SB Nation - Gio Gonzalez

Billy Beane Exclusive Athletics Nation Interview: Season End 2009 Part I

Tyler Bleszinski — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:00:46 -0000

The A's did make some strides forward in 2009 despite finishing with nearly an identical record the past three seasons. They have a good core of young players who appear primed to only get better, and despite the last week of stumbling baseball, the team was one of baseball's surprises in the second half.

With Brett Anderson, Trevor Cahill, Gio Gonzalez, Brett Wallace, Daric Barton, Rajai Davis and the rest of the team coming back with more experience, 2010 is looking up for us green and gold faithful. Billy Beane is exceptionally busy wrapping up the season and already starting to look ahead, so I appreciate him taking the time out to chat with me this past week. This is the first part of the interview. I will be running the second part first thing Tuesday morning. Enjoy.

Blez: When I talked to you in spring training it looked like you felt like this team could've gone either way. You were hesitant to say it was going to excel. You didn't seem to know what you were going to have.

Billy Beane: If you point to something right away, we had so many young and unproven starting pitchers in the rotation. You just didn't really know how they were going to react and it's hard to predict where you're going to go if you don't know where your pitching is. I think when we spoke it was right around the time when we were just becoming aware of some of the injury possibilities that ended up happening. The two most obvious were Duchscherer and Joey Devine. When you have so many rookie pitchers getting their first taste of the major leagues, it's very difficult to predict where you're going to go.

Blez: What would your assessment on 2009 be then? We're closing in on the final week of the season here.

Beane: It almost feels like two different seasons. I'm very pleased with the second half. I think we've played pretty well and we've surprised some people because we've played so well in particular after some of the bigger name players weren't here anymore. In particular the Holliday trade, and we've made other changes. But I think the most encouraging thing has been the way we've performed in the second half as well as the development of some of these players who I think are going to be here for a long time, which was first and foremost our goal this year. It's been the last couple of years that we've been trying to build that foundation of young talent that people can look forward to seeing for the next few years and creating a winning core for the foreseeable future. For the first time you really started to see that. You can look at some of the young players like Andrew Bailey who made the All Star team as a closer. Certainly Brett Anderson's performance and Trevor Cahill's improvement. Gio (Gonzalez) has made progress this year. Raj Davis, on the offensive side, has come on and shown himself to be a really good major league centerfielder. Ryan Sweeney as well as Kurt Suzuki's continued development and I know I'm going to leave people out. Cliff Pennington has performed very well in the second half. I think if you look around the diamond you'll see that these guys are going to be here for a while and they've proven over the second half that they can perform at the major league level. And as we continue to add guys from our minor league system, guys who are highly thought of, you can start to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

Blez: You mentioned people being surprised that the team picked up and became a better team when you ultimately traded away or got rid of some of the "name" guys like Holliday, Giambi and Cabrera. Some of those guys we all expected more from at the beginning of the year. Is there a point where you might've said, "Maybe instead of bringing in some of those guys, maybe I should've just started with the youth at the beginning of the year and perhaps they would've matured and gotten to that point?"

Beane: That's a good question. Personally I always like the idea of if you're trying to rebuild to just got full bore and do it. But there's also a balance as well. In fairness you have to understand a guy like Cliff Pennington probably benefitted from going back and starting the year in Triple-A. What we've seen this year even relative to last year is that he was much more ready to come up this year and contribute than last year. I don't think you could say that that would've been the case in April. But it's a fair question and certainly one that you think about. I do think there is something to be said about having some of those older guys in here so as not to put the pressure on those younger guys to perform. When we made some of these trades to make the commitment to the younger guys it was a different point in the season and I think it allowed them to relax and realize they were going to be able to play every day. They would realize they could make a mistake and still be in there. I'm not sure that that would've been the case had you started that way from the outset. You might've had a different mindset from the younger players. Keep in mind that some of the holdover guys are young too. Those players are different ones than they were in April. Even though we see Kurt Suzuki as the established guy, he's a guy that continues to improve as is Ryan Sweeney. I think having some of those veteran guys gave them the opportunity to continue some of that development. When the baton was handed off to them, they were more prepared then they were in April.

Blez: You were talking about some of those veteran guys you traded away. And obviously it hurt the team quite a bit that Matt Holliday didn't come close to his career numbers with the A's. There was speculation on AN, everything from he knew he was a short timer here in Oakland so he didn't care, to league adjustment, to the adjustment to not being at Coors Field. Why do you think he didn't come close to what he's doing now in St. Louis?

Beane: The first thing I can put to rest is that he didn't care because that was absolutely not the case. Matt was an absolute professional here. If anything he was probably guilty of putting too much pressure on himself than people know publicly. Matt had impeccable work habits and was a pro. There was probably a bit of an adjustment period. But keep in mind even right before he went to St. Louis, he was really starting to get going here.

Blez: His numbers definitely were going up before he was dealt.

Beane: Yeah you could see he was starting to feel more like himself and get it going. The fact that he took off when he went there was not a surprise. Certainly the lineup to hit in around Pujols, I think it became a perfect environment for him. I think had Matt stayed here he would've returned to his career numbers and I think he was headed that way before he left. I can tell you this. He was an absolute professional when he was here and any assertion that he didn't care is not true.

Blez: How do you find enough at bats for someone like Landon Powell who seems like he should get more regular playing time? Do you go into the offseason thinking about how you get more time for him despite the fact that Kurt Suzuki is a fantastic catcher, does a great job with the pitchers and is great offensively? Do you start to look at DH or a different position?

Beane: There's been times where Bob (Geren) has tried to do that. Early in the year he played a few games at first base and it's not something everyone can do immediately on an everyday basis. The other thing too is there were times that Landon was slowed down because he had nagging hamstring issues at different points during the season. Even though there are times when Bob wanted to get his bat in the lineup, Landon's body wouldn't allow him to. One of the things we're going to focus on with Landon is making sure he's as physically prepared as possibly to handle even more than he has. But we see it as a good problem to have. To be able to put in a catcher behind Kurt who has the ability to hit the ball out of the ballpark but is also a good defensive catcher is a great luxury to have. But the fact is, and you alluded to this, Kurt Suzuki is one of the top catchers in the game. Not only that but he's very much become a leader on the team so he's going to get the bulk of time, yet we are aware of the amount of production Landon has given us in his brief amount of time. I think the goal is ultimately to get him more at bats, but for the time being, Kurt is going to get the bulk of them. Part of Landon's responsibility is to make sure he can handle more playing time than he has because that hasn't always been the case this year.

Blez: When someone like Rajai Davis has what looks like a "career year," how do you assess whether a reasonable projection for next year is more like what he's doing, or more like what he's done before? How does the team go about trying to figure this out?

Beane: In some sense you have to take it at face value. He was with Pittsburgh and then San Francisco and now us. He's never really been given a full blown opportunity to prove himself as an everyday player and now that he is putting up the numbers he is, the first question is, can he keep this up? But if you go back and look at what Raj did in the minor leagues, he was a good minor league hitter so it shouldn't come as a total shock. You're not talking about a guy who was a .220 hitter in the minor leagues. He was a good player when he played. Right now we just see it as a guy who has hit well in the minors who has finally been given the opportunity and is carrying it forward. We're going to enjoy it and go with it and try not to overthink. Anyone who has seen Raj with us over the last year and three quarters, when he's played, he's played well. He's one of the unique major league players who continues to just get better. We're going to take it at face value and he's done enough to show that he's a good enough player to play every day at center field. He's such a weapon on the base paths and he gives you such a unique dynamic. If you look at the stolen bases he's had without even having a full season, it isn't out of the question that next year you could see stealing 65-70 bases.

Blez: You reference stolen bases and obviously it's something that has changed quite a bit about the A's. I think you're in the top three in stolen bases and Raj is one of the league leaders in that number and he really makes the overall team number larger. Did you make a decision to be more aggressive on the base paths because of the lack of power? Did you think, we've got to get some offense some way?

Beane: I really think it's Bob (Geren) trying to take the personnel he has and trying to do the best he can with it. He's playing to the strengths. We don't have a lot of power and it's certainly something in order to be a more complete offensive team it's something we need to get. In a perfect world you have both guys who can steal bases and guys who can hit it out of the ballpark. As much as anything, it's Bob really trying to take advantage of what he has. Early in the year we were having trouble scoring runs and he wanted to create a mindset of being aggressive and when you have a guy like Raj doing it the way he's doing it, it has a tendency of rubbing off on everybody. There's a sense of confidence guys have when they get on the bases and they look to steal bases. They're looking for that steal sign. It also has a carryover effect with the rest of the base running. We've been by and large a very good baserunning team and it was just a matter of Bob looking at his personnel and he thought that this is what we're going to have to do to scrape some runs out. The second half we've actually swung the bats really well also and if you combine that with the aggressive baserunning, that's why you're seeing a lot higher run totals. The one thing it really has done is just given the guys a more aggressive mindset. They realize they're not going to win a whole lot of ballgames by getting into home run hitting contests. I give a lot of credit to Bob and his staff as they've really scratched and clawed their way through nine innings of these games.

Blez: Two questions. Do you believe in that the stolen bases must be a 75 percent success rate or higher or it's counterproductive and second of all, do you believe that someone like Rajai Davis actually puts additional pressure on the pitcher? The assumption is that the opposition pitcher somehow loses that concentration because they're so worried about the baserunner stealing.

Beane: There is no question that if a guy like Raj gets on base, everyone is aware that he is on base and there is going to be some adjustments to how quickly the pitcher might deliver the pitch and the catcher might call for a different pitch than he otherwise would. So the game calling might change as well. I'm sure you could quantify it. I'm not aware of exactly how to, but you can certainly tell from a game situation how teams react differently if you're willing to steal a base so I do think it does have an impact. The Angels have certainly done that for years and I think it's had an impact on how teams play them. It creates a tense situation for not just pitchers and catchers but defenders because they have to come up with a perfect play. As far as the rate, there is certainly a point where if you're constantly running and constantly getting thrown out it's definitely having an adverse impact and the demarcation line certainly seems to be around that 70 percent area. You also have to keep in mind that it doesn't take into account some of the things teams are doing to adjust to a team that runs a lot.

Blez: Do you think that the stolen base has become a bit of an unvalued commodity in baseball considering how few there are now, especially in the American League, compared to years past?

Beane: What I think I've noticed more than anything is that a lot of the teams that are running have sophisticated coaching staffs and sophisticated ways to apply the running game, and I might not be accurate and this is just my impression, but those teams seem to be successful more often. The percentage at which they are stealing bases just seems to be higher.

Blez: The Rays are a good example from last year.

Beane: The Red Sox, who historically haven't been a running team the last few years, specifically with (Jacoby) Ellsbury at the top of their lineup. Yet they also seem to steal at a very high rate too. I think everyone is just trying to take advantage by making a percentage play as well. That's why the success rate seems higher. It just seems very much a part of the strategy as opposed to just indiscriminate running for the sake of doing it.

Blez: We talked about Raj and his career year. This is similar to that. Does Daric Barton seem like he's finally arrived or do you need to see more than a month of red-hot hitting, especially given that he's done that before?

Beane: I knew I'd forget somebody earlier and Daric has, certainly this last month, been swinging the bat the way we knew he could and very similarly to the first month he came to the big leagues a couple of years ago. One thing to keep in mind with Daric is that he's still extremely young. He came up at an age when many kids are still in college. He needs to be given the benefit of time and we need to do that. Through no fault of his own, he's had a few nicks here and there that have kind of interrupted his development. The biggest thing is this guy has been a very, very good minor league hitter and at times has shown that he can be a very good major league hitter. With young players, you just can't expect they're always going to be Andrew Bailey where they step on a mound and they never look back. Daric's development path is not unlike a lot of successful major leaguers where he shows you something and maybe he goes through some difficult times. That just means we have to be patient and hope that the guy that you saw in the minor leagues ultimately becomes that guy at the major leagues. This last month Daric has made some huge strides and we're not just excited about next year, but the next five or six years. The other thing you can't forget about Daric is how good a defender he has become. This is a converted catcher in the minor leagues. He's become a very good defensive first baseman, not just with the glove, but when needed, he throws very well from that position too. We're excited and it's great to see. We've always had high hopes for Daric particularly after that first month at the big leagues. He's one of the reasons we've played so well.

Blez: Staying with the first baseman theme, you have Barton, Doolittle and Carter as potential first basemen, but Doolittle and Carter also have some OF experience. What does the first base depth chart look like right now, and which of the players might be more likely to end up elsewhere on the field?

Beane: It's a question we may face and face very soon. We played Chris Carter a little in the outfield in Double-A. He's a good athlete. In a perfect world, all those guys become very good major league hitters and you have to find a spot for them. It potentially is something we're going to face. We're going to have to make a decision and it will be made on production first and foremost. Secondly, as you mentioned, it might be based on somebody's ability to play another position. In Chris' case we started to play him some in the outfield and I've even talked to his agent as he's going to play winter ball in Mexico and we've talked about getting him out there as much as possible because we think he's a good enough athlete to do it. We were doing the same with Doolittle in Triple A this year before he had the knee issue. It is definitely something as we go into the offseason and spring training we're going to have to prepare for.

Blez: Would the power potential for the position have a big deciding difference in who you play at first base? It's obviously still a concern with Daric because he hasn't put up much in terms of power numbers, but Carter has and Doolittle has some pop as well. Or do you maybe weigh the defense first?

Beane: Being a regular major league baseball player, the player brings a lot of elements: it's his baserunning, it's his fielding, it's his power, it's his ability to hit for average and it's when you add those things together usually one player is going to be better than the other even if he's deficient in one area because he may do one thing very well. It's not something we have to answer yet and it's definitely getting closer. We think all these guys are major league players, it's just about finding a spot for them.

Blez: What will most determine the timeline for when Chris Carter is called up to Oakland? Could he win a job out of spring training if he looks ready?

Beane: It's probably a little early to answer that. The only thing I'll say is that we wanted to give Chris some time at Triple-A and give him some confidence going into next year thinking he's seen the highest level of the minors and he could perform there. I think he did a great job in the few weeks he was there. It's just too early to answer that. I don't like creating definites at this point when you don't need to. A player usually decides when he's ready for the major leagues by performing at the highest level and at that point there's nowhere for him to go but up. Some of these guys are getting close to that.

Blez: Based on what you have seen so far, what's the current thinking on Brett Wallace's chances of being a major league every day third baseman?

Beane: We're going to leave Brett over there. He's played one full season, a total of a season and a half of professional baseball as he's moved very, very quickly because of his bat. We're going to give him the benefit of some time over there defensively and particularly given the long-term need we're going to have at that position, it would behoove us to give him every opportunity to give him the development time defensively to see if he can play the position because it would definitely be a great fit if he can play third base in the big leagues based on the personnel we have here and have coming up. It would be absolutely perfect. Especially given that Chavy (Eric Chavez) is coming into the last year of his contract, the chance that Brett with some further refining would be a very nice fit for us there long term. I guess the question is, is it still a work in progress? And we're going to give him every opportunity to prove he can play that position.

Blez: What do you do about third base, at least short term? I'm not even sure where Eric Chavez stands at this point or if he's a part of the conversation. I've read reports that he could do permanent damage to himself if he plays again. Where does Eric stand right now?

Beane: From a rehab standpoint, he's doing very well. The good thing about him having surgery when he did is that when we get into the offseason, he should have as normal an offseason as any other player. He should be able to start resuming normal baseball activities when everyone else starts. The time that he's had has been good. I think we have to be realistic including Eric because he's faced a number of surgeries and he's been more disappointed than anyone that he hasn't been able to come back completely. We have to be realistic on him coming back and have some short-term preparation as it applies to that position going into next year. I also think that Eric, given his talent level, deserves the respect and the opportunity to get healthy and given the opportunity to get back to doing what he does best. In short, we're going to try to prepare for both sides of the equation.

Blez: Where does Travis Buck stand with the team now as he seems to be caught in an almost purgatory state now between Triple-A and being up with the team but not really seeing much regular playing time? Is it the type of thing where he needs to get in there for a while to get his confidence back as he's seemed to have hit well in Triple-A?

Beane: The one thing about major league baseball is that it's pretty Darwinian. If you hit, you're going to play. Raj is probably the best example of that. When Raj got a chance to play he hit. Since he's been playing, he's looked around saying I'm not going to let anyone else play because I know I have to perform here in order to keep myself in the lineup. Most recently, Ryan Sweeney has done the same thing. With all players, not just Travis, it's ultimately going to be based on performance. Travis has had a couple of years in a row, unfortunately, where he's had concussions that haven't enabled him to even play regularly at Triple A. He's missed some time there because of these injuries. We still think very highly of Travis for the same reasons that most people did when he first came up. We think he's got the talent to be a good major league player. At this point it's when he's given the chance he has to take advantage of it and ultimately hopefully avoiding some of those injuries he's had the last couple of years. But we still think very highly of him and one of the best things about Travis is that when he first came up one of the areas we wanted him to work on was his defense and that was addressed to him and he did. He's improved significantly in the outfield and it was an area of weakness when he first came up. Ultimately when he gets to this level it will be based on performance.

Coming tomorrow: Beane delves into the pitching, the status of the injured A's pitchers and how he sees 2010 shaping up.

Could it be...? No, it can't be... OMG it really is! It's a Minor League Update!!!

grover — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:00:25 -0000

Hello again.

Work called me away for a while and it’s been tough getting back into the groove of things. For those who don’t know, I’m a wildland fire fighter and August got a little busy for those in my career field. So when I disappear again for a couple weeks just remember… I envy your access to in-door plumbing.

Anyways, I want to focus this week’s minor league update on the 40 man roster and the options that are going to have to be decided upon in the coming months. Why do this now instead of waiting until September 1st? The topic tickles my fancy, that’s why. As I seem to have (once again) misplaced my Cap o’ Omnipotence I’m forced to resort to basic logic and common sense reckoning to try and deduce the future roster.

That’s right… none of what I’m about to tell you is guaranteed!

The way I see it, there are 28-29 spots on the future 40 man roster all but guaranteed. On the pitching side, Brett Anderson, Andrew Bailey, Jerry Blevins, Dallas Braden, Craig Breslow, Trevor Cahill, Joey Devine, Gio Gonzalez, Jeff Gray, Jay Marshall, Vin Mazzaro, Clayton Mortensen, Josh Outman, Henry Rodriguez, Michael Wuertz and Brad Ziegler all seem certain to have jobs in the Oakland organization next year. That’s 16 pitchers of varying combinations of success/cheapness/options that aren’t going to be released just to make room on the roster. (There’s a pretty good chance that Outman will open next season on the 60-day DL, opening up an additional spot on the 40 man.) Santiago Casilla and Edgar Gonzalez are both arbitration eligible next season but neither pitched so well that the A’s are going to be eager to give them big pay raises, which could mean either or both players could end up as trade fodder or possibly even released. Dana Eveland is still on the 40 man roster as well, but his poor performance led to a demotion that will keep him from seeing any arby money next season. Unfortunately, Mr. Eveland’s suckitude forced the A’s to use his last option this season; meaning he can’t be stashed on Sacramento’s roster next season without first passing through waivers. Chances are Eveland isn’t going to be one of the 5 best SP candidates for the A’s come Opening Day 2010 and as a lefty with a pulse he’d probably get snapped up by some other team desperate for pitching. Therefore, I think this is good-bye to Mr. Eveland.

As it just so happens, it looks as if the A’s are going to need maybe 3 openings on the 40 man roster just to protect some arms that should attract a lot of interest in the Rule 5 draft. Pedro Figueroa hasn’t advanced past High-A ball but he’s a lefty with a low-90’s fastball. Brad Kilby is another lefty who’s put up back-to-back quality campaigns in Sacramento’s bullpen. Fautino De Los Santos is still trying to bounce back from 2008 TJ surgery but he wouldn’t last long if the A’s made him available for the Rule 5 draft. Jason Ray is in the same boat but I don’t think there’s much risk of someone grabbing him and keeping him on a 25 man roster all season.

There’s also a chance the A’s might be interested in bringing back Brett Tomko or Justin Duchscherer next season. Dan Giese should be fully recovered in time for next season; maybe the A’s are still interested in him as a swing man type. Plus, guys like Sam Demel and James Simmons could be knocking on the door next season and they’d need a spot on the 40 man to do so. Like I said, I could see 3-4 spots going to the guys I just listed and we haven’t even looked outside the organization to find help.

The hitting side of things is even more in flux.

Kurt Suzuki, Landon Powell, Eric Chavez (who?) Mark Ellis, Daric Barton, Travis Buck, Aaron Cunningham, Rajai Davis, Scott Hairston, Ryan Sweeney, Jack Cust, Tommy Everidge, Cliff Pennington and Gregorio Petit have spots on the 40 man roster. (Although I’m not sure if Petit has another minor league option available to him in 2010… if someone has a conclusive answer I’d appreciate hearing it.) C Anthony Recker is the most prominent bat in the A’s system that would be eligible for the Rule 5 draft this winter and I’m not sure if the A’s would consider his departure to be a great loss. So any Recker fans out there can protect him on their 40 man lists, but I’m thinking the A’s leave him off the protected roster. Chris Denorfia and Eric Patterson are both out of options, so if they aren’t in Oakland come Opening Day there’s a good chance they’ll be playing for another organization in 2010. I can maybe see Patterson as a back-up at 2B and in the outfield but I’ve got to squint and angle my head to one side to see it. I think it’s more likely that the A’s will try to bring back Adam Kennedy to serve as a deluxe back-up option/veteran mentor type.

The real twist comes when you consider the minor league bats that the A’s have in AA or higher that aren’t yet on the 40 man roster. Sean Doolittle, Adrian Cardenas, Josh Donaldson, Corey Brown, Chris Carter and Brett Wallace highlight the next wave of Oakland offense… which could be much more refreshing than the current ripple in the still waters we’ve experienced as of late. Yet again we haven’t looked outside the current organization to determine if maybe there’s another bat to be had.

So bring back Kennedy, add the newbies and you’re looking at 38-39 players on the 40 man roster before the Rule 5 draft. Does anyone see any glaring omissions?

Until the next time...

8-3 win makes it eight straight

Travis G — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 03:00:03 -0000

More photos » by Frank Franklin II - AP

Browse more photos »

Joba Chamberlain had one of his best starts of the year, going seven innings with six Ks and only five baserunners. He was efficient, throwing 100 pitches, including just 26 in his last three frames. His fastball averaged 93 MPH, and he topped out at 96.

Derek Jeter and Melky Cabrera had three hits apiece. The only hitless Yankees were Matsui and Swisher, though they drew one and two walks, respectively.

It looked as though Brett Anderson might pitch a perfect game through the first two innings, as he struck out four with only 26 pitches. It was a seemingly innocent infield single by Robbie Cano that started a two-run rally. The big hit came two batters later when Melky lined a double down the left-field line. Jeter followed that up with a Jeterian single to right, accounting for the Yanks first run.

It was still a fairly close game until the eighth, when the Yanks tacked on four more, beginning with a Jorge Posada homer and assisted by a Santiago Casilla throwing error.

Phil Coke was impressive in one perfect inning, striking out two with just 13 pitches. Yankee pitchers were able to bear down when Athletics got into scoring position, not allowing a hit in six AB.

Andy Pettitte goes tomorrow at 1 p.m. vs. Gio Gonzalez.

Signs Of Intelligent Life In Oakland

Nico — Sat, 09 May 2009 16:17:37 -0000

More photos » by Ben Margot - AP

Personally, I didn't think Scott Rolen's at bat was so effeminate, but Suzuki is entitled to his opinion.

Browse more photos »

It's unfortunate that the A's seem compulsive about spotting the division a month of smart play before getting it together, as the prevailing organizational philosophy seems to be, "The first 1/6 of the season is for working hard to put your team in a hole, the next 1/6 is for starting to do what you should have done all along, and the other 2/3 is either for playing .700-.800 ball or trading your good players."

Fast-forward to this week, though, and ignore - as if it were just your worst alcoholic nightmare - April's banishments of Sean Gallagher and Travis Buck, a belief that all running and bunting is "aggressive" and never just "reckless," "desperate," or "flat out dumb," and the conviction that a good insurance policy for a broken player is an even more broken one. There are signs of intelligent life in Oakland right now.

On April 25th, I suggested that in the next two weeks the A's should start working towards a rotation of Braden, Anderson, Cahill, Gallagher, and Gio Gonzalez, because Eveland was neither good now nor was he part of any solid future rotation the A's were trying to build, and because Outman was better suited to throwing hard out of the bullpen than he was throwing "kinda hard but straight" in the rotation. Anderson's blister has complicated things slightly, but with Gio eligible to be called up Monday and Anderson ready to go in the next few days, the A's are now poised to run with this rotation anytime - even as of today, because off days will allow them to use a four man rotation until May 21st, and the rotation is set up with Gallagher, Braden, Cahill, and Anderson poised to make the next four starts.

The lineups are finally making more sense, as Suzuki has been moved up to the #2 spot where he can get 5 PAs a game, and Buck is seeing regular playing time - which he should as a player who offers good defense and does not have large platoon splits in his career. (I'd still prefer to see Cabrera at the bottom of the order, but given how many weak hitters the A's have to start right now I can live with it.)

The bullpen management, which personally I believe has been a strength of Geren's all along in comparison to his lineups, overall use personnel, and offensive strategies, has been smart. A timely example was Geren's use of Bailey for two innings last night. By putting him in at all, the A's were going to lose Bailey's services Saturday anyway and it is always risky to use too many pitchers in a game because of the possibility that any one of them might do exactly what Ziegler did Thursday - which is to "just not have it and allow a crooked number." Rather than rolling the dice with 4 different relievers, Geren let Bailey - who was clearly doing fine - pitch the 9th, and in doing so he has Ziegler available for up to 2 innings today if needed while Bailey rests.

Guys like Dana Eveland, Dan Giese, and Rajai Davis and are "filler" - they're not very good now but they're also not part of any future success the A's will have. This is why it's so crucial for Gallagher, and Gio Gonzalez, and Travis Buck to be in the mix: Because they have just as good a chance of being good now (as however raw they are, they're also far more talented), plus they're the ones who have a chance of being really good later.

The smarter roster, the smarter use of personnel, a smarter brand of baseball - all this could have, and should have, been in place before May 9th. But better now than never and for the first time all season I'm liking what I'm seeing.

AN Interviews Oakland A's GM Billy Beane: Spring Training 09 Edition Part I

Tyler Bleszinski — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:00:10 -0000

For what I believe is the first time in Athletics Nation history, I had the opportunity to talk to Billy Beane during spring training. I'll be running it in three parts because it turned into a 17-page interview. If you're looking for the game threads on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday this week, they will be running in the FanPosts to make sure that people don't miss the Beane discussion.

I will say that if I'm lucky enough to do an interview with Billy during spring training next year, I will do it much later in the spring as it was too early in the spring for much to have been decided yet.

Enjoy!

Blez: I interviewed Jason Giambi yesterday and he told me to ask you about the deal that he thought he had signed, sealed and delivered.

Billy Beane: Well it really wasn't that simple. I never blamed Jason and whatever it was that we wound up offering him was significantly less than what he wound up getting. In all fairness, however it turned out, it turned out the best because we weren't really in a position to absorb (that salary). I think Steve (Schott) and Ken (Hofmann) made an honest effort but it was getting to the point had it happened it would have been very stressful on the franchise financially. He was obviously a great player and a fan favorite and a favorite of the owners. Everybody liked Jason. Ultimately it was hard to argue against what he ended up doing and what he ended up getting. I think he enjoyed his time in New York and we were able to regroup when he left. And now he's back, so we're happy.

Blez: More general question, how has camp been so far?

Beane: It's been good.

Blez: We're not really that far into it yet so it might be tough to tell. (Editor's note: this interview was conducted on March 10)

Beane: Well it's a long spring and that's a good thing because there's a sense of relaxation with guys who are a little banged up. Course that will change in about a week when you'll start to get a little anxious with guys. You know Duke (Justin Duchscherer) is a little banged up and Joey Devine. I think in another week I'll start to get a little more anxious if they're still not out there. The veteran guys we've brought in have been great. (Matt ) Holliday has been great. People call him a veteran but he's right in the prime of his career. He's just an absolute stud as a player and a just a great guy. To even have a player of that caliber with his work ethic is just incredible. A player of his talent is great to have but he's also just such a great person. And having Jason back just brings a lot of life and levity to the whole situation. He fills up a room with his personality and he's good with players, he's good with kids and he's good with everyone. He really is a glue in there. We've had great weather. The family is down and the twins are here so that's been good. It's been nice. It's also been great to take a look at some of these young pitchers.

Blez: I was going to get into that later, but I might as well get into it now. You've got Cahill, Anderson and Mazzaro.

Beane: Simmons and Gio (Gonzalez). And we haven't even seen Henry (Rodriguez) yet and he's supposed to be getting out there soon. It should be fun.

Blez: Of those pitchers, who do you think who is the most advanced at this point?

Beane: It's hard to say. That's a good question and I'm not sure we really know yet. I think that for their years and experience, Cahill and Anderson are probably a bit ahead of most guys at that age. At the same time, Vinny (Mazzaro) got some time at Triple-A last year and at least got his feet wet. And he's been as impressive as anyone down here. He's just been explosive with his stuff. I think he's had three outings and they've been dominant. It would just be really hard to say right now. They've only had a few outings so it would be tough to really judge and rank them. And they're all pretty mature kids. Brett and Trevor are very close friends and they have personalities that just don't seem to be fazed by much. They don't seem to be overly excited. They've handled themselves very professionally, which is what you want to see.

Blez: Do you compare this group to the next incarnation of the big three?

Beane: No, this is more of a group of guys. Those three guys were such unique individuals. You take a guy like Tim Hudson. You take what he did when he stepped on the mound and he was immediately one of the best pitchers in the league. You just don't see that happen. I believe he went 11-1 the year he came up. He never faced any adversity at any point. He went right through the minor leagues and buzzed through there. Then he came up to the major leagues and immediately was a number one starter. That just doesn't happen. In Barry's (Zito) case, he wound up right there at the top of the rotation too. He didn't face too much adversity either. Mark (Mulder) was a little different as he came right out of college and jumped right to Triple-A, which was a huge jump. He spent the year there and then was in the big leagues with us. He had some growing pains and a 5 plus ERA but literally the next year went from having that 5 ERA and being your fifth starter to being one of the best starters in the league himself. Those three were just so unique in A. getting up here so quickly and B. dominating guys right off the bat. It's not a normal career path. Most guys have some struggles. It wouldn't be fair to compare anyone to that group of guys. I mean they're three of the best pitchers from their generation. You know we'll see with these guys. I think what's different about these guys is almost that they're younger. You take Brett and Trevor and I think they'd be maybe juniors in college this year. A couple of high school kids as well. Vinny is a high school kid we drafted and those guys (the Big Three) were college guys so...

Blez: So this is a new path.

Beane: Yeah a new path. It's been an experience for us too because we've been so focused on college pitching that when these guys came through, we hadn't had to deal with this in a while so we wanted to make sure we weren't rushing them and comparing them to guys like Hudson, Mulder and Zito who played in college. But you also don't want to hold them back. So far they've handled everything we've given them. The advantage Cahill and Brett has was pitching in the Olympics. I think it was a great experience for them. And I think it will help them become more mature people in dealing with big events. We put Trevor in the game over against the Giants in Scottsdale. Spring training is spring training, but if you're going to pitch in a big game in spring training, pitching against the Giants in Scottsdale is about as big as it gets. Except for maybe a night game against the Giants or Diamondbacks here. We're trying to throw some things at them to see how they respond. So far they've seemed to pass every test.

Blez: Speaking of young pitching, (Michael) Ynoa pitched yesterday for a crowd of reporters and others. What were the reports you heard?

Beane: I didn't get over there. He's the kind of kid that's physically so impressive and for him to have that much athletic ability is so unique, especially for that size. He's really smooth and graceful. He's almost like an NBA small forward in the way he moves. He's very coordinated. He's also a very self-assured, very confident guy. He's got an easy smile and behind the smile you can just get the sense that he knows he's going to be good and he isn't fazed by that. He's been like that since we started this process.

Blez: What do you guys plan on doing with him this year?

Beane: He'll be here for a little bit and then he'll go back to the Dominican (Republic). It's still up in the air whether he'll come to the summer league or whether he'll pitch over there, but he's 17 and he's a junior in high school. He's a special 17-year-old, mind you, but I think we're going to take it one step at a time. He'll go back and pitch over there. And we've talked about the rookie league here. I think we'll make that decision as we go along. We want to make sure we're careful when we commit to something. He's also adjusting culturally. He's been taking English classes and I believe he conducted his interviews in English which is amazing.

Blez: So he didn't speak any when you were there?

Beane: He didn't understand a lot. But he's been taking English classes as a lot of our guys do. That tells you what kind of self confidence he has, and I might be wrong on this, but for him to request that his interviews be conducted in English is just really, really amazing. He didn't speak any at all when we went over there last year and we had to use an interpreter. He's a kid coming here so it's a big adjustment for him. Part of his success will be determined by how he adjusts to living in a new country and speaking a different language.

Blez: You mentioned the young pitching, but have there been any other pleasant surprises? People that might be flying under the radar.

Beane: I wouldn't say pleasant surprises, but there have been guys who have impressed. That (Ben) Copeland kid, you know the Rule 5, has played great down here. He just keeps getting better. And Raj (Davis) keeps getting better every day. He's such a good athlete with great speed. But every time he goes up to hit he just seems to be getting better and better. It is spring training, but he sure is exciting when he puts the ball in play. He's hitting the ball hard and driving it the other way. He's really been a great find for us from the day we got him on waivers. It's been great to get that kind of athlete and he's a great kid too. He's really just a good kid who loves to play. It's been fun to see him over the course of the year that we've had to continue to get better and better. (Ryan) Sweeney has been phenomenal down here. I don't think it's a total surprise. I think anyone who has seen him play despite his youth could see his athletic ability and everyone could see that this guy really has a chance to turn into something special. He seems like he went from a young adult to a real man in the space of a winter. He's driving balls and I think he's hitting like .550, .545 here and it hasn't been cheap. That's not a surprise. I think we could all see it coming, but it's nice to see.

Blez: I know it's tough to judge things so early in the spring, but how are you feeling about the team's chances in 2009?

Beane: I've always resisted handicapping. But there are some obvious things. I like our position players. I think we have a lot of depth. Everybody realizes how important having Chavy out there on an every day basis will be for us. Hopefully that's the case. He's had a little bit of setback with the shoulder but I don't think it's anything that's serious. I think it's just the normal rehab process with normal soreness that you would get but I like our position players. And we did exactly what we wanted to do which was to add some offense with Holliday, Giambi and then you add Nomar (Garciaparra) and (Orlando) Cabrera which at that point gives you the depth of having Bobby (Crosby) around. I'm happy with that. I think a real key for us is, and it's no secret, when can we close the gap with some of this young pitching? When they get here, they're going to be good but it's how quickly are they going to be good. They're going to be here, it's just how quickly are they going to be here. We really need to narrow that game. In the interim we need Duke and we need Joey because those guys are arguably two of our best pitchers on our staff. But the pitching is going to be the key. It's a little bit of a strange dynamic because while pitching is a concern, we think that we have the best group of pitchers in the minor leagues of anybody. So it isn't like we're going to go out and find pitching because we have it here. It's just matter of getting it to Oakland. And hopefully it can perform and compete when it does. That will be the key. And to predict that, I just don't know. I know these kids are talented and good. But being a major league pitcher takes a little more than that. Hopefully when they get here quickly. I'm hoping the fact that there will be a really solid position player team around them will help their development.

Blez: How concerned are you about Duke right now?

Beane: We're always concerned. Duke always seems to battle nicks here and there. There is no questioning how good he is but durability has always been a bit of an issue. I'm concerned because he's one of the best pitchers on our team which was proven last year given his All Star selection. He's one of the better pitchers in the league when he's out there. It's been keeping him out there that has been a challenge. He's as frustrated with the whole thing because this is his free agent year. I believe he was supposed to throw yesterday and I'm not sure how that turned out but he's confident he will be fine. But each day that goes by you get a little concerned.

Blez: What do you think you'll do with the rotation if Duke isn't ready to go?

Beane: That's a question better asked for later on. Someone will be in there. To say that we haven't begun discussing it would be a bit disingenuous because we have. But since we don't have to make a decision there is no reason to publicly discuss it and create all the questions that come with that discussion when it's not necessarily needed.

Blez: Is there a temptation to go out and sign someone like Mark Mulder who is coming off the injury to take a chance on him or maybe someone like a Pedro Martinez?

Beane: On Mark, my understanding is that he isn't ready to go out. That's sort of moot. But we've stayed away from signing the veteran starters because we have young guys that we want to be here at some point and I've never thought in our marketplace that that was an efficient use of your money. Short answer is no. It isn't really even something we pursued during the winter. We've got great young pitchers here and we want to give them a chance to get up here. It might be later than we want and it might be sooner than we expect, but they're going to be here at some point and we've just got to be patient with them. Sometimes you just go out and sign a guy and it just winds up being window dressing at the end of the day. What are you trying to achieve and what are you getting? Not really talking about Mark, but those other guys might have different interests and want to go somewhere else. We like to keep our slots open for our young guys and that's really where the success is going to come from is our young guys and it's going to be long term.

Blez: It's interesting that you take that philosophy with pitching. It's a really interesting mix of veterans and young guys on this club on the field. You've got Buck and Barton, but you also have Nomar, Cabrera and Holliday-types. How do you make sure that someone like Buck, who experienced a pretty big bump in the road last year, continues to develop and find playing time while bringing in so many veterans to bolster the offense?

Beane: We've never had a problem having too many good players so it's too early to be worrying about having at-bats. I think what we're saying here is if you hit, we'll find a spot for you. It's really not a concern. At the end of the day they'll be plenty of at-bats for everybody. Ideally what you'd like to do, especially with the veterans, is to not put so much pressure on them so that at the end of the day, they don't break down at some point later in the season. In Travis' case, here's someone we think very highly of and we expect him to get himself plenty of at-bats. We've got plenty of ways to mix and match.

Blez: Was that part of your goal this offseason because of the injury issues the last couple of years? To create as much depth as possible.

Beane: Oh yeah, as much as our payroll allowed us to. We're never going to have the perfect team in our situation but we want as many good position players as we can. Take a guy like Bobby. If Orlando is playing short and Bobby becomes a pretty good right-handed bat available that can play a number of positions. And we haven't had a player that caliber available to us. The same with Nomar. The idea that we can rest someone and have Nomar playing out there as a right-handed bat is great. It's always been somewhere we've been short. We always find a way to create at-bats where we don't necessarily want them so I feel pretty confident that getting these guys at-bats won't be an issue.

Coming Tuesday: Beane discusses how the economic situation affected his decision-making this offseason, why he wanted Orlando Cabrera and Nomar Garciaparra and how Bobby Crosby took the Cabrera signing.

How good is Oakland's 2009 Rotation, With a Cameo By Pythagoras and More Thoughts on Pitcher Value

devil_fingers — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 13:30:08 -0000

The As look like they are going for it this year. Previous offseason and 2008 mid-season trades of Nick Swisher, Rich Harden, and Joe Blanton (among others) helped restock the farm system. After the 2008 season, they traded for Matt Holliday (stud outfielder in a contract year and represented by Scott Boras -- in other words, he ain't gonna be in Oakland in 2010, whatever else happens) and signed Jason Giambi. They clearly needed the offensive boost these players should provide in and around Jack Cust. They also added Orlando Cabrera at shortstop, having clearly given up on Bobby Crosby ever reaching what used to appear to be his potential. These are not the moves of a rebuilding team.

Whether or not that is "enough" on offense is one question (along with how Cust and Giambi can both play without killing the As on defense). But the real question out there is if their pitching is enough, specifically their starting rotation. They certainly didn't add any "big names" to the rotation, and it isn't exactly clear who is gong to be in it. How bad (or good) will their starting pitching be? Drawing on different projection systems as well as the using some of the methods mentioned in my earlier Thoughts on Pitcher Value (with an "improved" update), let's see.

Methodology

[This next section goes over some points of methodology in figuring pitcher value, adding on to my earlier post. If that bores you or is old hat to yuou, please feel free to skip down the section on "The 2009 Oakland Rotation.")

In my earlier post, (which you might want to read if the idea if "replacement level" or "FIP" or the like are new ideas), I gave a very simple way of determining a pitcher's value above replacement level. In brief: for any player, value is rate over replacement times playing time.

For a starting pitcher, replacement level was defined as 128% of the lgERA (whether one uses ERA or FIP). So to get a pitcher's runs (saved) above replacement, we used the following formula (here using FIP as our rate stat; FIP is always scaled to that the lgFIP = lgERA):

((lgFIP*1.28)-playerFIP)*(IP/9.0)

There is nothing wrong with that formula, really. To get wins above replacement level (WAR), simply divide by the runs-to-wins ratio for that season. It's usually around 10 although if you want to figure it out for each season (like I did for every league and season through 2008 with MySQL) the formula is

(lgRA*2)+1.5

This is a fine way of doing a pitcher value analysis. But if you look around some sabermetric sites, you may notice another way of valuing pitchers using "win percentage," i.e., talking about certain pitchers as ".520" pitcher or .420 pitchers or whatever. You many think, "Hey, I thought we all agreed that pitcher wins are one of the worst stats out there." You'd be right. What is being talked about is what the pitcher's winning percentage would be given league average run support.

How does one figure this? It's funny... I asked and asked and asked... and while people were always eager to answer all my other questions, I guess I just asked at the wrong time, or it seemed to obvious. But it is a simple answer, to here it is, and I hope others can find this easily, as I could not.

It is done simply adapting of the Pythagorean Win Expectation discovered by Bill James. James found that one could roughly estimate what percentage of games a team would win by using

Runs Scored^2/(Runs Scored^2+Runs Allowed^2)

More recent analysts have found that 1.83 is a more precise exponent, and there are more sophisticated versions like PythagPat, but we'll keep it simple for now.

It's easy enough, then, to apply this to pitchers. Assuming the 1.83 exponent and that the pitcher has average support, the formula is

League Average ERA (or RA or FIP or whatever)) ^1.83/(League Average ERA^1.83 + Pitcher ERA^1.83)

Let's run through a calculation for last season.

Let's take former Athletics (and current Brave) pitcher Tim Hudson's 2008. When he was healthy, he posted a 3.83 FIP. The NL league average ERA was 4.30. So

4.3^1.83/(4.3^1.83+3.83^1.83) = .533 win percentage (rounded)

Originally, this post went on and on about methodology, but but it was getting too long and non-As focused, which is s probably what you really want to read. The source of most of this can be found in various places on the 'Net. Much of it can be found in a great series at FanGraphs by Dave Cameron, who is himself distilling a number of ideas, many of them from Tom Tango. You can find links the series on Pitcher Win Values at Fangraphs -- you can find the links in a post I wrote at Royals Review.

Here's a distillation of how it goes (and do check out the links for more detailed explanations):

Replacement level for starters is a .380 win%, for relievers, it is .470. See Tom Tango's helpful blog post for more on this. FanGraphs doesn't adjust for the relative superiority of talent in the AL, to do so, one make the replacement levels .370 and .460 in the AL, .390 and .480 in the NL.

To get runs saved one takes the player's win percentage - replacement level times innings pitched. For Hudson in 2008, that would be .(533-.390)*142= 23.1 runs above replacement (RAR).

Further, one needs to adjust for the pitchers effect on his run environment by averaging his FIP-ERA with the lgRA in the equation above, and scale it to RA to make sure that it accurately reflects the league and pitcher run environment and also gives pitchers their proper value in relation to hitters. Given that we're dealing with projections here, I will simply add .4 to the FIP and lgERA, although that is imprecise. For the As projections, though, it will have to suffice.

(Note that for simplicity's sake, I've left out park adjustments for now. I will get to that in the future.)

For Hudson, the result is a 2.4 WAR for 2008 -- given that the average player is around 2, and given that he only pitched 142 innings.

The 2009 Oakland Rotation

For the projections, I once again averaged the FIP generated from CHONE, ZiPS, and PECOTA. Using a weighted average, I've set the lgERA at 4.45.

Playing time is a difficult issue (and this is all from before Duchscherer's arm problems...) It's always tough to project, but with the As young players both in the majors and the minors... So I went with Baseball Prospectus' projections, as it tries to account for spot starts. If As fans want to jump in with suggestions in the comments, feel free. After all that bluster above, the chart is relatively short and straightforward. Remember -- the projected FIP is not me, it's the average of the three most respected and publicly available systems.

Player	FIP	IP	Win%	RAR	WAR
Justin Duchscherer	3.98	140	.547	24.8	2.5
Dana Eveland	3.82	160	.569	31.8	3.2
Sean Gallagher	4.45	130	.500	16.9	1.6
Gio Gonzalez	5.20	130	.429	7.7	0.7
Joshua Outman	5.16	100	.432	6.2	0.6
Dallas Braden	4.53	90	.492	11.0	1.1
Brett Anderson	4.72	80	.473	7.2	0.8
Edgar G. Gonzalez	4.58	70	.487	8.2	0.8
Trevor Cahill	4.88	50	.458	4.4	0.4

The first thing that might grab your attention is that that's a lot of starters. But keep in mind trying to account for injury risks, from longer stays on the DL to simply skipping a turn when a guy rests. Also keep in mind that guys might get into a rut and get sent into the 'pen for a bit, or young guys getting sent down or called up.

But just look at the winnings percentages for a minute, since they give us an idea of each pitchers relationship to league average (.500) and replacement level (.370 in the AL). The only starters on that list clearly above average are Duchsherer and Eveland. No, neither of them look to be dominating aces, but both are projected as clearly above average. Good #2 pitcher, one might say. Leave aside what you think about the As trade of Harden -- Gallagher projects as perfectly average.

As for the rest, well, only Braden and perhaps Edgar Gonzalez project close to average, but they are high-end #4s. What really is striking, though, is that none of these guys, except maybe Gio Gonzalez and the wonderfully-named-for-a-pitcher Outman, statisticaly profile as #5s, and even those guys are a ways from replacement level.

In other words, while none of the players are projected to dominate, none are projected to be horrible. And if there is an injury, there is plenty of non-replacement-level depth available to step into the breach. Is that enough to win the AL West? I suppose I have to disappoint here and say that I really don't know. It depends on the Angels, of course, who have a very good rotation, but didn't really replace Mark Teixeira, either, and keep getting older. And, of course, much depends on if the As hitting can improve. yes, that's a waffle, but I'll say this: it's not Hudson, Mulder, and Zito in 2001, but it's not the 2003 Royals, either. It's reasonable to think the As can contend with these guys.

A final thought: It's sometimes said that pitching is the currency of baseball. That may be true due to some perceptions about how trade value works. But the truth is, it is more accurate to say that runs are the currency of baseball. Even more accurately, wins are the currency of baseball, since they are what gets one into the playoffs, and when one signs free agents or makes trades, one is trying to purchase (through money or talent) marginal wins. But that gets to the crux of the issue. Here's the same players, their projected WAR, and some... other important data based on 2009 projections.

Player	WAR	Value	Salary	Surplus
Justin Duchscherer	2.5	$11.93	3.9	$8.03
Dana Eveland	3.2	$15.40	$0.44	$14.96
Sean Gallagher	1.6	$8.0	$0.44	$7.56
Gio Gonzalez	0.7	$3.67	$0.44	$3.23
Joshua Outman	0.6	$3.07	$0.44	$2.63
Dallas Braden	1.1	$5.32	$0.44	$4.88
Brett Anderson	0.8	$4.04	$0.39	$3.65
Edgar G. Gonzalez	0.8	$4.04	0.39	$3.65
Trevor Cahill	0.4	$2.31	$0.39	$1.92
Total	11.7	$57.77	$7.25	$50.50

[NB: All dollar values are millions. I've taken the dollar value of each WAR in 2009 to be $4.62 million on the basis of Colin Wyers' finding that the cost was $4.2 million in 2008 and assuming the general 10% annual inflation of that salary + $0.4 M replacement player salary. It seems too early to say for sure how to adjust for the new economic climate, and it's better to adjust too little than too much...]

Every team (yes, even the Yankees) run on a budget. And the As, even though they want to win, have a budget, and a pretty small one at that. Yes, they want to win. But it's not pitching that's the currency of baseball. It isn't even runs. Yes, wins are wins, but ultimately, you have to pay for wins. And the As, now matter how they are do, are hedging their bets. If this rotaiton doesn't work out, it's not like they're stuck with a bunch of contracts they can't move, or have mortgaged the future.

The real currency of baseball is well, currency (ok, money, but let me have my moment). The As are "on the hook" for a bit over $7 million for those player next year, players who are projected to return over $50 milllion in value. And that, not walks, or defense, or Jeremy Brown's Blue Plate Special, is what the concept of "Moneyball" is really about.

Diamond Notes: Should This Screwball Be Allowed To Throw One?

Nico — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:29:20 -0000

Among this morning's news from the desert (I'll have the Tanana split, please, with the Bill Almons on the side) comes word from Susan Slusser and The Chronicle that while playing catch Dallas Braden wowed Dana Eveland with a couple nasty screwballs, and both of them agree Braden should mix it in to his 2009 arsenal.

Braden reports he has already added a cutter to his 2008 repertoire of fastball, changeup, and occasional breaking ball (curve) and that he plans to "petition the A's coaches" to allow him to throw the scroogie. Braden got on the minor league map thanks to the screwball, then abandoned it following an unusual arm injury (scar tissue and humural defect) and surprisingly quick recovery, both of which convinced the A's that reintroducing the screwball was not a wise course of action.

Curt Young is apparently not enthusiastic about the idea, citing that what Braden did last year was effective - and arguably, adding a cutter to a repertoire that succeeded in 2008 would keep Braden ahead of the competition. However, I'd be tempted to look at it differently...

The A's have so many young starters with higher ceilings than Braden - specifically Cahill, Anderson, Mazzaro, Gio, and Gallagher - that the A's would be better off for Braden to thrive for a couple seasons and get hurt than for him to be "decent" for several years. It seems like this is an opportunity to go "high risk, high reward" with a pitcher who will be passed up within the organization in a couple years anyway. So if adding the screwball increases the chance that Braden will pitch like a #2-#3 starter instead of a #4 starter, and also increases the chance that he will injure his arm before 2011, it seems to me as if everything points to "turn him loose!" What do you think?

Either way, I figure at least we're not the Dodgers, still wondering if the team's LFer is going to be Manny Ramirez or Juan Pierre. They're so similar in value, only their parents can tell them apart!

And Gio Gonzalez has reported to camp with 27 more pounds of him to love. He says most of the added weight is in his lower body, while Eveland says it's all in Gio's butt and Braden says it looks like Gio stuffed two watermelons down the backside of his pants. Hmm...Is the disease known as "Jerome Williams" contagious? If Gio comes out throwing 96MPH on the black, all I can say is, "Hubba hubba!"

Poll

Should the A's let Dallas Braden throw his screwball?

No, the A's should not let Braden throw his screwball.

46 votes

The A's were right to say no before, but they should let Braden throw his screwball now.

202 votes

Yes, because the A's always should have let Braden throw his screwball.

159 votes

The A's should continue to deny that Braden has ever thrown a screwball.

57 votes

464 votes | Poll has closed

The Holliday Acquisition And Being Good In 2010 - Not Mutually Exclusive

Nico — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:00:05 -0000

I've heard a lot lately about the A's had better contend in 2009, since they have potentially compromised the very seasons for which they have seemingly been rebuildling: 2010-2012. I'm not sure the A's see it that way and here's why...

Let's assume the A's do not keep Holliday beyond 2009, because if they do then clearly they have taken care of the 2010+ seasons by making the trade. I think Beane and Co. looked at 2009 and saw the potential for a third consecutive sub-.500 year, saw the chance to acquire a huge asset for 90 cents on the dollar, and decided that improving the team now would be better both for team and fan morale (which translates into improved performance and improved interest/revenue, respectively), and that it could be done without preventing the team from moving forward in 2010 and beyond.

In 2010, the A's believe their rotation can be anchored by two very special pitchers in Cahill and Anderson, plus Gallagher (who should really be hitting full stride if he's going to), plus the best of Eveland, Gio, Mazzaro, Braden, Simmons - in other words, the rotation figures to be very, very good from 2010-2012, and a stellar rotation is the backbone to a team's success.The bullpen, with Devine, Ziegler, and Blevins under contract control for years to come, and with a slew of promising relief prospects at every level, is going to be very solid and will not require the A's to pony up any money or talent in order to have an enviable pen.

Meanwhile, come 2010 the A's can, if they choose, still employ Kurt Suzuki, Ryan Sweeney, Travis Buck, Aaron Cunningham, Mark Ellis, Eric Chavez, Jack Cust, Furcal if he is signed, the better or readier of Barton and Doolittle, and a Holliday-lite addition that the team will be able to afford, be it Jason Bay or an equivalent right-handed hitter with good power.

Then in 2011, a whole new set of prospects will be arriving as some veteran contracts, notably Ellis' and Chavez', expire - freeing up money, if needed, to address weaknesses or concerns. Those prospects include Chris Carter, Adrian Cardenas, Josh Donaldson, and Jemile Weeks.

In other words, armed with true talent and remarkable depth at the very most important positon - starting pitcher - and armed with a farm system that will be producing legitimate talent faster than the major league roster is losing players to free agency or age decline, with or without Holliday the A's are sitting pretty from 2010 on.

So if the A's are poised to ride the coattails of Cahill, Anderson, and an emerging veteran core of Suzuki, Sweeney, Buck, and Cunningham, starting in 2010, why not make 2009 as competitive as possible, take a shot at contending now, recreate the "culture of winning" the clubhouse knew from 2000-2003, and send the following message out to the rest of the American League: Look out folks, we're good again - and we're only going to get better.

The 2009 Oakland A's Starting Pitchers?

Tyler Bleszinski — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:00:05 -0000

It's been the unlucky 13 for the Oakland Athletics in 2008. The A's have had 13 different pitchers start at least one game for the A's this year. You ready for this list? Joe Blanton, Rich Harden, Justin Duchscherer, Gio Gonzalez, Kirk Saarloos, Lenny DiNardo, Chad Gaudin, Dan Meyer, Josh Outman, Sean Gallagher, Dallas Braden, Dana Eveland and Greg Smith.

Some of those guys were traded, some were injured and some didn't perform up to expectations. Yet when I look at that list, I see several pitchers who make me excited about 2009. Gallagher, Duchscherer, Outman, Eveland and Smith could very well be the opening day rotation for our green and gold next year.

And that doesn't even take guys like Trevor Cahill and Brett Anderson into account who very well could prove to be ready by the end of spring training next year. Gio Gonzalez could also very well bounce back and have a stellar spring training. And Dallas Braden has probably at least put himself in the conversation with his pitching performances of late too.

Now it's probably going to take one or maybe two pitchers to possibly get a bat if that's the route Billy Beane and company want to go. And with the A's history of having injured starting pitchers, the truth is that the team could probably use as many starting pitchers as possible.

But it's going to make for a fascinating spring training and the good news is that even if the starting pitchers are all healthy, a few of them will be excellent additions to the bullpen.

Now that you've pretty muc h seen all the A's starters at least once this year, who do you think wind up being the starting five on opening day next year? Course it won't matter much if Beane can't significantly improve this offense this offseason. But I'll just pretend for a moment that our offense could somehow approach league average and therefore pretend that the starting rotation will matter.

Mr. 250,000: Tigers 14, Athletics 8

Ian Casselberry — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:45:04 -0000

During the off-season, a few observers thought the Justice League lineup the Detroit Tigers assembled might be capable of scoring 1,000 runs. Apparently, the Tigers have decided they're going to spend September doing their best to reach that lofty number. Over the past three games, no ballpark has been able to contain these guys.

It was Home Run Derby at Comerica Park last night, with five balls getting launched into the seats off Oakland Athletics pitching. It might just be easier to list the Tigers that didn't hit a home run last night. But that would mean not mentioning Gary Sheffield, who not only had a fantastic night with two home runs and five RBIs, but also attached his name to one historically impressive number.

Sheffield's second long ball of the evening was the 250,000th home run in major league history. And his grand slam in the first inning was the 249,999th, which makes you wonder if someone in the dugout told him about that and he figured he might as well get the big number, too. It's like the baseball equivalent of having the top two scores on an arcade video game.

On the flip side, Oakland's Gio Gonzalez created a bit of history for himself, as well, becoming the roadkill underneath the Tigers' home run motorcade. Gonzalez not only gave up #250,000, but also threw the pitches that resulted in #249,998 (hit by Magglio Ordonez) and 249,999. That has to be worth at least a few appearances at card shows in the years to come.

You think there's any chance Gonzalez posed with Maggs and Sheff for a photo after the game? Nah...

One down note for the Tigers: Being handed a nine-run lead should really be enough for a starting pitcher. If you can't even get a decision with such a margin, you really didn't have a good night. Zach Miner, we're looking at you. Perhaps the focus wanes with an 11-3 lead and long breaks in the dugout. But in his last two starts, Miner has allowed 13 runs and 19 hits in 10 1/3 innings. Cause for concern? Could the innings he's thrown be catching up to him?

Back to the positives, Sheff's two homers also put him four away from the 500 mark for his career. Could he reach that number this season? Probably not, with 18 games remaining on the schedule. But it's possible, especially with some of the pitching the Tigers will be facing to close out the year.

Another number worth keeping an eye on is Miguel Cabrera's season home run total. As you know, the young man has been swinging a seriously hot bat in recent months (22 home runs since July 4) and his production has steadily moved him up the list of home run and RBI leaders. With 116 RBIs, Cabrera is currently fourth in the majors. But at 33 homers, he's second in the American League, and with Carlos Quentin's season-ending wrist injury, he has a decent shot at taking the lead in that category. (Alex Rodriguez and Jermaine Dye are right behind him, with 32 home runs.)

We also probably shouldn't underestimate the power of Tigers bloggers' birthdays as a determining factor in this power surge. Were those Detroit bats lifted in celebration for the births of Billfer and Samara? It's a theory that shouldn't be discounted. (I clearly missed the memo on birthdays when I signed up for this Tigers blogging gig. I'm a June baby.) Does the Tigersosphere have any more birthdays between now and September 28? This could be an important question.