This one's for you, PT!
Welcome to the Litigation Café, where the main entree is Chop Suey and for dessert you can claim a tort. Or if you prefer, two of you can order a large tapioca pudding and work out shared custardy. The bottom line is that the food will always settle eventually, so come on by. Just don't submit any briefs because we don't do that anymore.
On to baseball...
NOTE: Special feature coming at 6:00pm PST today! Noah Frank, the Media Relations director for the Fresno Grizzlies who was with the Chicago Cubs in 2008 and in the Texas League (San Antonio Missions) in 2009, will weigh in with an "inside look" at 3 players with whom he is familiar: Jake Fox, Bobby Cassevah, and Beau Vaughan. Stay tuned!
Beware of analyzing an A's off-season midway through. One thing that is comforting about having Billy Beane as your favorite team's GM is that you know he has a plan and that he's smart. That gives him two advantages over many GMs.
So far the A's have spent the off-season creating more holes, and only adding players who were available on the cheap because no one in their wrong mind would pay them very much based on the health and/or baseball ability they have shown so far.
That's because whatever Beane plans to do in the "big picture" scheme of the whole off-season, it's still ahead. Perhaps it involves signing Jack Cust after all and paying him less than he would have had Cust been tendered. Maybe it involves putting more FA dollars than we're expecting to the best hitter that the market overlooks. Perhaps this is another Winter where Santa will bring an unexpected trade right around Christmas -- remember that the Hudson, Mulder, Haren, and Swisher deals have gone down after the Winter Meetings, not during. It's tough when the subtractions precede the additions, but it doesn't matter in what order you do it -- what matters is how the roster looks at the end.
Here's what we know, and it's not much: In sizing up trade partnerships with other GMs, Beane found that in order to get the guys he wanted, he would have to part with players that are on his "untouchable" list -- these names probably include Suzuki, Sweeney, Anderson, Carter, Wallace, Cardenas. The A's are resolved to create a core of young, good players that can grow up and thrive together, and while Beane has said many times that no player is ever "untouchable," this particular rebuilding plan includes getting and keeping a key core that are here for the glory years to (hopefully) come.
So Beane can't easily address 3B, SS, big bat, without dealing the very players he is not open to moving. Good players aren't affordable on the FA market, and young players aren't even available. I could see the A's signing Glaus or Tejada as short-term stop-gaps, or trying to replace Cust's bat cheaper with a flyer on Delgado or Thome.
What I can't see is how the A's will continue to add young, up-and-coming pieces at positions that are still weak. Are Wallace, Carter, and Cardenas closer than we think, a la Anderson/Cahill? That's many ANers' nightmare: Start the service clock now, but why? Or are the A's just planning to be really uncompetitive, with a lousy left side of the infield and no power, for at least half a season until Wallcarternas are ready to take over? Or does Beane have something up his sleeve that I haven't thought of?
History would suggest the last one. And since it doesn't much matter what the roster looks like on December 13th, I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. There will be additions. But who?
Brandon Inge!!!
0 recs | 92 comments
![](<a href="http://s516.photobucket.com/albums/u323/NicoPemantle/?action=view¤t=litigationcafejpeg.jpg" target="_blank"><img src=){kind=link}
"shared Cust-ardy"?
OaklandSi - December 13, 2009
Thome and Glaus!!!
Do it.
9Custs - December 13, 2009
Starting the Service Clock...
I’m losing patience with the team keeping good players down just to delay their service clock. If they’re good enough to play on the team, let’s get them up here.
Few players seem to last with the A’s very long anyway. I’d much rather see the best players on the field (and start rooting for them right away). I’m tired of hearing about the potential greatness waiting at the minor league level.
I’ve been following the team for 30 years, and it’s getting hard to root for a squad that seems to have a 50% turnover every year.
don’t confuse me with StewCrew, there’s a copyright lawsuit pending :)
Stew's Crew - December 13, 2009
You would prefer they kept players once it was no longer worth keeping them
or pay them more than they should?
mikev - December 13, 2009
You seem to misunderstand the service time argument
The main complaint comes when the team rushes a young player who isn’t ready for the Bigs but is unfortunately the “best” option for the club to play. Trevor Cahill is a great example of this. He was one of the 5 best SP performers in ST last year but as a guy with 6 weeks of AA experience he wasn’t really ready to pitch in Oakland. He could have definitely used more minor league time before making his Oakland debut. That burns service time.
Moving on to this coming season… based on where they left off at the end of last season I do not believe that Wallace or Carter are ready to play for Oakland come Opening Day 2010. They are still in the learning phase of their game and it is possible that they could overcome their deficiencies during winter ball and ST but that’s not a likely scenario. Based on where they left off last year (in terms of their development) the A’s would be wasting their service time by playing them in Oakland at the start of the 2010 season. They just don’t look to be ready and it would be unwise for the A’s to use up a year of cheap labor.
grover - December 13, 2009
missed the point
Yah, I took Nico’s comment “Start the service clock now, but why?” and used it to vent on a marginally related theme. Oops.
Maybe it’s just the “rebuilding years”, but there’s been so much turnover these years, that it’s hard to follow a game when you can’t recognize the players without a nametag. I’m able to keep up – I’m an AN member, so of course I know who’s who :) – but I think you’re losing the casual fan when they don’t even know who they’re rooting for.
I guess after following the team for so long, I am tired of the turnover of players. The philosophy of “players don’t bring fans, winning brings fans” seems flawed. Next time I’ll try to post that in a more relevant discussion.
don’t confuse me with StewCrew, there’s a copyright lawsuit pending :)
Stew's Crew - December 13, 2009
I don't see how you can be impatient with the team
for doing something that it doesn’t actually do. Seriously, there are zero examples of the A’s “keeping good players down just to delay their service clock” (or can you name one?). On the contrary, the problem is that they start burning their service time when they’re not yet “good enough” (Cahill being the most egregious example).
I wish they would keep players down a bit longer to extend their club-controlled time, but for whatever reason the club doesn’t seem to do that. I’m going to be pissed if Wallace or Carter breaks camp with the team.
Faust - December 13, 2009
Mulder
…is the only example where a player could have started the season in the majors, but was withheld til May for service time reasons.
richwol1 - December 13, 2009
How do we know about Hudson and Zito?
Both midseason callups, ostensibly because they weren’t ready yet but possibly because of service time considerations. We really have no way of knowing.
Nico - December 13, 2009
Yeah, Mulder really showed he was ready his rookie year
vignette17 - December 14, 2009
I thought Mulder did amass a full year of service time his rookie season
Didn’t he make only one start in AAA that year?
PaulThomas - December 14, 2009
Yes, he did
But he also wasn’t pitching that hot, either
.305 avg against / .326 BABIP / 1.69 WHIP
(though I seem to remember him getting better as the year wore on)
cuppingmaster - December 14, 2009 via mobile
good points, i agree, bb has something up his sleeve. i just wonder
sometimes if he (or many a’s fans) will ever have the patience required to truly rebuild. i think that means we honestly concede the division for at least a year, and actually hold on to those untouchables. i’d rather watch the a’s lose a chunk of close scoring games and play well— play like they did the second half of last season— than trade some of these guys for a better chance at a .500 season next year. i’ve got nothing against winning games, but how much are we willing to sacrifice in order to let these guys grow?
oaklidiot - December 13, 2009
All I know is that I'm not paying for the lemon chicken
Nick - December 13, 2009
Um...You pretty clearly had two more shrimps than I did
(and when I say shrimps, I mean squid). I hope we can settle this amicably, but I’m fully prepared to take you to small clams court if you insist on being so utterly shellfish.
Nico - December 13, 2009
Small clams court?
I have a court date scheduled there next week. Has something to do with a tip and a miscalculated bar tab…
Nick - December 13, 2009
this would go to small clams court
OaklandSi - December 13, 2009
The waiting... aka "darkest before the dawn"... is a double-edged sword.
On the one hand it does help economize. And that is a fiscal reality of this team… though I do question the extremes they have taken in economizing the last couple years.
On the other hand, it usually leaves us with scraps. We severely limit our chances if we just scoop up everybody else’s unwanted scraps. Sometimes it works, but usually it doesn’t.
UncleLeo - December 13, 2009
Could be worse
Watching the warriors lose again and again.
Arcman - December 13, 2009
RAIDERRRRRRRZZZZZ!!!!111!!11
DyeLongJustice - December 13, 2009
OK, I'll climb back in off the ledge
I still believe in Beane as a generally smart GM who operates with a plan so it’s definitely worth waiting to see how this all turns out. I’m still a fan of Cust though and I am concerned that this move is a case of squandering value which is something the A’s can’t really afford to do.
OkayJay81 - December 13, 2009
I'm calling it: Beane's solution to 3B...
Doolittle! The first LH thirdbaseman in the majors since Mike Squires!
Nick - December 13, 2009
You don't count Ohlone field softball?
I played a pretty darn good 3B there long after Squires had hung up his spikes.
Nico - December 13, 2009
So that explains why the A's non-tendered Cust
They’re tired of the ball going over the fence for a strike.
Nick - December 13, 2009
Mario Valdez
Played one inning at third for the White Sox in 1997
elcroata - December 13, 2009
Dark is dark
What always bugs me is how cold it gets right before dawn.
grover - December 13, 2009
well, "darkest before dawn" sounds better in a song
than ’coldest before dawn"…you know, alliteration…
OaklandSi - December 13, 2009
I'm all for alliteration
And I fully support the arts in our schools.
grover - December 13, 2009
plus its false...it's always coldest shortly after dawn
stm72 - December 13, 2009
that's even worse in a song
OaklandSi - December 13, 2009
and even less alliteration
elcroata - December 13, 2009
i'm a speed metal guy...none of this matters to me
stm72 - December 13, 2009
In speed metal terms, it's always ARRRRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!! before the dawn
Ray of Lite - December 14, 2009
some new form of pirate talk speed metal?
stm72 - December 14, 2009
Nope, just a bad joke, showing my basic ignorance of speed metal
Ray of Lite - December 14, 2009
How about Jonny Gomes or
Garret Atkins???
MMunoz33 - December 13, 2009
Gomes has nowhere to play
We already have a lefty-masher in Hairston. Why two?
Barton is a better hitter than Atkins, who can no longer play 3B, making him kind of useless.
Thome, Glaus & Delgado are all decent options, if no one really wants Jake Fox playing everyday at DH (which I think is the plan as of this second).
PL78 - December 13, 2009
Gary Sheffield is another option
I dont think he will get much money this year but he can still hit, and would be a nice platoonmate for Hairston or could DH too.
PL78 - December 13, 2009
that would be interesting...
:-)
MMunoz33 - December 14, 2009
I'm not a big fan of The Sheff
I’d rather go after Glaus and Tejada, or Thome/Delgado.
mrod - December 14, 2009
No Sheffs,
just prep cooks plz.
Gaijin_Suketto - December 14, 2009
The only player I really hope we sign
is Aroldis Chapman. And I really hope we trade Travis Buck somewhere as Sweeney has made him redundant. If Cardenas blazes early we can trade Ellis somewhere too.
I really dont mind going with Pennington all year and the Chavez/McPherson→Wallace group at 3B. Every other position we can fill internally pretty easy. Adding a name bat to DH would be nice, but its not 100% necessary.
The odds of this being our opening day lineup are pretty good:
1B: Barton
2B: Ellis
SS: Pennington
3B: McPherson/Chavez
C: Suzuki
LF: Cunningham/Hairston
CF: Davis
RF: Sweeney
DH: Fox
Uninspiring? Yes. Horrible? Nah, its not as bad as you might think.
PL78 - December 13, 2009
It's bad enough that I'd go ahead and just make the lineup
in order of position, like you do. Why bother thinking more about it?
Nico - December 13, 2009
uninspiring
Uninspiring is a great word here.
We follow the team because we are inspired by what they can do, not because they are a short walk from BART.
Suzuki, Ellis, some starting pitching, and a bunch of maybes. I’d still wear my green & gold all the time, but would this team bring any fans to the park?
Stew's Crew - December 13, 2009
Dude the 2006 team barely brought any fans to the park.
mikev - December 13, 2009
Bad enough to still not draw people to the Coliseum? Yep.
kenntoe - December 13, 2009
huh? why would I bother posting batting orders
when we used 130 different ones last year?
PL78 - December 13, 2009
Okay i'll make a better lineup out of the remaining FAs we could feasibly get
1B: Delgado/Glaus
2B: Ellis
SS: Pennington
3B: Chavez
C: Suzuki
LF: Sheffield/Hairston
CF: Davis
RF: Sweeney
DH: Thome/Glaus
PL78 - December 13, 2009
Why are people enamored with replacing Barton at 1B?
I can’t see Delgado being an improvement over Barton. What Delgado adds with the bat he takes away with the glove.
Barton getting placed out by a top prospect is one thing, but Barton shouldn’t be benched/moved for an aging vet. We’re not talking about the Giants here.
Blicks - December 13, 2009
Not only that, but why are people so enamored with inserting Chavez at 3B?
It ain’t gonna happen, people.
UncleLeo - December 13, 2009
+1,000,000
MMunoz33 - December 14, 2009
December is the only month Chavez has the potential to be in the lineup is why.
shooting4life - December 14, 2009
Ick. What a waste of money
Between Sheffield, Glaus, Thome, Delgado and Chavez, at least two to three of these players will probably fall off the table into oblivion during 2010. Sheffield is very old. Thome and Delgado are in steep decline. Chavez may never play another game. Glaus is the only one that isn’t a huge risk.
richwol1 - December 13, 2009
funny you have chavez in the lineup...
there’s a better chance that bonds gets more AB’s for us than chavez
9Custs - December 13, 2009
LOL....
MMunoz33 - December 14, 2009
im not
i was just posting that having one of those FA mashers is a sexier option than what we are going to go with, I mean Delgado/Sheff&Thome are borderline HOFers, thats more interesting than Barton, Cunningham and Fox. Just sayin.
PL78 - December 13, 2009
I just think its too much like the 2009 Giambi Experiment
which we both can agree with doesn’t work.
I’m not opposed to Thome or Delgado at DH if Cust isn’t back, but nobody should be replacing Barton at 1B.
Blicks - December 13, 2009
Dye & Thome
I’m not sure how much each would cost, but it’s worth considering.
Although, if we could get SpartaCust cheaper than Thome then I’d take that.
It’d be nice to have a few hitters for the 3-4-5 spots. Unless you’re looking forward to Hairston batting cleanup…
Stew's Crew - December 13, 2009
Beane understands that there are PLENTY of DH options this year
The list goes on and on and with the economy in the pooper right now, I am sure plenty of these guys could be had for cheap
Cust
Dye
Thome
Sheff
Delgado
H. Blalock
R. Branyan
M. Jacobs
N. Johnson – like nick
A. LaRoche
C. Tracy
Miggy
T. Glaus
G. Anderson
R. Ankiel
Vlad
X. Nady
Huff
Matsui
ryanmoser - December 13, 2009
I think the A's should sign Nick Johnson, period.
If you’re worried about his health (and who wouldn’t be), you stick him at DH and enjoy his career .402 OBP — the guy is a terrific hitter. If Barton tanks, you have a 1B option in hand.
It’s kind of like signing Giambi, only this time the FA is the 1B “fall back plan,” not the Opening Day guy. And Nick Johnson can still hit. You just have to keep him healthy to get a really good hitter into your lineup, and the A’s might be able to do that in ways his former NL teams couldn’t.
Nico - December 13, 2009
I'd tap that
but it’ll require two years guaranteed, and probably $14M or more.
PaulThomas - December 13, 2009
Gah!
Nick Johnson has got some ridiculous skills, and would be a great addition for the right price, but damn, he’s going to be just as boring as every other high OBP, middling power guy. I know he puts up a lot more value than other guys who have more power but walk less, but if we aren’t going to be good next year, I hope we’re at least exciting. I’m starting to wonder if we’re even going to have a 20 HR guy next year.
DyeLongJustice - December 13, 2009
At least he's not bordering on decrepit
The others (Thome, Sheffield, Delgado) haven’t played the field reliably for years. At least Johnson has useful skills in addition to his bat.
I have to say, though, that Thome coming here is a little far-fetched. He left for the Dodgers to play a backup role because he thought they might win the WS. Coming to Oakland, where it is all but assured he won’t get into the WS this year, seems against his wishes.
cuppingmaster - December 13, 2009
well, considering that we just nontendered the only 20hr guy we had LAST year
I’d probably say no.
mikev - December 13, 2009
I'd totally be down to bring Jermaine Dye back to Oaktown
I Liked the idea a few weeks ago and I like it now.
mrod - December 14, 2009
no way man
NJ is not getting $14MM committed to him in this economy. Im thinking he will take a 1/$6MM offer from an NL team that will let him play 1B.
BTW I’m all for us getting him and playing him as a DH/PT-1B.
PL78 - December 13, 2009
What about trading for Zimmerman from the Nats?
MMunoz33 - December 14, 2009
You wouldn't want to give up what they would want in return.
But, then again, this is the team that just gave Pudge Rodriguez 2 years and real money.
Maybe they’d take Eveland.
mikev - December 14, 2009
What about Eveland, Wuertz, Fox, and Buck?
for Zimmerman and a throw in prospect…
MMunoz33 - December 14, 2009
Yeah we could have them throw in Strasburg
They won’t miss him, right?
PaulThomas - December 14, 2009
Nah!!
Why would we want that joker?
We need to keep things realistic… This is the Oakland Triple A’s Paul!
MMunoz33 - December 14, 2009
Hey hey, look at the non-tenders
I know a lot of people are resistant to pay for relief help, but bringing in Matt Capps would only bring us to a greater position of strength.
And then there’s the Yankee scrap heap. Chien-Ming Wang and Hideki Matsui would also be interesting additions to the team. All of these players would cost money, but they wouldn’t be crap additions like the last few years.
noava22 - December 13, 2009
Wang
I thought he made more than $5M last year. Wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.
Then again, injuries and suckitude (potentially related to injuries) the last two partial seasons. Still think we ought to just bring back Tomko.
cuppingmaster - December 13, 2009
All three would (more than likely) be productive and worth the money
Wang gives us our veteran 5th for awhile, Matsui takes over the Cust role…but actually hits, and Capps comes in and solidifies the bullpen. Our starters would only have to go 5, and then we hand it over to some combination of Breslow/Capps/Divine/Wuertz/Bailey. Hell yes. Capps and Matsui will cost some money (as might Wang), but they won’t be useless. It’s better than throwing money down a sink (Glaus = busted shoulder, Tomko = worthless) or at a thief (Beltre = Boris client).
noava22 - December 13, 2009
I don't know about Wang
He’s got a messed up shoulder and even in the best case scenario he won’t be able to pitch until June. Some other team can pay him and hope he can be healthy and productive for half a season.
OkayJay81 - December 13, 2009
The A's already have at least six relief pitchers who are better than Matt Capps
Best case scenario for him is that he becomes an emergencies-only mop-up man. I can’t think of a bigger waste of money, and that includes Jermaine Dye, which is saying a lot.
PaulThomas - December 13, 2009
I am depressed
My reading of the general AN consensus is that we knew that we had our top untouchable young players and prospects, but we thought we had an abundance of “really good but touchable” prospects that we could trade for hole-fillers.
Alas, the depth and quality of our prospects must just be in our heads because, as Beane says, nobody wants to trade us anyone unless they touch our untouchables.
Similarly, I think AN tended to think that we might lose one or two guys to the Rule 5 draft because our depth was so great. No cigar. Nobody wanted anyone on our Rule 5 list.
Are we in some sort of Billy Beane twilight zone bubble, where we see the world one way, but the rest of the baseball world sees our prospects differently?
Help! It is winter, cold and dark. Keep me away from sharp comments.
redtopcowboy - December 13, 2009
I think what it shows is that other GMs aren't nearly as dumb as often portrayed on AN
The prospects they want for their valuable players are the very ones the A’s don’t want to move, and they’re not settling for Buck or H. Rodriguez or James Simmons.
Nico - December 13, 2009
keep your wang out of oakland
na…actually, he would be a nice fit for approx 2.5-3.5 million
ryanmoser - December 13, 2009
An odd phenomenon that I've noticed
is that teams seem to care, at times, more about the position of the prospect they’re getting within the trading team’s farm system than about the actual skills of the prospect in question.
I can’t explain this. It seems like if you have a crappy farm system, you can actually acquire players in trade for less value than if you have a good farm system. If you’re giving up “your #5 and #10 prospects” either way, it’s much less lost value if you have a crappy farm.
I don’t mean to suggest that teams are literally calling up other teams and just asking for their #5 prospect, but somehow it seems to be easier to sell a trade partner on a fringy guy if he doesn’t look bad by comparison to numerous other good prospects in your system. Maybe because the “buyer” GM doesn’t get the feeling that he’s getting second-rate goods in return.
PaulThomas - December 13, 2009
Isn't just a matter of need?
Someone got called up/let go/retired and the team needs a replacement NOW. Therefore, they look specifically for someone at that position.
I agree that you ought to just acquire the best talent possible and work to build overall strength. I just think that’s the ideal and it’s not that clear cut for teams sometimes.
cuppingmaster - December 14, 2009 via mobile
I wouldn't mind Alfredo Amezaga. A good defensive SS and can play anywhere except C.
Sounds better than Miles.
WaddellCanseco - December 13, 2009
Just read that Lackey
has taken a physical with the Red Sox.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
Trainman - December 14, 2009
From Heidi Watney?
WaddellCanseco - December 14, 2009
she's a wow!
stm72 - December 14, 2009
Someone needs to tell Lackey
that the guy who did that prostate exam wasn’t a doctor nor was he affiliated with the Red Sox. I’m not gonna be the one to tell him, but someone oughta.
Nico - December 14, 2009
Wang
Looks like that’s not going to happen
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4740892
cuppingmaster - December 14, 2009
Potential 3 way trade involving Cliff Lee and Roy Halladay
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/10523430/Sources:-Jays,-Phils-talk-Halladay-Lee-blockbuster
Angels may be the 3rd team if their board is correct
Trainman - December 14, 2009
Pleasepleaseplease Angels trade Weaver
Just because it would be absurdly stupid and linear improvement at best, regardless of whether the pitcher was Halladay or Lee.
Blicks - December 14, 2009
Trading Weaver for Halladay or Lee would NOT be linear.
Not for 2010, anyway.
Nico - December 14, 2009
Well, the team is the Mariners.
Blicks - December 14, 2009
Yep
Mariners
Trainman - December 14, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.