When our starting pitchers return after the All-Star break, we will have more promising arms than we have room for them.  As most of them are battling injuries, it may make sense to switch to a Six-Man rotation.   While Cahill and Gonzalez may not need the extra rest, the rest of staff can certainly use it.  It's not like we're in a pennant race and can't afford to take a start away from Cahill to give to Ross. A six helps build up the value of our number 6 pitcher, and makes it more likely we can trade him for a bat if the opportunity presents itself.  While this was once a radical idea, The Chicago White Sox and Kansas City Royals have gone to six-man rotations this year and had success.  We would do well to consider doing the same.  

 

[Edit] Hat tip to PDXAthleticsfan for pointing out Cahill's ERA is much better on 5 days of rest, as he is less prone to give up home runs.  Since last year his record is: 

4 days rest: 122.2 IP, 47 ER, 76:42 K:BB, 14 HR, 3.45 ERA

5 days rest: 64 IP, 12 ER, 35:17 K:BB, 2 HR, 1.69 ERA

That's right. Shut em' both down. I don't want to see either one of them starting a game until after the All Star break. Starters throw too many pitches, and I want to see them hold up for a few months before exposing them to that level of stress. And I certainly don't want to see either one of them in the bullpen, where the erratic schedule can really damage them. Instead I want to merge them into one pitcher named HarDuke.

 

HarDuke is a two armed monster. The Harden arm throws the first 5 innings of the game, and then the Duke are throws the next 4. For the following game they flip it, and the Duke arm gets the first 5 innings followed by 4 innings of Harden. The rest of the bullpen wouldn't even have to warm up that day unless the game goes into extra innings. No matter how well or how badly the game goes, HarDuke will be the only one touching the ball for the first 10 innings.

 

 

Some of you may remember this post from before, and it's needed now more than ever. We all can see that Duke and Harden are incredible when they're healthy, and we know how fragile they are. Doing the same old thing is not worth it, and it's time to try something new. A two bodied player may be ineligible to win a Cy Young Award, but if together they pitch well enough to win one the A's will be in great shape. Say goodbye to Harden & Duke, and say hello to HarDuke.

 

 

[Heretical notion. A year ago our pitching pipeline was empty and we needed Braden as a future starter. We therefore had to take away his screwball to ensure he stayed healthy. Now that we have loads of solid prospects, we can afford to put him in the bullpen and let him throw his screwball. Not to be harsh, but we can now afford the injury risk of getting a truly unique player. Would you rather have a mediocre 6th starter, or one of the best left-handed bullpen arms in the game. I don't know myself, but it's worth thinking about.]

Poll

Shall we give HarDuke a shot?

47%

Yes. We have nothing to lose.

31 votes

20%

No. It's a waste of innings, since Duke and Harden will stay healthy all year no matter how much they pitch.

13 votes

32%

Don't care. Take Harden and Duke out back and shoot them since they're dead to me.

21 votes

65 votes | Poll has closed

We have two great pitchers - Duke and Harden - with major injury concerns. The starting rotation will expose them to a high inning count - thereby increasing the risk of injury, while putting them in the bullpen will expose them to both more frequent and less regular outings - thereby increasing the risk of injury! It seems like a no win situation.

Poll

Should we unleash the Two-Headed Monster?

7%

Other

6 votes

48%

Yes

40 votes

30%

No

25 votes

8%

Both

7 votes

6%

Neither

5 votes

83 votes | Poll has closed

Continue reading this post »

It’s much too early for this and some of you may accuse me of jinxing him, but look how Barton started his career. Of his first 13 big league games, he got hits for 11 of them, and had walks on the other 2, which means he reached first base in each of his first 13 games. I realize that’s not even close to the record, but I wonder what the record is. How many games would Barton need in order to set this very special rookie record?

Continue reading this post »

You may laugh, but look at the stats. We're almost at the All Star break, and the A's starters have 3 of the top 6 ERAs in the American League! We're all used to thinking of Blanton as an above average innings eater, but he's once again shown sparks of the same brilliance he did the 2nd half of his rookie season, when he was one of the best pitchers in baseball.

Continue reading this post »

Gustavo Chacín Born: Dec  4, 1980 - Maracaibo, Venezuela
Joe Blanton       Born: Dec 11, 1980 - Nashville, TN

Year Team  G GS W  L SV CG    IP    H  R ER HR BB   K  ERA WHIP  BAA  
 2005 TOR 34 34 13 09  0  0 203.0 213 93 84 20 70 121 3.72 1.39 .274  
 2005 OAK 33 33 12 12  0  2 201.1 178 86 79 23 67 116 3.53 1.22 .236  

Joe Blanton and Gustavo Chacín were separated at birth - by one week. Look how similar their overall stats were last year. Innings pitched, Runs, homeruns, balls, strike - these guys were nearly identical in every way. You can't find two pitcher who were more similar last year, let alone two rookies. They each did well in the ROY voting. It would have been great if we had both these guys - it's nice to have another lefty - but each of them are great in their own way and I'm more than happy with Blanton.

It seems that last year Blanton gave up fewer hits, while this year Chacín is doing better in that regard. If you look at DIPS though, these guys have been quite similar so far, and I wonder which of them will be the better pitcher 10 years from now. In the meantime, "Go A's" and "Smoke em' Cupcakes!"

Why Frank Thomas should hit leadoff!

I realize this will sound sacrilege, but there's more than enough evidence to prove the point. Look at Frank's stats when there are no out and no men on base: .345/.424/.862/1.286. That is also when he hit all 5 of his home runs this year. [When he didn't have 0 on and 0 out he was .111/.211/.142/.354] Whatever the reason may be, if he's most likely to be productive as a leadoff hitter, we should give him that opportunity as often as possible.

Now many will say we can't do it because Frank will clog up the bases. First of all, a 424 OBP is worth the tradeoff of a slower runner. In the worst case, during close games we can replace him with a faster runner who can then takeover the leadoff spot. More importantly though is that Frank will be followed in the lineup by Chavy and Swish, who have 20 homers (and 14 doubles) between them. Having more men on base, no matter how slow they are, will only help in those situations. Also bear in mind that Frank does have runs. He's been on the bases before and found his way home.

Frank wants to prove that the White Sox made a mistake in replacing him with Thome, who is on pace to have the best year of his career. He certainly has the drive, and already has been useful in helping Swish reach his prime. I say it's time to put him in the place where he'll do us the most good. I realize the Joe Morgans of the world will laugh at us - a lumbering giant as a leadoff hitter? Well guess what? If that's where he has an OBP over 400 and hits homeruns over 15% of the time, I say we give it to him.

The one problem I see is that Chavy needs a mighty bat behind him to reach his prime. A simple solution is to have Swish hit behind Chavy. Here is Macha suitable (alternating lefties and righties) lineup:

Thomas
Chavez
Swisher
Bradley  
Crosby
Kotsay
Ellis
Johnson
Kendall

This diary wouldn't be complete with giving much thanks to compy75 for giving me this idea with his excellent diary on May 1st

Update:

Today's game has further proven the point. Look at Frank's new splits between 0 on, 0 out and otherwise:

0 on 0 out 30 AB .367 / .467/ .967 / 1.433 6 HR

Otherwise 66 AB .106 / .213/ .136 / .350 0 HR

His AVG is 3.46 times better, OBP is 2.19 times better, SLG is 7.11 times better, OPS is 4.09 times better, and homeruns are infinitely better.

I think there must be a mental block going on over here, and Frank should hit leadoff until he gets his groove back.

Two quick points.

1. Frank Thomas may not be hitting well, but he's sure helping the team. Swisher gave Frank credit for helping him with his swing, and there is no doubt that his presence is giving Chavy the protection he needs to truly thrive.
   
2. Loaiza may need Kendall's help. Maybe Melhuse should switch to Zito, who can use a change of pace.

But now for the main point of this post: What do you think has been the four biggest surprises so far this year?

Here are my picks:

1. Frank Thomas is on pace to hit over 35 homers, yet has a batting average under .200 and an OBP of less that .270.
   
2. Swisher is on pace to break the Roger Maris steroid free home run record, and Chavy is right behind him.
   
3. Ellis has an OPS  of less than .500.
   
4. Kennedy has been outstanding, and if he continues like this will get us another pair of draft picks to go with the pair Zito will be getting us.

If anyone has a different top 4, I'd love to hear it.

One of the tenets of Moneyball is to use your best reliever when the score is closest, regardless of which team has the lead. Fortunately our bullpen is stacked this year with quality arms. Sarloos should be a #5 starter, not simply a long-man/mop-up guy. Street has Duke and Kiko setting up for him, Witasick has been good so far and is locked up at bargain basement prices, and Kennedy has been much improved since he focused on just being a reliever - and he has loads of incentives since he's in his walk year. Since we have several pitchers who could in theory close a game, I say it's time we use Street only when the game is tied or one run apart, whether it is the 9th, 8th, or even 7th or 6th inning.

Since baseball is a game of attrition played with pitchers arms, and warming up for a game also wears down pitchers, we should try to use our relievers for more than one inning whenever possible. Use them for 1.5, 2, or even more if need be. We should also use statistical analysis to see which pitchers should relieve which starters. It seems to me that since Duke's best pitch is his curve ball, having him relieve Zito is a bad idea. Even though one's a righty and the other's a lefty, after seeing Zito's curve all game, Duke's won't be as hard to hit. That however is just my completely uninformed opinion, and it may be total crap - in addition to being wrong. We can however use statistics to figure out who should relieve for who against which batters.

So that is my big wishlist for this season.
1)I would love to see Street called out in the middle of the 6th inning when it is a tie game with runners on first and second. That's when we need him most, so let's see him really help the teams, and not simply rack up the meaningless stat known as "saves".
2)Let's see relievers pitch more outs per outing, and thereby prepare for and pitch in fewer games each season, even as their total innings stay the same, to help keep them fresh throughout the season.
3)Let's see if there's some consistency in who relieves for who, which would indicate that Frost and Billy gave Macha info on the best way to mess with batters by getting the optimal reliever for each starter. (Essentially I want to pair each reliever to a starter, with Street saved for super tight game, and having either Kennedy or Sarloos always available in case a starter needs to leave the game early or extra innings is called for.)

The 2006 draft will be painful for us. If only Dotel And Durazo held up, we could have had two as many as four draft picks before the second round, but instead we'll have to sit out the first round this year. The good news is that we may have a good draft in 2007. It looks like we'll be keeping Zito this year, and if Meyer/Brandon/Windsor pan out we may not have to resign him. That will give us two additional draft picks. We also have JayPay and Joe Kennedy, who will walk after this year. Neither one is earning big bucks, so if they each have a good year we would be able to safely offer them arbitration. I realize the primary goal is to win now, but if Macha ever has the chance, he should pad the stats on these two to make them more desirable. If we are ever up by 3 in the ninth inning and have three average lefties up at bat, let Kennedy get the save so he can put it on his resume. Each of these guys has the incentive to make this year count and thereby earn a good free agent package. I hope Macha gives these guys the opportunity to prove themselves. If we have 3 free agents leave us, we could have as many as SEVEN draft picks before the 2nd round. It would be the Moneyball draft all over again, but with the lessons learned. (For some reason Atlanta made an exception to their usual strategy and went after the college aged Meyer while we ignored him completely.) The last Moneyball draft gave us two solid ROY candidates in the first round. I hope in 2007 we do even better.

Considering how little we're paying him, I think most people here would be happy if Frank Thomas gives us a repeat of his 2004 performance: 74 games, 18 HR, 434 OPS and 563 SLG. There is a chance though that he may be like the Frank Thomas of old and give us 150 games and 40 HR. He'll be with a winning team, and have plenty of protection with DJ, Crosby, Bradley and Swish hitting behind him. In addition to wanting to reach 500 HR, he'll want to prove that his former team made a big mistake in letting him go. While only in our wildest dreams will we have this problem, what if Frank Thomas remains healthy and has an incredible year, and helps us win the World Series? It seems that in such a case we'd have to resign him, and give him the big raise he'd deserve. It also seems he'd want to come back and further cement his case for the HOF.

It would also create a problem of what to do with Barton. If DJ is doing great, we wouldn't want to bench him just to make room for  Barton, no matter how promising he may seem. (Look at how we didn't give DJ a shot - even during a rebuilding year - when Hatty seemed to be doing well.) Will Barton start playing catcher more so that he'll have more to provide the team? Will he start experimenting at 2nd base and be given more chances at left field? Will we make him spend an extra year at AAA so that he'll be older and more developed when we get the first six years of his career?

While we may not have this problem, everyone here at AN should be hoping we do. If DJ and Thomas each have a career year, then Barton's only shot of making the team would be as a catcher, left fielder, or backup infielder. Otherwise he'd have to age a bit before joining the Rockin A's.

From top to bottom we have one of the best (and very possibly The Best) pitching staffs in baseball. We also have great defense, with 3 center fielders in the OF, and a great infield as well. Combine both together and we won't be giving up too many runs this season.

Now's your chance to go down on the record for which AL team will give up the fewest runs this season. List the top five in order, and a soon enough we'll see who's right.

We have one of the most solid rotations out there as well as one of the best bullpens. This leads to two questions.

1. If money were no option, is there any other team you would want to switch pitching staffs with in 2006?
2. If yes, then taking total 2006 pitching salary into account, is there any other team you would want to switch pitching staffs with in 2006?

Harden
Zito
Haren-Loaiza-Blanton (You pick the order)

Saarloos  (Longman)
Kennedy  (Loogy)
Witasick-Calero-Duchscherer (Setup - you pick the order)
Street      (Closer)

Nico's rant reminded me of this great post I read a while ago on how to fix professional sports. I really like this idea and I added some side comments in brackets to make it clearer. What do you guys think, and do you have any ideas on how to improve it. We need to make it more effective and find a way to craft it so that as many of the parties involved would gain from it.

Here is the original idea
http://www.whynot.net/view_idea?id=476

In professional sports, as in all businesses, labor disputes are usually a zero-sum game. The players want as much money as possible, and the teams want to keep it for themselves. Any rule that the league tries to institute to encourage fiscal discipline is bound to face fierce resistance from the players union. The current salary cap for each team is a prime example. Teams want to spend as little as possible on players salaries, and want penalties to help them restrain themselves, while players want teams to be free to spend as much as possible. The key is to find a rule that will increase most players' salaries, even as it lowers teams' payrolls. In other words, lower the mean salary even as you raise the median salary. While that may seem impossible, the great disparity in salary between the highest paid athletes and those who receive the league minimum gives room to maneuver.

[The mean salary is the sum of the salaries paid to all players divided by the number of players. The median salary is the amount paid to the player who has the same number of players getting paid more than him than he has players getting paid less than him. For example, if the A's 2005 payroll is $55,425,762  for 26 players, than the mean salary is $1,385,644.05. For the median salary, there are two players in the middle, Juan Cruz $ 600,000 and Keith Ginter received $583,333, giving the A's a median salary of $591,667. Our mean salary is twice our median salary. If in theory we could increase the median salary and cut the mean salary most players and the team would end up with more money. For all of baseball, the median salary is about $800,000 and the mean salary is more than 3 times that at about $2.5 million.]

An elegant solution is to institute a team player salary minimum. Each player on a team must be paid a minimum percentage of the team's total payroll. The salaries of the superstars would diminish, as the cost of acquiring them would include the added expense of increasing everyone else's salary on the team. Meanwhile, the players lower down on the totem pole would all see an increase in salary. It is clear this would increase the salary of far more players than it diminishes, thereby increasing the median salary and insuring the support of the players union.

It may also quite possibly save teams money. There would be far fewer bidding wars over superstars, since the cost of acquiring them would much greater. Instead, there would be more competition for the slightly better than average players, which is a more efficient market [as there are far more to choose from], and one in which teams are less likely to vastly overpay. While the salaries of the top players would drop drastically, the salaries of the average players wouldn't rise that much. If the proper minimum percentage per player were chosen, it may be possible to lower payroll expenses overall.

[Something would need to be done for those getting paid minimum wage. Perhaps the increase in salary they would get because of the new rule would be put into a fund that would be distributed as bonuses to all receiving the minimum wage, so that rookies for a low salary team wouldn't be much worse off than rookies for a high salary team. Of course a rookie could always negotiate an immediate raise in salary to the team's minimum in return for signing away his arbitration years.]

Even if the numbers don't work out for this particular plan, the general strategy of limiting the top salaries by a mechanism that explicitly raises the salaries of the more numerous lower rung players is bound to be a winning one. For example, a penalty tax can be levied on the portion of all salaries that is above the 85th percentile, with the proceeds distributed among all players in the bottom 60%. Such a rule would increase the salaries of more players than it diminishes, even as it lowers overall team spending.

[I like this 85 - 60 rule more than the previous one. It only hurts 15% of players and it helps 60% of players. You could even make it 90 - 70. It would only affect that portion of the salary which is above the salary of the 90th percentile. I can't find a single complete and sorted list of every player's salary, but the first $8-10 million or so would probably face no penalty whatsoever. I also like that there's a penalty for every super highly paid player which is distributed to every average to low paid player, even those who are on another team. The team owners would gain from this and 70% of players would get a raise from it. 20% would not be affected at all, and the final 10% would only face pressure to reduce that part of their salary which is above $10 M or so.]

I hate to ask non-Oakland questions in a new diary, especially on a game day, but this has been bothering me for a while.

A) Where can I get the stats for each pitcher classified by pitch. For example, how many pitches did Z throw this year? How many were curve balls, how many were sliders, who many were a two seamer etc? For each type of pitch, how many were called strikes, how many were hit foul, how many were swung at and missed? Of those hit into fair territory, how many were ground balls, and how many were fly balls. For each of those, how many led to a base hit and how many led to an out. I have no doubt BB and staff have these stats available to them, and Kendall obviously uses them to help decide which pitches to call. Are there any websites that make that info available to the fans?

A) Shouldn't a hit batter count as a walk? If a pitcher hits a batter, it's the same result as if he walked him, and both even occur as a result of wild pitches. Now there are some minor differences. a) Instead of four "bad" pitches, this is one "dreadful" pitch. b) The batter may get hurt. c) The other team may retaliate and hit your batters. d) Someone may get ejected. e) You are not allowed to do it intentionally. And so on. However, a pitcher who hits a lot of batters is like a pitcher who walks a lot of batters, and a hitter who can get hit is like a batter who can draw walks. Why differentiate between them, when the alternative of treating it as if nothing happened is so much worse. If a pitcher hits a batter it should not count as a perfect game.

C)Will we offer compensation to D & D? If they accept, how much would we have to pay? Would anyone else want to sign them away from us? Interesting how we have $10 Million flushed down the toilet due to injuries, only to have the new rookies have monster years that match or even exceed what we wanted from our veterans. The lack of compensation picks though bothers me, especially as other teams start to see the wisdom of drafting college kids and fewer of the good ones reach the latter rounds.

I realize the questions have nothing to do which other, but I thought it best to make it one diary and limit the space they take up. Any answers to these questions would be most appreciated. Thanks.

Athletics closer Octavio Dotel will have reconstructive elbow surgery as soon as possible, despite receiving recommendations from four doctors that he try to rehabilitate the injury first. - http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-athletics-dotelsurgery&prov=ap&type=lgns

What I want to know is the following. If we are paying Dotel's salary, why is he allowed to ignore medical adviceand go for surgery hat will end his season? Shouldn't that void his contract? From what I understand, we still have to pay him.

What will be his status next year. Will he be automatically on our staff? Could we trade him - not that anyone would want him.

It's not even at the All-Star break of his rookie year, and look what he's done.

1. He's the regular closer for his team
   
2. ERA under  2.0
   
3. BAA under .200
   
4. More strikeouts than hits plus walks
   
5. Has yet to give up a single Home Run

Almost every team in the league must be kicking themselves for not picking him in the first round. A sandwich pick one year, and leading the ROY race by a mile the next year. Like all good breaks though, it comes with a touch of bad news. The first is more teams will be drafting college pitchers, even relievers, to try to replicate our success. I say let them try, we'll just have to stay further ahead. I'd rather people learn from our successes than from our failures. The second touch of bad news is that a ROY will cost us big time when it comes to contract extension time. I'm sure Crosby's agent got him a whole lotta extra dough because of the ROY award, and no doubt Street's agent will do the same. Again, a small price to pay, and Street richly deserves it.

 

Poll

Will Street win ROY

83%

Yes

60 votes

16%

No

12 votes

72 votes | Poll has closed

So far are on track to lose 4 more games than Ratto said we would. The question is what should we do now? There are several things that come to mind.

1. Send down Charles Thomas and let him get some playing time. He's shown some potential last year, which is why we traded for him, and we can have him for a long time. Give him some regular playing time in AAA until he gets his stroke back, and only then bring him up.
   
2. Ditto with Keith Ginter. As soon as Crosby comes back and we have the option, let Ginter get everyday playing time in AAA until he's hot again.

Just because somehow can't hit with no playing time doesn't mean they've lost it forever.

3. Move Chavez down in the lineup until he hits well regularly. Maybe this will increase the pressure on him, maybe it will decrease it. Either way, a shake up is definitely called for.
   
4. Sign the Duke to a long-term contract, and give him a lot more playing time. Ditto with Street. It'll show everyone that good performance will be rewarded.

Now none of the ideas are particularly great, and I didn't want to do anything drastic like a trade, but that is probably what we really need. Is Cruz purposely messing up in order to get traded to a team where he'll have a shot as a starting pitcher? Who knows - but we definitely need a way to get him to focus.

Poll

What should we do about poor Thomas?

4%

Force Macha to play him regulary in the same position

1 votes

4%

None of the above

1 votes

0%

Trade him

0 votes

4%

Keep him where he is

1 votes

4%

Injure him and get him on the DL

1 votes

75%

Send him to AAA and let him prove himself

18 votes

8%

Poison his coffee

2 votes

24 votes | Poll has closed

We are on schedule to lose more than 100 games. Ratto said we'd win 60 games; right now we should be so lucky, since we're on pace to win 57. I say it's the double curse: http://www.athleticsnation.com/story/2005/5/27/15539/7276 - but whatever it is, it will take a miracle to break even this year. If anyone has an ideas of what to do now, I'd love to hear it.

Only three A's have even been paid more than $10 Million a year.

Jermaine Dye was the first, and was paid (on average) more than $10 Million a year for 3 years. Sure enough, he was average to terrible for those three years. Not once was he worth $5 Million a year, let alone the $10 Million he received.

At first I though it was a simple mistake, and best to let it slide. This year though we are paying two more players over $10 Million a year (on average). And sure enough, each of them are now playing at a level where we wouldn't have paid them $5 Million a year. Kendall moves to the A's and suddenly can't connect with the ball. Chavez suddenly gets the salary he seemingly deserved his entire career and returns the favor with his worst season ever.

It may be that as a small market team we have to scrap and claw. We needs lots of hungry players all tying to make it. Being a highly paid player when your teammates are all underpaid messes up the chemistry. It just doesn't feel right, and it lets itself out on the field.

Anyway, that's my theory. I wonder what other theories you guys have. It may just be bad luck. Hopefully this so-called curse will end ASAP. But you have to admit, this is the fourth and fifth time we've paid more than $10 Million a season and so far we've regretted all five of them. That's even worse than our Game 7 record in the first round of the playoffs. Either it's just bad luck, just something else, or a bit of both. The question is, what is that something else. I gave you my first attempt at a theory. I see some flaws in it, but it's a start. Please give me some more. I'd love to hear them.

1. I see the"Rotto watch" of how many wins we need to reach 60 has been taken down. The reason why is if we lose the next game we'll be 14-24, which gives a 36.85% winning percentage, on track to a 60-102 record. Ouch! The more honest of us must be somewhat chastised. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and so far Rotto has been correct. Give the man his moment -especially since it won't last. Kendall and Chavez will be coming around - though moving them down in the order for a week may be a good idea. Look what benching Miggy for a day did years ago. The best part of a slap on the wrist is that when it's over, they can start again afresh. In their mind they can differentiate between pre-demotion and post-demotion.
2. Our Double-Dees will be having Huge years as well, since this is their walk years and they need to prove their value. Of course we need them to prove it as well, otherwise we can't offer arbitration and get 4 draft picks for them. (Does anyone think there's a chance we offer arbitration to Rincon? 6 draft picks would be great around now).
3. Personally, I see some upside in Baseball thinking Billy lost out on both his big trades this year. It'll make it easier to get others to trade with him. Imagine if Haren pitched better than Mulder this year, and Meyer went straight into the Big Leagues with as good a rookie season as Hudson had. Would anyone trade with us ever again? Five years from now we'll see if these trades paid off. I still think they will.
4.  Imagine if we still had Boderman - him and Harden on the same team. Wow. What I don't get is that we got Lilly in return for a "player to be named". Couldn't we have named someone other than a round one draft pick? It seems to me we could have protected him and given up someone else. If we had, we'd really be sitting pretty now - at least as far as young pitchers are concerned. If anyone ever investigated this area please let me know.
5. It's been a while since I read Moneyball, but was Meyer on the Moneyball 2002 wish list? He was a college player drafted in the first round by Atlanta - which usually prefers high schoolers. Maybe if/when he works out he'll get an honorable mention in the new book.
6. Speaking of Moneyball, it seems that many sportswriter just don't get it - http://www.slate.com/id/2118325/  - which isn't exactly newsworthy, but hey, nice to see others noticed as well.

What is more surpising about Swish?  That he is leading the team in Home Runs, RBIs and Runs?  Or that he has only walked once this season? (While striking out a dozen times!?) Did Crosby tell him not to make the same rookie mistake he did and not go for a HR every at bat? If not, he better do so soon, and Swish better listen - one son of a big leaguer to another.

Anyhoo, here's you chance for a big "I told you so!" How many Home Runs will Swisher get this season? Please post exact numbers in the comments sections for bragging rights.

Poll

How many Bombs for Swisher this season?

20%

16 - 20

26 votes

0%

41 - 50

1 votes

44%

21 - 25

56 votes

1%

over 50

2 votes

22%

26 - 30

28 votes

1%

None of the above (There should be a rule that every poll include one of these, even when it doesn't make sense, so I'm starting the trend right now.)

2 votes

1%

Less than 10

2 votes

1%

31 - 35

2 votes

2%

10 - 15

3 votes

2%

36 - 40

3 votes

125 votes | Poll has closed

I saw too many posts attacking Zito, and felt the need to make this defense of him a toppost. There is more to say on this topic, and I hope others will join me.

Think of Zito as an average pitcher - With great potential! Everyone once in while he pitches like a Cy Young winner. Sometimes he can do it for a whole year! He tends to do it in the playoffs, which is great for us. We have enough good pitching that we can afford to have an average pitcher who can sometimes be a number one or two ace. Zito is more valuable to us than to other teams who don't have a number one ace, and so would want to make sure that if they shell out for one they'll be getting a sure thing. Great upside and being average in the worst case is pretty much the A's aquisition strategy. The Big Z fits right in. If another team had him, Billy would be bidding on him now that his value is so low.

Poll

Of the Big 3, Why did Billy keep the Big Z?

6%

Youngest - more likely to still reach his peak years - like Sandy Koufax did

3 votes

2%

Personal reasons - Billy just likes him and his music

1 votes

40%

Least valuable on the market - Huddy and Mulder were overvalued, Zito was undervalued, so Billy didn't receive the right price for him

19 votes

6%

Who cares - it was a mistake and Billy should dump him

3 votes

0%

Most unique - Lefty curveballers are not too common and you want your pitchers to differ from each other

0 votes

14%

Greatest upside - best curveball in baseball and a Cy Young award. You never know when he'll regain his old form.

7 votes

6%

Does better later in the season - shows he still has a young arm

3 votes

21%

Highest downside - never been injured and forced us to hire a substitute, and in the worse case pitches average - with average starting pitching quite valuable these days

10 votes

2%

Does great in the playoffs - the one time you really need starting pitching.

1 votes

47 votes | Poll has closed

I realize it's way too early in the season to look at stats, but so far Swisher is hitting a homerun every nine at bats and yet has not gotten a single walk all season. An absurd situation that won't obviously last. Anybody want to venture a guess at what his stats will be at the end of the season?

The 2ndpoint of this post is to give a great link about the limits of how fast a pitcher can throw. http://fray.slate.msn.com/id/2116402/nav/ais/ If only Steve Dalkowski was trained by the Oakland pitching staff. You wonder what his changeup  must have been like.

Look at this poll from last month. http://www.athleticsnation.com/story/2005/2/20/102852/447#commenttop
Out of 70 votes, only 12 said Tyler "Gets returned to the Cards before the start of the season." Now I admit I got this one wrong as well.

I think it is time for another poll though. Hopefully this time we'll do better. Be sure to post in the comments section if you want to have bragging rights for getting right.

Poll

Who will be the first pitcher we trade this Season.

23%

Etherton

33 votes

4%

None of the above - but we'll trade someone else. (Please post the name)

6 votes

0%

Calero

1 votes

10%

We don't trade any pitchers till after the season.

14 votes

46%

Dotel

64 votes

3%

Rincon

5 votes

5%

Bradford

7 votes

1%

The Big Z

2 votes

4%

Saarloos

6 votes

0%

One of the Little 3.

0 votes

138 votes | Poll has closed

My guess is that we keep Dotel and Durazo till the end of the year, offer them arbitration, and pick up four draft picks when they sign elsewhere. Thankfully we have guys in the wings ready to take their place. Does anyone think there is a chance we pick up someone in their walk-year mid-season in the hope of getting even more 2006 draft picks?

I am disappointed that we only have one first round pick and one supplemental pick in the 2005 draft. Considering the payoffs we've gotten from first round and supplemental picks in recent years (Crosby, Blanton, Street), we should have done more to get some more goodies this coming season.

For those of you who missed it here is the classic baseball routine remade for the age of steroids.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/20/opinion/20cammuso.html?

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Name That Steroid
By FRANK CAMMUSO

Published: March 20, 2005

Syracuse -- AT the Congressional hearings last week on steroid use in baseball, the star witnesses refused to name names. It's just as well - if they had, it could have been very confusing.

SENATOR Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank the witness for agreeing to testify today. Though I don't follow baseball closely, I consider the issue of illicit substances to be of critical importance in American sports. I have one question for the witness: Sir, will you tell us names of players that use these substances?

PLAYER Yes, sir. I can tell you Who is on steroids.

SENATOR Good. Then who is on steroids?

PLAYER That's correct.

SENATOR I want the player's name.

PLAYER Who.

SENATOR The player on steroids.

PLAYER Who.

SENATOR I'm asking you who's on steroids?

PLAYER Who.

SENATOR The guy on steroids is who?

PLAYER Correct.

SENATOR I warn you, sir, not to make a mockery of this hearing. You are under oath. What is the name of the player on steroids?

PLAYER: No, sir. What is on androgen.

SENATOR I'm not asking who's on androgen!

PLAYER Who's on steroids.

SENATOR I don't know!

PLAYER He's on Oxandrin.

SENATOR Who?

PLAYER I Don't Know.

SENATOR Who is on Oxandrin?

PLAYER No, sir. Who is on steroids.

SENATOR That does it. I have had enough. You, sir, are stonewalling!

PLAYER No, sir. He's up next.

Frank Cammuso is the editorial cartoonist for The Syracuse Post-Standard.

BB - http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpa2lpNnFzBF9TAzk1ODYxNzc3BHNlYwN0bQ--?slug=knight-hyper activeasviewchangeas&prov=knight&type=lgns

Kendall - http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpa2lpNnFzBF9TAzk1ODYxNzc3BHNlYwN0bQ--?slug=knight-kenda lllooksforwardtofres&prov=knight&type=lgns

Nice to see Chavy was confident in this BB article and didn't predict we come in 3rd or 4th place in the ALW again (that's last or second to last for you newbies) like he did last time in http://www.athleticsnation.com/story/2005/2/20/105724/236

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=knight-itsgetacquaintedtimeasnew&prov=knight&type=lgns

But for the first time since 1998, the A's aren't considered among the American League West front-runners.

"We shouldn't be," Chavez said. "Anaheim should, without a doubt. They've got pretty much the best player in the league in Vlad (Vladimir Guerrero) and one of the best hitters in the league in Garret Anderson. They've got a really good team over there. It's going to be tough, but we've been able to compete with the New Yorks and Bostons the last four years pretty consistently. Our expectations aren't low, but in the baseball world you've got to look at things realistically, and on paper we're probably third or fourth in our division. We're definitely going to have an uphill battle."

Shortstop Bobby Crosby said, "It's going to be a different situation for some of these guys. I think a lot of young guys are going to have to step up and be leaders. I don't think we have the liberty of having some of the older guys always leading the team. We're going to rely on Chavy to lead, but I think some of the younger guys have to step up and have a take-charge mentality."

I think Chavy likes playing the underdog, sort of like the Red Sox did last year. I recall him saying along the lines of "Anaheim is the best team is baseball" last year as well, and it didn't seem to help. Maybe BB should get him a statistics tutor, and teach him about the grand plan. Otherwise, give him a book on positive thinking.

Here's yet another say nothing article about spring training. http://athletics.scout.com/2/353491.html Some of you may like it though, especially the part about the A's minor league affiliates looking to hire part time employees to fill positions in areas ranging from concessions to ticket sales to promotions.

The point of this post though is to take a poll. What will happen to Tyler Johnson? Be the first to correctly predict and get yourself "I told you so" rights.

Poll

What will happen to Tyler Johnson?

47%

We buy his rights from the Cards (perhaps by sending them someone else).

34 votes

16%

Gets returned to the Cards before the start of the season.

12 votes

4%

We trade him to another team (I think we can do that, though the new team would then have the 25-man roster problem.)

3 votes

2%

Gets returned to the Cards midway through the season and never plays a game for us.

2 votes

4%

Stays on the 25-man roster all year but doesn't play a game for us.

3 votes

23%

Stays on the 25-man roster all year and plays for us this year.

17 votes

71 votes | Poll has closed