to sell tickets and to compliment Zimmerman. He would cost a couple of decent pitching prospects and I don’t feel like forking them over for 1 year of service before he jumps for a big contract
ru155 - November 28, 2009
Yeah, rumor around DC is that ownership, and not necessarily Rizzo
was very adamant on not trading Dunn last deadline.
Blicks - November 28, 2009
other options
Here’s the list of 1B free agents from MLBTR. I can’t say I’m very excited about any of them. Three of them we’ve already rejected.
Rich Aurilia, Hank Blalock, Russell Branyan, Bobby Crosby, Carlos Delgado, Nomar Garciaparra, Jason Giambi, Ross Gload, Nick Johnson, Adam LaRoche, Doug Mientkiewicz, Kevin Millar, Fernando Tatis, Jim Thome, Chad Tracy, Dmitri Young
iglew - November 28, 2009
I hope Ed Crosby doesn't see this list
and aren’t half of these people retired?
stormtown - November 28, 2009
More than that
how many former Expos/Nationals are on that list?
BleedGreen - November 28, 2009
Giambi?!?!
Maybe we should think of bringing him back ….
Dub_TC - November 28, 2009
Yes sir...
MMunoz33 - November 28, 2009
Retired?
I thought some of those guys were dead….oh and as far as Cust at 1B please God no I can only take so much.
sirbed - November 28, 2009
CROSS THEM OFF THEN
mikev - November 28, 2009
What are you, the American Coalition for Life Activists?
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
You need to go and watch Major League again, PT.
mikev - November 28, 2009
Not if it would require me to stop making bad law jokes that only I get
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
as a baseball fan
I find it offensive that you don’t know Major League quotes off the top of your head. Sad Panda :(
mikev - November 28, 2009
I'll only say
Fuck you Jobu!
jeffro - November 28, 2009
Basically the only guy who projects to be enough better than Barton to bother with
is Nick Johnson.
And he’s made of glass coated with nitroglycerine.
You could make a case for Delgado and Branyan, I guess.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
That's how I read it as well.
If the A’s are going to go out looking for someone, there are better things to look for than a free agent 1B.
iglew - November 28, 2009
I'm pretty sure that Lobsters just wander into cages
I’m no fisherman (unless fishing involves ‘standing by some water with a beer and a fishing rod, whilst not catching any fish’, in which case, I’m all pro at that), but I’m pretty sure that the only skill that catching lobsters involves is pulling up the trap.
What this says about lobsters, well, I’ll send that out to the floor.
On the subject, did you know woodlice are also crustaceans? I’d not imagine they are as tasty.
bobnothing - November 28, 2009
Were you being metaphorical?
lobsters wander into cages, ground balls end up in the first baseman’s glove, the only skill is pulling up the trap.
I could go to wikipedia to see if the crab louse is a crustacean, but it would probably gross me out.
stormtown - November 28, 2009
Ha, worth knowing
Nah, there was no allegory – I just have nothing of real interest to add to the 1B conversation.
bobnothing - November 28, 2009
Most (all?) of my posts are like that
I have nothing of real interest to add.
sirbed - November 28, 2009
I rarely pass up a chance to look something up,
so of course I made the trip to Wikipedia. The crab louse is not a crustacean; it is an insect. The wood louse is indeed a crustacean.
I didn’t realize “wood louse” was the same as the “roly-poly” bug. That thing has lots of different names.
iglew - November 28, 2009
I've never heard the 'roly poly bug'. But it makes sense
bobnothing - November 28, 2009
On a different Wikipedia page, I read
that “roly poly” is what they call it in the South. Which is weird, since I grew up in Anchorage.
But I say “y’all”, too. And so does my sister. So go figure.
iglew - November 28, 2009
Is Alaska mostly populated by Southern immigrants?
I remember being puzzled by the fact that people in Hokkaido speak basically the same dialect of Japanese as people in Tokyo, whereas the full-on dialect from across the straits in northern Honshu was (in the few snippets I heard of it) totally incomprehensible to me.
It was explained to me that Hokkaido was settled late (by ethnic Japanese— it had an indigenous population, which was of course semi-exterminated in the process), and mostly by emigrants from the Tokyo region, whereas northern Honshu’s dialect had been developing in semi-isolation for a thousand years.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
No, it's not.
There are a few, particularly some Texans that came along with the oil boom. But over all, Anchorage is dialectically homogenous with the rest of the Pacific Coast. I think our family was just weird.
iglew - November 29, 2009
I think that's the story with Oregon
Lots of Oklahomans ended up there, so the Oregon accent sounds kinda similar (at least, according to a friend I had who grew up in Oregon).
Nick - November 29, 2009
The area I grew up in... Antioch... also had a high "Okie ratio".
At one time. When Antioch was blue collar and all the paper mills and such were open. It has since been diluted and more of a bedroom community in recent decades.
UncleLeo - November 29, 2009
I'm from Oregon, I think that's nonsense
I think there may be a nationwide rural accent that transcends location, but I’ve never heard anyone from Portland sound Oklahoman.
stormtown - November 29, 2009
My friend was from Eugene
might be different in the middle of the state?
Nick - November 29, 2009
I call them roly polys
and I grew up in the bay area.
colin - November 29, 2009
I call 'em roly polys
and I grew up near Fresno
jeffro - November 29, 2009
I called em roly polys as well
mind you, I am from Mars.
BleedGreen - November 29, 2009
Thats what I was told it was growing up too. Interesting.
My folks are from the burbs around Chicago.
designatedforassignment - November 29, 2009
Regional accents is actually a pet topic of mine
so I do have theories about this. I just didn’t bother to list them all in what I thought was just a throwaway comment. To summarize:
1. I’m pretty sure my sister and I picked up “y’all” from a certain teacher we both had.
2. Accents have many components. My typical cadence is somewhat similar to Southern even though my vowels are not, so that’s why occasionally I get confused for a Southerner even though I’m not. (That’s just me, not my sister.)
3. I think the Wikipedia labeling of “roly poly” as a Southern term is just wrong. It’s used in many places, as comments here attest.
4. Like Stormtown, I don’t believe the connection of Oregon to Southern immigrants at all. I don’t think there’s anywhere on the West Coast where white Southern immigration was significant enough to affect regional accent today. (I’ve read that Southern California had a noticeable drawl in the 19th century, but that was gone by the 1920s.)
iglew - November 30, 2009
Bugs, crabs, same thing.
Almost all non-fish seafoood is either oversized bugs or oversized slugs.
iglew - November 28, 2009
But does it have a high bugging percentage?
Nico - November 28, 2009
The abbreviated Jeff plan
In April…
Oaktown:
1b- Daric Barton.
Sacramento:
1b- Sean Doolittle
3b- Brett Wallace
LF- Crush Carter
Come June. If Barton has proven last years relative goodness was a fluke, start the Doolittle, Carter or Wallace era
jeffro - November 28, 2009
I'm thinking Barton is less likely to be a total failure than Hairston, Chavez, Davis or Cust...in
which case they’ll need Carter, Doolittle and Wallace to fill in for those guys. I guess there’s Cunningham, Patterson and Buck as well.
WaddellCanseco - November 28, 2009
exactly
I expect by June there will be room for auditions for most of these fellows, Barton sucking or not.
jeffro - November 28, 2009
Yes.
And keep the service time down on Crush, Walrus, and Doolittle
Blicks - November 29, 2009
Crush and the Walrus
Sounds like a bad altrock band. I like it.
jeffro - November 29, 2009
Goo Goo Ga Choob
BleedGreen - November 29, 2009
Barton when he played everyday hit...
302/389/437 for a 829OPS in 37 games last year. He also had 18BB and 19Ks. He will start at 1B outta the spring. But Doolittle isnt far behind.
Syphon - November 28, 2009
Doolittle played like 20 games last year.
I’m assuming he’s going to get plenty of time in the minors to re-establish himself.
mikev - November 28, 2009
Is he even a sure thing to be ready Opening Day?
Nico - November 28, 2009
no idea
mikev - November 28, 2009
For the majors? Probably not
For AAA, maybe, but he’s going to be limited in spring training.
PaulThomas - November 28, 2009
I meant health-wise, to play anywhere
Last report I heard was non-committal, but it was a while ago.
Nico - November 29, 2009
He had surgery on his knee at the end of last season, didn't he?
jeffro - November 29, 2009
Yes, to repair a tear in the left patella tendon.
It may or may not affect him in spring training.
WaddellCanseco - November 29, 2009
Im giving barton till mid season.
So that a good amout of playing time for Doolittle is AAA. If hes hitting and Barton isnt. I think the change is made.
Syphon - November 28, 2009
What has Doolittle done to impress outside of a 1/2 year in High A ball?
For me he’s got a lot to prove at AAA.
WaddellCanseco - November 29, 2009
He was great in the spring last year..
and Before he got hurt he was holding his own in AAA.
Syphon - November 29, 2009
Get aggressively promoted by the A's
No, seriously. The fact that he got bumped through the minors so quickly says a lot about his “off camera” performance in things like instructional league.
He also had a strong performance in last year’s AFL, hitting 8 home runs (although unlike Desme, he didn’t strategically put all of them in a short span near the beginning of the league…). In fact, overall he hit 30 HR last season, albeit in slightly more than a full season’s worth of games (165 games or something like that).
PaulThomas - November 29, 2009
Wouldn't you say the same thing about Cahill?
I say that because I know you wouldn’t…but why not?
Nico - November 29, 2009
The fact that he was aggressively promoted by the A's
is one of several factors telling us that he is better than he appeared last season, yes.
The problem is that “what he appeared to be” last season was utter chaff, the kind of guy you would never willingly hire to pitch a game in the major leagues. He was so far beyond the pale of acceptability for a starting pitcher that even rapid, consistent improvement is not likely to lead to him being a good starter anytime soon.
If Doolittle instead of getting hurt last year had come up and had a .600 OPS for a full season, which is roughly the hitting equivalent of what Cahill did last year, I’d be pretty troubled by that too.
PaulThomas - November 30, 2009
Wouldn't the hitting equivalent of Cahill
be more like .800 OPS with .260 wOBA?
iglew - November 30, 2009
That's not physically possible
wOBA is derived from linear weights, which are the same events which also go into OPS. I think even if you had a hitter who literally did nothing but hit occasional home runs (a triple-slash line of .160/.160/.640), which is about the worst possible way one could compile an .800 OPS, he’d probably have a wOBA higher than .260.
There’s no easy analogy because there is no one mega-factor which is almost completely outside the control of the hitter, the way pitchers’ BABIP is.
PaulThomas - November 30, 2009
Oh.
But at least you got what I was trying to do.
iglew - November 30, 2009
Ya I like him too, but I still think he's got something to prove at AAA before
he’s anywhere near challenging for a major league job. His hitting at AAA last year was OK, but nothing special.
WaddellCanseco - November 29, 2009
Barton has had his chance!
He can’t hit outside of September. Someone else needs a chance.
fansince1980 - November 28, 2009
What does that mean?
“He can’t hit outside of September”? Is he a shellfish?
Nick - November 28, 2009
A shellfish son-of-a-bitch?
Nico - November 28, 2009
Er, you realize that Barton averaged around 1 at-bat per day until September?
When he finally got real everyday playing time, he hit very well, to the tune of an .871 OPS.
danmerqury - November 28, 2009
For what it's worth,
here’s the link to my case for Daric Barton which I made during the season.
My opinions haven’t changed since, as the only difference now is that his actual stats showed what his rate stats were suggesting at the beginning of September.
I think, particularly if we don’t seem to be competing, that Barton should be given the job.
King Richard - November 28, 2009
http://www.athleticsnation.com/2009/9/14/1031095/the-case-for-daric-barton
Here it is, sorry…
King Richard - November 28, 2009
and here it is, actually clickable!
http://www.athleticsnation.com/2009/9/14/1031095/the-case-for-daric-barton
mikev - November 28, 2009
Even better!
King Richard - November 28, 2009 via mobile
And here it is with a cute little button to click!
iglew - November 28, 2009
That makes the case all by itself...
King Richard - November 28, 2009
Glaus pls.
kthanxbye.
Daniel777 - November 28, 2009
Cust will be gone...Barton will be starting at 1B
With Beane’s recent comments, I doubt he get Dunn via trade when he could have had him last year on the FA wire.
With Carter and Doolittle and maybe wallace waiting in line for 1B, I doubt that anyone besides Barton is at 1B with Chavez backing him up and planning DH.
Cust will probably be traded. The cust experiment was a decent one, but I think if Beane can get the player he wants for him, he gone. Personally, I like cust and his bat/ops but I doubt he can make huge strides and become a better player – he is what is he is.
ryanmoser - November 29, 2009
I still can't see Cust being gone this off-season
The rumors about teams considering him were interesting but I haven’t seen anything to suggest a team will give up a significant package to get him and I don’t think Beane will trade him for peanuts.
I don’t really see the downside to letting Cust go to arbitration and get a salary in the neighborhood of what he is worth. The A’s seem like they are in a position to easily afford him and the in house replacements have enough questions that need to be answered before the team needs to start clearing space for them.
If by June, enough of the youngsters have proven they are ready for the bigs and the best spot for them is at the expense of Cust then he should be plenty easy enough to move then. No need to put the cart before the horse.
OkayJay81 - November 29, 2009
Ya, he's still their best hitter, and it would leave a pretty big lineup hole to just cut him loose.
A one year deal wouldn’t be a killer contract.
WaddellCanseco - November 29, 2009
DiegoAsFan
where you at in san diego? Live there also, was at the entire A’s series…too bad they won’t be back for another 3 years
ryanmoser - November 29, 2009
Actually I'm not in San Diego anymore
Was in the La Jolla area for many years but moved back to the bay last fall. Maybe I should go for a different screen name but I haven’t gotten around to it yet.
OkayJay81 - November 29, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.