Final Score: Tigers 11, A's 7
The A's blew a 6-0 lead and lost 11-7, but I'm not going to write a recap today. When Blez first brought me aboard to write on the front page, he asked me always to write "my truth" and that is what I have always tried to do. I try to be fair, and I try to call things as I see them, with as much perspective as possible.
Ballpark attendance may not be good, but reading AN each day provides incontrovertible - and often touching - evidence of how many truly passionate A's fans there are out there, fans who will love the team through thick and thin, who will cheer, curse, pray, and hope with every pitch, no matter what. And with each passing day, it becomes more and more clear that as a General Manager (not to mention a part-owner), Billy Beane has completely and utterly letdown his fan base by failing to rebuild OR reload, and failing to put together a team that is fun to watch for any reason.
Dear Mr. Beane,
Your fans don't ask for much. We are fiercely loyal to the A's, and just want a team that is either good now, interesting to watch, or has promise of being good soon, and for the third season in a row you have provided none of these.
You have "rebuilt" a team whose infield doesn't have a single player who has any bright future with the team, and doesn't have a single player who one can reasonably expect to be getting better in 2010. Chavez, Garciaparra, Cabrera, Kennedy, Crosby, Giambi, Kennedy, and an aging injured Ellis. It's an octet of filler. Your "Plan B" for the past 5 years, if an increasingly crippled Eric Chavez didn't work out, was apparently "to lose a lot of games." For your outfield, you traded away the only OFer with a high ceiling, the only OFer who could play the most important defensive position (CF) well, and kept a group of OFers whose futures range from "decent" to "bad." There is actually remarkably little to build on going forward and remarkably little reason for a fan to get excited about watching an A's game.
You have hired, as your manager, someone with the built-in problem that if he didn't turn out to be good at his job it would create an awkward situation for you as a close personal friend. The manager, who exudes the bland, overly comfortable, non-intense, "put in your time and get paid" brand of baseball the team shows on the field, pilots a team that is not good at the basics and is not full of energy.
It is part of your job not to put your personal relationships with Bob Geren and Eric Chavez ahead of the best interests of the organization, and your competence has to be measured against these decisions.
But worst of all, following a great run in the early 2000s ever since you "discovered" soccer your moves make fans quite reasonably wonder if you are even fully focused on, or committed to, doing the best job you can - as you have even violated your own rules of not rebuilding halfway and not calling up pitchers before they are ready. The team looks like it is going through the motions. Are they taking their cue from their manager or from his manager?
Which brings me to a request I am surprised to be making, as I held you in such high esteem at one time. If you are no longer interested in building the best baseball team you can, if the passion for the Oakland A's is no longer there, at least do well by A's fans one more time and find someone who has that passion. Because we have it - or at least used to have, and want to have it again.
Sincerely,
At Least Me.
9 recs | 639 comments
Sad to say...
….but I agree 100% with that, Nico. Well said!
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
Nico – THANK YOU so much for putting this message together. It is perfect, and I agree with you wholeheartedly. I see that an excerpt of your letter has been made available on SFGate.com . Good work!
ATLDuck - May 18, 2009
Signed
Me Too
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Me Three.
Thanks, Nico, for saying what a lot of us want to and saying it well.
lynnzgal - May 17, 2009
Me Four!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
I want my John Hancock on this letter also!
oaklandSMASH - May 18, 2009
Dear Mr Beane
Fire yourself, you are not a good GM in spite of what the Beane apologists think,
You have no clue how to build an offense and Nico is right on 100 percent.
Go and run your soccer club into the ground.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
wow
what a joke
tafkasam - May 18, 2009
To whom it may concern at Mlbtv:
It is with great pleasure to thank you for offering monthly rates.
ak_A - May 17, 2009
HAHAHAHA
I was thinking the same exact thing. Im not paying to watch this crap!
asfaninpismobeach - May 17, 2009
:)
….
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
I wish I had more faith in the A's ownership...
…to pick up the pieces if Beane were to go.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
Bravo, Nico
I’m sure this has not been an easy thing to write.
I spend an awful lot of my hard earned money to support this club, through season tickets, patronizing concessions, buying internet radio access when I’m away, etc.I’ve been a fan of the Oakland A’s since 1980, but my childhood baseball love was the “amazin’s” the early — and awful — NY Mets. I don’t require a team with a winning season every year.
I do, however, expect my team — and all of its owners, managers, employees, etc — to care, and for that caring to be obvious to all.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Also well said,
and rec’d.
lynnzgal - May 17, 2009
I love this team with all my heart
I think since 1980 I have (compulsively, quite frankly) watched, listened to, or attended about 150 games / year. And I have actually started thinking this week, “What other interests can I develop this Summer?” Which may be a blessing in disguise for me, but man – not for the reason I want. How do you get interested in a team that seems, from player to manager to GM, not to have a lot of interest in being the best it can be?
Nico - May 17, 2009
One answer....
Snark.
(But there are, of course, quicker and cheaper ways to get one’s snark on than watching the A’s on mlb.tv (when they’re not blacked out) and participating in AN comment threads.)
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
When the A's are not blacked-out....
…What is that? Like about four games for the entire season?
gregorymark - May 18, 2009
Well said again
They are interested in making a profit. Like I said, the A’s are DEFRAUDING their fans.
I am working out as I type this as I am that pissed off at the ineptitude of Billy Beane and 99 percent of the rest of them. They all make me sick.
But as lifelong fans, we will keep rooting for this ******* of a team
Trainman - May 17, 2009
If it's any comfort...
…this is at least in keeping with some of the deepest traditions of the franchise.
The last couple decades of the Connie Mack era and the entire KC period were pretty much this terrible, too.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
I'm reaching the point I'm already at with the Warriors
Until the team and the front office can prove they’re actually interested in winning and have a clue about how to do it, I’m saving my money. I didn’t go to a single Warriors game last year and the way things are going (yeah, me being about to move has a little something to do with it too) I may not go to any A’s games this year. I love the A’s but this team is painful to watch and what’s more, they don’t really have anyone WORTH watching.
I’ll stick with the minors for the time being.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Sad to say
I’m with you I have been obsessed with this team beyond belief my entire life. They have been down before but it hurts more now because I think we shouldn’t be this bad this quick after ‘06.
For all the credit Beane gets one playoff appearance in 6 years just isn’t that impressive anymore.
fansince1980 - May 17, 2009
Sorry to nitpick, but
makes no sense.
Since Beane became GM, the longest the team has gone without a playoff appearance is two years. This year looks like it will make three.
The last time the team went six years with only one playoff appearance was 1995-2000.
iglew - May 18, 2009
sorry to double nitpick, but
2004+5+6+7+8+9= six years, and we’re one for six, ‘cuz we sure aren’t going this year!
Gaijin_Suketto - May 18, 2009
huh?
We went to the playoffs in 2006.
travdog6 - May 18, 2009
Ah, I didn't realize you were counting 2009 already
You said “anymore”, so I thought you were talking about the past.
iglew - May 18, 2009
Being the best you can be
How can you know that the players, manager and GM are not interesting in being the best they can be? Just because someone doesn’t wear their heart on their sleeves does not mean that they are just there for the paycheck. Some of the disinterested looks from players that, you will say, show that the players do not care may be because they are as sick and tired of the loosing as you. A guy does not make it to the bigs without tons of desire to do it. They have slogged for years to make it. Unless you can read minds, this kind of talk is ridiculous.
Razr - May 17, 2009
On the surface
I agree with you Razr, judging their passion base on facial expressions or throwing helmets does not measure passion and desire. But when you heart and soul team is off to an epically bad start hard questions are fair game.
bajablue - May 18, 2009
A's are even making the Raiders look interesting.
The conspiracy theorist in me says that the current rampant mediocrity is a prelude to moving the team…I mean moving them out of the Bay Area. Yeah, yeah…I’ve heard all the arguments about there being nowhere else to move, but I can’t get out of my mind the comment by Selig that the A’s should never have been allowed to move to Oakland in the first place, and now that the Fremont deal is dead, and San Jose being problematic, the idea of the A’s staying in Oakland for an indefinite period of time is repellent to the Powers That Be. That and the fact that Wolfe and Selig are old frat buddies, yes?
gregorymark - May 18, 2009
Major League conspiracy theory.
I guessing that inside the locker room, there’s a cardboard cut-out of Beane with little strips of clothing that can be peeled away after every win, too?
LowcountryJoe - May 19, 2009
that explains why they traded for matt holiday, tried to sign johnson and furcal, and did sign cabrera, giambi and nomar!
xbhaskarx - May 19, 2009
Oh how the A's lose let me count the ways...
Oh how the A’s lose, let me count the ways, they can’t score one run for a couple of days. If they manage hits, then come double plays. You might think they are the Tampa Bay Rays, but even that team has seen better days, then the offensively challenge Oakland A’s. Who cares what they look like because it all pays, bumbling and stumbling, close your eyes Mayes. A’s pitcher’s throw and everyone prays, inside the ballpark, the baseball stays. Can’t throw can’t hit don’t even want praise. I sit back in my seat and chew on some Lays. Wait, it’s a hit my eyebrows raise. Another foul ball, not a thing to amaze. You can’t even play with the smaller A’s. Your no pro, like that announcer says. Strike three looking, your eyes in a glaze. Back out on D your not even phased, when your out there forever on some very bad plays.
jonxstri - May 17, 2009
Please leave this up on top of AN front page
Beane supposedly reads this site, not that it matters as his ego is too big to listen to anyone but himself but he does need to read this anyway. Someone have Blez email him and have him read it.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
+1
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
twins and yanks in extras 2-2
Maurer made an outstanding game saving tag.
ak_A - May 17, 2009
Mauer is an outstanding baseball player.
OldhamA - May 17, 2009
too bad we dont have ANY of those...
winchester5 - May 17, 2009
#1 picks
tend to be players like Mauer…there’s a price to be paid for getting a superstar the easy way in the draft.
ohmangoAs - May 17, 2009
And we're working on it!
iglew - May 18, 2009
crosby, cabrera, hannahan,kennedy
is irrelevant to next yrs team. if they gave guys like petit, pennington, patterson, etc i’m not so sure theyd be any worse than the current guys
Asfan4ever723 - May 17, 2009
i'm pretty sure they would be
alea iacta est - May 17, 2009
maybe they would,
but since their potential is greater than zero, what the hey?
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
He hasn't even discovered 'soccer' I don't think - he's a fan of Spurs, no?
Not a real football team.
OldhamA - May 17, 2009
Why did you trade Dan Haren?
He’s one of the guys who would have been worth signing to a big-time extension. As the young pitchers struggles this season reveal, true number one starters do not grow on trees.
I understand the Swisher trade, but why did you deal Haren? Why?
Pucking Insane - May 17, 2009
That was to David Forst, by the way.
Pucking Insane - May 17, 2009
I agree, Haren was someone to build a club around
Proven commodities are difficult to find in baseball.
Fleeting value, or supposed potential, is everywhere. Look at any ST field of “dreamers”.
One won lost won - May 17, 2009
Completely agree
Young pitcher only getting better. It just doesn’t make sense to me.
luvsthecurveball - May 17, 2009
Because he got a whole shitload of talent for him.
NateHST - May 18, 2009
And will that talent equal the exiting player in the end?
Pucking Insane - May 18, 2009
Seeing as his contract with the A's only ran until 2010
We wouldn’t have been able to resign him. Jesus, just look at the return Oakland got. It was ridiculous. He drastically improved are farm. CarGon, Carter, Cunningham and Anderson are ALL top 100 prospects.
NateHST - May 18, 2009
Brett Anderson, Carlos Gonzalez, Greg Smith, Dana Eveland, Christopher Carter, and Aaron Cunningham
That’s why.
travdog6 - May 18, 2009
So
2 4th or 5th starters, a CF who was go great he was dealt less than a season later, another OF who appears to project as a “solid if not great” starter, a player who strikes out way too much in the minors no less, and a pitcher who has promise but is being put in a no-win situation?
Pucking Insane - May 18, 2009
Dana Eveland
caused us many, many losses and is a failure but the rest of them make it a good trade
Trainman - May 18, 2009
Last year Eveland was the 38th best starter in the entire MLB
You know not what you are talking about.
designatedforassignment - May 18, 2009
+yes
NateHST - May 18, 2009
This post would have been just as helpful
with just the first sentence. The second sentence is unnecessary, unkind, and inaccurate.
iglew - May 18, 2009
Please don't make me laugh
The guy has been a failure from start to finish. See his career ERA.
Last year is last year. what about this year?
Quit trying to justify that Eveland is good. He is not CURRENTLY and is not in AAA.
The bottom line is ERA and wins and losses. He is bad.
So stop trying to bring up last year when talking about what he is like now.
He was sent down because he sucks and I doubt he will ever be any good because he has no clue how to find the strikezone and when he does, he throws batting practice.
Trainman - May 18, 2009
oh and he's sucking at AAA too
stm72 - May 18, 2009
Saying that Wins and Losses and ERA are good ways of measuring pitching...
is equivalent to saying that the world is flat.
Ignoring the offense behind them, park, defense and other variations of luck that has nothing to do with the skill of the pitcher give you a totally inaccurate view of a players performance.
Even in what is hard to describe as a bad year (though he was very unlucky) Eveland has contributed .2 WAR in 2009.
designatedforassignment - May 18, 2009
The Haren trade was better than the Swisher trade IMHO.
Even if DLS was healthy, the return for Swisher was rather paltry. The power and defense (can he stick at CF) questions with Sweeney were known prior to the trade, along with Gio’s major, major control issues.
Blicks - May 18, 2009
not really mad about this loss
offense scored 7 runs and a 21- year old pitcher had a bad day. I expected many of these kinds of losses going into this year. But they need this infield to get healthy so we can go ahead and trade them, al of them.
9Custs - May 17, 2009
count yourself among a tiny minority, IMO
How many losses begin with six-run leads? That is two already. You could absorb it as “that’s baseball” if you’re the Dodgers, who lost to the Nationals. But then the Dodgers continued to win. For the A’s, it leaves them set up for loss after loss after loss.
Back to Sacto with Geren. Heck, even a switch with Tony Dee would be tolerable to “status quo”.
One won lost won - May 17, 2009
but your expectations are too high...
if you are expecting the young pitchers to never have a bad start. 7 runs should win us a game, but it al depends on our starters.
9Custs - May 17, 2009
It's nice to have an occasional voice of reason
alea iacta est - May 17, 2009
Hopefully
If and when our offense is consistent, other pitchers will want to come play for us. Obviously, none would want to now with the offense as cold as it has been. But, other players sure came when they heard we got Matt Holliday. And, pitchers will be looking this way, too. Go A’s… keep hitting… either these young pitchers will work out or not…
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
and either Matt Holliday will continue to be a singles hitter or we won't...
mrod - May 17, 2009
he won't....sorry.
mrod - May 17, 2009
aye
4 – 4 is not bad though. He’s got to get that average back up so he can take a few more shots at the fence.
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
agreed...I was just being a smart ass.
:)
mrod - May 17, 2009
I still
agree with you, though. They all need to pump it up… he’d prolly be the first to tell you that
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
I'm not so sure he'd say that
He’s out of here no matter what and might be finding it hard to care amidst all of this terribleness. Don’t know if that’s a word but it’s how I feel.
luvsthecurveball - May 17, 2009
I was thinkin' today
he must be wondering what he got himself into…..we all thought it wouldn’t be this bad. That we’d field an at least decent team. and it has just been sad.
BERRYJO - May 17, 2009
I was actually thinking the same thing
This is the kind of loss we’d sorta prepared ourselves for going into the regular season.
But we didn’t expect it would follow two blowout losses, and we didn’t expect the sloppy defense, and we didn’t expect the worst start in Oakland A’s history.
Nick - May 17, 2009
Bravo, Nico
It had to be said… let’s see if it gets any reaction, whether BB himself or perhaps in the old media, or who knows where.
jasonthea - May 17, 2009
and michael urban, you suck
now you’re doing giants radio pregame, what a douche
9Custs - May 17, 2009
he's a giants writer through and through
maybe it’s just my personal bias, but i feel that he would be much better suited as a Giants’ writer.
DyeLongJustice - May 17, 2009
and i think he agrees
DyeLongJustice - May 17, 2009
Hey, we've all got to pay the rent
he’s a baseball writer in the bay area, what’s he gonna do, say no?
it’s a job, not a personal choice
alea iacta est - May 17, 2009
agree
it’s a job. He likes baseball.
One won lost won - May 17, 2009
I have no problem with him taking a job
that allows him to remain in the Bay Area, where he was born and raised, and where he is raising a family.
He is bery honest about being a fan of both the Giants and the A’s, even though many people may find that puzzling. But even if he was a fan of a team outside of the Bay Area, he’s got a job, and I don’t fault him for that.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
As it is, I don't see what the big deal is
He’s a writer doing a job, and as part of that people like him are often asked to join in on pregame shows and things like that.
Why should he restrict himself to just the A’s?
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
true...
…although A’s fans do kind of like having their own partisan guy…
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
That would be SuSlu.
And yes, we love her.
iglew - May 18, 2009
It's actually easy most of the season
to support both teams seeing as how they are in different divisions. But your true colors always show in the head to head battles. Me? I’m an A’s fan since I was a kid.
BERRYJO - May 17, 2009
I meant different leagues.Sry
BERRYJO - May 17, 2009
Best thing you've ever written, Nico
right on the money. Every bit of it. I pray Beane reads this, I really do. I’d like to hear him put a positive spin on this team. Just a horrible, horrible job.
Vacafan - May 17, 2009
My comment on this got lost in the game thread transition...
One of Billy Beane’s strengths as a general manager was his intellectual curiosity and willingness to try methods that were rejected by baseball lifers.
The trouble is that everyone else has caught up to him, and Beane does not seem as interested. That dips into the realm of mind-reading, so I’ll give a more concrete example of what bothers me now.
The Haren and Swisher trades were both examples of a team going into rebuilding mode. We’re waving the white flag, and are going to try to reload with a bunch of high-ceiling prospects. Some will pan out, hopefullly; others won’t. It won’t be fun for a while, but it will pay off in the long term, when the A’s would have a bunch of talented young players under club control for several years.
The Harden and Cupcakes deals only reinforced that.
And then Beane or Wolff got impatient, but only took halfway measures. If you’re going acquire a bunch of veterans, you need some veteran pitchers. If you’re trying to rebuild for the future, you don’t toss two 21-year-olds out there to get shelled on a regular basis. If you’re trying to do anything, you don’t ignore the obvious problem at third base, based on the far-fetched hope that Chavez would be able to come back from a serious of longstanding and neglected injuries to become an effective third baseman again when his shoulder was “shredded.”
And let’s be blunt. If you want to be taken seriously, you don’t hire your Best Man as manager and expect anyone to see anything but old-fashioned buddyism and back-scratching. That’s the kind of thing baseball lifers do. I haven’t been impressed with Geren, but it almost doesn ‘t matter. It’s just hard to take him seriously.
One of the criticisms of Beane, and the whole Moneyball thing, was that Beane wasn’t really so smart. He got lucky and acquired the Big Three and several good young hitters, several of whom benefited from PEDs. Once that group had departed, Beane wouldn ‘t look so smart. And with the exception of 2006, when he got lucky with Frank Thomas, that’s proven to be true.
Beane’s far-flung intellectual interests are all well and good, and make him an interesting individual (albeit one with whom I have deep political differences). But I do share Nico’s belief, based on various comments he’s made in recent years, that he’s really not all that engaged in the job anymore. David Forst is doing it. But whoever it is, the results aren’t good and the future prospects don’t look much better.
One good thing about baseball lifers is that you know the job is their #1 priority. I’m not sure that’s the case with Beane anymore. If it is, then perhaps it’s time to reevaluate his legacy and performance. If it’s not, he should hire somebody who is willing to make and stick with the hard decisions that Beane or Forst apparently isn’t.
bear88 - May 17, 2009
As far as young pitching goes
I would give a “pass”, considering what happened in Detroit. They let their young pitchers (Bonderman, etc) have big losing years, but two years later they were in the World Series. Sometimes it works. Curt Young is a worthy pitching coach IMO.
Since it worked for the Tigers, I will pronounce the strategy as acceptable, but… ONLY my opinion.
One won lost won - May 17, 2009
Beane got lucky with the big 3
He fires or gets rid of anyone that makes the A’s better
His philosophy on hitting plain sucks and has done for years.
The team(s) will do better with him gone which is not going to happen.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
beane's philosophy isn't completely at fault...
the system works. just not in a home stadium that has 2098923 acres of foul territory.
ArielPrieto - May 17, 2009
Always love your comments
grover - May 17, 2009
Once I read the Forst comments on blog I shall not name,
I became convinced that the blogger was right. That is, that Forst was indeed the man behind the curtain. It makes one wonder just how important DePo was to the success of the teams in the early 90s. With all that said, is there any reason he would not be brought back?
Oh, and solid post.
Pucking Insane - May 17, 2009
I love this, Bear. Excellent points and I feel the same way about the Big Three.
ATLDuck - May 18, 2009
The last 3 seasons.
This team has been unwatchable. 2006 was a fluky season since the only reason we made the playoffs was going something like 17-2 against the M’s. I havent been excited to watch this team since Hudson/Mulder were traded.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
I have to agree
I go to fewer games, because whether it’s a Loaiza or it’s an Eveland as SP, I feel the other team is rarely far from taking the lead. Unfortunately, even a two-game sweep like with KC doesn’t remove the worry, whenever the A’s face a decent offense, that they are vulnerable to giving up the (X…try a number)-run lead.
Who wants to pay money/spend time on that???
One won lost won - May 17, 2009
I'm rooting for Texas, Toronto and Milwaukee Now
The Brewers because they mash… and Cubs fans are as intolerable in losing as the Red Sox fans used to be..
Blue Jays because TB has lost its mojo (lose Longoria to the pitcher at the beginning of the game— seriously?) and the other alternatives are evil..
And Texas because they have the guy that should be managing here, and if we can’t do it, and we can’t, then we must all become Ranger fans and shut down the Scioscias and Lackeys of the world.
jasonthea - May 17, 2009
My (distant) second team in the division has always been the M's.
If the A’s can’t win it, I hope they do.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
It is safe to say
the A’s cannot win it, especially with single A players and management who does not give a flying F
Trainman - May 17, 2009
it's also good as a fan of BASEBALL in general
to follow other teams sometimes. This year, preseason, I picked the Royals and Pirates. Last year it was the Rays and Brewers. I sure got lucky on that one.
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
I've been a huge A's fan since '91....
when I was 12 years old and just becoming interested in baseball. I’ve seen the A’s go through their ups and downs, but never have I found being a fan of the A’s as difficult as this year and last. I try hard not to be the guy that threatens to stop being a fan, but damn the management and ownership makes it more and more difficult on a daily basis. It’s become obvious to me that this team has pretty much no chance of competing this year. I’m not necessarily opposed to playing the young guys, but why have a losing season while your paying guys like Giambi and Holliday millions? Get rid of the dead weight and let some of the youngsters play regularly.
I have always supported Billy Beane, but I’m ready for him and Bob Geren to move on. The two of them have succeeded in building a team that has little talent, and even less desire to win. It’s hard enough to watch this team lose seemingly a different way every game. I could even deal with a 100 loss season as long as the team showed potential for the future. This team is not built for the future, and apparently not for the present either. My biggest issue with the team this year and last, is that they have absolutely no heart. My nephew’s little league team plays with more fire than the majority of the current A’s roster.
AEP2007 - May 17, 2009
Just in case any front office types are reading this....
Please bear in mind: we’re among the team’s most diehard fans.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
I'd say season ticketholders are more diehard
Those folks your see behind third base amongst the empty seats, bundled up against the weather.
Those are the real diehards IMO, because they buy season tickets, drive to the Coli in awful traffic, and sit ’til the end through hometown mediocrity.
One won lost won - May 17, 2009
I am one of those season ticket holders
except that I take BART to the games.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Don't have to be a season ticket holder to be a die hard fan
but I get the point. After watching this game today I realize just how foul of a mood this team puts me in when they continue to play like they are sleepwalking. I can’t for the life of me understand why Bon Geren still has job unless Beane feels responsible and guilty if he blamed Geren. still, ya know, how many times has this been brought up in the last several weeks? More and more, it seems as though there really was no plan other than to “roll the dice and hope everything went right”. I totally agree that there should have been some emphasis on getting a vet starter to help out the youngsters this year, especially knowing Dike’s history. The 3rd base thing I’m kinda disappointed in not so much because Chavvy is never healthy but because I thought Nomar would be able to play 3-4 times a week even if Chavvy was not playing, which is the case to a certain extent. The excitement of coming out of ST and starting the year taking 2 out of 3 from the Angels now seems like a distant memory…….and no real vision of how the future looks for us “die-hard fans.” :(
mrod - May 17, 2009
I disagree.
They buy season tickets and then sell 75% of them to other people for face value, just keeping the games they wanna go to.
mikev - May 17, 2009
many season ticket holders don't do that
it’s hard to generalize that way. One of the things I appreciate about the A’s is that you can buy packages of games, rather than have to buy tickets to all home games.
Giants season ticket holders have to buy the entire home package, so they buy them in groups and only pay for the games they want. In fact, many fans throughout major league baseball do that.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Agreed
But I’d say the amount of season ticket holders that go to every game they pay for is very small.
mikev - May 17, 2009
I have no way to say that's true -- do you?
If I had to guess i’d say that the number is higher for A’s fans in general because you can buy packages instead of all of the games.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Just all the season ticket holders I've bought tickets from.
mikev - May 17, 2009
wouldn't you only be able to buy tix from the type of SS ticket holder you describe?
You wouldn’t be able to buy from the hypothetical ideal ticket holder you wish the A’s had.
ohmangoAs - May 17, 2009
Ideally I'd be one of those ones who goes to every game
But I’m broke.
mikev - May 17, 2009
+1
broke
oaklandSMASH - May 18, 2009
It's too bad really
I’ve felt for years that the key moment for this franchise was when Long’ s ball went into the corner on that now long-ago night in October. If Howe had only pinch-ran Byrnes; if Jeter hadn’t made such an incredible play; if Jeremy had slid; if the umpire had called it differently…
Well, you know the rest. Dye would never have broken his leg. I firmly believe that team with a well-rested pitching staff would have handled the Mariners… and whether or not they would have beaten Arizona, we would have had a WS in this era.. before the Giants did.. before Bonds’ HR chase became the be-all and end-all. The team would have had 15-20 million more to play with based on the ensuing attendance spike. As good as that team was in 2002 attendance would have carried over until 2003 big time. Maybe with the successful playoff experience they beat the Twins and then it’s the Angels. Maybe we have a repeat all Bay Area WS in 2002, and win it AGAIN, ensuring another year or two of big-time attendance and payroll flexibility. Tejada does not leave in that environment, and I doubt Hudson does either.
But those things didn’t happen— BB soldiered on, but eventually this franchise spiraled back to lousiness— as has been its pattern for a century now. Let’s hope we get someone smart to pick up the pieces and can win, say, 2013 or so. But forget the next two or three years and the end of the Beane regime.
jasonthea - May 17, 2009
You missed a piece on the Game that Zito lost and Jeremy out at home
Two runners on, bottom of the 4th, Chavez got a fat pitch and he didn’t miss it. As soon as he hit it, I KNEW it was gone, as did Mussina. Mussina, looked down, slumped and kicked the ground. I jumped up from my seat….YEEEAAAAAHHHH!!!
….Chavvy hooked it foul by about six or seven feet. You talk about “close”? Even a swing that was 1/10th of a second slower would have re-wrote history.
One won lost won - May 18, 2009
Ugh
Forgot all about that one until you mentioned it. But I’ll never forget how deflated the stadium felt after Jeter’s flip.
dtnick - May 18, 2009
Does Buan have an email address
I want someone to email the game thread and wrap up to him to pass onto Beane. Is this possible?
Trainman - May 17, 2009
radio@oaklandathletics.com
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Done
I sent an email.
It had a couple of comments from me at the bottom
Sorry but we love the A’s and are sick and tired of having a team that could not even compete in AAA.
“Geren might have been a good best man but he is not a manager”
Trainman - May 17, 2009
You guys are pathetic! Beane is better than most GM's
There was so much excitement before the season started that the A’s could be a good team. Things had to go right and so far a lot of players have been hurt and things haven’t gone right. Billy needs to stay the course and this team will be good. Nico you are in the wrong in calling Billy out. I, in no way, agree with your post.
benhall2121 - May 17, 2009
Please take off your blinders
Billy is awful
Trainman - May 17, 2009
That's overstating it, IMO
He has or had the ability to be a first-rate GM.
Nico - May 17, 2009
Had the ability
The worst thing Lew could have done was give him ownership. Now he rakes in profit without carign about what he puts out there.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
I don't agree with this.
Companies do stock grants and employee purchases and the like so that the employee feels that if they do a good job and the company prospers, they will see more than a paycheck as a reward. Instead of just showing up, doing your time and collecting your paycheck, you’re more likely to do the extra things that make the company do better.
LoneStranger - May 17, 2009
Ya
Billy definitely does not care at all.
travdog6 - May 17, 2009
I think Beane is more motivated by his work than the money
What’s he need money for? He doesn’t have enough time in the day to spend it.
When he took, then foresook the Boston job, that should tell you that money or “raking in the profit” is the last motive in the line of what’s important for BBeane.
In my opinion, he has just been drawing a run of bad hands in a poker game, by analogy.
Heck, you could do that all night, even if you’re a bona fide WS of Poker player. It’s not as if he does a Mo Vaughn or a Jeff Cirillo year in and year out. I would say his biggest mistake was assuming Chavez would remain a healthy player.
One won lost won - May 18, 2009
Okay
Let’s see the reasons why things are all right.
Any time you’re ready.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
There's a difference between saying things are all right and saying
“stay the course.” 2009 isn’t going to be all right, but before the A’s traded for Holliday, did you ever seriously think they would compete in 2009? Given that most of the players from Beane’s four big trades spent last year in A ball, I think the earliest you can make a fair assessment of the rebuild is 2011. So while I definitely agree Beane has made a few poor decisions of late, I think much of the GM-bashing and the assertions that this team has rebuilt halfway, or doesn’t have anything bright to look forward to, are an overstatement.
And I would add that while the signings of Cabrera, Nomar, and Giambi, as well as the Holliday trade may seem confusing for a rebuilding team, they do provide Beane with some trade ammunition at the deadline, which is important considering Beane fired most of his big shots last year. The one year deals given these vets means that the A’s will once again have a lot of payroll flexibility come 2010. Trade-wise, Buck, Sweeney, and Davis are also very expendable considering the development of Brown, Cunningham, and Doolittle (and Spencer and Thomas) as well as the cheap FA market for corner OFs. If you look at some of Geren’s more controversial moves in the context of a rebuilding season, such as platooning Buck and Davis, they make a bit more sense.
I think the plan this year was always to continue rebuilding, and I think if you look at the minor leagues, the plan is coming along all right. As for 2009, I think the best we can hope for is a couple good trades and some positive development at the big league level from folks like Anderson, Cahill, Buck, and Cunningham.
scromulus - May 17, 2009
If the plan all along is to next be good in 2011,
with four lousy years in between, then I stand by an earlier statement that Beane is no more skilled at rebuilding than many, many GMs. Heck, the Marlins can do that and win a couple World Series.
Nico - May 17, 2009
Why should he be more skilled?
Why is there this expectation that he’s magical? I would say at this point, its the Twins, not the A’s who get the nod for being the team that’s consistently competitive on a low budget, but even they are starting to show cracks because no team can be good forever whether they’re the A’s/Marlins/Twins/Padres or the Yankees/Braves/Angels. At least the A’s have been more proactive than most other organizations headed into decline.
If your GM gives you 7 competitive years to 4 non-competitive years you’re a pretty lucky sports fan.
scromulus - May 17, 2009
Kudos on the Twins assessment...
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
-1
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
Well, the big problem is there was too much uncertainty behind the 2009 roster that Beane put together. Way too much emphasis on the premise that “things had to go right”. Chavvy had to stay healthy and he had to play up to the same level he had player ealier in his career before his huge contract, Giambi had to produce, Nomar had to stay healthy, and perhaps most importantly, young pitchers like Anderson and Cahill had to perform like veterans. It’s just way too much to hope for, and not a realistic expectation.
ATLDuck - May 18, 2009
I really don't get the sense of entitlement that's coming through this thread
Seriiously – what do the A’s actually owe us, the fans? We don’t employ them. We didn’t take out an ad on craigslist sayng ‘wanted, team to compete a little and go to the playoffs occasionally’. No – the A’s put together a team and say, ok, here’s a team, please pay to come watch us. That’s the way the transaction works. If you don’t like the team – and God knows, there’s reason enough not to, JUST DO SOMETHING ELSE INSTEAD. But like, don’t go on like they’ve slept with your sister or something.
I don’t know about you, but I sat and watched a game this morning, and, as disatisfying as it was, it occupied me for three hours. If they keep on like this, likely I’ll lose interest in the second part of the season.
And here’s the thing. Let’s go back to the beginning of this year. The A’s have been rebuilding for a couple of years, and the front office sees that there might be an opening to contend, and makes a couple of moves. It looks like it hasn’t worked out. A reasonable criticism can be made for trying to go for it too early. But on the other side of the coin, could they afford to have another season of the kids, and to continue with the attendance falling? Should they have stuck to their course they were ploughing? Possibly. Hell, I’m just some guy on the internet – I DON’T KNOW. But I’m not going to accusing them of lacking pride. Jesus. I mean, on one hand, Beane is accused of having too much ego, on the other, not enough pride. You think he really doesn’t want to win?
He has made mistakes. But to call him pathetic, or dumb, or lacking pride? Seriously. If infalibility is what’s expected, then might I suggest that there’s not many of us here who’d meet that level?
I’m not saying that this team isn’t above criticism, but let’s get some effing perspective on this. It’s becoming a drag
alea iacta est - May 17, 2009
If they want more support and good crowds, then yeah, they do owe it to the fans
They owe it to the fans to prove that winning is a priority.
Beane’s the architect of this team. If it’s a bad team, if it’s a team that has nobody to really care about, if it’s a team that’s just going through the motions, if it’s a team that’s very injury prone…well, who DO you point the finger of blame at?
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
that's right
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
You're missing my point
I’m not trying to absolve Beane from criticism. Far from it, actually. It just seems weird to be claiming to be ripped off by the team, or sold down the river, or whatever, when, yknow. They never promised us anything.
I do agree – they they want more support and decent crowds, they need to put a winning team out. But let’s not pretend that that’s not want they want, or that the players are ok with what is happening. Does anyone really think they are happy with what’s going on?
I’m not trying to divert the finger of blame – but I’m also saying, it’s nothing personal. As a fan, don’t feel that the club is trying to shaft you. Mistakes made are mistakes made, not personal attacks.
alea iacta est - May 17, 2009
I agree
the club is not trying to shaft us but they are not trying to build a fan base either with the product they are putting out there.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Yes, a i e, but they "owe us"
the same way stand-up comedians (also in the entertainment industry) owe it to their audience to show up sober or to practice their material. You may still be good or bad, but just at least put your best and full focus on the task at hand, and don’t favor your friends or lose interest and do it half-assed – which is the perception, if not the reality.
To say “they don’t owe us anything – if they’re not winning, or they’re boring, go do something else” may be “accurate,” but it doesn’t really make sense when you’re talking about a sports fan and his/her sports team. The best thing they have going is that we love THIS team, not some other team or other sport or other activity; they don’t get to say “well then don’t care so much” when it’s convenient.
Nico - May 17, 2009
supposedly they want us to care
at least that’s what baseball clubs strive for in their marketing. All we ask is the same from them.
Many fans have questioned the direction of this organization over the past few years. Ironically, AN has been on the whole one of the more supportive forums in terms of supporting the management and ownership of the A’s
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
I think from a humanistic stand point though,
you really kind of owe it to yourself to not go see comedians that suck, or bands that suck, and if baseball isn’t fun for you right now, don’t go to the game. Its your life and and its your time to do with as you choose.
In the past, when the A’s have been going well, I’ve foregone social gatherings and declined offers of extra hours at work because I really wanted to see the game that night. That’s not gonna happen for the ‘09 A’s. If I am watching the game, and they start to really suck, I might grab my book.
scromulus - May 17, 2009
for the most part, right...
but sometimes you gotta go see bands that suck because they’re your friends’ bands. And of course, with an organization like a baseball club, some fans see said organization more as friends than as a crappy band.
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
Quick question, as well
You watched the game on TV. That probably didn’t really cost you anything except your time.
Would you pay to go watch this team in person right now? That’s the big question.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
I sure as hell am not paying to watch Geren and the Geriatrics...
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
Yeah, I still enjoy going to watch the games
I can’t afford to go to as many as I like, not having a job and all at the moment, but $2 Wednesdays are hard to beat.
A baseball game always has a basic level of enjoyment to it, no matter what the score is, ultimately.
alea iacta est - May 17, 2009
Which is why I'll continue to go as well.
And lets face it, we’ve had some damned good entertainment this decade. That’s why its so hard to watch what’s happening right now.
lynnzgal - May 17, 2009
Well, I for one am an NRAF who hasn't seen an A's game in person since before Hudson came up
but I went to well over a hundred games from 1982 to 1986, and those teams completely sucked.
I know it’s not fun to watch Cahill or Anderson or Outman, but I was a devoted fan of a team whose starting rotation for two or three years consisted of guys like Bill Kreuger, Chris Codiroli, Tim Conroy, Gorman Heimueller, Bill Mooneyham, a washed-up Steve McCatty, and Lary Sorensen. It was so bad that everyone got really excited when the team picked up Ray Burris.
One thing that made it easier: 1985 was the only season without either Rickey or Jose. So there was almost always one exciting, young hitter to bring you out to the park.
Nick - May 17, 2009
Thanks for this memory
I’m another NRAF who hasn’t been to the Coliseum in maybe ten years longer than you have – maybe not since the summer of ‘86, in fact. I spent 1983 in Europe; I could only follow the A’s through the International Herald Tribune. I think Kreuger, Codiroli, Conroy, and Heimueller were all rookies that year – makes this year look like a bunch of old guys, doesn’t it? And Mike Warren too; without “cheating” by resorting to Baseball-Reference.com, I think that was his rookie season and the season of his no-hitter. I thought that would be the beginning of something, but not one of those guys ever panned out, and probably none of them should have been expected to if we really knew how to evaluate prospects at that time.
When I got back from Europe, I discovered Bill James, who taught me how to really think about baseball for the first time in a way I had never even realized was possible. James was a revelation, but he never really was able to get a handle on the A’s (which he admitted), always getting them wrong. I remember in one of the Abstracts he bitched about the A’s foolishly focusing on Ray Burris, who wasn’t going to be part of any future winning A’s team. I also remembered going to a beautiful sunny afternoon game at the Coliseum where Burris pitched a crisp 7-0 shutout (or something like that), just a fabulously refreshing break from the usual young A’s pitcher like Kreuger or whoever who would take forever on the mound, peering intently and at length at the catcher trying to picture some pitch they might throw that might have a fighting chance of not getting creamed by the batter. It’s not as if Burris was blocking anybody, and when after his one season with the team he wanted a two-year contract instead of the one year Alderson was willing to offer, they let him go, so obviously they weren’t overvaluing a single decent season or trying to build around him.
Sometimes a competent pitching job and a well-played game of baseball are a pleasure on their own and worthwhile for themselves, whether or not they are part of some longer term plan for success or not. In fact, I could use one of those right about now.
Faust - May 17, 2009
You said it.
I’d take it.
lynnzgal - May 17, 2009
I'd forgotten about Warren!
And yes, he was a rookie when he no-hit the (IIRC) already-division-clinched White Sox in 1983! I remember watching Don Sutton pitch a shutout in 1984 — he didn’t help the team go anywhere, but I still remember that game.
Incidentally that awful pitching staff managed to throw 37 consecutive scoreless innings between 8/13/83 and 8/17/83. Baseball is a funny game.
Nick - May 17, 2009
Yes
I’ve been to every Saturday game this season, plus opening night, plus a couple other weekday games (it’s the most games I’ve been to this early in the season, ever). Despite the struggles so far this year, as others have mentioned, there’s still something enjoyable about going to games regardless of the score. And there have been some bright spots, like Suzuki’s continued development, Cust’s improvements this season, Braden’s gutsy and solid outings (I wasn’t a fan of his before this season), and Andrew Bailey coming out of the bullpen.
In hindsight, though, I think Beane should have stayed the full rebuilding course instead of going with a veteran lineup. Bring in a few vets to fill the holes for now and provide some leadership in the rotation, sure, but I think it’s time to let the kids play.
dtnick - May 18, 2009
+1
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
Totally disagree (re: the "owe" part)
If they “owe” us nothing, why should we give them our time, money, and emotional commitment?
As far as I’m concerned, it’s an even trade… each side “owes” the other side something in return for what the other side is giving.
I do agree that some of the criticisms of Beane are over-the-top, but he’s not exactly doing much to keep his reputation of late, either.
UncleLeo - May 17, 2009
I for one am missing posts from Rlangford right about now.
Pucking Insane - May 17, 2009
I was just thinking the same thing.
mrod - May 17, 2009
Entitlement??
Hardly…
When your team— the one you’ve essentially run for the last 12 years— has won all of one playoff series, is coming off two mediocre years in a row, and appears to be a lot worse this year… and yet they’re making a movie about you starring Brad Pitt, where’s the sense of entitlement? please.
Billy you may not be selling jeans.. but we are not buying egos.
jasonthea - May 17, 2009
Again - it's this assumption that the team owes it to you to win
when they clearly don’t? If you don’t like the fact they’re making a movie, don’t go see it. Don’t give them the money, and don’t waste your time thinking about it. Problem solved.
alea iacta est - May 17, 2009
And again -
To say "they don’t owe us anything – if they’re not winning, or they’re boring, go do something else" may be "accurate," but it doesn’t really make sense when you’re talking about a sports fan and his/her sports team. The best thing they have going is that we love THIS team, not some other team or other sport or other activity; they don’t get to say "well then don’t care so much" when it’s convenient.
Nico - May 17, 2009
they don't get to say it,
but they can sure stare smugly, roll their eyes and IMPLY it!
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
Read Nico's post a bit more carefully, please.
He’s not demanding that they win. He’s demanding that they give us a reason to watch them. And that begins with the folks on the field and the guys in the dugout appearing to give damn. And it continues with the folks in the front office trying to assemble a team that is at least interesting and is, additionally, either good now or provides some hope for the future. Or to put it another way: a fan cannot expect his or her team to always win. But it’s not unreasonable for a fan to expect a team to provide some evidence that they might reasonably be expected to win sometime in the future.
Right now this team is doing none of these things.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
That doesn't sound like a fan to me
Maybe a “casual” fan. But any true sports fan is at least somewhat competitive, somewhat passionate about their team and/or it’s players.
I spent my money to go see my NL team, the Mets, in San Francisco this weekend. It was my baseball budget for a couple months but I’d rather spend it on a team that I perceive as wanting something as much as I would want it if I were a player.
luvsthecurveball - May 17, 2009
interesting you'd feel that way about the Mets
with all the accusations over the last few years that they don’t all have their heads in the game…
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
True
I don’t know why they melt down at the end of the season every year and I’m really hoping it’s a problem solved. But they at least appear to want to win. And Murphy makes me laugh frequently so it’s good entertainment. You can’t say that boy ain’t trying.
luvsthecurveball - May 17, 2009
has it been poor planning or bad luck?
4/5 ths of their projected 09 rotation duke,eveland, gio, gallgher injured or struggling have given nothing and were forced tofast track cahill/anderson.
The bullpen had tons of depth last yr with devine/ziegler/brown/blevins etc which allowed them to trade street. i know at the time brining in wuertz/spring were surprising moves but imagine where the bullpen would be wihtout either to fill in along with bailey. Thats almost a complete 08 staff, having produced not much so far.
the FA hitters all had risks attached to them, worst case scenario has happened.
It might be unfair, but the progress of sweeney/buck/barton as potential core pieces of this future offense has not happened thus far. Only Suzuki looks like a current regular player to stick long term.
I’ve given up on contending and moved onto the continued rebuild. Hope some of these older players regain some value and are commodities at the deadline. The next wave of prospects in AA/AAA will be ready by late 09 into 2010.
Asfan4ever723 - May 17, 2009
If they want people to attend the games
they need to put a decent team on the field.
This team would be lucky to compete in AAA.
They are defrauding the fans.
MLB teams are supposed to entertain the fans, that’s how they make money and the players get their high salaries.
we are being ripped off by an embarrassing team.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Buan is reading the post!
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
And?
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
My radio just cut out
They cut off the broadcast
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Oh snap!
Censored!
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
didn't read the whole thing
reading posts by others, this time criticizing letting many of the coaches go.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Buan didn't read the last three paragraphs
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
LOL
That was yours eh?
Trainman - May 17, 2009
no, I'm referring to Nico's front page post
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
OK
Trainman - May 17, 2009
He really read some of it word for word?
What did he read?
Nico - May 17, 2009
My audio cut out
Trainman - May 17, 2009
he read everything except the last three paragraphs
he said, “it goes on”…then he said it was signed by “at least me”
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
He read most all of it.
Although, he reads about as well as Buck read last year for the Cops for Kids commercials.
33SwisherSweet - May 17, 2009
Good
Other emails ripping Beane and team
Buan is reading one now.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Props to Buan for reading this.
He just gained some respect from me.
33SwisherSweet - May 17, 2009
been a big fan of Buan for the past ten-ish
stranahanahan - May 17, 2009
years
maybe it’s been a bit less than that but he’s a smart guy and he does things right. Always enjoy listening to him…
stranahanahan - May 17, 2009
Here an Idea.
Spend some fucking money on the god damn team.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
No, spend the money on people that are worth it
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
I was infering to
Hudson/Mulder/Tejada/Giambi when he was good.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
since when did they have the yankees payroll
teajada/giambi roids
mulder turned into crap
zito overpaid crap
i wouldve kept hudson, but that wasnt a given with his free agency and oblique issues
Asfan4ever723 - May 17, 2009
I dont care.
Sepnd some damn money on the team. Im sick of having a AAA team.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
Somehow I doubt they had the money to keep everyone
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Then its on the owners.
If you cant afford a MLB team, dont buy one.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
Go talk to the last ownership group on that one
Who, might I remind you, are no longer owners.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Well I know the Schott and whoever else owned the A's
were real cheap.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
Which is a big reason why "Hudson/Mulder/Tejada/Giambi when he was good" were not kept
But I also doubt they could have afforded all of them.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Well prob not them all.
But they shouldnt have all gotten away. What message does that send to fans?
Syphon - May 17, 2009
Probably the messages most people debated at the time
And the messages we debate whenever the A’s trade away someone with name recognition for prospects or let someone else sign a larger contract elsewhere.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
They did sign one of them 'when he was good.'
His name is Eric Chavez.
LoneStranger - May 17, 2009
Hindsight the only player worth keeping was Hudson
and even he has had his issues with injuries. Giambi has been injured and embroiled in the steriods scandal. Tejada magically aged 3 years, declined with the bat and glove and is neck deep in the steriods scandal. Mulder got injured and fell off a cliff a year after we traded him. If any of those had been signed long term this club would be in an even worse state now.
DeJay - May 18, 2009
they have spent enough money to have a good
organization and build a contending club.
The question is: has the money been spent wisely in the last few years?
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
I dunno.. our Payroll is what... 50mil.
A normal MLB team should prob be in the 75-80 mil range.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
it was in that range in 2007
and we have evidence of other teams that have had good seasons with less.
the question is still whether the money was spent wisely.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Well... as of now it hasnt.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
What was Tampa Bay's payroll last year?
$40 million total? $50 million? Yankees? $200 million and no playoffs.
Throwing money is not always the route to success. Being baseball smart is important.
JD Drew was perpetually injured, yet Boston signed him and he is reasonably healthy.
We get Joey Devine on the cheap, looks unhittable, now he’s a TJ surgery guy. You just cannot assume money makes any of the situations work.
One won lost won - May 18, 2009
If the A's had extended any of those players they would be no better off today.
And system-wide they would be much much worse off.
scromulus - May 17, 2009
Maybe not Huddy.
But that doesn’t invalidate the trade.
mikev - May 17, 2009
That unknown.
Syphon - May 17, 2009
:)
…
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
Let's start with a manager who can actually manage and who the players want to play for
33SwisherSweet - May 17, 2009
All in favor?
I
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
I am sure Lew would have an upsewt stomach
after reading how we feel at the moment. If he cared about the team he would.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
upset
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Still don't understand why they're making a Moneyball movie now
It’s past its time. Cancel the thing. People are going to see that and wonder, “What happened?”
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
+1,000,000,000
33SwisherSweet - May 17, 2009
this
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
I wonder if they change the end of the movie
and have Beane and Geren run over by BART.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Is there a way to block the posts of certain users?
I’d appriciate it if someone let me know…
EastCoastA - May 17, 2009
No. Just don't read their comments if you don't like their posts.
Nico - May 17, 2009
That's basically impossible.
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
How do you suggest doing that when the post comes above the username?
EastCoastA - May 17, 2009
by post I mean comment
EastCoastA - May 17, 2009
I often look first for the green username,
before deciding whether or not I care to read the comment.
Nico - May 17, 2009
that makes a lot of sense and is a good rule of thumb...
…although some people’s comments can grow on you. Some of the commenters I used to avoid are now my favorites!
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
What's funny is I basically am the polar opposite of that.
I very rarely look at WHO is posting something before I am thinking of a response.
mikev - May 17, 2009
I don't want who the person is to color how I interpret what they say.
LoneStranger - May 17, 2009
I don't know what that means.
mikev - May 17, 2009
he was agreeing with you
by saying that he wouldn’t want to know who it was, since knowing might prejudice him in some way. (correct me if I’m wrong…speaking for others usually goes badly for me)
ohmangoAs - May 18, 2009
I don't think that's a good way of going about that.
But that’s just me
travdog6 - May 18, 2009
why would you knowingly provide someone with false information? you didn't have to answer his question.
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
killfile!!
harenshair - May 18, 2009
nico is lying: there definitely *is* a way to block posts from certain users.
i assume you want to block trainman…
firefox:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/firefox.html
greasemonkey:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748
killfile:
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/4107
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
I'm sorry, did you mean I was lying or that I might be mistaken?
Please reply; thanks.
Nico - May 18, 2009
Oh, and just to clarify, what I was saying is
that AN does not have any such feature. (Which is neither a lie nor a mistake.)
Nico - May 18, 2009
i didn't get your message because my answering machine was broken, and no one was home when i called you back
did you not know such a thing existed at all, or was your answer that AN doesn’t have that feature?
-killfile has been mentioned on AN well over a hundred times, including numerous times in threads and even subthreads that you actively posted in and definitely read.
-he asked if there was a way to block certain users, not if AN had that feature. were you mistaken about the question?
-did you also mistakenly not specify in your answer that you just meant that AN had no such feature? that’s a lot of mistakes in one comment…
Please reply; thanks.
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
The second of your three dashes
You come across as a really angry person, dude. Have some fun.
Nico - May 18, 2009
It seems like a waste of time, doesn't it?
Flashfire - May 18, 2009
wait... who started this thread?
i’m not really seeing the anger there…
xbhaskarx - May 19, 2009
that is all...
mrod - May 17, 2009
exactly, we didnt win a series with that core group of guys
whats the climax of the movie?
9Custs - May 17, 2009
Giambi slides and we go on to win the Series!
They changed the end of The Natural when they made the movie, why not change the end of Moneyball?
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
I’m thinking about changing my screen name from “RHP Brad Ziegler” to “Fire Bob Geren” real soon.
Rated-R Superstar - May 17, 2009
Don't Call my friends pathetic!
The A’s owe every fan! If not for fans, they would not be employed. You do not rebuild at the professional level, period. Maybe in a transition year, but years of rebuilding? C’mon they are supposed to be professionals. It does seem very obvious, the team is not trying and that is shameful. In any other line of work that kind of attitude and performance gets you fired. Yes, they OWE US FANS. That’s what we pay for. That’s what they advertise. Go to a restaurant and have them tell you there is nothing to eat we are rebuilding, after they take your money. Or you go to see a famous concert and you pay top dollar for a certain performer and a ten year old comes out to sing Mary Had a Little Lamb.
Yes, many were optimistic at the beginning of the year, but it was only wishful thinking. Everyone knew how pathetic the trades have been over the last two seasons and we all just were praying for something good. You can’t blame us for trying. Although we knew they did not address major issues, we were wishing for luck. The people on this site are very intelligent and very loyal to the A’s. Why would they bash the team until they know for sure? Now they do and you think they are wrong for pointing out the problems.
We are owed, at the very least, an honest effort. The teams want us to give them our money, buy their gear, pay for games. That’s just great! We deserve a team that plays hard and management that have the best interest of the team, in mind. In fact, they owe it to us!
Sense of entitlement = we paid money!
jonxstri - May 17, 2009
Geren's typical post game comment
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=290517106
The Tigers outscored Oakland 34-9 in the weekend sweep.
“I just talked to everyone as a group, and told them that I thought the effort was outstanding this weekend,” Geren said. “We just need to write this off as a bad series, get out of town and start fresh in Tampa.”
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Glad to see Bob's got the morale part down
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Whereas Jim Leyland goes to the mound twice
in the middle of an at-bat to tell his pitcher, “throw f***ing strikes.”
Nico - May 17, 2009
(and burns them with his lit cigarette)
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
Clever.
somebodyelse - May 18, 2009
LMAO...
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
is he high?
SwisherThresher - May 17, 2009
I don't know, but he should be...
…fired!
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
What a motivator
Part of being a manager is leadership, this guy is cast fron the same mold as Steve Boros; 100% boring. I remember when the A’s blew a game llike this in 1980, Billy Martin kicked over the buffet and told the team until they play they won’t eat on the team’s dime. They responded well.
If I ran the show I would hire Gene Tenace as my manager. He can teach hitting, Toronto is doing well, and he knows how to win..Egad I can’t take more of this lame ballclub.
billyball1981 - May 17, 2009
Billy wrecked the buffet?
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
lynnzgal - May 17, 2009
He traded it for some seeds, which may or may not develop.
Much of it depends on how long the organization cultivates them and whether or not they’re brought up too soon.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
It's like Geren thinks this is little league
where everybody gets a little ribbon for just making it to the park with their uni on right side out.
luvsthecurveball - May 17, 2009
The defensive effort was especially "outstanding."
It took a special level of effort to make all of those errors.
jeepers - May 18, 2009
two major problems
one is injuries…we’ve had an insane amount. now some of them, you can’t do anything about. but others…well, you can’t count on certain guys. chavvy is the main one. i still wonder, though, if the a’s strength training staffs all the way down the system aren’t doing something right. anyway, take away the unpredictable injuries that have killed us the last few years…the pitching staff this year. we all KNEW coming in that there might be issues w/ duke, and that cahill needed more time in AAA (anderson was more ready, but not ready imho). yet we didn’t make any moves to sign some pitchers…didn’t need to be big time guys, but people who at the very least could pitch some innings so our young guys (and i include gallagher in this…he had control issues, something that should have been worked on in AAA for a month or two). but no, we didn’t do that. and look, our pitching has been, as predicted, all over the place. i hope this stuff doesn’t get the young guys off track too much. then, the biggest problem – we have no idea about offense. i understand the draft is a crap shoot, but wow, we have been absolutely awful in developing hitters. is that a scouting issue? a coaching issue? its pretty obvious it has been atrocious for the past few years, and needs to be addressed.
guy incognito - May 17, 2009
Sorry
But the injury apologists just chaff my knickers. Look around the league. Injuries are everywhere. Teams plan for injuries. What was our plan? Bring in an injured guy to back up our injured guy (Garciaparra and Chaves).
bajablue - May 18, 2009
Many angles to the problem
No one thing, be it Geren or injuries or Beane involved with soccer has led to this. Each should be evaluated to find the root of the cause.
Some of the problems… and questions:
1. Injuries!
Are we even in this problem if the players are healthy? Granted some of the injury total is due to signing older vets that we all know have a higher chance of landing on the DL. Subtracting the injuries for guys like Thomas, Giambi, etc do the A’s still have more injuries than average?
2. Prospects not panning out
Crosby, Meyer, Barton, etc. Guys who were to be great and are either poor or not on the team. There’s still time for Barton to turn it around, but suppose our prospects did pan out? How does the team do then? In my estimation the A’s are all too eager to trade for minor league talent. Having a stocked farm system is great… but is it worth a poor record in the big show?
3. Management
Under Geren the A’s are a combined 164-192, or a .461 winning percentage. Under Macha and Howe you have to go back to 1999 to find a losing season. I repeat: Macha did not have a losing season. So even if Geren isn’t the problem, I can’t see him as a solution either. This is one of my big critiques of Beane – installing his friend as manager. Maybe his ever-positive schtick works well in the minors when guys need to believe in themselves, but this is the majors.
4. Failure to learn from other teams
Money ball and statistical analysis is great, but it’s not the key to winning. Teams like the Twins are doing better than the A’s without all the fancy analysis. Does that mean our problems are overshadowing any statistical benefit? Or is it because too many stats don’t make for a fluid team?
5. Batting with RISP
Why take a walk? Swing! Swing! Errors happen, singles happen, things happen! unless the bases are loaded taking a walk does not score a run.
alright, back to campus…
Jernskogen - May 17, 2009
I'm willing to bet the Twins are doing fancy analysis.
I bet every team is doing it now. They just aren’t all talking about it.
LoneStranger - May 17, 2009
+1
Nick - May 17, 2009
Likely correct
Although I swear I read an article where they claimed not to; that doesn’t mean it isn’t misdirection. The hitters swing at darn near anything, so walks doesn’t appear to be something they value highly. Their drafting has turned out far better as well. Also helps that they positively looted the Giants.
Jernskogen - May 17, 2009
Their 2 best hitters (Morneau and Mauer) are patient hitters who walk quite a lot
and guys like Denard Span and even Nick Punto take their share of walks.
But you know who doesn’t walk? Delmon Young and Carlos Gomez, the 2 young prospects they targeted in their big trades recently. And those 2 guys happen to suck as hitters.
Seriously, how would you feel if Beane had traded Johan F’ing Santana for a now-23-year old CF who hit .258./.296/.360 last year and is hitting .207/.277/.310 this year?
Nick - May 17, 2009
Santana trade
was terrible. That’s what Smith got for trying to be greedy.
So maybe the Twins don’t overvalue walks. Could you see either Young or Gomez on the A’s? Only if the price is a total steal I bet. Anyway, you’re taking what I said too far. Walks are not bad; walks when you’re not scoring runs and have men on base are not ideal. How many times have we seen the A’s strand runners multiple runners in a game while struggling to get one or two runs? I’m all for getting a hit in those situations instead of a walk. Waiting for the big boppers to hit one out only works if they regularly do so; it’s not a guarantee they will, especially when it’s cold like during a night game.
Perhaps it all comes back to situational hitting.
Jernskogen - May 17, 2009
I'm not so sure.
They actively take steps to teach players that all that matters is aggressiveness.
They just happen to scout players better than anyone not named Logan White. And that’s why the Twins are always in the hunt.
rageon - May 18, 2009
Whoa!
I think everyone needs to take a step back and take a deep breath. Do you guys really think Beane doesn’t care anymore? I know his moves for this year haven’t worked out at all but that doesn’t mean he’s just carelessly throwing a team out there. Look at the Holliday trade. If we still had Street, Smith, and Gonzalez, would we be in any better of a position? I doubt it. Sure Gonzalez is raking in AAA, but that’s just because he’s not associated with the A’s. If he was starting for our mlb club he’d be hitting .220 just like the rest of the lineup and everyone would be complaining about the need for a big bat. Well, Beane cared enough to get that big bat and it just so happens Holliday has made the whole thing look foolish but that doesn’t mean Beane doesn’t care or isn’t interested.
To me, Beane is guilty of the same thing most A’s fans are guilty of: impatience. He really wanted to see the team compete instead of watching another year go down the drain. So did I, so did a lot of us. You guys can’t say you weren’t at least a little excited at the start of this season with the pieces we had in place. If things broke right, we could have competed. Things didn’t break right, that doesn’t mean the guy in charge doesn’t care anymore. If anything, he cared a little too much and let his feelings get in the way of the rebuilding process. We can still rebuild with the pieces we have don’t worry. Beane won’t just sit back and let this team implode.
chipper1001 - May 17, 2009
Perhaps
if those hitters he’s invested in start hitting on a consistent basis and scoring runs, other pitchers will want to come play for the A’s. Practice, practice. Maybe, they can get Blevins to throw some BP. Kill two birds, ya know.
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
OR
Frank Thomas… easy fix
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
if he "went for it" this year, he did so part way
getting veterans with injury histories (hoping that somehow they’d remain healthy enough and with quick enough bats), one legit star in his prime, depending (once again) on the franchise player who hasn’t been healthy enough to produce in several years — but not getting at least one more veteran starting pitcher. How does one expect Duchscherer to remain healthy enough to be the staff ace? How does one rush promising pitching prospects and hope against hope that they aren’t set back by the experience?
Gonzalez should have remained in AAA all last season. He is recovering in the Rockies organization, who wisely have not brought him up.
What has happened to the “can’t miss” prospects – Barton, Buck? Why has there been so much turnover of the coaches? Is all the misfortune and underperformance just an unfortunate coincidence? Perhaps — but at some point many will begin to question the direction from the top.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Randy Wolf was available for 1 year / $5 million
Instead of getting Holliday for a season, guys like Street, Smith, and Gonzalez, or Sweeney, Buck, and Mazarro could have been used to land someone like Chase Headley or Ian Stewart long-term.
And in those scenarios, the A’s might be better NOW as well as much better in the future.
Nico - May 17, 2009
I agree
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
He was,
and it’s easy NOW to look at him and say “he would have been a nice addition.”
But I think a few months ago a lot of sensible people, including you might have thought that Randy Wolf would be predictably bleah.
travdog6 - May 17, 2009
Yeah, but I also thought the A's would let Gallagher pitch
I also thought Wolf would sign for more than 1 year / $5million.
I did, and do, think that Randy Wolf is nothing more than a “decent” starter. But he’s a veteran, who is pretty reliable, and wound up signing for $5million.
What I’d really like to have seen is for Beane to bid higher (in talent) for Javier Vasquez, who was traded on the cheap and would have been an ideal addition.
Nico - May 17, 2009
Memo to Beane;
make Nico the new assistant GM and fire David Forst.
I am in favor of Nico turning this storm around, one move at a time!!!!
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
I'd rather make Leopold Bloom the new assistant GM,
because I like my personnel moves to be sassy and saucy!
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
But who will we have to gripe about the greater Tampa area on AN?
oaklandSMASH - May 18, 2009
but some people can't enjoy losing baseball
Gaijin_Suketto - May 18, 2009
how closely do you follow every random idea nico or anyone else posting here comes up with?
i’m pretty sure nico wanted to sign jeff suppan to a big free agent contract three years ago, but people don’t remember things like that because they don’t actually happen, so you’re not watching jeff suppan pitch every fifth a’s game.
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
Time to Sell the Team or to Sell Out My Loyalty?
I used to think that I would go on loving the A’s forever. These two past years have been difficult to bear, but this year is purely miserable. I’ve asked myself many times as our popular fan favorites have been traded to other teams, “Is it the players like those who were traded that I love or is it the A’s team?” I’ve always come back to my senses and realized that it’s truly the team that I loved and it’s the team that made me look forward to the following Spring and Summer day so I could be entertained and thrilled with the hope of another win or at least the realistic possibility of a another win.
This baseball season just brings me deep, deep disappointment with bleak feelings that a bright new day with an exciting game to watch is no longer realistic.
Now I ask myself and my relatives and friends who are also fellow A’s fans, "Is it time to watch the Giants from now or is it time to ask the A’s ownership to please sell the team to a new owner or group of owners who are honestly and truly committed to a winning even if it means risking paying more to get real talented players and coaches?
Right now, I’d rather look forward to another Monday of work after a weekend than to look forward to the next more than likely A’s loss.
Finally, regulars of this blog are sending out honest feelings about how bleak our A’s look instead of being so loyal and defenders of such a miserable organization.
quietfan - May 17, 2009
If anyone wants to go become a Giants fan...
…I say have fun.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Sorry, Flashfire, but I beg to differ
The Giants are more interesting to watch. Lincecum is awesome, Sandoval is intriguing and full of infectious energy, the team is always a threat to pitch a gem or rally from down 4 to tie it, to steal a base or hit a 3-run HR.
They’re not a great team, but they’re “worth watching.” I honestly – and I say this as someone who has watched every single game he could this year – cannot say that about these A’s.
Nico - May 17, 2009
I never said "Don't watch the Giants," did I?
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
No, but going on what you did say,
becoming a Giants fan the last few years (I used to hate them) has been my salvation lately. I figure “go Bay Area” and it’s nice to have two shots at a good team, or at least a fun team to watch.
Nico - May 17, 2009
I kind of see where you're coming from
And quietfan was asking if it’s time to watch the Giants from now on or hope the current A’s group sells. That sounds to me like switching allegiances, though. I don’t mind watching the Giants and I don’t root against them, but I don’t see myself shifting gears to the point I pull for them over the A’s.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
I agree, I'm an A's fan
although I don’t hate the Giants and do go to a few Giants games each year. Hey, I love baseball, and when the A’s are on the road I sometimes need to see an MLB game in person.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
I'm an A's fan for life, no two ways about it
But I’d rather the Giants be good than also be bad. It’s just more interesting.
Nico - May 17, 2009
amen...
Lincecum and Sandoval are fun to watch.
Suzuki and Cust are fun to watch, too.
Too bad that Sweeney, Buck and Crosby are so horribly masochistically painful to watch…
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
Typing of the Giants
Game underway on ESPN. Mets @ Giants. Cain on the hill for SF. The opposing pitcher is Pelfrey
SwisherThresher - May 17, 2009
New fans
The problem, when the team is playing poorly, is that they don’t gain or add fans. Particularly new fans. When I moved out here both teams were in the midst of their 1998 magic. Keep in mind I gave up on baseball after the players strike – was not a happy fan. Anyway, came out here, saw the games and got back into baseball. I made the smart choice and latched on to the A’s (had some help in that department from my childhood, but still, I could have gone either way). Suppose the A’s were playing like this and the Giants were the better team? Who knows. We’re the active fan & like it or not a team cannot subsist on die-hards alone.
Jernskogen - May 17, 2009
Yes, the Giants...
… are frankly a much more interesting team right now. I am not a sell out- I just love baseball, the game… and I still love Barry Zito.
By the way, this letter is spot-on. It voices my feelings exactly.
Chilango - May 17, 2009
And for those of you who live in the Bay Area....
…whatever they’re calling the Giants’ stadium these days, it’s simply a better place to watch a ball game than the Coliseum is.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
it's also a much more expensive place to watch
fans aren’t going in big numbers to the coliseum because of the team — and because of how it’s been marketed in recent years.
As old as the coliseum is it’s a great place to watch a game when the fans come. I have been to many of those games in recent years.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Any ballpark full of people is ok
Even the Vet and the Metrodome (to name two of the worst parks I’ve watched ballgames in) are (or in the case of the Vet was) ok when they’re full of people and the team is locked in a pennant race.
But having been to the Coliseum pre-Mt Davis and post-Mt Davis, with big and small crowds in each, I can say that, whether the crowd is big or small, it’s a much worse place to watch a ballgame than it used to be.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
having been to many games
both pre and post Mt Davis, I can say it’s a great experience when lots of fans come and the team is good….and up til recently that wasn’t such an unusual experience.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Like a said: winning + fans = good times at any ballpark
But you can’t always guarantee the winning. And losing + bad ballpark has a way of limiting the number of fans.
Additionally, good ballpark > bad ballpark.
The last game I went to at the Coliseum was in the summer of 2006 (the fate of the NRAF!). The A’s were playing Boston and we won. The place was packed. It was great. But it was still a lot less good than it used to be in the old bleachers, ’cause Mt. Davis sucks.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
Erp: "Like I said..."
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
I don't like Mt Davis either
but it’s not the cause of poor attendance.
I have been to many games since 2006. I also was at Fan Fest in January 2007 when 25,000 fans showed up (lots more than went to the Giants Fan Fest that year).
It’s the team and the marketing. Many people who I know who used to attend and don’t anymore talk about the management decisions, not the coliseum, as the reason they don’t go anymore.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
I'm not blaming Mt Davis for the poor attendance
In fact, I think ownership is, if anything, too obsessed with a new ballpark. I totally agree that team and marketing are more important.
But this subthread began with a discussion of the experience of being an A’s fan in 2009 vs. the experience of being a Giants fan in 2009. And were I a Bay Area resident with no strong rooting interest in either team, there’s no question where I’d rather watch a ballgame. And it wouldn’t be the Coliseum.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
I'm not jumping off board just yet.
I’ve always felt that the only person that I could not bear to lose from this franchise was Billy Beane. If, however, he has already extricated himself from the decision process and his presence is only illusory, then yes, we need to move on.
But, for me, this has been the first year of disappointment. I did not like the Holliday trade, the Nomar signing, the drafting of Weeks over Brett Wallace, the rule 5 selection, starting Cahill and Anderson, and continually ignoring organizational holes at 3B and SS. So many of the A’s moves this year and past offseason seemed so uncharacteristic of Beane and I’m still confused by them.
But prior to this year, I was okay with the rebuilding. For the most part, the moves the A’s made seemed to make sense given their circumstances.
So for me, it’s really only been one offseason and and a couple of months of disappointment and confusion. And even though they’ve been very bad months, I’m not ready to write Beane off just yet. Actually, considering the stark difference in philosophy from last year to this year, what I want most is for Beane to come back.
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
"but how are you gonna keep him down on the farm...
…now that he’s seen gay Paree?"
(an old WWI song)
I’d rather see him get hired to run a big time soccer club than to be bored and stuck…
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
Yeah and that's where I agree with Nico.
I’d rather not have Beane at all than have Beane half-assing it.
I’m just not ready to say that Beane is mailing it in. The goal this year was to compete within a weak division. I really feel we would be in competition if Holliday, Cabrera, Giambi were playing well. I don’t think those were foreseeable “ifs” and so I can’t blame the organization just yet.
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
Fiercly Loyal
To the tune of an attendance of 9,000 at home games.
pbra17 - May 17, 2009
but they're a loyal nine thousand!
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
once again
the passionate discourse misses the central point, the one that no one will acknowledge because let’s face it, we like to be told happy stories where the swelling, triumphant music plays and we get those Velveeta-preprogrammed fuzzy happy feelings… and when the mendacious rears its head we sometimes tend to deny it’s doing what it’s doing, because it’s unpleasant and we feel powerless and after all this is only a game anyway, no need to take years off yer life, right?.
We continuously fail to ask the central question: in what way is it in the owners of this franchise’s interest to field a winning product here in Oakland, when we all know it’s their fondest wish to abandon the city as soon as it’s feasible (and in the case of Fremont, even when it isn’t).for more profitable pastures? If they did happen to win something here or field a reasonable & competitive product, the city might fall in love with the team again and then their plans would be squashed.
Call me Mr. Conspiracy but that’s exactly what the fuck it is, with the Commissioner in on it since merely 40 years ago when he was frat brothers with the owner. If you ask me it’s all about that, the idea that they need 3,000 and under a night to be able to get what they really want, to be able to say, hey look no one is interested here we have to leave… and they end up getting sympathy for their pre-ordained view from the MLB brass who are alleged to be guarding the henhouse from the greedy owners, but are in fact in collusion with them just like old times, like the “businessmen” they are. I am sorry for the unpopular & paranoid view but I just don’t see how you get anything but we are getting from this ownership, given their expressed motivations for the future of the team elsewhere.
The baseball stuff is obviously a factor as well, with the rest of the AL pretty much hip to the fact by now that these motherfuckers ain’t ever gonna swing at shit, so you can just pour in first pitch strike after first pitch strike and they’ll just watch it go by, so the other teams are acting accordingly and we are essentially fucked; even if we have studs at every position it don’t mean shit if your approach is always to be guaranteed 0-1 on every damn hitter. When you add the fact, observable by any 12 year old child, that the traIning and conditioning staff are so inept for so long that they may as well be working for the Angels in secret, stir in a little Eric “Money for nothing and your crutches for free” Chavez and a little 21-year old pitching and here we are.
It doesn’t matter, really, not to them anyway. Calling for Beane’s resignation is exactly the type of Pyrrhic rhetoric that goes nowhere…. that guy is part owner of this trip and he ain’t going anywhere. The plan is split out of Oakland by any means necessary, or so it would appear, and that isn’t going to affect the product on the field in any kind of positive or gratifying way anytime soon… how could it?
I apologize but I don’t see how the situation adds up to anything but a crappy, lame-duck team for the foreseeable future… if we were smart we’d be mounting a campaign to get this carpetbagger to sell it to someone with a soul, that’d be the only way things with this team will improve or at least not be so embarrassing, IMO.
emperor nobody - May 17, 2009
this hasn't actually been ignored
we have debated this on AN in the past.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
we can debate it all we want
but all we’ll get is Ted Knight in “Caddyshack,” i.e. we’ll get nothing, and like it.
I mean, you go to a game and they conveniently put some “All You Can Eat” seats (no one ever sits there) in the top deck, just so they could remove the section of the tarp that said “Oakland”… what’s next? Maybe they could petition Selig to have Rickey go in the HoF as just “Athletic” with no city mentioned, hell maybe they should run a sort of pogrom-style program to wipe out the history of the team in Oakland as if it never happened, like a Stalinist paradigm applied to sports, the A’s could have their own “Tass” type news agency to distribute revisionist propaganda about how the ’70s championship teams really played in El Cerrito.
emperor nobody - May 17, 2009
(sigh) I know
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
although if we're gonna revise,
we should say that the El Cerrito Athletics won FIVE straight WS titles. It’s got a nicer ring to it.
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
awesome
Then let’s have the top potential revisions to A’s lore, like:
Byrnes touched home instead of hobbling around like a little girl kicked in the shins
Giambi’s potheaded brother slid
Eck hit Gibson between the numbers and struck out the next guy
Of course, the A’s won all of those games and marched to the WS title in all those years, it goes without saying.
Let’s go, Cerrito!! clap clap clapclapclap
emperor nobody - May 17, 2009
i like your slapshot/major league take
and i’ve felt the same vibe, which i say not out of being hippie-like but out of having a vague feeling that is only supported by half the facts. the other half just don’t fit. for one example, in a scheme to downgrade a team, why acquire holiday*? just to give up draft picks?
AV - May 18, 2009
Wow.
An emperor nobody sighting!
jeepers - May 18, 2009
10 more
games before their next day off. TB-ARI-SEA Any wagers on how many we win? My guess was 7 out of 15 while Nomar was on the DL. That was before Ellis went down. Nice, quick recovery with Kennedy. Can’t wait to watch the Outman game. Seems like the only good starter left. Was hoping Gallagher might do better this time around… maybe.
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
Like it or not
the Royals were on a losing streak and the Tigers were kicking azz before the A’s showed up. So the outcomes were really no surprise. If Geren does a good job with lineup cards and pitcher hooks, we might actually win the next few series.
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
I don't think the level of dissatisfaction expressed
is solely the product of this weekend’s series.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Agreed
but, things keep moving…. Rays have won 3 in a row….
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
the GOG is probably pretty easy to predict now.
LoneStranger - May 17, 2009
Well written, Nico, as usual, but riddle me this...
You are in a meeting with Mike Crowley, Lew Wolfe, Billy Beane, and David Forst last November. Financial and performance analysis points to two very likely possibilities: 1) The free-falling economy will cause the A’s to lose money for the first time in a long time, and 2) the Angels will be weakened by free-agency and, therefore, vulnerable in the division race.
Beane is a man who understands probabilities and outcomes. If he were convinced of those high-probability scenarios, what could he have done differently?
ptbarnum - May 17, 2009
Well...hindsight is 20/20 so let me try to stick to things
that were actually proposed on AN (by me or by others) at that time:
Go into the season with an expected rotation that includes Braden, Wolf, and Gallagher, inserting Anderson when Duke can’t go but keeping Cahill at AAA no matter what because he doesn’t have anywhere close to major league command yet.
Get off to a rocking start and win the West!
Nico - May 17, 2009
Thanks for the response.
Sure, he could have done those things. But he didn’t. And the things he did do haven’t worked out so far,so that indicates…what? Beane is negligent, incompetent, over-hyped, stupid?
All that you say may be true. But this what I see: Beane has waged a brilliant guerrilla campaign against competitors with superior resources. Now the odds are catching up to him, and he knows it. The big-money teams are using financial resources to sway the draft and free agency in their favor. (The big-money clubs can overpay for draft choices, for instance, and thereby benefit from the agents’ desire to steer their clients to the larger payoff and away from clubs with the inability to pay.)
Beane really has only one choice: Play for the Black Swan event. Keep your exposure limited most of the time, then take your shot when you perceive favorable odds, though still long-shot. The Tampa Bay Rays were the worst team in baseball in 2007. World Series the next year. The Black Swan event!
I think Beane saw an opportunity, took his shot, and just missed it. (Kinda like Matt Holliday on any number of pitches this year.) But because he has kept his exposure limited (just look at the exposure the Tigers have with their payroll) he lives to fight again.
None of this is to say I am not pissed about what has happened. Beane is a big boy who has lived a charmed existence. If you accept the accolades and the Brad Pitt casting, you have to take the crap, too. But I just can’t see how he has been as incompetent, or as negligent as you imply.
ptbarnum - May 17, 2009
by you OR by others? sure, in hindsight you can create a playoff-caliber team if you go back and pick over the best ideas thrown out by 2,000 people.
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
i think you've got it, old chap!
Maybe the best ideas thrown out by 2,000 people then winnowed down are the best way to run a club.
Maybe the club could be better run if all major decisions were made by AN polls.
Gaijin_Suketto - May 18, 2009
AN polls + a time machine
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
btw your FK link doesn't work.
designatedforassignment - May 18, 2009
I think we can do it without the time machine...
Remember Grandstand Managers’ Day?
Gaijin_Suketto - May 18, 2009
I have an issue with #2
The rebuilding plan was accelerated/altered when Beane concluded that the 2009 AL West would be up for grabs. Setting your bar at competing in a crappy division doesn’t guarantee you’ll compete throughout the league. It falls in line with Beane’s “crapshoot” theory, but if it’s become a philosophy, the organization is in trouble.
scatterbrian - May 17, 2009
i'm a bit disappointed in this post
i agree with several of your points, but I think you take it a bit too far especially considering we’re only 20 percent through the season.
you seemed at least semi-optimistic in the offseason when beane made all these moves. your emotional post doesn’t have enough substance behind it. If you were beane what would you have done differently?
probably avoided trying to compete this season? so we wouldn’t be in a much different position…
we’d have cargon and a tiny bit more money.
in my mind beane did a nice job giving the team a chance to make the playoffs this year. they were projected to win the division by several reliable sources (BP?). You didn’t seem to argue against these projections too strongly then, and thus I don’t think you have enough backup for you to make such a strong statement after on 20 percent of the season.
I just noticed above that you suggested picking up wolf and branyan. i’d say going it to the season i’d put nomar or gamabi chances at succeeding as high or higher than branyan. Wolf , while being injury prone, or another starter would have been nice though. It’s a shame basically all the young starters have struggled thus far, it was tough to predict that.
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
actually it was reasonable to expect young prospects
who probably would benefit from at least half a season of AAA to struggle.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
well
i agree that we had to expect that some would struggle…
however to expect gallagher, eveland, cahill, anderson, outman, and gio gonzalez too all struggle was more than I expected. i’m guessing that all six of these guys are pitching worse than their preseason projections, except maybe outman and braden of course…
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
I think it would have made much more sense
not to have to have all of them come up to the big club this season, at least not so early. They did so because Beane did not trade for or sign a decent veteran starter, hoping that Duchscherer would be healthy enough to be the veteran ace.
I agree that more was expected — and reasonably so — of Gallagher and Eveland.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
They showed interest in Randy Johnson.
I’d much rather have had RJ than Randy Wolf.
mikev - May 17, 2009
not me
he hasn’t been particularly impressive for the Giants. Wolf, on the other hand, has been better…and I believe he’s cheaper as well.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
wait...the giants signed the more expensive and less effective option?
stop the presses.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
We're talking about less than 50 innings here.
Wolf’s BABIP is .243
Johnson’s is .337
mikev - May 17, 2009
the Giants have a more experienced rotation than the A's
they can handle Johnson for one year. He’s in the NL west where he wanted to be.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
it sounded
like RJ really wanted to sign with a NL team anyway.
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
i agree
like Nico, I’ve always thought that Cahill should have started the season in AAA. I agree that the A’s should have traded for or signed a Wolf, Johnson or some other veteran starter especially when duke went down.
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
dbeach13, what I said then, and say now,
is that this organization needs to address 3B and SS and keeps not doing it.
I said that about 3B and SS 3-4 years ago. How you roll the dice on a weak division now, and still keep rebuilding for later, is you get a good young 3Bman or SS and hope he’s ready to contribute now (kind of like they have done with Cahill and Anderson), knowing that if he’s not at least you’re still getting better for later.
Nico - May 17, 2009
that or just go after a solid but not spectacular type
Allen Craig, Ryan Freese, etc.
mikev - May 17, 2009
ok
i can agree with that. i do remember you asking for those two things for quite awhile. i’m not sure if any of the surefire prospects were available, but I agree that Beane should have at least attempted to get more prospect depth at those positions the past few years.
that being said – it would probably be easy enough to trade carter or one of the other top prospects for a 3B/SS right? I’m guessing that Beane has been thinking in the back of his mind.
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
Screw the surefire prospects
Just get a guy who won’t embarrass himself and won’t miss 130 games a year.
mikev - May 17, 2009
Hannahan
Nick - May 17, 2009
Embarrasses himself at the plate
mikev - May 17, 2009
Can you name a couple of 3Bs who are the kind of player you're talking about?
Nick - May 17, 2009
Sure
Melvin Mora
Brandon Inge
Josh Fields
Kevin Kouzmanoff
Casey Blake (but not for the money he got)
Ryan Freese
Allen Craig
mikev - May 17, 2009
Mora's still getting $8m a year, isn't he?
Inge would be great to have now, no doubt. But he made $6m last year and hit worse than Hannahan. Kouzmanoff is still pre-arb and would cost something to get from SD. I don’t see what’s so great about Fields. Do you mean David Freese with the Cardinals? I’ve never seen him, but he looks like a late bloomer who might be a power prospect (maybe like Craig Paquette?). What would the Cards have demanded for him? Similar situation with Craig, though he’s younger and maybe more of a prospect (though still in AAA).
The open market for these guys is something like $8m/year. If the complaint on this thread is, “Billy, either compete or rebuild, make up your mind!” then unless you can get one of the younger guys on your list for not a whole lot in a trade, it sounds like the “middle of the road” type decision people are upset about here.
Nick - May 17, 2009
See I'd much rather have Chase Headley or Ian Stewart
That’s still really rebuilding for a great future – it costs you a lot of (pitching, young OF) talent back but that’s what you have.
Nico - May 17, 2009
Well, to be fair, Billy did almost trade himself for Youkilis
Do you think he could still get that deal?
Nick - May 17, 2009
What, you don't have faith in Cliffy P. or Booby Croz at SS?
:)
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
We sure need to trade for a 3B
I think it would take Holliday and some top pitching prospects to get one because whoever gets Holliday is probably only renting. I think Holliday goes back to the NL.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Ouch, what a game.
Losses like this make me feel like somebody just jammed a needle through my nether regions.
Or.. wait.
mikev - May 17, 2009
I'd post a Bob Flanagan picture here,
but all the good ones are not only NSFW, but NSFH either!
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
I don't have time to read all these comments...
But, doesn’t it seem like David Forst has the keys to this team? Maybe Beane needs to take away his driving permit for the time being.
Colorado Fan - May 17, 2009
some people have been asking this for at least a couple of years
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
if frost
is doing most of the work and we’re still failing, then what’s the point of firing beane? we’ll have the same result.
you guys need to pick an argument either:
a) beane is a slacker figure head that doesn’t make any decisions
OR
b) beane is making poor decisions and should be fired
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
the question is whether Beane has been making these decisions
or whether he’s been leaving them up to Forst. I don’t think anyone here knows the answer. Regardless of who is making the decision, they are being questioned.
the criticisms and questioning you’re reading here are largely from people who have tended in the past not to support that view.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
ok
i can see that – some here are complaining for A and others are saying it’s B. Nico’s post kind of includes both though…
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
I know. I'm not usually one to complain much
since i love baseball and I understand that you can’t win every year or have all of your decisions work out.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
besides, the AL is a .500 league anyway
give or take :)
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
This is very likely
Especially when asking yourself why Forst continues to remain here in Oakland as a “lowly” assistant and not the main man. Seattle, a team with a big payroll, wanted to interview him for their GM vacancy and he declined.
franks a lot - May 18, 2009
not much to add...
but I completely agree with the post, though the little Ellis bit made me sad. :(
I hope Beane reads it.
#14fan - May 17, 2009
As I read Nico's post and the always excellent comments, i'm struck by two things...
1.) the subtitle to Moneyball no longer seems accurate…“the art of winning an unfair game.” winning? how quaint.
2.) the parallels between beane’s baseball career and his GM career. hot start and then disappointment.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
what's
the A’s overall record since Beane has been a GM, and how does that rank in MLB (i’m assuming top ten)?
now what has the A’s overall payroll been since Beane has been a GM, i’m sure it’s in the bottom ten.
Despite the recent poor performance, the overall picture is still favorable in my mind.
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
but which way is the compass pointed and what is the recent trend?
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Well, there's an ALCS appearance 2 seasons ago
Then 2 seasons proving that the team needed to make some changes.
The problem isn’t that the team needs to rebuild. Like Nico said, the problem is that the rebuild isn’t finished.
mikev - May 17, 2009
or that it was aborted?
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Regardless of the term
I 100% agree with Nico in that CF, 3B, and SS long term solutions have not been addressed.
mikev - May 17, 2009
what are also 3 things that are not exactly easy to find...as our drafting and trading
makes clear.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
*cough* Brett Wallace *cough*
mikev - May 17, 2009
great...how do we get him w/o subtracting meaningfully?
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Draft him instead of Jemile Weeks
Shit, wait
mikev - May 17, 2009
lol
stm72 - May 17, 2009
it looks like an effort was made on SS/2B with drafts
and CF with a trade (Carlos Gonzalez) that was rescinded with the Holliday trade.
Beane has traded away 3B prospects (Teahan), passed up draft 3B prospects (Wallace), and let possible prospects get away (Guzmán) repeatedly in these last few years.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
we have lots of guys in progress and i hope it works...
but seems like we’re betting heavily on cardenas…who was not drafted by us.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
I know. What worries me is that too many of the best prospects
in the A’s minor league system (both drafted and traded for) don’t seem to be succeeding once they do come up.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
or they lack defensive skills...
and move to positions of strength already.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
how is
losing basically no prospects of consequence other than cargon mean it’s aborted?
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
the bigger issue is that is that guys we've received in trades like barton and meyer...
have not performed for whatever reason (including bad luck) and our drafting has left a lot to be desired.
i’ve very hopeful that DLS has good potential, gio gonzalez/eveland turn potential into major league production, cunningham/buck play successfully everyday, but there’s a lot of ifs. too many ifs given what we’ve traded
stm72 - May 17, 2009
I really don't understand why people don't think this team drafts well.
They do.
mikev - May 17, 2009
we draft well if frequency of success is what matters, where are the
everyday major league contributors?
stm72 - May 17, 2009
From 99 till now
Buck
Street
Suzuki
Braden
Quintanilla
Etihier
Swisher
BLanton
Teahen
Papelbon (unsigned)
Crosby
Bonderman
Cotts
Bynum
Harden
Zito
Ludwick
Mulder
Laird
Byrnes
mikev - May 17, 2009
it does us no good, if those guys are not on our roster helping us...or
the pieces we acquired in trades are not on our roster.
we’ve done a pretty good job with pitchers…hitters on the other hand at important defensive positions has been less good
stm72 - May 17, 2009
all contributors,
but no stars, other than Mulder and Zito…
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
Papelbon? Ethier? Harden? Street? Suzuki?
Regardless, when presented with the list of contributors, the argument then changes to “omg they’re not on our roster”
That wasn’t the question posed.
mikev - May 17, 2009
the on our team is implied...unless the a's are running a
charity for other teams?
stm72 - May 17, 2009
oh, and signed is implied too, as per papelbon
unless we’re going to count smoak too?
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Why would those things be implied in the question "Do the A's draft well?"
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
cuz it ain't fantasy baseball. they actually need to play for us.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
It shows they picked talent.
Whether or not they signed isn’t really relevant when you’re discussing the talent evaluation process.
mikev - May 17, 2009
yipee. my goal is to win the world series
stm72 - May 17, 2009
You do that by acquiring talent.
mikev - May 17, 2009
i know...
but we are going to do it by making great trades and drafting well.
judging by our major and minor league teams, we’ve done more trading to acquire talent than drafting it.
we’ve traded a lot of good pieces (harden, swisher, haren, mulder, hudson) and we’ve gotten some great pieces. but we’ve gotten more “what ifs” and “could be’s,” then studs.
you and i are talking past each other, but here’s the bottomline. this team is awful to watch. the young talent isn’t delivering yet.
in the real world results matter. in the theoretical world, process matters. i prefer results and results are less than good.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
No, they don't.
Whether the draftees currently play for us has nothing to do with how well the A’s drafted.
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
It absolutely does
Saying that not signing a draft pick doesn’t make it bad pick is as silly that signing a FA is good regardless of cost. After all, doesn’t the overall talent on the team increase (assuming the FA is not a below replacement player)?
Resources are scarce and everything has an opportunity cost. Papelbon fell to the A’s not because no one saw his talent. Papelbon fell to the A’s because he was not signing in the draft.
However, in the round he was picked, the upside of signing him, though unlikely, made the pick worthwhile. If that’s what you’re arguing, I agree.
vignette17 - May 18, 2009
Actually, I confused the topics there.
I wasn’t talking about signability. I was talking about whether Mark Teahen, Andre Ethier, Barry Zito, etc., were good picks despite the fact that they don’t currently play for Oakland. I don’t understand why inbillywetrust doesn’t want to take players such as those into account when measuring Oakland’s draft success.
But even in spite of my error, I would say that you can’t ignore the draftees who didn’t sign. If we’re trying to measure how well the A’s drafted, Papelbon and Smoak should be considered, though of course so should be the likelihood that they would have signed.
Rocktopus - May 18, 2009
because i'm trying to root for an actual team, not some mythical
could’ve been team. we can be warm in cozy with all the great players we drafted but don’t play us. why is it so hard to understand that i don’t want moral victories, i want actual victories.
stm72 - May 18, 2009
I really don't know any other way to put it.
What does that have to do with the A’s drafting abilities?
Rocktopus - May 18, 2009
But
many would be an upgrade to what we field right now: Ethier, Swisher, Papelbon, Teahen, Ludwick would all start and Paps would close on this years team. Just saying…
bajablue - May 18, 2009
perhaps a better word would be "backtracked"
unless Sweeney is considered a legitimate centerfielder.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
Which brings me to talent evaluation...
Nico - May 17, 2009
how many comments have you made in the past year and a half praising sweeney?
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
um, do AN search to back up your call-outs.
Nico on Jan 11, 2009
Nico on Dec 25, 2008
Nico on Nov 8, 2008
And I’m not really cherry-picking. I didn’t see mad Sweeney love anywhere.
ohmangoAs - May 19, 2009
And I don't dislike Sweeney either
I’ve just said, from the start, that he’s neither a power hitter nor a CFer.
Nico - May 19, 2009
a guy who writes frong page stories every other day and thousands of comments
has stated his opinion of sweeney three times, and never before november 08?
xbhaskarx - May 19, 2009
(front page)
xbhaskarx - May 19, 2009
we need better drafts and that doesn't appear to be our forte
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Beane tried to repeat 2006 in 2007
with largely the same cast – but with his friend instead of Macha at the helm. When Thomas signed with Toronto instead he got Piazza for the samw amount that he’d offered Thomas (for one year, but only becaseu Piazza didn’t want to sign for two years). He also signed Bradley for 2007, betting that Bradley would stay healthy enough to be productive. He betted on Chavez being healthy enough to be productive, although it was known that Chavez was playing hurt, and that there was some thought even then that he should have had shoulder surgery immediately following the ALCS. It was also known that Kotsay was having back trouble, although Kotsay did not have surgery until spring training 2007.
When practically everything that could go wrong in 2007 did he began to get rid of some people, such as Bradley and Kendall. Then they were faced with a decision: patch up and hope to do better 2008 with nearly the same crew, or begin the rebuilding, stocking up on prospects and aiming for a contending club probably in 2010-11. that’s when he decided to cash in on Haren’s high value. Swisher was not a planned trade, but the White Sox offer was too good to pass up. The rebuilding continued in the middle of 2008, when they traded Harden and Blanton.
The trade for Holliday (including the immediate future centerfielder) seemed like a shift toward contending in what looked like a weaker AL west in 2009. But you don’t contend without pitching….and the A’s best pitching prospects were probably not all going to be ready for 2009. Beane counted heavily on Eveland and Gallagher improving — too heavily, we now know. I don’t fault him for that. But Duchscherer should not have been relied on to be the veteran ace.
Trading for Holliday probably helped the A’s to sign Giambi (though J’s likely first and second choices, Yankees and Rays, didn’t want him). Having Giambi and Holliday made the A’s more attractive to Nomar and Cabrera (though Cabrera had wanted a bigger and longet term contract).
Relying on Chavez to be healthy and productive was probably the biggest mistake — though it was nothing new, and with Chavvy’s contract it’s no surprise; the second biggest mistake if the club was to make a contending run in 2009 was to not get a veteran starter.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
I believe I read that the Rays did indeed want Giambi and were offering more money,
but he took the lower amount to come back ‘home’ to Oakland. I’d have to search for the source though.
LoneStranger - May 17, 2009
I believe they signed Burrell pretty early on
but you may be right. Most of the free agents (Burrell, Giambi, Dunn, Abreu, Cabrera, etc.) asked for more money and years than they eventually signed for.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
The Rays chose Burrell
Nearly immediately after the A’s signed G.
vignette17 - May 18, 2009
+1
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
well
you’re right that more weight should probably be given to the current trend. I don’t think we can just look at our current record though…
our minor league system ranked in the top 3 by basically all of the experts. that needs to be taken into account.
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
Sure, but lately it seems the people who are highly touted in the system...
…either struggle mightily at the major league level or wind up somewhere else. How much of that is them being brought up too soon is definitely up for debate.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
the strength of our minor league is now in the majors...
cunningham, anderson and cahill.
now we need to rebuild the upper level minors. hopefully guys like cardenas, doolittle, carter, brown, etc…continue their pace of development.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
sure but the strength of our minors was traded for...not generated organically...
which means that we’ve give up someting of value to get this strength.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Quote
“I told (our staff) that I could send ‘TBA’ for all three games,” Geren said Wednesday. “Or, we could go with (Brett) Anderson, (Dallas) Braden and (Trevor) Cahill and change it if we need to.”—Geren
I think these pitchers are unconfident to say the least. Geren needs to say who is going to start for sure. Pitchers seldom pitch well, especially young & inexperienced, when they are left to wonder when their next start is. If this was the rotation then he should’ve said point blank instead of making it some mystery. Obviously, this is beyond competition anymore and turned into nerves. If he don’t like the pitcher, shitcan him, and let the next guy know when his day is. Pitcher’s need time to prepare mentally for each start. Sad but true in most cases. I believe this helped the Tigers beat us.
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
The reason they were looking at "TBA" as a possibility...
…has everything to do with the statuses at the time of Anderson and Braden.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Well
For starters, I’m incredibly frustrated too. But there are things to be positive about. To me, Anderson and Cahill still have showed all the promise I expected. The results haven’t been there, but there is nothing I see that tells me they can’t be front of the rotation starters. If one of Gallagher-Gonzalez-Mazzaro-Braden can be a 3 man, you’ve got a nice foundation. I think Braden can definitely be at least a 4, so your pitching isn’t too bad. The pen is fine – Ziegler is an ok setup man, Bailey can close, Casilla is fine, and we’ve got some flamethrowers on the way. Even Jeff Gray looked alright to me – not sure why they were so quick to send him on his way.
Now on offense, hey, I’m frustrated too. I think we can get by with 2 of Sweeney-Buck-Cunningham as the corner outfielders, as long as we have two mashers in the infield. Suzuki is at least an MLB average catcher. I mean, we did score 7 runs today. If Holliday picks it up, hopefully we can get back one piece in return for him. We’ll be okay.
My bigger concern, though, is Beane’s newfound willingness to pay for mediocrity. I know Ellis is a huge fan favorite, but doesn’t Adam Kennedy prove how much we overpaid for the guy? I mean Elly is okay, and at his best he’s great defensively – but he also was coming off an injury, and didn’t have tremendous upside. Yet we give him 5-6 m a year? I just don’t really get why. We always say we can’t afford a star, yet for the 5.5m to Ellis, 4m to Cabrera, 6m to giambi, we did shell out 16m. That’s enough to land a star. Then you trade for Kennedy, swallow hard on Crosby at SS, and you’re alright. The way to win this game is to get stars. Billy is great at finding guys to be league average.
SeanR - May 17, 2009
The way to win is to get stars?
Tell that to the Yankees.
mikev - May 17, 2009
uh....
mikeA - May 17, 2009
OK
But wouldn’t you rather have the Yankees roster than ours? But thats nonsense.
Look at the Phils, though. Two huge stars in Utley and Howard, a star pitcher in Hamels, star closer in Lidge, and the rest of the team is about league average. Now that isn’t fair to Shane Victorino, but its roughly accurate. The talent Beane has is his ability to fill holes with league average players. He’s good at finding league minimum bargains. If we could find a way to get just two or three real studs (obviously this was the idea with holliday), he could fill in the bits.
But thats the scary thing with the Holliday trade. We dealt away the one guy we had who could truly be a 5 tool player. Let’s hope we get a similar prospect back for Matt.
SeanR - May 17, 2009
The Phils roster is, IMO, more desirable than the Yankees.
But when you have a $200M payroll, you can afford to give a 38 year old Jorge Posada a 3 year 45 million dollar contract and not give a shit.
When Beane does that and it doesn’t work, we’re stuck with Jermaine Dye and his broken leg.
mikev - May 17, 2009
Rollins, Werth, and Madson are all above average
(though Rollins has been slipping since his MVP) and LF (Burrell, no Ibanez) has been above average, too.
Nick - May 17, 2009
at the time of the ellis deal, commentators elsewhere were saying the union should block it because the a's were taking advantage of ellis
now a month later it was a terrible signing because ellis is injured (not even the same injury he had before) and because adam kennedy has performed well over seven games…
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
Eveland
is laughing
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
have you seen his ERA in sacramento? no he's not.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Sure he is
They’ll figure it out… or not
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
They let the one
guy go who had a half way decent record last year… and that was with the lack of run support… they gave his job to an unproven pitcher… smart move
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
They potentially got a 3B solution in return for him, though.
mikev - May 17, 2009
Who?
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
Cardenas.
mikev - May 17, 2009
why is he playing 2B in AAA then?
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Baisley
mikev - May 17, 2009
he's DH'ing today, petit at 3B today
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Exactly my point.
These guys all need somewhere to play.
Though, it could very well be that they want Cardenas to be a MLB second baseman. He’d be a well above average bat for the position and if he could even play “sufficient” defense, he’d be a very good guy to have there.
mikev - May 17, 2009
we need to play guys with the best chance to make the majors
at their likely positions.
baisley, petit, pennington, etc…should not be given everyday opportunities over cardenas and patterson and others coming up…
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Baisley, Petit, and Pennington have all made the majors already.
mikev - May 17, 2009
sorry, i meant as starters, regulars, not fill in scrubs
stm72 - May 17, 2009
So it appears the plan for Cardenas is to be Ellis' heir apparent at 2B.
mikev - May 17, 2009
dunno, but it'd be how i'd run the minors...
if i was in charge.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
See there's the problem.
What do you do with the other 3 mentioned guys? Cardenas is, from what we can tell, not MLB ready yet.
When injuries force you to call up a guy from Sac, it needs to be a guy who has been playing every day. What good is Baisley going to be if he’s on the bench for 2 weeks and then called up to Oakland
mikev - May 17, 2009
what i meant is that if you think...
cardenas is the everyday future 3B, then he gets the bulk of the playing time there…or he should.
as for the rest…yes, it’s a conundrum.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
turned
it into a preseason competition which shouldn’t have had no question
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
Who, Blanton?
You mean the guy who was nobody special?
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
no
Eveland… as if these guys are really hanging in the bigs
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
You're suggesting Eveland was fine because of his record?
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Absolutely
Are you suggesting what they are doing now is a solution?
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
Eveland
should have been #1 with these group of guys… he was #2 behind Duke
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
LOL
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Seriously, that's more an indictment of the others than anything else
Check Eveland’s splits last year. It wasn’t until he got back from Sacramento that his walks dipped and his K/BB ratio improved. His problem was some of those walks became hits, so either way he was still allowing an average of three baserunners for every two innings pitched. He’s just not a very effective pitcher and he’s regressed terribly so far this year.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
You seem to be forgetting how bad Eveland's control was last year
To the point they sent him to Sacramento to iron it out. Then he came back and pitched better by the end of the season only to regress even worse so far this year.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
BTW
Blanton nailed down a couple playoff victories for the Phil’s… Way to go Joe!!! World Series ring and all. Talk all you want.
SFBAsportsfan - May 17, 2009
Doesn't change the fact he wasn't pitching well here
He wasn’t much better in Philly after the trade, but he did get more run support.
He was better in the playoffs. Good for him.
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
he'll be remembered for his WS dinger
long after he’s dead…
Gaijin_Suketto - May 17, 2009
Action is needed, you have to start somewhere....
Good bye Bob Geren.
Boozhound - May 17, 2009
+1,000,000
While it’s true that you can’t fire the players so you fire the manager, hiring a good manager can make a huge difference.
I remember when the A’s hired LaRussa in 1986. That was a team that was going nowhere. Some good young pitchers, and excellent management (or over-management, depending on how you look at it) catapulted them to the top. I guess the ‘roids didn’t hurt either. Have we considered that option?
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
:)
.
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
This won't happen
Beane extended Geren’s contract this past off season. And most importantly, this may fracture their friendship, forcing Beane to photoshop out Bob Geren from his wedding photo album.
franks a lot - May 18, 2009
Idea
Why don’t we trade the Mets Aaron Cunningham for Murphy?
Then we can play Murphy in the IF where he belongs, and our OF glut is a little smaller. For the Mets, they can actually get an outfielder who can, you know, play the outfield.
SeanR - May 17, 2009
Might as well trade Buck for him.
Since the team seems to hate Buck anyway.
mikev - May 17, 2009
If they got Murphy and still kept Buck, they'd probably play Murphy in the OF over him
Flashfire - May 17, 2009
Wow Nico
Very, very well said. I could not agree more. An example of the reason I read every one of your posts.
luvsthecurveball - May 17, 2009
Im glad im not in a position of power
I would make some emotional moves right now that would probably hurt this teams chances this year.
First: I would send Cahill and Anderson down to AAA. They both need to work on an out pitch and the A’s could preserve some service time.
Second: I would cut Crosby outright, 5 million be damned. (I cant stomach him in an A’s jersey anymore)
Third: Bob Geren would be fired right away.
I know that these moves would’nt make a huge differance this year but I sure would feel better for a day or two.
asfaninpismobeach - May 17, 2009
Don't look now
But Crosby has been one of the better hitters so far :X
mikev - May 17, 2009
more gooder or less badder?
720 ops….yeesh.
stm72 - May 17, 2009
No power to speak of
But his OBP is .370
From him, I’ll take it.
mikev - May 17, 2009
hopefully he can sustain a .309 babip and teams continue to walk him
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Crosby is one of the most productive hitters on the team this year, Pismo
He’s getting on base as well as anyone, including Cust and Suzuki. I know we ended up losing the game, but he worked a BB after a great AB in the 1st, and the next pitch was the bases-clearing 2B by Powell.
Nick - May 17, 2009
Sad and seems to be true--(and the A's are following the Raiders into oblivion)
In recent years, as I watched my beloved Raiders be almost completely ruined by all around pathetic management led by an out-of-touch owner, I could always take solace in my beloved A’s. But now it seems they are following suit and I would never have expected it. What the hell is it with Bay Area sports franchises and management problems (Warriors, Giants, 49ers in addition to the Raiders and now the A’s)?
Mark A - May 17, 2009
The Sharks are very well managed, w/ SI naming ownership 4th best in the NHL
However, in recent years, the team is oft picked to win it all only to crash & burn in the playoffs
It’s been a tough couple decades for Bay Area Sports. If I recall right, the only two teams to win championships in recent years (AFL Sabercats and MLS Earthquakes) were dismantled, shipped out, shutdown…
SwisherThresher - May 17, 2009
My two cents...
Looking at the bigger picture, all GMs make errors. Injuries happen.
I think Billy Beane had, up until the Blanton trade, done an excellent job when it comes to dealing with pitching. Look over all that time, and only ONE starter traded away amounted to anything, and that’s Aaron Harang…and he was traded at a time the A’s were contending, for a rental to help put them over the top. I can almost excuse the Haren trade because of the haul, and the Harden trade because of the injury factor and the acquisition of Gallagher…but the Blanton trade
-dumping a horse who is your primary innings-eater when everyone not named Duchsherer looks shaky, that was dumb then. And it’s even dumber now. And compounding the problem, trading your best trade bait, Huston Street, for a one-year outfield rental and wasting money on an unnecessary cog like Cabrera left the rotation in tatters because there was no money for a Randy Wolf and/or Jon Lieber to mark time and allow the Andersons and Cahills and Mazzarros to develop properly in the minor leagues.At the other end, though, when looking at position players. Two lists. Players from the organization the A’s kept in the post-Crosby years, who worked out: Suzuki, who’s great; Swisher, who’s a back-up now. Just those two. Players the A’s gave up who are MLB players now: Ethier, Teahen, Angel Berroa, Estaban German, Nelson Cruz, and I’m probably missing one or two.
What does that mean? It means that either the organization isn’t properly scouting itself, or that there’s a systemic failure within the organization to develop position player talent, I think it’s the latter and I think it really needs to be addressed.
The Geren issue is something again. A manager has three roles: spring training mentor, in-game managing, and playing group shrink. In making comments about the manager’s role, Beane only talked about in-game work, and he’s right: that’s no big deal and hunches generally even out. But the other roles, as mentor and shrink…Geren’s a dud. The team plays with neither decent execution nor much passion.
richwol1 - May 17, 2009
Nitpick
Angel Berroa is not from the “post-Crosby years”. He left in the three-way trade with Ellis, Damon, etc., before the 2001 season. Crosby was drafted later that year.
iglew - May 18, 2009
trade thought
i know we don’t usually work with the Angels, but I wonder if they would interested in a Barton (plus maybe another prospect) for Brandon Wood.
It’s looking more and more like we’ll go from Giambi to Carter at 1B and Barton will be left out.
Wood who can play SS AND 3B was once considered one of the top prospects in the game like Barton. It seems like the Angels have little faith in him now based on his short unsuccessful stints in the majors
I’d probably be even willing to trade Holliday for Wood+
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
Wow!
Your fans don’t ask for much.
Except when they do. Like when they talk as though it’s their money that is being spent (or should be spent), irrespective of revenue that isn’t generated when their asses do not pay for a friggen seat!
…and for the third season in a row you have provided none of these.
Bullshit! In 2007, Beane built a team that had a promise of being good. And if you recall, Loiaza, Harden, Chavez, Piazza, Bradley, Kotsay and Crosby all spent significant amounts of time on the DL. To suggest that he didn’t for three years is false.
You have “rebuilt” a team whose infield doesn’t have a single player who has any bright future with the team, and doesn’t have a single player who one can reasonably expect to be getting better in 2010.
Are catchers not part of the infield any longer?
For your outfield, you traded away the only OFer with a high ceiling, the only OFer who could play the most important defensive position (CF) well, and kept a group of OFers whose futures range from “decent” to “bad.”
Selective memory? Most regard Buck as an OFer with a good future. And then there’s Holliday who we got in return for that high-ceiling OFer…but I guess he’s just chopped liver at this point in his career.
There is actually remarkably little to build on going forward and remarkably little reason for a fan to get excited about watching an A’s game.
Not even the pitching? Not even when the Chavez, Giambi, Crosby and Holliday contracts come off the books? Then they’ll spend. But you’ll probably second guess all of that, too.
It is part of your job not to put your personal relationships with Bob Geren and Eric Chavez ahead of the best interests of the organization, and your competence has to be measured against these decisions.
That’s bold, right there. And you presume that Beane is not looking out for the best interests of the organization or at the very least has put his personal relationships above the interests of the organization. What do you really know of his motives and whether or not he isn’t looking out for the organization’s best interests. If it can be measured, back it up and be sure to tell it from the side of the fence where he’s a partial owner that is working against his own interests as a part owner.
If you are no longer interested in building the best baseball team you can, if the passion for the Oakland A’s is no longer there, at least do well by A’s fans one more time and find someone who has that passion. Because we have it – or at least used to have, and want to have it again.Great idea. Maybe it’s time for an AN fundraiser to see if the fan base here can round up enough cash to purchase Beane’s portional ownership of the team and give it, proportionally, to those who contributed the money. If he does not agree to sell at any price, than perhaps he does have the passion; or, he’s still turning a profit [which would kind of rule out that he’s not looking out for the interests of the organization].
Lot’s of emotion here; maybe it’s crowding out the voice of reason.
LowcountryJoe - May 17, 2009
+1
to go along with personal relationship with geren/chavez comment:
the a’s have one of if not the highest turnover rate of players in the league. I’m sure beane has had a personal relationship with a lot of players that left the team – swisher, zito, etc. I agree that you need a lot more backup information before making such a controversal statement that you want beane to see.
a personally enjoy beane’s interviews on this site, and I would hope something like this wouldn’t affect that…
dbeach13 - May 17, 2009
Beane has actually admitted that his relationship with Chavez has colored his objectivity
And his connection, personally, to Geren is way above any nice connection he has had with any given player who came through.
Nico - May 17, 2009
+a bunch
chipper1001 - May 17, 2009
Who keeps coloring the "opposing" viewpoints in green?
I would say it’s because of the rose-colored glasses, but that wouldn’t make any sense.
Plainly put, Billy Beane has done a really, really, horribly bad, embarassing job. Denying that is intellectually insulting.
Vacafan - May 17, 2009
c'mon man
i know you’re frustrated. we all are. but let’s not put counter-arguments into the category of so stupid they don’t deserve anyone’s time. Nico presented an argument that takes a somewhat extreme position. He makes some good points but it doesn’t mean that if we disagree it’s “intellectually insulting”. Defending the other side is justified and if anything it’s intellectually stimulating. (As evidenced by the recs)
chipper1001 - May 18, 2009
look a little closer
arguments from Beane apologists and critics alike have been colored green. As well as other arguments, like alea iacta est’s “whatever, go do something else” argument.
Cutthemullet - May 18, 2009
Intellectually insulting?
hmmm. Care to outline an answer to my fanpost? I say this with absolutely no snark…it’s fun to debate things. There are definitely some big mistakes, but you have set yourself up to proving a high (or should I say low) standard :)
ohmangoAs - May 18, 2009
yo, LCJ
I’ve had my share of disagreements with you, but I have to say, great post right here. And I like Nico’s too, because there’s also little doubt that the A’s are one of the most boring teams in the league. In terms of entertainment value alone, I’d rate them right alongside the Pirates and Padres as the teams that would be least appealing for the neutral fan. As a counterexample, the Orioles suck, and there’s no chance that they won’t suck, but Nick Markakis is one of the most exciting players in the league, and Adam Jones, Brian Roberts, Matt Wieters soon make them an entertaining 72-90-caliber team. This is a boring 81-81-caliber team.
Cutthemullet - May 18, 2009
81-81
is giving them too much credit at the moment
Trainman - May 18, 2009
LCJ is back!
if you’re reading this, email me.
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
so where did that 32mill in revenue sharing go?
Asfan4ever723 - May 17, 2009
Call Lew.
Check the books.
Let us know.
mikev - May 17, 2009
lew said you could check the books on how they spent the money investigating fremont...
not sure if he’d let you see the a’s books
stm72 - May 17, 2009
Good point.
mikev - May 17, 2009
:(
drmmerchk - May 17, 2009
This is going to be a long season w/lots of dreck
Losing is easier to deal with if there’s a minimum amount of competence and focus on the field, and in both of these areas this team is getting to be unwatchable. It’s like they know they suck and now they’re just punching the time clock.
I’ve been wondering about the little hitters meeting that OCab called last week – here’s a guy hitting in the low 200’s, a one-year rental, and why would he care? I wonder if it’s because he comes from teams that don’t accept losing lightly, and from managers (Guillen, Scioscia) who don’t accept a lack of focus and hustle. Maybe he was trying to compensate for Geren’s complete lack of leadership.
coffee roaster - May 17, 2009
+1 re: OCab picking up Geren's sac, er slack.
33SwisherSweet - May 17, 2009
The good thing is....
A ten game winning streak can completely change things. That is what makes baseball a great game. I am very understanding of the frustration that it is to be an A’s fan today. I think it’s a little early though. Nothing is out of reach yet. The only thing that needs to change now is the accountability of each and every guy and the passion to play. I am sure Bob Geren is a good guy, but it is not difficult to see that he is not the answer. We need an intense Manager. I really miss Tony LaRussa.
Boozhound - May 17, 2009
The A's have yet to win three games in a row all year.
Pucking Insane - May 17, 2009
Thats why Geren has gotta go IMO.
Boozhound - May 17, 2009
to be fair to geren (not sure why i'm doing this)...
but he’s got an offense that’s generating no power (actual, not potential) and a very young pitching staff…
stm72 - May 17, 2009
No doubt...
the firing of Geren is not the only answer. I just think it is a start. Most of the time I am not usually on the side of the fence that wants a manager fired. In this case, I cant think of a reason to keep him. I think it would be a great decision by upper management to let everyone know that losing is not acceptable in the organization. We have seen it in the past. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.
Just a start…com’on…Bob Geren..reeeaaalllyyy!!!????
Boozhound - May 17, 2009
Firing Geren won't solve all the problems of course
But it would improve the quality of the product on the field. As richwol1 puts it upthread, one of the main roles of the manager is to be group shrink. And Geren is clearly terrible at this. Find someone who’ll light a fire under the team and it will play better and be more fun to watch. And that just might also positively affect the development of the young players in the medium-to-long run.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 17, 2009
Forst/Beane has done a rotten job of drafting talent.
That is the bottom line. If we drafted like the Twins, Braves, and so on and so forth, we wouldn’t be debating this sh*t right now. Look at the whole bunch of them from Buck, Pennington, Powell, Putnam, Robnett, and so on forever……….Forst/Beane have tried to be too cute with drafting players that won’t be modeling jeans or whatever the hell was said in moneyball. Now the chickens have come home to roost BIG TIME and the b.s. needs to end. You have to draft players will skills, but also some physical upside. It was apparent to every scout but ours that Sweeney was not projected to have any power. Well, it was true. Look at him now. A 6’4" singles hitter. Same with Suzuki. The second coming of Jason Kendall! Good average, no power. We need to draft/develop some gawd damn sluggers because it is too expensive to get them on the free agent market. So what do we do? We draft a bunch of wimpy hitters. Hello Jemile Weeks.
pedoman - May 17, 2009
How about the Rule 5 draft
Passing on high upside gambles like Hamilton and “pure talent” gambles like Soria in favor of guys like Mike Neu, Ryan Goleski, Ben Copeland?
Nico - May 17, 2009
that has never made any sense and never will
The A’s seem to think that the meaning of Rule 5 is that only 5th outfielders can be drafted….not a time to pass on upside.
Cutthemullet - May 18, 2009
Alot of people passed on Hamilton so you can’t blame Beane for not thinking a 24 year old ex-drug addict who hadn’t played above A ball was going to explode like that. Hell the Cubs even drafted him and then traded him. Soria looks like a big one missed and I can’t understand the point of picking Copeland but the truth is a lot more Mike Neu’s come out of the Rule V than actual difference makers.
DeJay - May 18, 2009
Is it drafting or developing talent?
You can give me the finest three pounds of Kobe beef in all of Japan, and it will still taste bad (trust me). You know what I mean though?
Pucking Insane - May 17, 2009
Reply failure!
Pucking Insane - May 17, 2009
yes, I know what you mean
pedoman - May 17, 2009
Good post Nico
Sadly you are 100 percent right
Athletic - May 17, 2009
I agree, sort of...
I don’t think Geren has done a poor job—considering what he has to work with. I’m listening to the espn Sunday night telecast, and listening to Joe Morgan makes Geren sound like a freakin’ genius. Do you remember way back when the A’s wanted a change in philosophy (along with skippers) and they hired Steve Boros and then Jackie Moore? Can you compare Geren to the ineptitude of those two former managers? Geren lacks the fire of a field leader—I agree with that. I’d give anything to see a Davey Johnson or Tim Foli manage the team. This past week I saw two different A’s players not running hard to 1st base. I remember when Billy Martin sat Mike Heath for several games because of the same infraction; yet Geren praises his players for their hustle. It’s one thing to be a positive leader, and it’s another to constantly portray the team as seen through rose-colored glasses. I hope Geren will receive a “wake-up” call and start managing this bunch of misfits.
Flamethrower - May 17, 2009
money
To the folks who are complaining about the the fans who point out the fact that the A’s don’t spend money I don’t get it are you investors? John Fisher and his front man Lew Wolff have made money on the A’s every year they’ve owned the team and I’m still convinced they bought this team a real estate deal waiting to happen.
I still trust Billy Beane but this ship has to be righted and the A’s have to commit to keeping some players so the casual fan will have something to hold on to. I’ve said it more than once, I’d give Geren until the All Star Break and if he doesn’t have this team on the right track I’d cut him loose.
sirbed - May 17, 2009
The longer Geren remains
the longer this team is not on the right track. No point in waiting as it’s clear that Geren couldn’t manage his way out of a paper bag with holes in both ends. And holes in the sides as well.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Don't forget holes at SS, 3B, and CF
Nico - May 17, 2009
The holes at SS, 3B and CF ...
… and the crater that is the 2009 starting rotation … are why this team is on the wrong track — not the manager. If there were enough Major League talent on this team, we’d all be fine with Bob Geren.
I would hit Cabrera last, not first, but I think most of his decisions have been sound.
I can’t argue with him not getting on his players in the media.
Eck - May 17, 2009
so much to complain about
it is not even worth the typing. Every part of this team is a joke. The defense is as bad as i have ever seen…from a GM who values defense these days. lets get a comparison going to some of the worst A’s teams ever. 1977…1997 the 2009 edition will challenge them all by september. 4 o’clock tomorrow, lets go get em…maybe TB will hit the pitcher again
KCB58 - May 17, 2009
Where's Paul Thomas?
…would be interested to see what he had to say about this
swerv - May 17, 2009
I know he was always down on the Holliday trade
And he was the first person I heard suggest the A’s sign Branyan. I too would like to hear PT’s perspective, along with what he would do now, given all that is, to get the A’s back on track.
Nico - May 17, 2009
Not to toot my own horn
Ok solely to toot my own horn:
I’ve been on the Branyan wagon for a long time. I also wanted the A’s to sign Carlos Pena. Then again, I might have preferred Hee Seop Choi. Blind squirrel, nut. Nut, blind squirrel.
vignette17 - May 18, 2009
Too soon to abandon ship. Even though it’s water under the proverbial bridge, the problem is as plain as the dimple on my cheek, giving up (or away) freaking great pitching. You know the names as well as I do, but for the record: Hudson, Mulder, Zito, Haren, Harden, Blanton. So we went from a team with the best damn pitching in the majors to a team with the worst damn pitching in the majors. On the other side of the bay, Zito is looking more and more like ZITO! The Freak is a franchise. And Cain, if he had three runs a game, would be a 20 game winner. Somewhere between here and there, Billy, there’s got to be a trade. They need a bat, we need an arm. Hell, we need a couple arms. I won’t dangle names because this is not Topps trading cards, it’s major league baseball and I’m nowhere as knowledgeable as Mr. Money Ball … BUT we have some of the best young hitters in baseball; throw in a couple plus, perhaps, a marquee slugger that can also play defense and Zito would be so welcomed back to the green ‘n gold (if, of course, Giants ate some of that contract). Or, if not across the bay, somewhere across these here United States and Canada is a pitcher that can go seven innings every four days and keep his ERA below a three. Then again, maybe I’m just heat-stroked but the A’s are not fun to watch. And it’s the one team I love watching more than any other. What say you, Billy?
Johnny U - May 17, 2009
There's not a team in the major leagues that would take on Zito's contract willingly.
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
Baseball Hell
Let’s face it folks we are all residing in baseball hell with this team. I agree 100% with Nico. Rooting for a losing team is one thing (remember the late 70’s?), but when any reasonable hope for the future is staring you in the face makes it really tough.
My problem (like I am sure of many others) is that I am an addict. My drug of choice is Oakland A’s baseball. I have been hooked since 1972.
Billy Beane has done some great things for this franchaise. He made watching the A’s fun and special. For that I am forever grateful.
However, it appears that he has lost his golden touch. Whether it is his “love” of soccer or something else, we all deserve more.
KCa's - May 17, 2009
I dunno. I dont really agree with this sudden backlash on Billy Beane
I think to imply he has lost interest in the A’s weakens whatever argument you are making by injecting pure speculation.
I have, and continue to, blame the A’s woes on Small Market Payroll Syndrome.
oakinboston - May 17, 2009
the Bay Area is not a small market
I’m assuming you mean low payroll — that the teams with lower MLB payrolls are doing worse? (The MLB payroll doesn’t take into account how much the organization spends on minor league player development, scouting, etc)
Let’s take a look at 2009 MLB payrolls (this can also be done with payrolls in other years):
2009 MLB payrolls
Team Payroll Average
Yankees $201,449,289 $7,748,050
Mets $135,773,988 $4,849,071
Cubs $135,050,000 $5,402,000
RedSox $122,696,000 $4,089,867
Tigers $115,085,145 $4,110,184
Angels $113,709,000 $4,061,036
Phillies $113,004,048 $4,185,335
Astros $102,996,415 $3,814,682
Dodgers $100,458,101 $4,018,324
Mariners $98,904,167 $3,532,292
Braves $96,726,167 $3,335,385
WhiteSox $96,068,500 $3,694,942
Cardinals $88,528,411 $3,278,830
Giants $82,161,450 $3,043,017
Indians $81,625,567 $3,023,169
BlueJays $80,993,657 $2,892,631
Brewers $79,857,502 $3,194,300
Rockies $75,201,000 $2,785,222
D-backs $73,571,667 $2,724,877
Reds $70,968,500 $2,957,021
Royals $70,908,333 $2,727,244
Rangers $68,646,023 $2,367,104
Orioles $67,101,667 $2,580,833
Twins $65,299,267 $2,251,699
Rays $63,313,035 $2,183,208
Athletics $62,310,000 $2,225,357
Nationals $59,328,000 $2,045,793
Pirates $48,743,000 $1,874,731
Padres $42,796,700 $1,528,454
Marlins $36,814,000 $1,314,786
There are teams with a payroll not much more than that of the A’s that are doing quite a bit better, and that also have strong minor league organizations, such as Texas, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, and Cincinnati.
It’s possible that how money is spent may be more the issue, as well as scouting, drafting, and possibly developing players…and the manager and coaching staff (the latter of which has had lots of turnover in recent years) might be considered.
OaklandSi - May 17, 2009
yes, I meant payroll.
but I was referring to Oakland as the small market.
To be honest I think drafting is controlled by two additional factors people are largely ignoring:
1) luck
2) having a better draft slot because of a crappy team
maybe 2 will start working in our favor now.
oakinboston - May 17, 2009
woo... hoo?
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
the A's market has never been limited to Oakland city limits
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
What is the A's market then?
I think saying the Bay Area is overinclusive.
Rocktopus - May 18, 2009
no, it's not
the Bay Area has two MLB teams, one in the NL and one in the AL.
And both teams have broadcast affiliates and draw fans beyond the Bay Area.
This is nothing unique, by the way.
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
You don't think the presence of the Giants cuts into that market at all?
The market seems a bit difficult to define, but I don’t believe it’s as large as the entire bay area and obviously it’s not as small as just Oakland.
Rocktopus - May 18, 2009
obviously the markets overlap
just as they do in every market that has more than one major league club.
There is certainly enough population for more than one major league club here.
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
Both draw when they win
The difference is that the Giants can still draw pretty well because of their park even when not winning. Right now the Giants are a better run team in most aspects – media (KNBR), front office, farm system (baumgartner, Posey, etc.). But if we were winning or had a hope of winning we’d do a lot better. Just look at 89. Both teams competitive and both drew pretty well.
bajablue - May 18, 2009
of course both draw when they win
and if the A’s were perceived as more entertaining than they are right now — and if they were marketed more positively — they would be drawing better than they are right now, older ballpark or not.
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
The Bay Area is not a small market, yes this is true
But it is the smallest 2 team market.
Cheezombie - May 17, 2009
smaller than Chicago?
(which actually has 3 MLB clubs — Milwaukee is only 1 hour away)
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
Chicago is the 3rd largest metro, Bay Area is the 6th
Cheezombie - May 19, 2009
The Bay Area
Is smaller than Chicago… roughly 7 million here and 10 million there. In between the Bay Area and Chicago there are two other, larger metro areas, Boston and Washington DC. Here is a table.
jeffro - May 20, 2009
WTF?
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
Minnesota does just fine with their small payroll
and very good GM
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Their 2 big, recent trades have been just horrible
They gave up Jason Bartlett, Matt Garza, and Johan Santana, and got back Delmon Young and Carlos Gomez + a bunch of spare parts and a decent pitching prospect. Young has gotten worse since his rookie season, and has been atrocious this year. Gomez hits like the 09 version of Travis Buck. And those were the Twins’ 2 big targets, whom they anointed as 2/3 of the outfield of the future. If Beane made 2 trades like that you’d call him an idiot for it.
Nick - May 17, 2009
The worst thing the A's have done as an Organization, whoever the decision maker was,
was to let Ron Washington walk.
Talk about someone who plays with fire and passion everyday, not to mention the guy who made Chavez and Ellis the defensive monsters they are (were).
Two of the teams ahead of the A’s in the standings are managed by Ex-A’s coaches,
and the A’s are stuck with Bob “Whatever” Geren
supermarc589 - May 17, 2009
Wash would have been great
Only guessing but his personality and style would have clashed with Beane who wants managers who are puppets. I think Wash would have been too vocal.
Trainman - May 17, 2009
Beane doesn't care about the A's, is more interested in 'soccer' and yet still wants puppet managers?
Seems to be a bit of an inconsistency there.
DeJay - May 18, 2009
Washington is doing a good in Texas.
The team has been improving every year since he became manager
javaball - May 17, 2009
He was very close to being fired last year because the team was performing so badly.
Ron Washington Could Be Fired Tonight
It hasn’t exactly been a smooth ride for Wash over in Texas.
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
And in his first year, the team actually got worse, from 3rd place to 4th.
Not that any of that is an indication of Washington’s skills as a manager, but if that’s how you’re gonna frame the argument…
Rocktopus - May 17, 2009
I totally agree, supermarc589 - and I was strongly in favor of hiring Washington all along
Nico - May 17, 2009
+1
MMunoz33 - May 17, 2009
I believed then, and still believe now,
that by the 2007 season it was too late to get Wash.
I can’t prove it, but I believe that in fall of 2006 Wash had already decided that he would prefer the Texas job to the Oakland job. The only reason he was interviewing for the Oakland position was in case the Texas offer didn’t come through. I also think that Billy knew this, and that’s why the decision to hire Geren was postponed for so long: Because even if he wanted to offer the job to Wash, he knew that Wash wouldn’t answer until he got word from Texas. Thus, Billy couldn’t make his decision until after Texas had made theirs.
If we wanted to lock up Ron Washington as manager, the time to do it would have been before the 2006 season, when Macha was temporarily fired then mysteriously rehired again.
iglew - May 18, 2009
Just arrived on site after a weekend of
obligations, celebrations, work and so forth. Kept an ear of the baseball saga but could scarcely believe the downward and dismal spiral.
Thank you, Nico, for a significant contribution to AN in the way you marshalled your facts and presented your case against Beane.
Another Friday evening game coming up for me in skigurl’s season ticket seat. Who’ll be there? I’d like to come by your section and say hi.
LibrariAN - May 17, 2009
Geren is bad
Billy’s relationship with Geren is putting the whole orginzation down. Boring Bob is a terrible manager with no motivation our game strategy. He can not even muster up enough energy to do a quality quote. He should have been fired after last year but Billy treats managers like Al Davis its all about friendships and not winning get your head out of your ass and fire Geren.
dlo99 - May 17, 2009
Friction
A lot of people bring up the fact that Beane doesn’t want someone he may clash with but isn’t a little friction a good thing. If you get a group of like minded people there is no one there to say “hey wait a minute this is wrong”.
I know Macha rubbed some people wrong but they won. Looking back on the last 3 years the trade of Danny Haren and the firing of Ken Macha are Beane’s two biggest mistakes.
Let’s just hope that one of these young pitchers turns out to be as good as Haren and that Geren either gets his s*** together or the A’s get someone who can get the job done.
sirbed - May 17, 2009
Overall BB is doing ok, he just needs to
stop being blind at 3b and draft a HS TOOLS guys once in a while with the 1st pick! Except for the 1st pick last year I liked the draft (finally). I like guys like Dixon, House, Barfield, Coleman, Leyja and Hunter (gamble hear but worth the chance!)
I liked the Ynoa signing! Hope for more of that kind of signings!
Last year BB did good in picking up talent! Be more aggressive with the first pick and GET a 3b! Cardenas is not what I want at 3b, 2b yes!
calas - May 17, 2009
I agree
He tried to buy us a good year with the Holliday trade, Nomar, Cabrera, Giambi and the problem is that two of them are corner infielders that are old and injury prone (as in can’t play everyday or do get on the DL). Add to that the signing of Ellis, who we all love, and there was no way of knowing if he would be healthy this year. Also Beane gave away the best CF we had. If they all stay healthy we have change but they haven’t and won’t.
Then you have Chevaz who hasn’t been healthy in 3 years and drafting everyone but a top quality 3B to eventually replace him is silly.
I have a feeling, we the A’s continue this way Holliday and maybe even Giambi and Cabrera will be dealt this July. Also, hoping that Beane reads Nico’s post and realized he must replace both the SS and 3B for next year. Hopefully Cardenas will be up in Sept at 2B and then next year with the seasoning they are getting this year the pitchers will be better.
Eastbayjim - May 17, 2009
Now the question is: Who can the A's trade Holliday, Cabrera for this July that can help us.
I believe Taj and grover both had nice posts in the off season for SS and 3B.
Eastbayjim - May 17, 2009
What Did the "Moneyball" Approach Ever Get us?
Jeremy Brown? Nick Swisher? Great book, but finding the undervalued talent was never enough to compensate for not drafting / developing / trading for talent.
I still contend that Beane was historically lucky to have Hudson, Mulder and Zito on the team at one time. Find ONE other example of a team having three pitchers that good, that young and that cheap at once.
It just doesn’t happen.
Too many top prospects go the way of Dan Meyer or Todd Van Poppell. And Hudson was a 6th round pick. Without three number one starters making close to the minimum, none of Beane’s “genius” would have mattered. He caught lightning in a bottle and built a legacy off of it.
There were a few good trades — the 1999-2003 flipping of closers, Mulder for Haren/Calero/Barton, getting Johnny Damon & Mark Ellis, Jermaine Dye — but there are a lot more more clunkers than keepers.
On the offensive side, Kurt Suzuki is the first Oakland farm product to be a potential All Star since Giambi and Tejada. Right? Wow, that’s a bad draft record.
Billy Beane is an interesting guy and he’s willing to challenge orthodoxy, but he had a great 7-year stretch (2000 – 2006) that was based more on the good fortune of having The Big Three than anything else. He hasn’t proven to be a “genius” since they’ve left.
My family has loved this team since 1929. I’ll root for them until I die. But Nico is right: this franchise now is wandering in the wilderness with no direction out. It will take real genius to come up with the next Giambi/Tejada/young Chavez while Anderson/Cahill/Simmons/Gio/Inoa/??? are dominating the American League.
Eck - May 17, 2009
No direction home
I’ve been an out of market A’s fan ever since my family moved to Minnesota from Modesto when I was about eight. Being an out of market fan is tough, especially when that team gets limited coverage as is. When the A’s continue to field such a disappointing product, especially when there is no real hope of improvement, you have to ask yourself it is really worth it. I spend alot of money following this team, when it would be much easier to follow the Twins, who consistently field a quality club, who I can watch on TV, and who play about a mile from my college campus, with a state of the art ballpark on the horizon. I love the A’s but I have no good reason to. The A’s are at risk of losing many, many fans if this kind of management continues.
Erasr - May 17, 2009
There are two types of people on AN
1. Those who criticize the fans who “worship at the altar of Beane”
2. Those who don’t make me want to cut myself right now
JediLeroy - May 18, 2009
ha
true
chipper1001 - May 18, 2009
I dunno about most people in here...
But i blame Dan Johnson.
Cheezombie - May 18, 2009
This site has become this:
Cheezombie - May 18, 2009
New Thread Mojo!
(please?)
GreenNGoldSooner - May 18, 2009
Here are some quick facts.
1. Beane personally shot Ellis in the leg.
2. Beane is the reason Giambi is old.
3. Beane never really wanted Smoak in the first place
4. Beane is the reason Sweeney hasn’t developed that power.
5. Beane hates trading for good players. Only bad ones.
6. Beane has been sneaking into Chavvy’s room at night and stabbing him in the spine.
7. Beane told Giambi not to slide.
8. Beane spikes Geren’s punch before the games, just for his own sick entertainment.
9. Beane is the cause of endangered species, the economy, wars, famines, floods, and movies like Gigli.
10. Beane wanted Bill James to be animated in Moneyball.
11. All Beane ever does is brag about how awesome he is in Moneyball.
12. Beane is the reason Holliday has sucked…and Buck…and Rajai…and Giambi…
13. Beane is why Crosby never lived up to expectations.
14. Beane KNEW Crosby would never lived up to expecations, he just really likes practical jokes.
15. People on AN need to fucking relax.
NateHST - May 18, 2009
+1
DeJay - May 18, 2009
Stop being selective
The list of all the things he has done wrong are longer than this
starting with his choice of managers and his hitting philosophy of backing way on base causing most hitters to be passive and indecisive.
We will chill out and relax while the team loses 100 games every season.
Trainman - May 18, 2009
every season?
The A’s have lost 100 games recently… er, wait.. when was the last time they did? Oh, 1987.
jeffro - May 18, 2009
wait, I meant 1979
My brain is not with me today.
jeffro - May 18, 2009
Why don't you make that list then?
And why don’t you back up any response of yours with some factual evidence, rather than just your opinion (which you treat as fact).
travdog6 - May 18, 2009
Ridiculous.
By that list, there are no truly bad GMs, just unlucky ones.
Pucking Insane - May 18, 2009
Do you seriously think
Beane is the reason the A’s do well in the regular season and then lose in the postseason? Because if you do, that’s fucking ridiculous. Beane does not play for the A’s. He does not put sleeping pills in the sandwiches and drug the brownies before the games. And there are bad GMs, like Sabean signing Rowand and Zito to ginourmous deals. Beane doesn’t usually do that.
People on AN think Beane is a fucking wizard or something, and that’s ridiculous. EVERY prospect has to pan out. EVERY player must stay healthy. EVERY pitcher must be the anti-Eveland. NO LOSSES EVER. Sweet jesus, lighten up and relax. It’s going to be okay. We are not going to die. And if we do die, it’s not Beane’s fault.
NateHST - May 18, 2009
Man, you are just a...
…fucking ridiculous f-bomb machine.
Chilango - May 18, 2009
Yeah I tend to try not to use it
But all this Beane hating is getting ridiculous. Everyone needs to relax and just enjoy baseball games or baseball will cease to be fun for anybody ever.
NateHST - May 18, 2009
Agreed.
Blicks - May 18, 2009
+1
tafkasam - May 18, 2009
WTF
Im sick of the A’s. Sick of Billy “I have never won” Beane. sick of this illusion that we are going to compete every year. Chavez your done man. Your my boy but just retire. Im sick of spending half of my life invested in this team just to be made fun of. I love the A’s but beane and geren need to take a perm. vacation away from baseball and lets deal with this in a couple years.
P.s.
i hate letting the A’s ruin my nights after they lose. Cant even go out cause im so pissed off.
Fancy - May 18, 2009
But what about the Movie?
Okay, I agree with most of what Nico says but I’d like to also add that I think it’s absurd that a movie is being made about the genius of Billy Beane when it’s very obvious that he is no more of genius than any other manager. Sure, I’ll probably shell out the bucks to see it if it ever reaches the theater’s, but don’t you think the fundamental premise will be lost once the A’s have their fourth losing season in a row (by 2010)?
greenmachine - May 18, 2009
Nico, really well said
Bwan (not sure how you spell it) read the letter but as an email sent to him, yesterday at the end of his show.
As for me, I am rooting for my childhood team – the Dodgers. The A’s are my adopted in 1980 team and I love them. But too many loses for too long have worked me down. I’ll watch them when it’s free but I won’t pay MLB. I gave up my season tix in sec: 126 2 years ago. I saw this coming and the view was no longer worth the climb or traffic. Bad baseball, one year mercenaries to fill spots, young guys like Barton who really did not seem like a bonafide future star and the rapid trading of solid, young, proven arms was too much.
bajablue - May 18, 2009
I personally think that we're blaming Beane
in this instance whereas I think he basically made a guess that the pitchers he brought in were more ready than he thought. That and the fact that I’m betting a lot that Billy, who has a great relationship with his current owner, got a lot of pressure from the current owner to see if he could try and compete for the AL West crown this year. Now I’d never say that Beane would cave to the pressure, but he did make a miscalculation in hoping that some of the younger pitchers would be ready to go.
Obviously the biggest miscalculation was thinking that the offense would support these young guys. So far, outside of Cust and Suzuki (who has been a bit of pleasant surprise to me), the offense has been just as bad as last year, possibly worse. I think most people, Nico and myself included, did not think that would happen. Not when the middle of your lineup includes a name like Holliday and Giambi and Cust. I mean could you really have ever guessed that this group of offense would actually be worse than last year? And almost everyone thought Chavez was going to be more healthy than in the past.
The good news to me is that as long as Holliday starts hitting, I think he could be flipped for some of those young pieces of the infield that we so desperately need. And maybe Cardenas and Doolittle are the real deal for once. My point is that I don’t think that Beane has lost it or is indifferent to the current product on the field. Beane actually owns part of this team and even if he wasn’t emotionally attached anymore (which I definitely do NOT think is the case), he’s got a very serious financial interest in making sure that he remains engaged. I do think that the A’s are missing DePodesta’s input on things which Billy always claimed was the biggest loss the team ever suffered.
The A’s aren’t trapped in no man’s land right now even if it feels like they are. They still have a player who could be flipped to someone looking to get an early jump on him as a free agent or a contender looking for a boost. Cabrera is on a one-year contract. Crosby is gone after the year. The A’s will have flexibility again after the season. They can even let Giambi go (I believe the option is a team option). And while Cahill and Anderson clearly aren’t ready right now, I do think there is a lot of potential there for them to prove their mettle as major league pitchers. I think they could’ve used some more time in the minors for sure and that, combined with the sputtering offense, has been the biggest mistake of the year. But you can’t blame Beane for trying even if it was 100 percent his decision to try and fast forward the rebuilding process (and I think there were external pressures on him for that). Hell, how many people had the A’s being a surprise team this year? A lot.
And again, the team has some flexibility after the season ends. I disagree with this post at its essence simply because I know that Beane has not emotionally checked out on this team. He tried doing something that hasn’t gone anywhere near according to plan. But drawing this conclusion is wrong.
Tyler Bleszinski - May 18, 2009
Good rebuttal, fair enough - my question would be
how you feel about having traded so many of the team’s valuable assets and still not having a 3Bman or SS here or on the way, given the blinders we don’t have about Chavez and Crosby, and how you feel about the “knighting” of Geren to lead the team. Coming off seasons gutted by injury and responding by counting on Duchscherer, Chavez, Ellis, and Garciaparra…? Just curious.
Nico - May 18, 2009
The new assets are fungible too
You argument is akin to saying that one no longer has assets if they convert their dollars to Euros.
On Geren, I’d agree.
No alternative to counting on Duke and Ellis- at least none I’ve seen.
On Chavez and Garciaparra, I think there’s some defense for the wait and see approach. Also, the fungbile assets argument applies here too. We can flip an SP now, or better, when duke gets back.
ohmangoAs - May 18, 2009
Win.
Thanks Blez. I was waiting for this….
tresselfan - May 18, 2009
Taking from Blez's comment and the collective
data of the season so far….
I see it distilled down to Beane’s risk taking on a lot of different moving parts that seemed from get go a pretty iffy calculated risks that now seem almost like foolish risks in retrospect
ak_A - May 18, 2009
You both make compelling points.
But perhaps are not participating in the same debate.
Not to put words in your comments, but if I understand correctly, one is talking about the past three seasons, and the other is focusing on the most recent offseason.
To which I think neither is wrong.
Just a quick observation.
somebodyelse - May 18, 2009
I'm not crazy about Geren
And I don’t doubt that if Geren wasn’t dealing with so many injured players right now, he’d be on the hot seat. He may be on the hot seat any way. I’m not sure.
As for relying on Chavez and Ellis and Duke, well that was part of the error in judgment. I think Beane took a guess that those guys, based on all the medical information he’d been given, would be able to be in there a lot more than they have. You’d think that he wouldn’t have had so much faith on aging and oft-injured players given the teams’ recent experience, but that was an error in judgment. It was kind of a risk he’s had to take.
The fact that the team has no one who can man third and short right now is also an error. He thought Crosby was going to come through and the team had ridiculous money tied up in Chavez. The team should’ve made those positions more of a priority in trade talks when moving Blanton and Harden and others, but sometimes you just have to take the best available and hope that if you get an abundance of players at a certain position who prove they are good enough, you can flip one or two of them to fill a need you have. They tried to address the shortstop issue with Furcal but he didn’t want to play in the Coliseum for the next three years. There isn’t much you can do about that.
And the truth is if the A’s move Holliday and don’t get a stud prospect for third and/or short, then I’ll feel a hell of a lot more hopeless. But it’s tough to watch this infield and wonder how Beane isn’t firing pretty much everyone that gave him the medical info on Chavez and Duke for that matter.
Tyler Bleszinski - May 18, 2009
Agree on all counts there
It’s the lack of flipping excess talent (SP, OF) for a 3B/SS that irks me. It’s fine to get “best available” or to draft “best available” if you then turn around and use it to get what you need.
Where I am weakest in my arguments is that – hope springs eternal – I too was optimistic that all this would work out. But my job as a fan isn’t to face reality and refuse to ignore Chavez’ health history as a warning signal that you should at LEAST be preparing some good Plans B and C in your farm system and trades.
And while I’d make a lousy GM myself, that’s ok because I’m a fan and an analyst, not a GM – but what I want from my actual GM is to make moves that at least have a good chance of working out, and I’m not sure that relying on the health of Chavez, Ellis, and Duchscherer, or evaluating Sweeney as a CFer and trading your high upside alternative, is doing that.
Nico - May 18, 2009
Frightening to think that Nomar was probably viewed as Plan B to the Chavez at third quandary
Therefore, ignoring the health history of TWO players projected to play the same position was a mistake. Nomar can’t even do the one thing we all take for granted (walking) without having a setback. The alternatives beyond these two? Hannahan? Crosby? Casey Blake looks even better now.
franks a lot - May 18, 2009
Blake has 8 home runs
The entire A’s team has 21. Blake would have been a huge upgrade.
bajablue - May 18, 2009
I think it's more likely that Furcal wanted to remain in Los Angeles
and that he was looking at his old club in Atlanta as a fallback. I don’t think he looked at Oakland as more than leverage in his negotiations with the Dodgers…nothing wrong with that, of course, that’s business.
I doubt he was seriously interested in playing on the A’s until he saw the coliseum…I know some sportswriters claimed that, but Furcal also remarked later that the A’s did not make a good offer.
It makes more sense that Furcal simply did what he needed to do to get a better offer to return to the Dodgers (although what his agents did with Atlanta did not sound very ethical). I don’t think it’s accurate to blame his going to the Dodgers on the Oakland coliseum.
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
this was in response to Blez -- don't know why it didn't thread correctly
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
now it looks like it threaded accurately -- ?
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
It threaded correctly, actually.
Blicks - May 18, 2009
I know, I read it first before my coffee
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
I have to agree with this.
Blicks - May 18, 2009
Thanks for the post Nico.
The new bandaids cannot hold the old bandaids any longer. They need to start letting the younger infielders stay and learn the game at the MLB level, regardless if they are part of the future or not. Any future moves using the veterans as trade bait MUST address 3B, SS, SP and OF. Outside of Holliday and maybe Cabrera, we will not get much so I am only dreaming.
On another note, I was planning on driving across the state in July to see the A’s play the Rays, but for the 3rd year in a row now, I will pass. I was excited when the season started but I have lost interest in this team for now. Geren needs to be shown the exit (fast) and they need to get a fiery manager in here who does not put up with “going through the motions” style of play. Until that happens, this team will be under .500 for some time, IMO.
OakFaninFL - May 18, 2009
I don't like the idea of "keeping" managers...
When the team is lackadaisical, fire the manager and hire a Billy Martin type. When the team is too wound up, and or fighting the Billy Martin type, fire him and hire a Charlie Manuel type. Then, when the team’s fundamentals go to shit, fire him and hire a Ron Washington type.
If you have big superstars, hire a guy who will be their valet and cheerleader. If you have young talented kids, hire a guy who will teach them and push them, but never get complacent and never ever let the manager overstay his welcome. Managers should always be looking over their shoulder, and if they can’t manage that way, then fire ’em anyway!
Gaijin_Suketto - May 18, 2009
Is there a feature where you can somehow click a button, and it'll send you to the first new comment?
If there isn’t, there should be.
Cheezombie - May 18, 2009
after the page loads click on "z"
it should go directly to the first new comment.
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
ahhhhh
Cheezombie - May 18, 2009
see ya
This is to all the people who after 30+ games into the season now want to be Dodger fans or Twins fans or whatever fans. If your loyalty to the A’s is this shallow why are you on AN in the first place?
Do the A’s stink right now? You bet but I couldn’t change my passions if I wanted to and I don’t. I may be down on the club right now but I’m still a fan and always will be. Go A’s!
sirbed - May 18, 2009
I have no interest in or intention of changing the team I root for.
I just wish that watching that team gave me more pleasure (which might, but does not necessarily, consist of winning more).
Hence my approval of Nico’s post.
GreenNGoldSooner - May 18, 2009
Although I'm the guy who writes about synonyms between warfare and sport,
I think that the concept of bleeding green&gold or bleeding dodger blue or whatever is kinda silly. If these were militaries or tribes or mafia families, it would make more sense, but they’re entertainment corporations trying to make a buck off of us. Oftentimes, they give us significant value in exchange for our entertainment dollar. Right now, the Athletics are not.
It is only human to search for greater meaning, and to many of us, most major institutions have failed to give us any greater meaning in our lives. There are some people to whom the only real constant thread that’s run through their entire lives is following a particular ballclub.
I just want the die-hards and the casuals to realize that they’re generally on the same side, although they’re getting different things out of the baseball experience.
Gaijin_Suketto - May 18, 2009
Great post, great comments
This is what I love about AN.
For my part, what I dread about this club (and last year’s club, too) is that it is so damn dull, and the whole experience of being an A’s fan is so second rate.
It’s nickel and dime stuff, I know, but a 21st century baseball team has a real radio station, and would NEVER subject its fans to Controneo and Buan, year after year. C’mon, man: both of whom are downright awful. I have no doubt there are two dozen ANers who would do a better job than Buan. Can’t they hire one of them?
If you go to the Coliseum there is absolutely nothing to eat that’s remotely tasty or interesting (or, in this economy, economical…) and the dot racing and softball highlights between innings seems to be the only thing that can get the house excited. The whole experience is dispiriting.
And this has nothing to do with the fact the club sucks and that everybody continues to stand around waiting for a pair of walks and a 3-run homer than never come. That’s baseball – sometimes you suck, and you have to deal with it (and hope that management has a plan… But there’s no reason the experience should suck. But with the A’s, the experience does indeed suck.
Who in the world is going to buy season tickets for 2010?
solotar - May 18, 2009
plenty of reasonable eats at the coliseum
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
BB IS DOING HIS JOB, HIS JOB HE IS PAID TO DO. LEW OWNES THE A'S.
If Leyland was sucking it up for the Tigers would you ask him to quit? no you would call for him to be fired. If you want to point the finger Lew Wolff OWNES THE MAJORITY of the Oakland Athletics franchise. (At least from what I know). AT THE END OF THE DAY, BB HAS A JOB. LEW WOLF OWNES THE TEAM. LEW HIRES AND FIRES, HE IS THE ONE WHO DECIDES WHO IS GM, NOT BB.
Is this not correct? Even if Billy is part owner that doesnt mean he cant be fired from his JOB. Please feel free to correct me if im wrong but its like blaming Geren for sucking as coach and having that position!
asfan777 - May 18, 2009
BB has definitely made himself look like an idiot in some ways
I know BB can’t plan for Holliday and Giambi sucking (you can plan for injuries to Ellis/Chavez/Duke/Nomar though).
However, the complete lack of evaluation by BB which went into this offseason, especially when trading for Holliday, was absurd.
Young pitchers, even those with MASSIVE upside, don’t come into MLB and not struggle. Mulder struggled for a year. Greinke struggled, as did quite a few pitchers who are really good now. Hughes and Buchholz have massive upside; both of them got banged up in MLB quite a bit. Absolutely idiotic to rely on a combination Anderson, Cahill, Gallagher, Gio, Outman, Braden and Eveland to propel this team to the playoffs. The latter two had some positive MLB experience, but they also have the least upside of the bunch. When most/all of these guys would have to pitch and pitch well in order for this team to be decent, that was a MAJOR problem. The A’s rotation has no established depth. Tons of upside, but no depth.
Bailey’s arm is going to be blown out at the pace he is pitching at (he is going to regress a bit anyway, but his numbers are still good). Hell, the entire bullpen will be toasted.
Adding OCab and Giambi and Holliday, even if they did hit the way they were supposed to, wouldn’t make this team really good. More bearable? Yes. I have nothing against the Giambi and OCab acquisitions, although banking value on the thought of contention and thus the success of the young arms was a massive, massive risk.
Best thing that can be done for the A’s is to hope that Holliday starts hitting soon and trade him once he does, bench the vets who aren’t performing (let Kennedy man 2B until Ellis gets back, just b/c of his defense behind the young pitchers), release Crosby, send down one of Cunningham/Buck to AAA so they can get full time ABs, and hold open season on the arms.
Send down Cahill and Anderson. Because they can’t all be in AAA, some will have to be at the MLB level because none of these guys should be in the bullpen.
MLB: Braden-Gallagher-Outman-Eveland-some retread like Jerome Williams/Edgar Gonzalez
AAA: Anderson, Cahill, Gio, Mazarro, Simmons
Shift around guys if necessary.
Yeah, this got a bit ranty. My bad.
Blicks - May 18, 2009
Oops
The Holliday trade was just a horrible idea in the first place. You don’t give up cost-controlled assets (even if they are not that good) to bank on contending. Perceived value of Smith/Street/Cargon could bring in something younger/cheaper, if said perceived value was there.
And the best thing for the A’s thing is just my two cents. I honestly think this year should’ve been an extension of retooling
Beane has done a great job in some respects, and I liked the OCab (defense!) and Giambi (run support!) acquisitions, but just not the rushing up pitchers and the acquisition of Holliday.
Blicks - May 18, 2009
I don't like tho Holliday trade,
but what we lost in that trade is certainly not crippling, and can even been replaced by whatever we get when Holliday is inevitably flipped.
travdog6 - May 18, 2009
Nice letter, Nico
I agree completely. At the same time, I can’t wait to see what BB does with Holliday, who we get in return, and if things change when Duke comes back.
A'sfansince1970 - May 18, 2009
Out of curiosity
What are the chances that Geren will actually get fired before the season is over?
If he does, what is the likelihood that the A’s will hire the type of manager they need to get this team moving in the right direction? I am not asking to even come in second or third anymore! At this point, I just want someone who can truly guide these kids and help (not hinder) their transition to the show. Watching Geren manage these young players has been excruciating. The 100+ Gio relief appearance was the last straw for me. I am not saying his job is easy, but maybe he just isn’t the right person for this team.
I am just a regular fan, with season tickets, who isn’t as well-versed or knowledgeable as most people here, but I am a fan none-the-less. Nico’s post expressed my own thoughts and feelings very well. But before I get my hopes up I just want to know if AN thinks Geren’s firing is a real possibility.
IHeartDwayneMurphy - May 18, 2009
Compare the A's to Boston
I live in Boston and am surrounded by Sox hysteria. I think it’s instructive to note:
1) With all of their money, it took the Sox a long time, lots of mistakes, AND a change of ownership to create a consistent championship caliber team. Even with their money, they cheated AND got lucky in order to win.
2) I don’t think the Sox were any smarter in 03 – 07 than Billy was from 00 – 06. Their money just let them afford mistakes. I also don’t think the Twins or Rays are any dumber than Billy, and that may be a problem.
3) Best case scenario for this team this year was to contend for the AL West; even then, they needed some luck AND for the Angels to underperform. Well, at least the Angels are keeping their part of the deal . . .
4) Likely scenario is that Billy deals players away for future talent before the deadline, and the team of the future starts to take on a more definite form. At that point, we’ll be able to assess how Billy’s doing. But we won’t know for a few years.
5) At the moment, I give Billy a B-, graded on the curve. It’s an interim grade that could change a lot. And he’s got a few years left to pull it up.
I’m optimistic, personally.
eastcoasta'sfan - May 18, 2009
Scutaro, Swisher and Haren:
Those three have been irreplaceable.
Raymond St. Martin (Saint) - May 18, 2009
Come Away From the Cliff Nico
Nico I love your writing and I am a huge fan, but I am concerned that you and baseballgirl are letting emotion negatively affect what is usually great prose from both of you.
Things look bleak right now but we will be ok! We are not viewing the finished product on the field. Our #1 starter and our closer are on the DL, the latter out for the year. Our 3rd baseman/all star has not stayed healthy (again). Our backup has not either. The ripple effects from all of these are 2 can’t miss prospects (see below) in the rotation a year early and 2 AAA players (Crosby/Hannahan) in the lineup regularly.
For the most part I like what Beane assembled coming into the year. Couple the injuries with two key pieces underperforming (Holliday/Cabrera), a lineup that has to settle in and get comfy.
Beane went out and stole a starting caliber 2B from TB. More moves are coming- we have way too many assets that are coveted by other teams. We cannot evaluate this team and make any conclusions until the all star break.
Finally- all of you need top look at exactly what your expectations were this year. Even if everything was going as well as they could have we would be in the thick but we were not going to be a playoff team this year ANYWAY! You can’t possibly believe that we were going to overtake the Angels and their 9 figure payroll? None of you are that naive. So let’s finish rebuilding and turn our young studs into big lueagers and then make our run next year- even when our kids struggle you can see the talent and that includes Buck and R. Sweeney (but not Bat Boy Crosby).
And about Cahill/Anderson. Look up The “Big 3” stats their rookie years and tell me how many of them did not get lit up every third start with the slight exception of Hudson who settled in quick after his epic duel with Randy Johnson in Arizona.
Cahill is doing as well as could be expected: 2 adequate starts followed by a whuppin’. That’s what rookies do even the great ones! Granted, I expected Anderson to be farther along than Cahill but I will give him the blister benefit of the doubt.
We have too much talent on the field to play this poorly, we will improve. Lets give this team until the all start break before we start calling for heads on the guillotine!
incarnate - May 18, 2009
As I'm watching the bottom of the 1st inning of the A's-Rays game, I'm thinking
“Hmm…”
Nico - May 18, 2009
FWIW Marty Lurie thinks the major problem
is relying too much on luck, both in starting pitching (too many rookies) and in terms of wishing for good health for too many injury-prone players. He doesn’t think that Geren is primarily to blame as the manager can only do so much with the players he’s given.
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
Korach just told Marty that he thinks it was too optimistic
to go into the season with this many prospects in the starting rotation. He also thinks something needs to happen to spark the players.
OaklandSi - May 18, 2009
Well Nico, I left this forum long ago...
for exactly what you are finally saying! Beane firing Bradley is his usual “cocky” way was my last straw, and this place (you!) just pooh poohed everything Beane did. Hiring his buck toothed buddy was laughable, and I only read this place a few times a season by then. Why on earth would you ever fire Macha, because Mark friggin Kotsay said he didn’t “communicate” well? And yet Nico, you pooh poohed all of those bozo moves, but NOW, NOW you have had enough! I had enough when he canned Macha and Bradley, two guys who had us winning games!
SquawValleyUSA - May 18, 2009
Pooh, Pooh'd
Nico didn’t pooh, pooh the hiring of Geren. Nico wanted Ron Washington to become the A’s next manager. I was pissed that Bradley was released, and was ho-hum about the “letting go” of Macha, …but Managers and Injury Prone players don’t win you more games.
I guess we’ll see you when times get better for the A’s. Late.
Colorado Fan - May 18, 2009
Luck is no lady
The question becomes, then, how reasonable was it to rely on the inordinate amount of luck that would have been required for all these fragile pieces to mesh together into an organization strong enough to withstand the season? If everything had worked out perfectly, we would have had a tough little team. But there didn’t seem to be much back-up planning.
Oakville Athletic - May 18, 2009
two random observations...
anti-stats folks like jeepers and foolshgame22 wanted both cahill and anderson in the starting rotation, whereas stat folks like PT, mikea, etc. wanted anderson in AAA and cahill down in AA.
a year ago every blue jays fan wanted jp ricciardi fired, he was one of the worst GMs in the league, the whole moneyball approach was a failure…
okay, now back to the emotional knee-jerk comments…
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
And before the season everyone was saying that this team would steal the division.
They were arguing about how smart Beane was because LAA was weak and we could catch them. A month later, fire the GM he doesn’t even like baseball anymore and the team was poorly constructed.
designatedforassignment - May 18, 2009
Personally, I wanted Cahill in AAA and Anderson in the bigs
and still think that makes sense.
Nico - May 18, 2009
So whats your point?
We have a 6% chance of making the playoffs this year. You praised Beane’s construction of the team earlier in the year. Also if you want to discuss it I think you are very very wrong on the rotation.
designatedforassignment - May 18, 2009
I am not an anti-stats person.
I wanted the best five pitchers we had in the rotation, which by many predictive statistical measure, were indeed Cahill and Anderson. For the record, I also only advocated seriously for Anderson.
jeepers - May 18, 2009
I think the rotation most advocated for was
Duchscherer
Gallagher
Braden
Gio
Eveland
and when it became clear Duke was out I certainly voted for Anderson to get a shot (but not for Cahill). The further health issue of Gio made things even murkier, but he could have been replaced by Outman.
Nico - May 18, 2009
Actually edgar gonzalez had the best projections of the rest.
designatedforassignment - May 18, 2009
Not based on what other people have posted here.
jeepers - May 19, 2009
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
with pro-stats people like you, nico, and flashfire, who needs anti-stats people?
xbhaskarx - May 19, 2009
I thought it was funny.
If I change my sig line, will that suddenly make me a stats person? Do I have to sign up for a ERA+ decoder ring?
I wasn’t aware it was a zero sum game. Is it really “you’re either with stats, or against stats?” Is viewing statistics as a useful tool enough, or do I have to create a shrine to Bill James above my fireplace? What happens if I question the slavish devotion to statistical measures, even in the face of evidence that in some cases (over hundreds of years!), statistics have been used to advance appallingly stupid ideas? Is there a statistical pope from which I need special dispensation to justify any behavior that might be perceived as “anti-stats?”
At their core, stats are just one of many ways available for us to interpret phenomena we observe. As with any tool, they should be applied where they make sense, abandoned where they don’t, and always refined.
I think it’s fantastic for the game of baseball that so much has been done on the latter front in the past 30 years, and especially in the last 10 or so. Why I’d be branded “anti-stats” for questioning them, or even (gasp!) poking fun at them is beyond me. That kind of zealotry is no more valuable in discourse than it is in other aspects of life.
jeepers - May 19, 2009
No
Some people are playing the “so-and-so is anti-stats” game because they have nothing better to do and are looking for a reaction.
I enjoy stats. I look at them frequently and have been into them from about the time I first started following baseball over 20 years ago, but I disagree with the ways some of them are used to push agendas.
This happens not only with many of the “core” stats (batting average, wins, ERA, WHIP, etc.) in which, for example, there’s more to it than just a pitcher’s won/lost record or ERA, but especially many of the newer ones based on formulas that try to dig a lot deeper than what’s on the surface. Just because someone points to a stat like tRA (since it’s come up over the last few weeks) doesn’t mean it’s automatically correct, nor does it mean it’s being used the way it seems intended to be (more as a predictor, less as a measure of results so far).
I’d like the pro-stat/anti-stat silliness to end, but it’s not going to happen if some people are always having the same fights about what’s more valuable in judging a player.
Flashfire - May 19, 2009
I use stats often and believe in many stats
I also don’t use stats all the time and don’t believe everything every number tells me.
Nico - May 19, 2009
Personally
I don’t mind if someone doesn’t buy into stats. I get it. But give them a chance, and if someone doesn’t buy into a stat, explain why. It seems to me that some stats (tRA comes to mind) are simply ignored rather than examined.
travdog6 - May 19, 2009
It probably depends on how they're used
The whole tRA debate started up when the claim was made that Eveland had been the best starter on the team at the time, when he wasn’t. The stat may have suggested he’d BE the best pitcher the rest of the year, but we saw how quickly just a couple more starts changed that.
Lately I’ve started paying more attention to walk, strikeout and walk-to-strikeout ratios when looking at pitchers like Eveland and others. Some people discount a stat like WHIP because of defense factoring in in different ways, but I say if someone consistently has a high WHIP over the course of his career a whole lot of it is on him. I don’t buy into luck being as big a factor as some do. There are times where it sure does come into play, but it feels like some people chalk every single thing that happens once the ball leaves the pitcher’s hand up to luck and no more. I disagree.
Flashfire - May 19, 2009
I completely agree
Also want to add that I think the goal of tRA is great and I like the idea of how its produced/what it does, however i think the whole Eveland debate showed (like ever other stat) it’s certainly not perfect.
travdog6 - May 19, 2009
Agreed too
I also don’t really know what the point of continuing to say that Eveland was the 38th best pitcher last year is, except to instigate. Over the course of Eveland’s career so far, last year is the exception to the norm and even then he had to spend a little time in the minors to get some things fixed. Now whatever progress he made is completely gone.
It’s just so easy for people to pick and choose the stats they want to use to bolster their opinion. I’ve done it. Nico’s done it. People on different sides have done it. Pretty much everyone does it.
Flashfire - May 19, 2009
Grinding the gears
It seems like maybe we tried to shift too quickly from rebuilding mode to contenders. Maybe the ownership just got tired of all those below 10,000 crowds last year, and wanted to liven things up with some big names, but the only big names we could afford on short notice were available for pretty obvious reasons.
Oakville Athletic - May 18, 2009
why was Macha fired?
If anything Geren is not an improvement. What has he done for us lately? 2 second place finishes? Macha had us in the playoffs but sure not past the second round but damn that sure as heck beats going down to a sucking third place!
beatNYY - May 18, 2009
If I ran a blog that was lucky enough to get Billy Beane to do interviews,
I would be embarassed that Billy might actually see this post on the front page.
Can you criticize Billy? Sure, he is a big boy and probably doesn’t mind if you think he made a bad trade, a dumb decision on a free agent signing, a bad draft pick or just an overall unsound strategy. But to question if he cares? if he is keeping guys around that he feels are bad for the team just cause he likes them? This is questioning things you have no way to prove one way or another — and really is attacking Billy’s character rather then his decision-making — which seems a bit petty with no actual proof. Some examples:
When you say this, you imply that Billy is not aware of this. You imply he is actually doing this. You can say he should fire Geren, you can say he should release Chavez, but to imply he keeps them on the roster and does so only because they are his “friends” (rather then because he thinks they still have something to contribute) is basically accusing him of nepotism or worse. Before you do that you should have more proof then “I think they are bad, so Billy must realize that too — so the only explination is that he wants to keep his buddies around.” Kind of flimsy logic on which to base a character assasination of Beane.
and
Really? You really think that Beane doesn’t care? You actually can write that you think he is not trying? What exactly makes you think that? Was it his lack of doing his homework to go over slot and get some good picks in the last draft? Was it flying to seal the deal with the most interesing international young pitching prospect in Ynoa? (who turned down more money from Texas because of Billy’s uncaring attitude). Was it acquiring the best player in all of MLB that was moved via trade in the offseason in Holliday? Was it taking the effort to try and rebuild the offense and bullpen by signing Giambi, Garciaparra, Cabrera, Springer and trading for Wuertz? Was it being involved in many free agent discussions including Furcal and RJ as he tried as hard as he could to sign guys he thought would make the team better?
I am not supporting any of the decisions above (although most were at the worst decent ideas at the time they were made). My point is that a guy that truly does not care does not make the effort to keep his hands in all of these different pots just to make the roster a little bit better. To take any of these decisions and decide that Billy “blew it” or made a mistake is fine. To somehow decide this is evidence that he is no longer interested or trying is just wrong — especially because if these moves had worked out (as Billy probably thought they would) you would be singing his praises about how he took advantage of a weakened Angels squad to make a run at the playoffs.
AsFanInLA - May 18, 2009
rec'd
xbhaskarx - May 18, 2009
Yeah that to me
was the most wrong part of the post. I know Beane cares. Even if he isn’t emotionally involved that much any more, which I highly doubt given his legacy and career have been built upon working for this team, he has a huge financial stake in caring about whether or not the product he puts on the field is competitive. The competitive fire burns brightly in Beane and I’m sure that chairs have been thrown and he is spending long, sleepless nights trying to figure out what to do with this team.
Tyler Bleszinski - May 19, 2009
Rec'd
because people should read this and AFLA’s comment.
ohmangoAs - May 19, 2009
Then he should stay and fix the issues
I said, “If you are no longer interested in building the best baseball team you can, if the passion for the Oakland A’s is no longer there.”
If it is there, then go to work, starting with the moves for 3B and manager you should have made years ago, and the “don’t rebuild part way” mentality you preached years ago.
Nico - May 19, 2009
Fixing the issues isn't something that happens overnight.
I’m not exactly sure what you’re asking of Beane at this point. It’s getting into the middle of the season, what is he supposed to do?
Even though the A’s went for it (and as of now, failed miserably) this year, they haven’t completely comprimised their future by any means.
travdog6 - May 19, 2009
Well even if you say "if" it still was implied by the tone of the entire post that you felt like he no longer cared.
Also, just because he has not landed a 3Bmen does not mean that he has not tried to trade for guys that were too expensive (talent-wise) to acquire. I choose to assume that he is still out there trying to fill the team needs and just has not found a lot out there (most teams are not trading a month and a half into the season).
And even if he does not trade for a 3Bmen all season long, it STILL does not mean he doesn’t care, it could just mean that everyone knows how badly we need one and is overcharging Beane — so he is still just waiting for the right deal. That may or may not be a good strategy — but if in his mind it is the right strategy then he is still doing what he thinks is best, and that shows he still cares.
AsFanInLA - May 19, 2009
We're.All.Gonna.Die!.!.!
The Dogfather - May 18, 2009
Would you like some french cries with your wah burger?
This sounds like a buncha caterwauling to me.
Less market inefficiency + low payroll + undesired destination + freakish injury vortex created by 5th dimensional mad scientist + plain old bad luck = shitty teams.
Nico + super emotional after a disgusting loss + craning your neck to see the man behind the curtain = this post.
Tighten it up, Nico, you’re going soft on us.
sleepingcobra - May 18, 2009
I think that with the payroll billy has to work with,
and the method he chooses to build his teams by, there are going to be rebuilding years in which the team sucks. We are currently going through that phase of reloading and bringing in talent to hopefully start a new stretch of success. But success with this payroll is simply not possible without having years like this.
travdog6 - May 19, 2009
Hey look! its the anti-billy bean bandwagon!!
MAKE SURE TO GET A SEAT CLOSE TO THE EDGE SO YOU CAN JUMP BACK ON THE BILLY FANWAGON WHEN THE TEAM STARTS WINNING!!!!!!!!
exebache - May 19, 2009
It turned bad about the time ....
The A’s traded Rich Harden. Pitching is what wins ball games and the man on the A’s who makes the deals has dealt away all of our pitching but why Does he have an alliance with another team? Considering that he fired Macha and the team has spent the past two seasons in third place with his pet project manager Geren and now we are in last place and over the past 4 games we have given up around 50 runs before today and It is not easy to sit and watch and not say anything. But why trade away Harden and Haren and have last years all star pitcher not available and send another good pitcher to the world champs and you begin to wonder is the man loyal to another team?
beatNYY - May 19, 2009
ya know....
We did get something in return in all of those deals….and those guys wouldn’t have helped us long term…and you need more than pitching to win ballgames…
travdog6 - May 19, 2009
Great post Nico...
:)
MMunoz33 - May 29, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.