SB Nation User Blog: PaulThomas

Comparative Advantage: A Collaborative A's/Rays Solution

PaulThomas — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:56:55 -0000

Comparative Advantage: A Collaborative A's/Rays Solution

Hello all. I've written a fanpost discussing possible trade solutions for the A's and Rays, leveraging the fact that the Rays have infielders and starting pitchers while the A's have catchers and bullpen pitchers aplenty. I'd like to hear both sides of the issue, though, not just A's fans. Are my proposals logical? Too favorable to one team or the other? I think this could be a great discussion, but I need your help to make it so.

Comparative Advantage: A Collaborative A's/Rays Solution

PaulThomas — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:23:37 -0000

I've been paying close attention to trades for a few years now. And I have to say, rarely if ever have I seen a better match than the Rays and the A's right now. Each team has areas of significant strength and significant weakness. With the exception of outfielders, each team's strength happens to BE the other team's weakness. And both have a number of tradable assets unencumbered by bloated salaries or impending free agency. They really need to get together and make a deal, and I'm here to tell you have.

Warning: This is really long. I tend toward the verbose at the best of times, and the rambling at the worst. If you want the quick and dirty, skip down to the two bolded trade proposals at the bottom of the post.

Point The First: The Rays Have Too Many Infielders

Here are the triple-slash lines and WAR figures posted by the Rays' starting infielders in the 2009 season.

Jason Bartlett: .320/.389/.490; 4.8 WAR

Ben Zobrist: .297/.405/.543; 8.5 WAR

Evan Longoria: .281/.364/.526; 7.3 WAR

Carlos Pena: .227/.356/.537; 2.7 WAR

It's hard to argue that this was not the best infield in baseball in 2009. The Yankees were pretty good, but the Rays fielded the single-year equivalent of 2 Hall of Famers, another All-Star, and an average starter for a playoff team. That's insane. These men are not losing their jobs, regression to the mean be damned.

That said, the Rays also currently have three backups available:

Sean Rodriguez

Willy Aybar

Reid Brignac

Akinori Iwamura has already been dumped. I wasn't a fan of that trade at all-- they seem to have panicked and feared being stuck with him through the start of next season. I can't imagine how that could have happened-- he's basically an average starter signed to a contract that pays him like a backup or fringe starter. Someone would have absorbed it. But it's all water under the bridge now.

Rodriguez is a quality prospect acquired from the Angels in the Scott Kazmir trade. The A's seem to like him, and were rumored to be considering a swap which would have sent Michael Wuertz to the Angels for him, although like all trade rumors, it's unclear how much credence we should put in that. While he's struggled badly in his MLB time so far, he's posted solid walk rates throughout his career in the minors, posted the usual ridiculous power numbers for an Angels prospect (if chicks really do dig the longball, the Salt Lake Bees' home park must be quite the dating opportunity) and appears to be able to handle several infield positions competently.

Aybar is a backup/platoon infielder. He's poor against lefthanded pitching and average at defense at 2B and 3B, so he's not well suited to be a starter. He won't be discussed further here; I'm assuming he will be kept on the Rays bench as the sixth infielder.

Reid Brignac is another former top prospect, and like Rodriguez he's struggled in very limited MLB time. He's still young (2010 will represent his age 24 season), has shown decent pop in the minors (career minor league isolated power of .167; hit 24 home runs in 2006) and is viewed as having a strong glove by most scouts and by TotalZone. Unlike Rodriguez, however, he lacks patience at the plate.

As things stand, the Rays will almost certainly be forced to send one of Rodriguez and Brignac to the minors. This seems suboptimal, as one of them will probably be playing a role sooner rather than later and both are essentially big-league ready. Instead, Tampa should look to move one of their infielders to address other weak spots on the roster.

Point The Second: The Rays' Catching Situation, By And Large, Sucks

Let's start with the general and move to the specific here. The 2009 Rays offense was very strong overall-- indeed, it set a team record for runs scored. It was, however, marred by two severe weak points. One of those was center field, manned by former wunderkind B.J. Upton. This is not the time or place to attempt an explanation of his troubles; let's just say that given his age and defensive acumen, he's on a sufficiently long leash that the Rays are likely not looking to upgrade center field. The other black hole was at catcher.

Even by the rather feeble standards of catcher offense, the Rays were horrible. Their catchers put up a combined .233/.276/.349 line, good for an sOPS+ of 74 (indicating that they were 26/2=13% worse than an average team at that position). Rays catchers were good for all of 0.8 WAR on the season, or almost a win and a half below average. The primary culprit was also the primary starter, Dioner Navarro, who followed up an uncharacteristically good 2008 with a genuinely horrible season. In just less than three full seasons' worth of PA, he has racked up an offensive value of -45.9 runs by Fangraphs. This is not that terrible-- as mentioned, catchers are awful offensively and the positional value of 12.5 runs largely cancels it out. Still, expecting even league-average play out of Navarro next season seems very optimistic.

The gaggle of backup catchers in the system are even less awe-inspiring. Michel Hernandez served as the primary backup in 2009, but he's 30 years old and hasn't even lost his rookie status yet. As far as I can tell, he's been released. Gregg Zaun could still end up taking arbitration, though his option was declined; his numbers are actually quasi-respectable, but he's approximately 60 years old and clearly not a long-term solution. Shawn Riggans barely played in 2009 and was horrible when he did; his career MLB wOBA is .274, and while that's a small sample, he's turning 30 next year and there's little reason to expect improvement. John Jaso, the last real internal option, has great plate discipline but is dogged by persistent questions about his defensive abilities and suffered a major power outage in 2009. The fact that he wasn't even called up to the big leagues once in 2009 is an implied vote of no confidence from Rays brass.

There's little help available on the free agent market. Tampa can likely find some more Riggins types by dumpster-diving (hello, Eliezer Alfonso-- how's it hangin'?) but that's about all that's out there. Jason Varitek is probably the best MLB free agent catcher, which is amazing. There's nothing there; if they want a chance to improve, it'll be by trade.

Enter Oakland, which has a surplus of catching talent right now. The MLB job is safely in the hands of Kurt Suzuki, who rarely sits and racks up value through playing time and defense while being passable with the bat. The A's also have three additional catchers at or near the major-league level and under team control, however-- Landon Powell, Josh Donaldson and Anthony Recker. Powell has had a ton of health problems and while he'd be a pretty solid candidate for a starter's job without them, that's water under the bridge at this point. Recker profiles more like Jaso, with more power and less plate discipline. He's a solid candidate for a team's second or third catcher, but it's a stretch to see him starting for anyone other than a team desperate for a warm body not named Rod Barajas.

The key to the whole situation is Josh Donaldson, who has put up some weird numbers in the minors (especially a walk rate which has fluctuated from amazing to actually below average) but, overall, a very strong hitting line since being drafted in the first round in 2007. He's still young for a catcher, turning 24 in a few months, and while his defense is not fabulous (Pravda claims some improvement in his skills, but those articles have to be read as carefully as Livy to figure out the grains of truth in them), he should hit legitimately at the major league level, something that any team has to hope for out of their catcher spot.

Donaldson would instantly become the best catcher in the Rays' system not named Navarro. In the best case scenario, in which Navarro hits like 2008 and a re-signed Zaun miraculously holds off demon Age for another season, he polishes his skills in AAA prior to a September callup. In the worst case scenario, Zaun falls apart, Navarro hits like it's... well, not 2008, and Donaldson is starting in the bigs by June. Navarro is nontendered that offseason and Donaldson takes the reins for the foreseeable future.

Point the Third: Oakland Lives, Breathes and Excretes Bullpen Pitchers

Here's something like what the current depth chart for Oakland's bullpen looks like.

RHP:

Michael Wuertz

Sam Demel

LHP:

For the most part, this excludes starting pitchers. Eveland could theoretically get a starting job, but it's hard to see how at this point.

In any event, this is insane. There are 13 guys at Oakland or Sacramento who could be average or better relief pitchers. This is despite the subtraction of two significant prospects, Daniel Thomas and Andrew Carignan, to shoulder issues; despite the subtraction of 2008 mainstay Andrew Brown to the same (Tangent: anyone heard any news on whether he's managed to make a recovery? I loved that guy... he was such an odd character...); and not counting several intriguing pitchers lower down in the system like Mickey Storey and Paul Smyth.

[Tangent: Notice the origins of these guys? Santiago Casilla and Henry Rodriguez were signed as low-profile international free agents. Eveland was a peripheral piece of a major trade. Wuertz was acquired for two organizational players. Blevins was acquired for half a season of Jason Kendall. Devine was picked up for one season of Mark Kotsay. Meloan and Breslow were acquired for bupkis-- they were waiver claims. Brad Ziegler was signed as a minor league free agent. Then there are the draftees: Demel (3rd round), Bailey (6th round), Kilby (29th round), and Jeff Gray (32nd round).

The sum total of the resources the A's spent on this incredible collection of bullpen talent was four mid-to-late round picks, two C- prospects, and the corpses of two formerly good major leaguers. This is an object lesson in why it is never, ever, ever acceptable to expend a first-round draft pick on a relief pitcher. Ever. Or sign a Type A free agent relief pitcher.]

[Tangent to the tangent: What would happen if teams actually took this to heart? Type A relievers would virtually be forced to take arbitration if a team offered it-- indeed, that may already be the case in practice for anyone but the creme de la creme. It certainly presents an odd scenario. I'll be watching that situation with alert interest this offseason.]

Bottom line: The A's can afford to part with 3 or 4 of these pitchers without any real hesitation. That still leaves more than enough depth to withstand injuries. The team will probably trawl the minor league free agent list again this offseason to find one or two more guys worthy of a shot, and if a major crisis hits they might be turned to. Otherwise, even a denuded bullpen will be sufficient.

The Rays do not enjoy the same situation. Or, really, anything close to it. For whatever reason, their otherwise crack GM team has not succeeded in consistently putting together a good bullpen. It was briefly decent in 2008, but that was on the back of journeyman Grant Balfour, whose season that year now looks like an all-time fluke. He's still under team control in 2009, but might not even be tendered a contract. The only genuinely good reliever the Rays have at the major league level is J.P. Howell. Dan Wheeler has a spot because he's a sunk cost, but it confounds me that a team with the Rays' financial limitations gave a $10M contract to a mediocre relief pitcher. Randy Choate is decent and probably fills the second lefty spot.

Is there any help in Durham? The Bulls were an excellent minor league team this season, losing the AAA championship game to the Memphis Redbirds (who unseated the RiverCats from the PCL throne in a three-game sweep). Not much there, though. Winston Abreu had a great season, but he's 32 and hasn't stuck in the bigs in three tries despite consistently shredding AAA lineups. Like most of the Rays bullpen, he's incredibly prone to the gopherball.

As a result, the Rays need at least one and probably two good right-handed relief pitchers if they intend to compete in 2010 (as they should). They have two choices. One is to convert one of their excellent starting pitching prospects to the bullpen. The other is to make a trade.

Here's the thing, though-- starters are worth more than relievers. Way more. Converting starting pitching prospects to the pen is a wasteful process. The Rays can obtain surplus value by dealing one of those starters to a team with a surplus of good relief pitchers-- and coincidentally enough (OK, not coincidentally at all) the A's are exactly such a team. The A's need to concentrate value. The Rays actually need to spread it out, or at least move it from one part of the roster to the other. We've got a tailor-made trade situation here.

Point the Fourth: Putting the Pieces Together

Warning: The following requires large amounts of half-assed guesswork and projection based on minimal data samples. If this offends you, please stop reading, or at least skip to the end so you can tell me how obviously unfair this trade is to the [A's/Rays].

Donaldson

Let's take Josh Donaldson first, as he's the one guy we know is moving. The MLE for his performance this year was a line of .209/.291/.324. That looks really terrible, but it's deceptive. One wouldn't expect a 23-year-old to particularly dominate the minors. Also, it's based on a BABIP of .249, which seems comically low even for a catcher. It should be reasonable to predict improvement from that mark over the next few seasons.

The MLE line would be in the neighborhood of 20 runs below average over 120 games' worth of play. Over the same period he would accrue about 23 runs in positional value and playing-time value. That would make him worth about 0.3 WAR this season. He's a bit of an iffy defender, though, so let's call him exactly replacement level this season.

I'm going to project steady improvement over the next three seasons, though. Partly because it's easy and partly because it represents the center of a probability distribution ranging from "no improvement at all" to "breakout to star-level offense." Let's assume he picks up about 6 runs a season per year for the next three years, and that he plays only half a season next year (60 games). Let's also assume he starts declining in his age 30 season at half the rate that he ascended at. His value then looks like this:

0.3+1.2+1.8+1.8+1.8+1.8+1.5=10.2 WAR

Rodriguez

Sean Rodriguez had a rather excellent season in AAA this year, posting an MLE line of .236/.325/.452. He has also, however, struggled terribly in the majors so far in his young career. It's nothing that can't be overcome (a mere 216 plate appearances) but in those PAs he's put up the ugly line of .203/.276/.333, coincidentally rather similar to Donaldson's MLE from this year. That being said, it has to be leavened with the AAA numbers. Right now, if Rodriguez were to step into a lineup and play everyday, I'd peg him for around a .700 OPS. While he's slightly older than Donaldson, he should also improve steadily over the next few seasons. His bat probably has a bit more upside in it, so I'll call his improvement 8 runs a season until his age 26 season.

We have only tiny samples of major league play to go on when it comes to defense for Rodriguez. Some TotalZone has tended to characterize him as about an average infielder in the minors, oddly varying not a jot from position to position. Let's call him an average second baseman, as that weighs his apparent decency at shortstop against the fact that average in AAA is probably below average in the majors. What value does all of this give us?

Right now, he would be roughly 10 runs below average with the stick, with a +2.5 position/defense adjustment and 20-ish replacement runs for a WAR of about 1.3. Measuring that out (I won't bother declining him at age 30, as infielders tend to last longer than catchers):

1.3+2.1+2.9+2.9+2.9+2.9=15 WAR

Hm. Pretty valuable. More so than Donaldson. If he's the return piece, we'll need the other half of the trade to make up some ground.

Brignac

You can really see the difference in MLEs between the International League and the Texas League here, as Brignac comes in ahead of Donaldson in MLE (.245/.281/.354) despite posting a significantly worse in-season hitting line. Disappointingly, however, his line has basically stagnated since he was 20. This stagnation has been matched with a stagnation in his prospect stock, as he's failed to improve while other top prospects have passed him by. I'm a bit surprised to see he only received a grade of C+ from John Sickels last season.

What can we project from him moving forward? He doesn't have fantastic hitting skills; his plate discipline leaves a lot to be desired and his power production has, like the rest of his offensive game, seemingly stalled. Right now, he would hit at about 20 runs below average. I'm going to project an improvement of 3 runs a season to age 27.

On defense, it's a different story. TotalZone pretty much thinks he's the bee's vertebrae, if not quite knees-- he scored poorly this year but very well in every prior year. I'm fairly comfortable penciling him in as an above-average MLB shortstop. Let's say 2.5 RAA so that it plus the positional adjustment makes him 10 RAA as a fielder. Add in 20 replacement runs, and right now he'd be worth about 1 WAR. Again, I'm going to project a half-season from him next year and then six years beyond that.

0.5+1.3+1.6+1.9+1.9+1.9+1.9=11 WAR

Seemingly a little better than Donaldson, but in the ballpark where a swap of the two is likely to benefit both teams.

Relievers

Thankfully, we don't have to get into the heavy-duty (and heavy-handed) guesswork here. Most of these guys have actual track records.

The Elite

Bailey: Nasty 2.56 FIP this season led him to accumulate 2.4 WAR. Assuming some regression to the mean, he's probably good for at least 1.5 for the next 5 seasons. Of course, he's a pitcher, so we'd better mark in some discount for injury risk (especially since he already has one round of Tommy John on his CV). Call it 1.2, then, implying that he's worth about 6 WAR overall.

Wuertz: Even nastier 2.37 FIP this season, though he's not been as good in prior years. Probably about as good as Bailey going forward, since the personal "mean" that he's regressing to looks a lot like the league mean that Bailey is regressing to, but he's only under contract for 2 more (relatively expensive) seasons. Worth about 2.4 WAR, but they're less efficient than the other prospects'.

The Very Good

Ziegler: FIP doesn't really do Brad Ziegler enough credit because of his insanely high ground ball rate. His home run rate is tiny, of course, but they also get him out of a lot of jams through double plays. In his first two seasons, one a partial year, he's assembled 2.1 WAR. After we discount for injury risk (which might be lower for submariners but-- as Pat Neshek could tell you-- doesn't disappear), he looks to be worth about .9 WAR a season to me, or 4.5 over 5 years.

Joey Devine: His 2008 FIP was sick (under 2) but somewhat based on not actually allowing ANY homers on 44 flyballs. This is not likely to continue. He also had some crappy performances in prior years (albeit in very small samples). Health is clearly an issue for him seeing as how he missed the whole 2009 season with Tommy John. I'm going to assume he misses the first 2 months of next year rehabbing, and discount him by 50% to account for injuries. That pegs him at about 0.7 WAR a season after next year and about 0.5 WAR next year, for a total of 3.3 over 5 years.

Jerry Blevins: He was squeezed out of the bullpen in a numbers game this year, but the man knows how to pitch. Only three lefthanded relievers with at least 20 IP bettered his 3.01 FIP in 2009, and that number was assembled without the benefit of a ridiculous home run rate. He's somewhat flyball prone, so he's unlikely to be truly elite, but he's amassed 0.9 WAR in about a year's worth of IP, and he's pretty durable. Regressing that somewhat, but accounting for the fact that he still has 6 years of control (I think), he should be worth around 4 WAR.

The OK

Craig Breslow: Something of a revelation this year, as he pitched competently for the A's after a waiver claim. Amazingly, this is his fifth organization in five years. He's been averaging about 0.6 WAR per season (roughly a league-average reliever), but he's no spring chicken and will probably decline somewhat over the 4 years remaining before he would become a free agent. Overall probably worth around 1.5 WAR.

Dana Eveland: Had a horrible season as a starter this year, but his fringy control and decent lefty stuff might play a bit better in a bullpen role. His career FIP of 4.36 would probably drop some, to more like 4-- still not great, but good enough to make him an option as a second lefty. Four seasons of Eveland at 0.4 WAR a pop put his value at about 1.6 WAR total.

The Mediocre

Santiago Casilla: In six partial seasons, Casilla has only managed to amass 0.4 WAR total. He may or may not be better than Jesse Chavez, since at least he's in positive territory, but he never really seemed to recover from an elbow sprain in May 2008, as his control seemingly vanished after the injury. He's now up for arbitration and will probably be nontendered. Might be useful as a throw-in in our trade, though, so let's credit him with 0.3 WAR value (0.1 a season).

The Prospects

Jeff Gray: His numbers make him look like a control specialist, but he does throw fairly hard. He's been a bit longball-prone in his career, which would make him fit right in on the Rays' staff (... sorry). Does get ground balls, though, if not quite at the rate of college chum Ziegler (interestingly, the other future MLB player on their team at the time was, of all people, Ryan Howard). He hasn't dominated the minors, so expecting him to be more than an average reliever is probably excessively optimistic. Discounting for injury risk, he's probably worth about 2.5 WAR total.

Brad Kilby: If you haven't watched his pitching motion, check it out. It's a trip. He literally hides the ball behind his left butt-cheek until he's halfway through his delivery. This apparently works like a charm, because he struck out 97 batters in 80 1/3 innings this season. Unlike Gray, Kilby HAS dominated the minors, and while his fastball isn't shooting off sparks as it approaches the plate, he's got good velocity on it for a lefty reliever. This year he was on pace to be worth about 1.6 WAR. Discounting that as usual, but keeping in mind his stellar track record and sturdy build, he seems like a 1 WAR a year kind of guy, and that's worth a total of 5.5 or so over 6 seasons, discounting a bit for decline at the end.

Henry Rodriguez: There probably isn't a pitcher with a more unhittable fastball in all of prospect-dom. Unfortunately, the strategy to beat Henry Rodriguez does not involve swinging at said fastball. He walked 41 batters in 52 1/3 innings this season. He has also, for whatever reason, consistently posted BABIPs against that range from bad to baffling. If Barry Zito is one end of the BABIP-as-skill spectrum, so far it looks like Rodriguez is at the extreme other end. Trying to project him as a reliever is basically hopeless, so I'm going to give up and pretend that he's 2009 Carlos Marmol, who posted a WAR of 0.6 despite being very lucky on home run balls. I'll credit Rodriguez with 0.3 WAR a season, or a total of 1.8 over six years.

John Meloan: Hm, seems he was already in Tampa's system earlier this year. Whoops-a-daisy. He seemed to finally put it together late this season after yo-yoing around half the parks in AAA. Trying to make head or tail out of a statline which has seen him play in 14 different parks in 4 seasons is not easy, but he looks sort of averagey, maybe a bit worse. I'm calling him the same as Rodriguez, albeit for different reasons. Another 1.8 WAR player.

Sam Demel: The wildest card of all, as he's never played in the majors. He's consistently maintained about a strikeout an inning in the minors, though, and while his control isn't all that great, it comes with a power sinker which gets a ton of ground balls (55.4% for his career) and two offspeed pitches. He looks a lot like a young Jason Grimsley, who varied from good to awful at times in his major league career, but was if nothing else always interesting to watch. (As far as I know, Demel doesn't have the roid rage. But he's pretty comparable otherwise.) Projecting his skill is pure guesswork, but I think he'll put up 3 WAR or so in his period of team control. Your mileage may vary.

Let's map out some potential trades, then.

Donaldson should mostly cover the value of Brignac, if the A's want him. If they prefer Sean Rodriguez, we're looking at dealing one of the high-value relievers along with him. Donaldson plus Devine gets most of the way there, but the Rays will probably be looking for more. Throwing in Jeff Gray would make the values very close to even and seems like an excellent trade for both teams. Brignac is undoubtedly capable of handling any infield position well enough, and even if there's an adjustment period, Aybar is also available to cover the corner spots. Meanwhile, the Rays turn the surplus from the Kazmir deal into one reliever who is elite if healthy, another who seems to be pretty decent, and the catcher of the future.

Trade Proposal One: Donaldson, Devine and Gray for Sean Rodriguez

Now, what about if the Rays really want to keep Rodriguez? Donaldson for Brignac is a fairly even swap, but the Rays clearly can take advantage of Oakland's pitching depth. What else have they got in return? Well, as I mentioned, they've got a bunch of starting pitching prospects lurking around. Nick Barnese, Adam Moore, and Jake McGee are intriguing.

Barnese has suffered some injury problems but overall did well in Low-A ball this season. His strikeout rate was down a little, but he has quality stuff and projectability on his side, along with youth.

Matt Moore is a bit better than Barnese from the statistical side of things, except that he's had command issues at times. His strikeout rate is disgusting (and constant-- basically about 12.8 per 9 innings throughout his pro career). He did a better job than Barnese of staying healthy this season.

Jake McGee is a bit older and would be closer to the majors, except that he had Tommy John surgery in mid-2009 and only just got back into the swing of things late this year. He played some rookie ball this year and predictably blew it away, but struggled some in High-A ball. A lot of that was bad BABIP, but it does raise some concern over whether he's really 100%.

I think McGee is the right choice here. Moore and Barnese are a few years away, and by that time, the Rays may need reinforcements for their rotation. Right now, those concerns are nonexistent. Price/Shields/Garza/Davis/Niemann is as good a group as any in the game.

So the question then becomes how much reliever value is needed to cancel out the starter value of McGee. He has high flameout potential (there's probably a 50% or greater chance he never starts a game in the majors) but also high upside. There's no question but that the Rays will want two guys back, and they need righties more than lefties at this point.

The Devine/Gray package again looks fairly attractive here, or the Rays might prefer Ziegler. Their need for right-handed relief that can get righties out is acute, and few are better than Ziegler at that task. They'd probably want a prospect included with him, and it makes sense for the A's to give them one. Again Rodriguez seems to make a lot of sense, but if they're not interested in dealing with his issues, Gray probably offers similar value in a different sort of package.

Thus, we have

Trade Proposal #2: Josh Donaldson, Brad Ziegler, and Henry Rodriguez for Reid Brignac and Jake McGee.

You must be champing at the bit right now, either to tell me how awful my logic is, or how you wish this trade would happen but it never will, or something. Fire away. I've invited DRaysBay over to participate in what I hope will be a collaborative process, so be nice to them.

Have at ye. I'll check back in in the morning to see what's the haps.

Matt Murton on the waiver wire

PaulThomas — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 01:16:56 -0000

Matt Murton on the waiver wire

Well, for those of you who want a litmus test for this front office's understanding of how to value hitters, here it is.

Gullible's Travails; or, Prospectus Lost; or, I Am Not a Beautiful and Unique Snowflake

PaulThomas — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 02:34:40 -0000

It's been a while.

You might be thinking, "Paul Thomas? Didn't he swear off the site?" Well, actually, no, not as such. My extended absence has relatively little to do with personal taste and everything to do with the fact that, for the last two-plus months, I've been suffering from a severe case of writer's block. I had this romantic notion that I wouldn't start commenting again until I had published something of at least SOME kind of merit, and so I've been a no-show since late March. In retrospect, that might not have been the best idea, since there's never anything so detrimental to creativity as the knowledge that one MUST be creative in order to get somewhere... frankly, it's started to feel like a bit of an albatross around my neck lately. But I digress.

I just about had a fanpost lined up for when my 30-day "time-out" ended... and then I didn't get it done, and it started to look pointless, and I was starting from scratch again. So I did, and got about halfway through another piece before succumbing to a combination of poor writing, annoyance at my own lack of spreadsheet savvy, and general fatigue. This is my third try. I still have the bits and pieces of the other work. Hopefully they'll come together at some point in the next two months or so.

Instead, I thought I'd leap into the fray with something that I'm pretty confident I know something about-- dollahs. Beaucoup bucks. Etc etc etc. I'm taking the A's' budgets for the next 3 years and taking a stab at turning the ship of state around. Maybe it'll look great and maybe it'll look hopeless-- no way to tell until we start.

This is the last I'll be saying with respect to myself, although ifyou have any burning personal questions, hagiographic odes, and/or suggestions that I perform anatomically unlikely self-abuses, I suppose I'll be hanging around the comments section.

OK, first things first. If you have not bookmarked Cot's Baseball Contracts on your browser, you aren't really paying much attention to things. The site was pretty fantastic even before this season, but it's become multiple times more awesome since the year started with the addition of "future payroll obligations" spreadsheets. Want to know who's a free agent when? How many arbitration hearings your team will be going through? What the five highest paid players on the team are? How about for next year? All these questions will be answered here.

I assume you've opened up that window-- if you haven't, do it now, because we'll be referring to it repeatedly in the next few pages.

Prologue: The A's Available Payroll

Before I start buying players for my imaginary team, I have to figure out how much actual cash I have to play around with. Let's turn to trusty old Mr. Spreadsheet for some help here.

In 2010, the A's have $19.25M committed so far. That's... not very much. With Giambi fired, if the A's get 23 random AAA players to fill out the roster alongside Eric Chavez and Mark Ellis, it'd only cost a Marlins-esque $28.45M. We've got some room here. But how much? Many of the actual A's are eligible for arbitration. Specifically, Michael Wuertz, Jack Cust, Santiago Casilla, Chris Denorfia, Rajai Davis, Joey Devine and Dana Eveland entered this year in a position to potentially look at arbitration next season.

However, this is not as much of a problem as it seems. Rajai Davis seems to have rediscovered this thing known as "hitting" since I started working on this fanpost, which ironically makes him harder to deal with since I can't just sell him for a steak dinner like I could a couple of months ago. Still, "players on your team having actual trade value" is a good problem to have. I'm deeply suspicious of this putative improvement of his, mostly because I have to take any opportunity to use the word "putative" that's offered to me, but he's beyond waiver bait. He'll probably get about $1.5M next year.

Santiago Casilla's hour is up. His performance is declining and there are too many other good relievers in the system to pay him. Dana Eveland and Chris Denorfia both needed to spend most of the season in the bigs to reach arbitration status, so they won't get there.

What are the other 3 going to make? Joey Devine bageled the 2009 season, so he's not likely to cost much, especially given his checkered past. I figure he signs at about $750K. Wuertz has been rock-solid this season in the bullpen and looks to get around $2M. Jack Cust hasn't been terribly great this year (Thanks, griping fans! You broke the A's best hitter!) but is still in line for a raise, probably to about the $4M range. Add it up together with the prior guaranteed money and you've got only $27.5M committed to fill five roster spots, or $35.5M if the other 20 spots are filled at the league minimum.

This year's team spent about $62M at the big-league level. It's not real likely that the economy or attendance will be significantly worse next year (mostly because they're already both terrible), but we might want to redirect some resources toward buying more amateur players (rarely a bad idea), save cash for midseason trades, or what have you. Let's assume a working budget of ~$60M for next season.

We've got ~$25M to play with! Awesome, right? Not so fast. We'd better look into the budgets for 2011 and 2012 to make sure the team isn't spending itself into a corner next season-- I think we can all agree that we'd like to avoid any more Lilly-for-Kielty salary dump fiascos.

The 2011 Budget

As usual, we start with guaranteed money... which... really isn't much. In fact, the A's don't have a single player actually under contract through 2011 at this point-- the only committed money is option dollars going to Eric Chavez (ouch) and Mark Ellis. I think we can safely write off the $3M to Chavez as a deadweight loss, but let's pencil in $5.5M more for Ellis's option year for the time being. That gives us $9M spent and one roster spot filled.

Then we get to arbitration, and things get hairy. Cust, Wuertz and Devine are all still subject to arbitration, of course. Assuming incremental raises for the three of them, we're looking at something like $20M spent and four roster spots filled. Surely we've found some way to get value for Davis by then, so I won't worry about paying him.

The following players are candidates to be up for arbitration for the first time in 2011:

Daric Barton, Travis Buck, Dallas Braden, Dana Eveland, Chris Denorfia, Ryan Sweeney, Kurt Suzuki

Based on the service time they've accrued so far this season and their remaining option status, I expect to be paying all of these guys except for Barton. The exact amounts are wildly dependent on how they do in the next couple of years. I'll take some wild-ass guesses:

Suzuki: $2.5M

Braden: $2.5M

Buck: $1.5M

Eveland: $1M

Denorfia: $1M

Sweeney: $1.5M

$10M in total, bringing us to $30M with 10 roster spots filled. Another 15 league-minimum salaries bring the total to $36M. Again, we've got around $26M to play with, assuming a slight rebound in the economy and, thus, A's gate receipts.

I was hoping to do 2012, too, but it's basically impossible. Players who are rookies this season are potentially eligible for arbitration by then, which means that practically the whole 40-man roster could be seeing raises. Obviously, not all of them will be. Anyway, let's go on the assumption that for the foreseeable future, the A's have about $26M to spend on free agents each offseason.

Step 1: Spending Money on Players Already On the Roster

It's pretty well known that deals before free agency save money. Players have a strong incentive to "cash in" and guarantee themselves a nest egg in case of injury. Teams are much less risk-averse, so they can do well by essentially playing insurance company for their players. There are limits to this-- you don't want to hand out the Dontrelle Willis contract-- but it's hard to go too far wrong here.

After this season, I'm looking to sign two players to long-term deals: Kurt Suzuki and Brett Anderson. After 2010, I'm looking at two more, Trevor Cahill and Vin Mazzaro, assuming they continue to show progress. Although the way they've been getting hammered lately, that might be overly optimistic. Still, better to have the money available if it's needed than to spend it and look like a fool later.

Suzuki is one of the better catchers in the AL-- he's a defensive stalwart, plays lots of games, and hits at an acceptably decent level. I'm looking to ink him through his first post-free agent year with an option year for the second. I think the team can do so with a 5-year, $22M contract with an additional $10M option year at the end. As I've drawn it up, this will cost the team an additional 0.6M next year (the savings is at the other end).

The pitchers get contracts modeled on the brilliantly win-win contract agreed upon between the Rays and James Shields prior to the 2008 season. Anderson's contract is for 4 seasons and $15M with 3 club option years at the end; the other two pitchers get 4-year deals with 2 option years and $12M guaranteed. For our purposes, these contracts add $0.4M next season and about $2M in 2011 with, again, the savings being realized later in the decade. All in all, leaving space for pre-arb contracts whittles down the available funds a bit. You'll thank me later.

If anyone wants detailed year-by-year breakdowns of these proposed deals, ask me in the comments section and I'll gladly provide them.

Step 2: Spending More Money on Someone Already on the Roster

We'll get to the interesting bit in a minute, I promise. Actually, this one is pretty interesting too: what on earth does the team do with Justin Duchscherer after this season? Right now, he's not likely to get draft-pick compensation if he leaves as a free agent, so there's no disincentive to re-signing him-- it's purely a question of whether he'll be worth the money. Which in turn raises the question of how much "the money" actually is.

I'm offering him a 3-year deal at $9M, $3M a season, tomorrow. It's not great wages for a guy who can be as dominant as he was last year, but it offers him a chance to stay in Oakland, gives him a nest egg for retirement, and fully absorbs the risk that he's unable to return to effective pitching. Ultimately, it's not much to pay for a player with the upside of a #1 or #2 starter. We'll know if he's decided to accept by season's end, so we go into the offseason with either $22M or $25M to spend for 2010.

Step 3: Shortstop

There are two positions on the A's roster that even the most unreasonable optimist (alright, I'll wear that sandwich board-- I did predict 84 wins for this A's roster before the season...) cannot hope to fill internally by next season. Not that there aren't other problems, too, but if we're looking for short-term fixes, it's got to start with shortstop and third base. The list of shortstops who will be free agents next season is ugly:

Orlando Cabrera OAK
Bobby Crosby OAK
Adam Everett DET
Alex Gonzalez * CIN
Khalil Greene STL
John McDonald TOR
Marco Scutaro TOR
Miguel Tejada HOU
Jack Wilson * PIT

My solution is Yunel Escobar, who has managed to piss off the Braves to the point where they have actually considered trading him-- quite an accomplishment, given his contract status. But maybe a change of scenery is what he needs.

He's not the perfect choice, I'll admit. So far this year, Escobar has actually been only about average-- his fielding numbers and his value over replacement have both been limited by some nagging injuries (hey, he'll fit right in here). That said, as a hitter he was very strong for a shortstop in both of the last two seasons, he's affordable, and he presents a possible buy-low opportunity. Why? Because Bobby Cox isn't real fond of him, and what Bobby wants, Bobby gets. A year ago, Bobby preferred Mark Kotsay to Joey Devine, and that worked out pretty well.

Still, Joey Devine was a reliever with a checkered past. Yunel Escobar is a proven MLB shortstop, and the offers are going to need to be a little better there. Atlanta has needs all over the place right now and could use quality prospects in the outfield, on the mound, and certainly in the infield too, if they move Yunel.

I'm willing to go pretty high for Escobar-- I assume that Dustin Coleman is moving as part of the deal, they'll almost certainly ask for an outfielder like Scott Hairston, and other pieces like Henry Rodriguez or Travis Buck could be deployed. It really depends on what they feel their primary needs are.

Is it a risk? Sure. Every trade is a risk. But I really like Escobar-- he's got a great OBP out of the SS slot, decent power, and depending on who you ask, pretty good defense.

Backup plan: The return of Marco Scutaro! No, he's not as good as he's been this year (most random spikes in power are just that, random). Yes, he's starting to get on in years. Fact is, he's the top option despite consistently getting little play from the mainstream media, and he liked playing in Oakland. If the Escobar deal falls through, I'm offering him 2 years, $18M. He ought to get at least as much as Edgar Renteria...

Step 4: Third Base

I had a pretty funny Jake Fox joke all lined up here (for those interested in a meaningless guessing game, it involved a Monty Python reference, like at least 30% of my jokes) and then Beane goes and trades for Brett Wallace, who's pretty much Jake Fox except five years younger and, thus, an actual prospect. Great. I'm having enough trouble making this interesting without the "help" of Billy Beane, the world's worst straight man.

As far as Wallace is concerned, he seems to be a ways off with the bat, and it would probably be optimistic to say "scouts are mixed" on his defensive abilities at third base. That's technically true, but it's a mix between "he might not be a complete eyesore there for a few years" and "if you play him at third base, your pitchers will start complaining about having to work unpaid overtime."

At the very least, his ability to claim the position entering next season is questionable. We need a backup plan.

Backup Plan: Let's check out those free agents again:

Adrian Beltre SEA
Hank Blalock TEX
Geoff Blum HOU
Joe Crede MIN
Pedro Feliz * PHI
Chone Figgins LAA
Troy Glaus STL
Melvin Mora * BAL

Looked a lot better before Adrian Beltre went and blew out his shoulder (although I did see him back in action the other day), but at least there's something here. The tremendously underrated Pedro Feliz (if the Phillies don't pick up his option), Beltre if he's healthy, Crede if he's healthy, and Troy Glaus if he's healthy are all somewhere between acceptable and very good. (Most of them are standout defenders, as is/was Chavez, which makes me wonder a bit if there's any nexus between "good third base defense" and "injuries." Could it be that the only way to be a really plus defender at third is to give up your body and risk major injury?) Figgins is interesting as well, but if I'm signing him, it's as an outfielder, so he won't be discussed here.

Right now, there's no real way of knowing what the health status of any of the members of this Medivac Brigade will be in the offseason, but chances are good that 2 or 3 of them will be healthy going into next season. Given the risks involved, the A's can probably score the second-best of the group for around 1 year and $5 million.

Step 5: A Step Back... er, wait, I mean, A Status Reevaluation

Time to take a look at how the 2009 roster is shaping up so far.

1B: ??

2B: Mark Ellis

SS: Yunel Escobar or Marco Scutaro

3B: Brett Wallace or Beltre/Crede/Feliz/Glaus

C: Kurt Suzuki

LF: ??

CF: ??

RF: ??

DH: Jack Cust

SP: Dallas Braden

SP: Vin Mazzaro

SP: Trevor Cahill

SP: Brett Anderson

SP: ??

CL: Andrew Bailey

RHP: Joey Devine

RHP: Brad Ziegler

RHP: Michael Wuertz

LHP: Jerry Blevins (gradually getting his groove back)

LHP: Craig Breslow

SW: Justin Duchscherer?

Available Budget: Between $8M and $25M

Not bad, except for the outfield. Right now, there isn't a single player with a cemented spot out there. Looks like it's the next area of concern.

Step 6: The Outfield

This section kind of got thrown into flux by the acquisition of Scott Hairston. The outfield depth looks quite a bit better than it did prior to the trade. I'm leaving the analysis in, though, because if the A's are interested in contending, starting even two unproven outfield prospects is not the best. I like Aaron Cunningham, but the prospects are not a particularly happy-inducing group of players right now. Sweeney and Buck have alternated between "injured" and "terrible" for most of this season. Rajai Davis is a known quantity-- good backup, bad starter. Assuming he doesn't fall back down the cliff he recently climbed to the top of, he should be traded during the offseason. I'm the charter (some would say only) member of the Chris Denorfia Fan Club, but even I'll admit that he just doesn't look like someone who can handle starting duties.

Is there any help on the way? Unfortunately, not really. It looked like Sean Doolittle and Corey Brown might be on their way to the bigs by August or so, but then both players ran into the injury buzzsaw. Doolittle hasn't played since May; Brown's done a little better, but not much. We have to assume they'll be plying their trade in AAA next year. Eric Patterson probably deserves another chance, but I'm not holding my breath. Someone out there is going to say Grant Desme, to which my answer is "31.5"-- as in "percent of the time he has been struck out by A-ball pitchers."

The team is, therefore, potentially looking at signing a free agent outfielder.

Step 7: The Outfield Market

I won't C&P the entire free agent list here, because there are a lot of outfielders, most of whom make no sense to sign. I'll hit some interesting options and/or pitfalls, however.

Bobby Abreu: .399 OBP is snazzy. History of horrific defense is less snazzy. He's not really an improvement over Jack Cust in the field, so you're running at least one major minus out there in your outfield. Also, he's getting old.

Rick Ankiel: There aren't many players who've had a weirder career than Ankiel. He's about to hit free agency for the first time, 10 seasons after his MLB debut. His power has fallen off this year, attributable to a sudden decrease in the number of his fly balls that are clearing the fence. Nick Swisher will tell you that this makes him a good buy-low candidate. Not so good: his low walk rate and his average defense.

Jason Bay: Yeah, not happening.

Marlon Byrd: An intriguing candidate indeed. In prior years, his defense has been good to excellent, as has his hitting. This year he's fallen off just a little, but part of that may have to do with decreased playing time. He's got a little of that 2006-Jay-Payton thing going for him. He's on my short list.

Mike Cameron: Still doing Mike Cameron-ey things, like striking out a lot, playing good CF defense, and hitting home runs. Also a short-list candidate despite a fairly high risk of collapse.

Johnny Damon: One would have to assume he's not eager to reprise the scene of his worst hitting season.

Chone Figgins: Speaking of odd careers, Figgins has had a pretty weird one too. He seems to be alternating good and awful seasons, which is not a reason not to sign him for next year, but he's also on the wrong side of 30, which is. Will his legs hold up? Knowing the A's medical staff, I'm going to say "no," and Figgins without legs is a pretty lousy player.

Vlad: Season gets a grade of EPIC FAIL so far. [Should I make the "buying low doesn't matter if you're buying Caribbean penny stocks" joke, or would that be "culturally insensitive?" Well, I guess I just made it. Anyone else find it ironic that there's no politically correct way to ask whether saying something is politically correct?] Not going there.

Matt Holliday: Yeah, not happening.

Magglio Ordonez: From near-MVP to ticket out of town in two years? I don't think anyone has any idea what to expect from Mags next season. Ultimately I don't think he solves the A's' problems unless they get real lucky, and I feel like someone will pay him too much for past performance.

Randy Winn: Winn has been chronically underrated for years, but I think Byrd is better, younger, and likely cheaper.

Final Assessment: I'm offering up to 2 years, $16 million to Mike Cameron, who continues to play quality ball in his mid-30s. If we've failed to make any trades to fill 3B or SS, re-signed Duchscherer, and assuming he accepts (not certain), that's it-- we're out of money. If not, I'm also looking to ink Marlon Byrd for around 2 years and $10 million.

Step 8: First Base

The cold corner has been a house of horrors for the A's in recent seasons. Daric Barton's struggles the last two years are well documented, and the rest of the PA have gone to a crew of has-beens who have posted an sOPS+ of, as of writing this, 56 (that is, OPS+ relative to the situational average-- in this case, a league average first baseman hitting in Oakland). This putrescent performance is the worst on the team-- worse even than third base, manned primarily by noted no-hit wonders Jack Hannahan and Bobby Crosby. There's not much out there in free agency, which is why I haven't bothered to save dollars for the position-- Nick Johnson is about the only name that interests me, and I fear that his extreme injury risk won't be properly accounted for by the free agent market.

Brett Wallace again pokes his head in as a candidate here, but the offensive requirements of first base are considerably more onerous than third and I just don't see him being ready by next season. In addition, the A's are well advised (because of the lack of depth at 3B in the system) to keep him playing third for as long as he seems to have any chance of sticking there. He's a desperation option, but that's about it.

In order to build depth, therefore, the A's need to do some dumpster-diving and come up with a few free or cheap replacement options that can be turned to if Barton fails to deliver. Calling up Tommy Everidge was a good start-- odds are that he's not realistically a candidate to contribute at the major league level, but it doesn't hurt to give him a try. If nothing else, there's more upside there than there is with Giambi, who hasn't hit well even when he's been able to avoid the DL.

The next candidate on the list might be worth it just for the marketing-- Hawaiian late bloomer Kila Ka'aihue has more walks than strikeouts on the season and is busy posting his second consecutive season with OBP's north of .400. The potential business bonanza of "Kila Monster" merchandise and offseason package tours to Hawaii with Kila and Kurt Suzuki aside, the man needs a chance at the major league level, and the Royals aren't going to give it to him. I'd look to trade a bullpen arm to acquire him-- Andrew Carignan and Henry Rodriguez both fit the bill, as power arms who walk a few too many hitters to be at their best in an environment like the Coliseum.

If the A's are looking for a poor man's Daric Barton clone, providing great plate discipline at the expense of power, they might want to look into Wes Timmons, the first baseman for Atlanta's AAA franchise. He has zero power (literally-- no home runs this season), but he boasts a remarkable BB/K ratio (not a fluke-- he was at 45/25 last season) and pretty decent speed and batting average numbers. Perhaps the A's could get him as a throw-in to the Yunel Escobar trade outlined above, or perhaps they could snag him as a minor league free agent. I can't tell if he's going to be granted free agency this offseason or not.

Randy Ruiz just got a callup from Toronto to replace Alex Rios (let's not get into how weird THAT whole thing was) after consistently pounding the ball in the high minors for the last several seasons. Toronto already has an established first baseman in Lyle Overbay, so he's not likely to stick there long-term. As a guy who's somewhat older than Everidge, I'm less bullish on his chances to make good, but it never hurts to stock your larder with as many flavors of Spam as possible. (I bet you didn't even know there WERE multiple flavors of Spam. Well, there are-- Hot 'n' Spicy Spam, Spam Spread, and even Spam Golden Holy Grail. You can't make this stuff up, folks.) Maybe they'll all suck, but at least they taste better than "going hungry," which is what the A's have been up to lately.

Another option the team might look at is the Mexican League. Most of the sluggers down there are thoroughly over the hill, keeping their careers going by playing where the air is thin, but there are a few exceptions. One particularly interesting fellow is Japhet Amador, a 22-year-old first baseman currently with Veracruz. He's showing formidable power (21 HR) for a youngster. One assumes he won't come cheap, probably involving a transfer fee in the high six or low seven figures, but if the scouts say that his talent is legitimate, it'd be worth it. The A's seem to have a real edge on the competition in scouting the Mexican League, and perhaps they can parlay that edge into another solid prospect. All that said, Amador is unlikely to be a significant factor next season.

Time to set some concrete goals. By Opening Day of next season, the A's need to:

Get Everidge a significant cup of coffee (100 ABs or so).

Give Daric Barton another extended period in which he can actually start for the team.

Hire or acquire another "freely available talent" slugger.

Odds are, unfortunately, that first base will continue to be a problem area through the early part of next year. Still, the worst thing one can do when presented with a major problem is "nothing." The second-worst thing one can do is "sign Carlos Delgado." Hopefully the A's can avoid those pratfalls.

Step 9: Pitching

We're finally to the last stage in what has become a rather epic exercise in putting the "depth" in "depth charts." Taking stock again, we find that the A's have potentially as much as $20M to spend, or potentially as little as zero, depending on what moves get made.

As was the case last season, the A's could really use one more starter to enter the season with. This year, the lack of said starter led in part to the utterly bizarre decision to start the season with Trevor Cahill and Brett Anderson in the big-league rotation, which did the team no favors from a winning standpoint while pointlessly squandering their service time. I'm fighting the impulse to go off on a rant at this point about how bad last offseason was, and will instead simply point out that everyone would be a hell of a lot happier if the A's had signed Randy Johnson instead of Jason Giambi and Orlando Cabrera. Sometimes signing a starter IS the right option.

Is it right for this season, though? There are certainly some major names available next offseason:

Erik Bedard: Do you trust the A's to keep him healthy? He's very, very good when he is. Personally, though, I'd expect him to start about 10 games in 3 seasons in an Oakland uniform.

Kelvim Escobar: Eek. If there's anyone more injury-riddled than Bedard, it's this guy. The extension he signed with the Angels has basically been a disaster. Might be worth it on a Brad Penny-like short term deal, but I'm not making any kind of long-term commitment.

Rich Harden: Speaking of risky... honestly, I don't think he'd want to come back, nor do I particularly relish the thought of seeing him back.

Tim Hudson: Recovering from Tommy John Surgery and will miss most or all of this year. The Braves have a contract option on him for next season, however. I have no idea if it will be exercised or not. If he was available, I would be all over him-- not only is he a fan favorite and very good at baseball, he'd be perfectly situated to serve as a "second pitching coach" for young sinkerballers Cahill, Anderson and Mazzaro.

John Lackey: Not having a great season, due largely to an inflated BABIP. I feel like he's still going to get paid a ton of money, but the one scenario in which I could see him actually being affordable and desirable (a season in which his peripherals remain good but his ERA is mediocre) is partway toward coming to pass.

Jason Marquis: You've got to be kidding me. Or since I'm writing this, I've got to be kidding myself, which is a little weird. Anyway, this is your obligatory "don't sign lame pitchers having fluky-good years" reminder.

Brett Myers: Not that great, and injured. Still have a hard time believing he was the #2 pitcher for a World Series winner-- not only is that karmically insulting (given his status as well-known wife-beater/thug), it's downright mystifying from a player-talent standpoint. I guess Chase Utley really is that awesome.

Jarrod Washburn: His improvement this year is mostly real, thanks to a much improved sinker, but he's still getting on in years and extremely likely to be overpaid.

Well, that was pretty disappointing, actually. Not nearly as much there as I thought there would be. If Tim Hudson is available and we've got cash left over, I'd be willing to go as high as 3 years at $10M a pop for him, and I think there's a decent chance he would enjoy returning to take on a leadership role as the unquestioned veteran "stopper" of the staff. The A's should probably put a bid in on John Lackey, too, but more to drive up the Angels' price to re-sign him than for any other reason.

Step 10: Is It Worth It?

Let's do a quick-and-dirty projection of this lineup to try to figure out how it looks.

C: 3.5 WAR (Suzuki is pretty good)

1B: 1 WAR (still a problem area)

2B: 2.5 WAR (Ellis is excellent, backups not so excellent and likely to see some time)

SS: 2.5 WAR (assuming the A's land Escobar; somewhat conservative)

3B: 2 WAR (Still not sure how much to believe in Wallace or the free agents, but there are actually a lot of good options here)

LF: 3 WAR (Hairston is solid)

CF: 3 WAR (Cameron is also still solid)

RF: 1.5 WAR (I want a prospect breakout as much as you do, but can't just assume one)

DH: 2 WAR (assuming a rebound by Cust once the A's finally realize that messing with his hitting style is idiocy)

SP1: 3 WAR

SP2: 2.5 WAR

SP3: 2 WAR

SP4: 2 WAR

SP5: 1.5 WAR (the above more or less assumes a rotation of Hudson/Braden/Anderson/Cahill/Mazzaro, but obviously the estimates are extremely generic)

RP: 5 WAR (A's have a lot of quality in this area even after the Hairston trade)

Total: 37 WAR, or somewhere in the neighborhood of 87 wins. Good enough that some prospect breakouts could put the team over the top, but not nearly a dominant force.

Conclusion: Where the Hell Do The A's Go From Here?

Well, o apostrophized reader person, that's an excellent question. And one to which I can now authoritatively state that... I don't have a good answer.

I really don't see how it's possible for the A's to contend without developing one or more top-tier players internally. The math just doesn't add up-- it's very difficult to fill 14 or 15 slots with slightly above average players, and in any event, the A's are a long ways from doing so. As for generating those top-tier guys, development takes time, and the players with very high upsides are not especially close to reaching them.

The sudden reverse-course, "go for it" decision for this year may well have set the A's rebuilding plans back by a full season. The outfield is a mess and missing the guy who was previously the top prospect, Carlos Gonzalez. The infield is filled with veteran time-servers. After examining the options, I think it's time to admit that a. it was a failure, and b. that the A's should not repeat it next season.

That's not the same as advocating inaction, mind you. What it means is: avoid trading for one-year rentals, avoid players who might block legitimate prospects, and generally try to avoid Type A free agents. Interestingly, I think a lot of my "plan", above, is still operational. Yunel Escobar isn't hitting free agency anytime soon. Hudson's no Type A with all the time he's missed; Adrian Beltre might not be, either. Marlon Byrd is on the outside edge of maybe, but is probably acquireable. However, it mostly rules out Cameron and Scutaro.

One thing I think is very important is for the team to punt this season as soon as humanly possible, which means immediately transitioning to "auditioning for the future" mode. Axing Giambi was a good start. Nomar and Crosby have no value and should be released, which sounds heartless but might actually improve their chances of playing for a contending team down the stretch, as the new team would only have to pay them the prorated league minimum salary. Springer gets a pat on the back before being put out to pasture at the back end of the bullpen (or, ideally, traded, assuming he's willing to make the move and clears waivers, which I think he would). Adam Kennedy should have his playing time scaled way back, because he is not a part of the A's future. I'm still baffled as to why he wasn't moved at the deadline. Trevor Cahill should be sent immediately to AAA, which will preserve an additional season of club control and allow him to work on... well, pretty much everything. (I'm less worried about Mazzaro, who's not been great but is suffering from a bizarrely inflated BABIP in his last 10-ish starts.)

Summation

1. The A's have in the neighborhood of $26M a season to spend on free agents for the foreseeable future.

2. Approximately $4M should be earmarked for raises to players already in the organization, as a loyalty bonus for signing pre-arbitration contracts and/or for a long-term extension for Justin Duchscherer.

3. Major holes on the roster are shortstop, third base, an outfield spot, and first base.

4. The A's should make serious efforts to trade for Yunel Escobar (ATL).

5. Within the month, the A's need to clear the roster of, or at least bench, veteran stopgaps in favor of players who will be with the team beyond this season, including at least Cliff Pennington, Gregorio Petit, Tommy Everidge, Travis Buck, Aaron Cunningham and Chris Denorfia.

6. Entering the offseason, the A's should be targeting good-glove players at third base, in particular Joe Crede, Adrian Beltre, and possibly Pedro Feliz depending on whether his option is exercised. In a perfect world, those guys are fill-ins and defensive replacements for Brett Wallace. More likely, they're starting for at least half the season.

7. In the outfield, there are a number of interesting players, but the big names will not realistically be available. Once again, the A's should be targeting underrated players with crack gloves like Marlon Byrd.

8. First base doesn't appear to have a long-term solution available, so the best solution is competition among a number of different options, including Daric Barton but not handing him the job.

9. There isn't much available at SP. Tim Hudson is worth a sniff if he is on the market.

10. Don't have inflated expectations. 2010 is probably not going to happen, although there's enough upside lying around that the A's aren't out of the running by any means.

Alright, I'm spent. Have at it.

Brain Dead Racially and Culturally Diverse Hitters Hacking at Slop

PaulThomas — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:28:50 -0000

Brain Dead Racially and Culturally Diverse Hitters Hacking at Slop

Jokes about bizarre crypto-racist talk radio rants aside, the Giants have some massive problems with plate discipline, and the blame has to go to the guy in charge.

Some statistical Solarcaine

PaulThomas — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:34:39 -0000

Ed's note: I was too distraught to write up a recap yesterday, and PaulThomas said almost everything I was going to say in the following post. Monty agrees with Paul and me; here's a quote from the CoCo Times:

"They shoot 70 percent in the second half and we shoot 27 (percent). I think that's the tale of the game. It's no more complex than that."

Cal now needs to win AT LEAST one more regular season game, and Thursday night's game against USC seems like the time to do it. Hopefully we will not look back on a season sweep to 7th place OSU as the reason we were kept out of the tournament. - CBKWit

People do still use that for sunburns, right?

I couldn't help but look at the stats from today's game, because I didn't feel like the Bears had played all that badly. And, turns out, they didn't.

Let's toss out the two ridiculous Randle heaves at the end of the game (although he's capable of hitting those). Other than those two shots, Cal took 50 shots in the game and made 17 of them. On the season, Cal's shooting percentage is very near 50%-- but let's call it 48% for ease of handling. That means Cal should have made 24 shots.

On the season the team's 3 point percentage is (now-- it dropped 1.7% just from this game alone) 44.1%. The Bears took 18 3s. Basically, they should have made 8 of them; in fact, they made 3.

Add up those missing points and on a normal shooting day, Cal wins this one easily, 73-65. I suppose you could dock Cal a few points for making more free throws than average, but Oregon State got a bundle of easy points off end-of-game FTs too.

Now, I know you can't just get up and say bad shooting = bad luck. But come on. You'd have a hard time arguing that the quality of looks the Bears got today was worse than average. Oregon State's defense was porous at best and Cal was regularly getting wide-open 3s. I'm not even going near the officiating, Oregon State's own shooting (highlighted by four second-half plays which would put any baller 80% of the way to winning a HORSE game) or anything else the team couldn't control. If Cal does what it normally does, HORSE shots or no, Oregon State goes down.

I hope Montgomery's message to his team was that sometimes these things just happen. The worst thing that could happen is for the Bears to overthink things. This isn't a game they need to explain away (unlike the first one). It just-- happened. One presumes Ben Howland is busy telling his team the same thing-- sometimes Taylor Rochestie scores 33 points. Accept it and move on.

TotalZone for Minor Leaguers

PaulThomas — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:25:50 -0000

This isn't going to be one of my really long rambles, just a quick look at some information which you may not have seen. Minorleaguesplits.com, which you should check out if you are at all interested in the A's minor league system, now includes a "defense" button for position players! This takes you to a page where defensive stats are calculated-- in runs-- using a primitive but reasonably effective method called TotalZone, developed by Sean Smith (of CHONE projection fame) to measure defense for players who played before modern fielding metrics. Turns out it also applies to minor leaguers.

Take this with a grain of salt, not for the gospel-- TotalZone isn't super accurate and I wouldn't get too caught up in the exact run measurements. It's more useful as a concept tool.

So what does it tell us about the A's prospects?

Aaron Cunningham: Looks like a defensive "tweener". He scores modestly well in a corner and modestly poor in center. Squares with my take on him, which is that his defense and positional adjustment should make him roughly league-average apart from his bat.

Sean Doolittle: Despite scouting reports touting him as an excellent 1B, did not score well on this metric at all... but conversely his limited work in right field has been excellent. I think I have to drop him a little on my personal prospect list, but it's encouraging that he's showing well at what's theoretically a harder position.

Chris Carter: Just give the man's glove to an RBI league, already.

Adrian Cardenas: Too little data to say much. Seems OK at shortstop so far.

Corey Brown: Appears to be able to handle center field competently. Combined with a plus arm, could be a net-positive defender.

Javier Herrera: Defense has declined from "good CF" to "average corner" since the injury problems.

Cliff Pennington/Gregorio Petit: Maybe there's hope for Cliff after all; he scores well on the metric (though he was very poor in the majors last year). Petit looks OK but not great, so he'll either have to improve his hitting or start transforming his tools into better defensive performance if he wants an MLB job.

Jeff Baisley: Seems very competent. Hitting will still make or break him.

Jack Hannahan: Can apparently play second base if needed. +13 runs there in 2006-2007.

Jermaine Mitchell: Looks like a defensive stud. If he can rediscover his 2007 stroke, could still be a very good player.

Matt Sulentic: Reports that his defense has improved are borne out here, so even a skeptic like me has to move him up the list some.

Big winners (relative to reputation/scouting report): Pennington, Sulentic, Mitchell, Brown

Big losers: Doolittle, Carter, Herrera

Should the A's take James Skelton in the Rule 5 draft?

PaulThomas — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 03:43:50 -0000

Should the A's take James Skelton in the Rule 5 draft?

Yes. But so should damn nearly everyone else, so the neutral saber-dork in me hopes he doesn't make it down that far.

Your Team Should Choose James Skelton in the Rule 5 Draft

PaulThomas — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:53:13 -0000

as long as someone else hasn't done it first, of course. Well, depending on who you are, it might be worth it to trade up to get him!

Skelton is the most attractive position player Rule 5 candidate I've seen in some time. Let me explain why.

1. Position: Position for players is like location for real estate. It's everything. It puts every offensive and defensive stat into context. Good catching is like beachfront property-- it's insanely valuable, especially if it isn't eventually going to slide into the sea (Mauer) and isn't so damp you can't really enjoy living there no matter how many bathtubs you put in (Posada). Stretching the metaphor still further, Skelton is the equivalent of a beachfront bungalow which is up for a foreclosure auction.

The rates at which useful catchers come along in Rule 5 are not high. Most teams hoard them desperately, obsessed with obscure injury scenarios. Yes, Jesus Flores was let go a few years ago-- and the Mets were roundly derided for it. Even though he hasn't been great so far, it was still a terrible decision for the Mets to leave him off their 40-man roster.

2. More position: Rule 5 is a funky gimmick. If you take a guy, you can't option him down for a year unless the team you took him from lets you. Normally, this is bad, because if he starts stinking it up you either have to give him back or effectively play a man short. A lot of Rule 5 picks are, for this reason, relievers-- you can always hide them in unimportant (low-leverage) innings.

Well, here's the awesome thing about catchers-- you can do the same thing! Everybody, even Russell Martin, has a backup at catcher in MLB. It's just physically impossible for anyone to play 162 games at the position. The position is tailor-made for snagging a catcher in Rule 5 and then hiding him where he only has to play 30-odd games during the season. If he works out, maybe you increase his playing time-- but even if he doesn't, you can keep him around without killing your roster. And he's only bumping your backup catcher off the roster anyway-- honestly, unless you're an Indians or Twins fan, did you actually care about that?

3. Age: James Skelton's career minor league stats look like this:

276 G 867 AB

253 H 45 2B 5 3B 13 HR

181 BB 179 K

.292/.416/.400/.816

This is a good line out of any catching prospect-- not a whole lot of power, but walking more than you strike out is a great indicator of success because it indicates a knowledge of the strike zone coupled with a strong ability to make contact with pitches when necessary. And there's some hints here that he might develop into a 10 HR guy-- a solid number of doubles and triples relative to home runs.

Still, it's not fabulous. What is (relatively-- we are talking about Rule 5 draftees here) fabulous is his age. Skelton just turned 23 about a month ago, and he's reached AA ball. One of the key predictors of how well a prospect will do is how old he was relative to the average player in the leagues where he was playing-- and for most of Skelton's career, he's been younger than usual. He's going to be that again in MLB next year, so it's nice to know he can hold his own (especially in terms of drawing walks and putting the ball in play) in tough environments.

Age again: The other great thing about scoring a young guy in Rule 5 is that even if he ends up kicking around the back end of your roster for a year and then getting optioned back to AAA to try again, he's still young enough to turn into something useful down the road! For some guys, mostly college draftees, Rule 5 is sort of their last gasp at having a big-league career. That puts a ton of pressure on them to do well, and baseball is, by its nature, not a game that normal people play all that well under pressure.

[Tangent: Want my take on why statisticians searching for "clutch" in MLB players can't seem to find it? In order to get good enough to stick in Major League Baseball, you have to be a freak in more than merely physical ways. I know I could never do it-- I'd still be seething about my first at-bat, if I struck out, when I went up for my second, which is no way to focus. The extreme selectivity of MLB tends to weed out the temperamental and mentally weak prospects, leaving a landscape that looks almost robotic when it comes to pressure situations.]

The great thing about taking guys drafted out of high school or signed from Latin America in Rule 5 is that there's some potential payoff down the road even if you don't end up with an immediately good player. Almost everyone picked in Rule 5 still has all three of his minor league option years left at the end of his Rule 5 year. This means you can keep Skelton around until he's 27 without letting other teams claim him on waivers, and see if he makes something of himself.

James Skelton has his drawbacks as a prospect. Obviously-- if he didn't, a. he wouldn't be available to pick in Rule 5, and b. he'd be Matt Wieters, who's good enough to force his team to trade a league average catcher for a pile of lame. He's not great defensively, I noted that he has little power, and all things being equal you might like that strikeout rate to come down a little (striking out a lot in the minors sometimes indicates that a player won't hit for average in the majors). But he's probably better than your backup catcher. He's almost certainly more valuable than your backup catcher, because he's available on the cheap for the next seven-to-ten years. If you're really hard-up, like San Diego, he might even be better than your STARTING catcher. And he's available for 50 grand.

Draft him, ye MLB GMs.

Kurt Suzuki is Good At Blocking Pitches

PaulThomas — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:11:37 -0000

Kurt Suzuki is Good At Blocking Pitches

Apparently those blocking drills in the bullpen last year paid off.