PT believes, as do many others, that since Trevor Cahill has been a "gascan" in all but three starts, he stands little chance of improvement (in fact, regression to a 5.00+ ERA is predicted by Paul) and thus should get out of the way of whatever little chance of contention that Mr. Thomas and others  believe the A's have next season and instead toil for the River Cats.

Hmmmm...

Let's look at a couple of equally young starting pitchers. In both cases, unlike Cahill, they got a cup of coffee near the end of Season One then pitched pretty much full-time in Season Two.

One of them had a combined ERA of 4.80 and an ERA+ of 79 in those formative years-- the other was even worse at 5.59 ERA and an ERA+ of 75 with a horrific WHIP of nearly 1.7.

Now it was pointed out to PT that improvement on the mound is often not incremental-- that pitchers, particularly young pitchers, are capable of quantum  leaps if an organization is patient with them at the major league level.

And Pitcher A managed to go 24-20 his next two years with an ERA under 4 and a ERA+ of about 100, then jumped up to become one of the best left handers in the league just two seasons later at age 25. And Pitcher B did it even faster, winning 18 games at 22 years old on his way to a legendary career.

Cahill's ERA is 4.54 and his ERA is 91--- better than both of these examples-- but of course he's a "gascan" most of the time, right ???

And he doesn't throw all that hard, but neither did Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux.

I don't know if the leap will come next year or three years from now-- and I'm certainly not projecting a HOF career for young Trevor. But he could be very good, and I don't think sending him down to Sacramento is going to help him get there anywhere near as much as staying here in Oakland. So let's let Mr Beane have the final say on this one and cheer Cahill on in his 30+ starts as an Athletic next season.

Not a short series, where I will fully admit the A's wouldn't have enough frontline pitching. But everyone plays everyone-- either one or two games. Now Tomko being shut down would change my view, but before that development here are the teams that I believe would definitely finish ahead of the A's:

New York Yankees

LA Angels

Boston Red Sox

St Louis Cardinals

Colorado Rockies

And that's it. The Giants, Phillies and Dodgers would be very close to the A's, IMHO. Frankly we're playing better ball than any of them right now and are stronger in the bullpen over all save the Dodgers. I think the A's would outplay the Marlins, Braves, Rangers, Tigers, Twins and other pseudo-contenders. And they're flat-out playing much better ball than just about every other team.

Interesting off-season because while the debate will undoubtedly be stoked around here as to whether or not to go for it in 2010, I believe BB is going to try to get a pitcher and perhaps a SS to do just that.

Only minus 17 after tonight. And nearly +30 since AS break. Team has played 500 ball since then, and somewhat over .500 ball if you start from the low water mark just after the AS break (25-21).

Almost all of that time without their best player or any of the players acquired for him save Mortensen. So here's the theory. This offense is going to be-- at worst-- league average next year given the improvement shown in the past two months plus potential contributions from the likes of Wallace, Carter and Cardenas at various points in 2010.  Some will argue the point but I'm gonna stake whatever my baseball acumen's worth on that, and we can allcheck it out a year from now. The bullpen should be better than most however it shakes out. What will ultimately determine whether this is a .500 type squad or something better is, of course, the starting pitching. And in a season when we got nothing from Duchscherer, lost Outman for most of the year, lost Braden for most of the 2nd half and had MAC pitch to mixed results, who knows what next year will bring. When Brett Tomko is your most dependable late season starter you don't really know what you've got the next season.

But a little luck on the injury front and some expected increase in maturity could-- underline the word could-- spell a significantly better rotation. If so, they could win 90 games next year. Easy.

for 90 games, they scored barely 4 runs a game-- one of the worst offenses in all of baseball. Since then-- over the last 50-- they have scored 5.3 runs a game, one of the best totals in the AL. Giambi was weeded out, but Holliday hasn't been here for nearly all of those 50 games, either. Obviously Davis, Sweeney and Ellis have all picked up the pace considerably, as has Cust. And several of this year's contributors-- Kennedy, Garciaparra, Crosby and Barton come first to mind-- will probably not be in Green and Gold next year.

Is it a regression to the mean? Is it as simple as a bunch of players fighting for jobs and/or contracts?

I don't know, but this I do know. If by adding some combination of Wallace, Carter and Cardenas, next year's squad can match the past 50 games, well then that's 850 runs for the season. If the young starters can jell in what will be for most their second full season in the bigs, then the A's will probably allow no more than 750 runs and more like 700 and contention may not be such a pipe dream after all.

got to thinking about zone rating in its various forms and other defensive metrics. And particularly about the fact that what we loosely call defense-- whether it's an aspect of Voros McCracken's assessment of pitching, Baseball Prospectus' team defensive efficiency or the individual metrics-- is really a very varied set of actions, ranging from the simple catch of a pop fly to the athletic and challenging dive and throw in the hole. And that there is a distinct possibility that maybe we overrate outfield ability and likewise undervalue the performance in the infield.

So as a starter and an attempt to generate some discussion, I took the two most valuable spots in the two basic parts of the field (excluding catcher, which is another entire discussion that has spawned a lot of study as to their (supposed) ability to "handle" a pitching staff)-- that is one from the infield: SS, and one from the outfield: CF. And I tried to rank the plays they make from easiest to hardes. If I've left something out, by all means let me know. I have excluded the really rare play such as chasing down an inside the park or other bad carom from another outfielder's misplay or injury, or the bounce (clank) off the 3Bman's glove (though Larry Bowa did this pretty nicely in the 9th inning of Game Three of the 1977 NLCS and then didn't get the call from the 1B umpire) , or the pretty inconsequential such as backing up the wild catcher throw to second base. And no rundown situations. But everything else is pretty much in here.

AT SS:

1. catch of inning ending force play from 2B

2. Pop-up right to spot

3. Line Drive right at glove

4. catch of inning ending force play from 1B

5. tag play on steal (theory being if throw is off line or high, there hardly ever is a chance for an out. And the good throw is easy to catch and then apply the tag)

6. hard hit ground ball right to fielder-- no baserunners

7. Pop-up--- requires some movement, but not sprint or dive

8. soft live drive-- same

9. GB direct at SS-- inning end force to 2B-- this could be reversed with 6, but some times the throw has to be delivered quickly to a moving target

10. GB-- infield in. Throw to Home

11 GB-- start DP

12 GB-- catch and throw: from 2B

13 GB-- catch and throw: from P or C

14 GB-- catch and throw: from 1B

15 GB-- in hole-- throw to third

16 relay throw from OF-- to 3B

17 relay throw from OF-- to home

18 leaping or diving catch of Line Drive

19 chopper-- charge and throw

20 GB running in either direction (not deep in hole) and throw

21-- sprinting/diving catch of popup (Jeter variation going into stands at old Yankee Stadium is tougher version of this)

22-- diving GB stop-- throw for force or to start DP

23-- up middle dive and throw to first

24-- in hole dive or snare and throw to first

Here's my first point. Everything up until about 9 are simple plays that almost any half-decent fielder at this level can make 99.9% of the time. 10-18 are pretty standard for the better fielders-- although of course pre-pitch positioning can make a difference on the ground balls and some SS release the DP ball more quickly, accurately or with more force. There could be a lot of variations among the 30 starters in this group. From 19 on you get to plays that can create much wider variations at the major league level.

CF to follow.

Well, we're a little more than a month away from the time when 8 teams will be in, and 22-- including our beloved boys-- will be out. For some reason i find myself more fascinated by the possible matchups this year than in the past couple-- is it the Angels' offensive revival? A group of NL teams that I find myself liking a lot? New York putting Boston back into its more historic place? Who knows?

But take your shot-- not only as to how the races will play out, but then the four matchups-- and beyond-- in October. Here's one man's opinion.

1. The only true NL race-- the WC-- will go to the Rockies. 666 ball over three months time-- week in and week out-- is simply too much evidence to discount. I suspect that they may put a real scare into the Angeleno NL West entry after the next few days;

2. The only good AL race-- the WC-- will go to Tampa. I simply think the Sox are wearing down, and that Texas will fall a bit short, and that the youthful Rays have one more strong run in them with the likes of Price and Longoria leading the way.

3. The bad AL race-- the Central-- will be "put on the board" on the South SIde for the simple fact that no one else in that division is any good, so why not? With Quentin back their lineup should be enough to carry them through.

4. The probable 1st round NL matchups-- Colo-Philly and SL-LA-- could both be epic 7 game series full of star performers, top notch pitching, and real managerial intrigue. I like the Cardinals a lot, and the Phillies too, though if there is aa big upset again I see the Rockies. And then the NLCS may come down to how Carpenter and Lee are used-- and if they face each other who has the better couple of games. But what a series it would be, and I suspect Dodgers-Phils wouldn't be bad either.

5. Who might get enough pitching to shut down the explosive AL offenses, partic. in NY and Disneyland? Well again if I am right about the Rays, maybe them. I expect Price to finish strong after a disappointing rookie campaign. But if chalk prevails and it is a LAA-NYY series (and wouldn't it be wild to see the BB play two LA-NY series back to back) for the pennant, I see Scioscia and Co. pulling it off-- somehow someway. Their closer isn't as good; nor is the rest of the bullpen; and neither is their ace. So what-- they hit the bejeesus out of the ball and have a knack for playing the game.

6. But the Phila-SL winner wins the whole thing. Unless Lidge never gets his act together. But whether it's Lee and Hamels backed up by Utley-Howard-Wirth-Ibanez or Carpenter and Wainwright backed up by Pujols and Holliday, I like the NL teams in short series.

and the implications of the findings are becoming more meaningful

Let's just do it the fairest way, to negate the differences in games played:

Runs per game: Since and including July 20

LAA      7.2

OAK     6.1

MINN   5.85

CLEV  5.8

NY       5.6

TOR     5.0

BOS     4.8

CHIC    4.7

TB         4.6

TEX      4.45

KC        4.3

SEA      4.3

DET      3.9

BAL      3.9

I am not going to claim that all of a sudden this team is an above average offense-- they might be, but the sample size is way too small to prove it. But when for the better part of a month they score a run and a half per game more than half the teams in the league, I do think it is fair to say they are no longer one of the worst offenses in the league. And as for the late great Matt Holliday-- still tearing up the Senior Circuit as Sabathia did in a different way last year-- in the 20 games since he left, the A's are scoring 5.6 runs a game, and have scored 5 or more runs 13 times and fewer than 3 runs only twice-- only the Twins have scored 3+ runs more often. Causality or lack thereof is not the point-- the point is that they are more than competent without him.

The fact is that the lineup going out there every day is no longer a bad one-- in fact there is rarely an easy out on the field any more. And this all before Carter, Wallace, Cardenas, etc-- and without the likes of Buck and Barton. If-- and the if is big-- it continues for a few weeks more before the weather turns (though it's less of a factor in the Bay Area in September) I think the 2010 prospects need to be upgraded, partic. if the improvement by Anderson and Gonzalez is supplemented by Duchscherer and/or better starts from Cahill and Mazzaro. They might just win 75+ games and I suspect that end result may leave a lot better taste for the year to come than the last two seasons did.

You gotta hand it to Billy-- he took a system basically becoming bereft of quality everyday players or prospects and restocked in a hurry, much like his similar turnover of the pitching in the past couple of years. So let's size this one up.

CATCHERS: Suzuki, Powell, Donaldson

Would think status quo next year, but Donaldson might be ready to challenge 'Zook for the everyday job by 2011. Given the value of the position, would not be shocked by a trade around then.

CORNER INFIELDERS: Crosby (where else can you list him?), Cardenas (I'm going to put him at middle infield, too), Kennedy (ditto), Garciaparra, Wallace, Barton, Everidge, Carter.

All right, I'll say it. I think Brett Wallace gets the 3B job next spring. Can/will the A's sign either Crosby or Kennedy to play a utility role? The problem with Crosby is that he doesn't want to do it, but he may find the pickings slim in terms of a starting SS position. The problem with Kennedy is Mark Ellis, who is signed through 2010. Nomah's obviously gone. Would think Barton's on a really short leash now-- since Everidge and his right hand bat may be a better stopgap until Carter arrives. Or maybe Wallace gets converted to 1B (and Cardenas is the 3b man of future) and Carter is slated for a DH role, or vice-versa. But that seems very speculative-- even more than this entire exercise.

MIDDLE INFIELDERS: Cardenas, Kennedy, Pennington, Ellis, Weeks, Green

SS is simple now. Pennington plays until Green is ready, which is probably 2011 at earliest. 2B?? One more year of Ellis-- given his injury record and declining bat, Kennedy as a roving ultilty player/spot starter and injury replacement on the ready makes a lot of sense. Not sure given this year's performance if A's have coin to give AK what he wants, though. Weeks is either ready by 2011 or the A's use their option on Ellis.

OUTFIELDERS/DH: Hairston, Davis, Sweeney, Cunningham, Cust, Doolittle, Buck

Hairston is a given. Davis is fast pushing Sweeney into 4th OF status. Doolittle is fast approaching. Cust is a stopgap at DH until both Carter and Wallace arrive, at which case he's probably victim of a young player numbers game. The big question-- which dominates this board out of all proportion to his ability, is Buck. Look for a trade in the off-season-- for whatever reason, the entire organization has soured on the guy and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

So the 13/14 players next year would be:

Suzuki-Powell/Ellis-Pennington-Everidge-Wallace-(Crosby/Kennedy 1 of them, not both, in a 1 year deal)/Hairston-Davis-Sweeney-Cust-Cunningham-- with the final player either a back-up middle infield type like Petit or a new bat (Carter, for example) or Daric Barton, if he can ever show that he can hit.

and by 2011

Donaldson-Powell/Carter-Cardenas-Green and/or Weeks-Wallace-Pennington/Hairston-Davis-Sweeney-Doolittle. Ellis might remain as a utility player/defensive replacement. Weeks might be shifted to the outfield if Wallace stays at 3B and Cardenas moves back to 2B. I predict they bring in one more bat for the OF by then.

I don't see much of a future for Cunningham-Buck-Barton as well as the obvious candidates like Crosby, Cust and Kennedy. And I forsee Donaldson beating Suzuki out by 2011 and the latter being traded.

Here are the AL totals for runs scored since, and including, the night of the big comeback vs. the Twins-- that's 16 days of information.

14. SEATTLE  49

13. KANSAS CITY 53

12. DETROIT  61

11. TEXAS  62

T9 . BALTIMORE, TAMPA BAY 66

8. TORONTO 68

7. CHICAGO 72

6. MINNESOTA 77

5. BOSTON 78

T3. NEW YORK, CLEVELAND 82

2. OAKLAND 98

1. LOS ANGELES/ANAHEIM  114

Yes, our boys have played every day in this stretch, but only the Tribe pulls slightly ahead into 2nd for runs per game. And yes some guy named Holliday was here for the 2 double digit explosions. But even since he left, team has been scoring over 5 runs a game, way ahead of their previous pace. They have scored 3 runs or fewer only 4 times in the past 12 days, and are the only team-- along with the Yankees-- to have scored at least 2 runs in every game. And all this without the organization's most promising hitters, who are somewhere between one month and one year away from playing in the bigs. We may in time view the 2007-July 2009 period as the nadir of the A's offense.

Whatever else you think about the man and his motives, he has been the closest to the truth all the way through the sordid revelations of the past 5 years or so. His reaction to today's New York Times report that Manny Ramirez and David Oritz were both found to be using steroids in 2003-- on the infamous list of 104-- was, in effect, "I'll be surprised when you tell me something I didn't already know." Now of course he was never the teammate of either of the Red Sox stars, but neither was he ever on the same squad as Alex Rodriguez, and he confidently and correctly fingered the Yankee Ripper a while back.

But Jose went on to tell Pedro Gomez that baseball will have a real problem when they discover that a current HOFer was a user. OK-- put two and two together-- and, much as I hate to say it, there is an obvious suspect. Who has gone in from the steroid era? Jim Rice wasn't around when PED use exploded. Gwynn? Never-- just look at him. Ripken? Can't imagine. Molitor? not out of the question, but he was never a power guy and he retired before the late 90s. Same for Yount. And Ozzie Smith. Eddie Murray's career was effectively in its last moments when PED use started to mushroom. Winfield was done.  Boggs? He was a singles hitter his whole time.

One of the sad facts about steroids is that it isn't simply a haven for the untalented. In fact, the very attributes that drive someone to be the best-- including pride, ambition and, of course, monetary goals-- can also make them hell-bent to stay there. Even as they age. As they approach records. As they need to recover from the daily grind... the two dozen or more years of playing the game professionally. Isn't it obvious who Jose is fingering here? The one HOFer he would most be in a position to know whether or not that person used? And as we celebrate his ascenion to baseball's highest height, can we really be sure that Rickey was clean??

OK, let's trot out the big guns.

LEFT FIELD: Barry Bonds, Rickey Henderson, Ted Williams

No one else comes close, when you think about it. Billy Williams, Willie Stargell, Lou Brock, Pete Rose (for a time), Musial played too much 1B, Yaz was very good, Jim Rice, Tim Raines should go to HOF but probably won't, Winfield played both there and in RF, Belle had a terrific 10 year run. But a) perhaps the greatest hitter of all time and b) the greates leadoff hitter and base stealer of all time, and c) perhaps the greatest player of all time and certainly the best player (pre PED use) in a generation or more?? Manny Ramirez would probably rank 4th but he is simply not in the league of the others in terms of an all-around player or as great a hitter as Teddy Ballgame. Those are the top three. Williams was an indifferent fielder, but both Bonds and Rickey were among the sport's best in the first half of their careers. Hold a gun to my head and I rank them Bonds, Williams, Henderson. Reluctantly.

CENTER FIELD: Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Ken Griffey, Jr

Again a pretty simple choice. No Snider, no Reggie Smith, no Dale Murphy, no Carlos Beltran, none of the defensive specialists like Pettis or Lemon or Hunter or even Edmonds, no Andre Dawson or Curt Flood, no Richie Ashburn. We're left with Mays who, given the lack of African-American players in the Ruth era, is certainly a legitimate candidate for best player of all time; Mantle, who was actually better at his peak than Mays; and Griffey, who may-- underline the word may-- go down as the greatest player in the steroid era who did not use steroids.

RIGHT FIELD: Henry Aaron, Frank Robinson, Roberto Clemente

Aaron is a no-brainer, of course. And while Robby did play some LF and DHed at the end when he was also managing, I think his greatness is underappreciated. MVPs in both leagues. 4th on the pre-steroid HR list. A Triple Crown. Clemente is a tough and, admittedly, sentimental choice on my part because of the way he played and the way he died. A lot of ink has been spilled showing that Al Kaline among his contemporaries may have been a better overall player, albeit less flashy. And you can make a case for Reggie, for Tony Gwynn, for Winfield when he played there, for Sosa but for the PED use. In the end I think it comes down to Clemente vs. Kaline and I go for the panache although the actual numbers say different.

STARTING PITCHERS--RIGHT HANDED:Tom Seaver, Greg Maddux, Roger Clemens

I'm picking 3 from each side, and three more. The top candidates are pretty clear-cut here-- the question is which 3 deserve top mention. Gibson, Marichal, Seaver, Clemens and Maddux stand atop the career hill. Jim Palmer right behind. Nolan Ryan is in his own category. Pedro Martinez was, like Sandy Koufax before him, as good fior a shorter period of time than anyone. The longevity types like Robin Roberts, Don Sutton, Gaylord Perry, Phil Niekro and Bert Blyleven are all very good pitchers, with all save Blyleven in Cooperstown with Bert likely to join them in the next two-three years, but they were never dominant like my top 5. Catfish we love but he shouldn't be in Cooperstown, God bless him. Neither should Drysdale, probably. So if I had to pick 3 I'd go with Tom Terrific and Maddux for sure, and a somehat confused vote for Clemens on the strength of his total body of work, struggling with how to judge the second half when I believe PEDs played a huge role. But one game? Gibson, for sure.

STARTING PITCHERS--LEFT HANDED: Sandy Koufax, Warren Spahn, Randy Johnson

It pains me to leave Carlton out of this mix. Koufax was simply too brilliant from 1961-66 not to be here. Spahn was too extraordinary post 30 years old. and Johnson combines the best of both. Carlton won 4 CYs and had perhaps the greatest individual season (other than Gibson's 1.12 ERA in 1968) in recent memory winning 27 games in 1972 for a last place team that only won 59 all season-- but there was also a fair amount of peaks and valleys and a marked decline in the last four seasons. Other top candidates: Glavine, of course. Tommy John (funny how your identity can be appropriated-- he is now a medical procedure much more than a pitcher). Vida Blue in his A's heyday. Guidry same for the Yanks. "Kitty" Kaat. The Chairman of the Board, Whitey Ford.

STARTING PITCHERS-- REMAINING: Bob Gibson, Pedro Martinez, Steve Carlton.

Palmer and Marichal were terrific. But Gibson had the something extra in his incredible WS record. Pedro was more dominant than either of the 1960s/70s guys. And Carlton did more for longer. But if you included either of those two instead of any of these three I couldn't complain. Bob Feller might have qualified except a fair amount of his career was pre WWII. Amd the war itself cost him dearly, as it did for Ted Williams.

RELIEF PITCHERS: Mariano Rivera, Dennis Eckersley, Hoyt Wilhelm.

The last one was tough. Do I reward the longevity of "Hell's Bells" Hoffman? The versatility and sheer dominance of Goose Gossage? The ability to throw multiple innings in the pre-LaRussa era of Rollie Fingers? Wilhelm is now a relic, but he was unique. Unique pitch, the knuckleball. Many more innings pitched than relief specialists pitch now. A long and always productive career.

So there it is: 27 position players and 12 pitchers. Hmm.. 39 players-- who is the last one to fill out this team at an even 40? To ride the bench and be ready in a pinch? I would think you have to go with Mike Gallego.

Let's face it-- these trips to NY or Boston ain't what they used to be. And now we await the thrilling news about Orlando Cabrera-- Orlando Cabrera!!-- and more losses. And hope that September is a barrel of fun with the likes of Everidge or Carter or Doolittle even Cardenas in the lineup. SO in the wake of a truly entertaining induction speech by the one and only Rickey, here are my thoughts on the best three (3) players at each position since 1945. (Rickey will find his name on this list, don't worry). Let's start with catcher and the infield, and tomorrow I'll get to the OF and the pitchers.

CATCHER: Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Gary Carter.

And probably in that order. No, I never saw Berra play, but his numbers are very good, his postseason record incomparable-- at least for number of appearances/games-- and besides the guy has entertained us all with his "late out there early" and "fork in the road" Berraisms. Carter gets the nod over a lot of top contenders for his complete play-- the "Kid" could field the position and was a feared hitter throughout the late 1970s and 1980s. Fisk only has longevity over him; Piazza was too poor a fielder; and the obvious 'roid linkage to Rodriguez takes him down just a notch in my book.

FIRST BASE: Willie McCovey, Albert Pujols, Frank Thomas.

Those too young to have seen him probably have no idea just how feared a hitter "Stretch" was in the period from roughly 1965-70. Think Pujols and Bonds and add three inches. Pujols is obviously the creme de la creme today, and health and steroids notwithstanding, may ultimately challenge Gehrig as the greatest to play the position. Thomas is a trickier proposition-- he only played the position full-time for about 10 years (McCovey played some outfield early on since the Giants had Cepeda as well for a time) and then became first a part-time and then full-time DH. But I can't put McGwire or Palmeiro ahead of him both for the obvious reason and for the fact that for those 10 years he was simply a much better hitter than both of them. Eddie Murray is probably the best of the pre-PED era, but since I believe the Hurt is probably clean, again the offensive numbers are too compelling. Mattingly and Hernandez (and Will Clark, for that matter) are nice players but not in Thomas' league offensively, despite their clear defensive superiority. And Stargell played a lot of outfield. And Banks' great seasons were at SS, not IB. And Killebrew played a bunch of different positions and was a 260-270 hitter for most of his career.

SECOND BASE: Joe Morgan, Roberto Alomar, Craig Biggio

Morgan is one of the 15-20 greatest players of all time. And maybe 15-20 worst announcers of all time, but that's for a different place. Alomar has two problems-- the "spit" is one, and a poor tail end of his career including some allegations of less than total effort. But at his best he was the nonpareil player at this position-- a great top of order hitter and a scintillating fielder. Biggio simply did more for longer than other contenders such as Whitaker, Grich or Sandberg. Chase Utley has a chance to get into this company one day.

SHORTSTOP: Cal Ripken, Ozzie Smith, Derek Jeter

Well this one might be very different if a certain player had never signed with the Yankees. Despite some of the problems I have with the Streak, Ripken's overall output at this position is simply staggering-- and he was for most of his career a lot better fielder than given credit for, kind of the opposite of Jeter. Ozzie was a wonder in the field and became a very good hitter in his 30s. Jeter has too much offense to let someone like Omar Vizquel or Alan Trammell by him. There were no great all-around SS in the 1950s, 60s, or even most of the 70s-- save for a few seasons by Ernie Banks. He-- and Robin Yount as well-- suffers becasue he was not a strong enough fielder to keep playing the position. And as for ARod, well, 7 seasons are not enough, I'm sorry;

THIRD BASE: Mike Schmidt, George Brett, Wade Boggs

The third guy here is tough. Eddie Matthews is a strong contender. So is Brooks Robinson. And maybe Scott Rolen. and one day either Evan Longoria, David Wright, or both. (Brett Wallace, perchance??) But in the end Boggs' sheer hitting talent-- all those .350 plus seasons and batting titles, plus pertty solid defense, wins out. (Matthews, btw, has more Win Shares than either Brett or Boggs, so I am probably reaching here) This is one case where seeing the guy play all those years-- even with Margo and the chicken factored in-- has an impact on me. And again 7 years of ARod ain't enough, though at least here he has a chance to reach the top rung.

DESIGNATED HITTER/ALL PURPOSE PLAYERS

Edgar Martinez,/Pete Rose, Paul Molitor

Edgar for DH obviously-- none better over the long haul. And Rose and Molitor both played numerous positions and were terrific top of order players.

Hope this stirs up some debate. I'll have OF and pitchers tomorrow.

Or second 45+ percent, to be more accurate.

I'd love to see a late run at the playoffs. Nah gonna happen. A) they're not good enough and b) I don't think either the Angels or Rangers, falter badly, and certainly not both.

I'd love to see a final record around .500 but they have to go 44-32 to do it-- nearly .600 ball-- and I seriously doubt that's in the cards. So here are my expectations for the remaining two and a half months of this, so far, frustrating season:

1. make a smart decision regarding Holliday. That may or may not be a trade. His value hasn't been helped by either his performance or the glut of contending teams (this is counterintuitive, I know. But I think the entire market is being held back until some clarity about true pretender vs. true contender emerges). The two draft choices look better all the time. But regardless I just want to feel on August 1 that whatever one thinks about the decision to bring him here (and I should note, for the record, that CarGon is hitting barely above the Mendoza line in Colorado with an OPS of 613 and a scintillating OPS+ of 58), or his play here, that the team benefitted from his leaving;

2. Make the season a success for MAC. Qualified success , undoubtedly. But let's hope they remain relatively healthy (Anderson in particular has been battling a variety of ailments) and that each can point to some areas of progress from the experience. They and Braden are the A's core going forward-- and they might be, dare I say it, Giant-like in their progression, portending better times ahead;

3. Get the kids with bats up for the final month at least. That means some combination of Carter, Cardenas and Doolittle. If Holliday departs that opens up an outfield slot, and though others around here would disagree, I'm sure, I'd just as soon see Carter and Doolittle get some PAs than Barton or Buck. same goes for Cardenas vs. Ellis/Kennedy. Which also means the likes of Giambi, Nomah and even Cust should play much less.;

4. Play hard and embrace the spoiler role. Make Texas and the Angels (or the White Sox or the Yankees) remember how their fortunes got affected by playing the A's as Tampa Bay just did. Don't do a Kansas City rollover job;

5. Keep Hairston in the middle of the order and let's see just what he can do. He may be a fixture there next year;

6. As for the final record, I'll be happy if they play .500 ball the rest of the way. That would mean another 75 win season, but that's who they are;

7. Pray that Outman and/or Duchscherer still have a future. there is the makings of a very good pitching staff still--- with those two back in the saddle in some form next year or maybe 2011 in Outman's case-- it should be one of the best in the league;

NY Times front page story is very intriguing today. The essential point is that the time players are missing has jumped up 26% from 2006-08 and is headed to a similar total as 2008 this year.

What is fascinating are all the theories-- each of them at least mildly plausible:

1) Steroids. Or the mix of testing that has now put amphetamines on the no-no list. Players felt indestructible when they were roiding in the past and all of the speed helped them endure the pain and trial of a 162 game season. Now without either they are breaking down a lot more;

2) Better medical techniques. Kind of akin to some studies that show that rape statistics have risen as women have felt less of a stigma about coming out with their stories-- in part due to better testing. Docs are now more able to find certain injuries and recommend invasive procedures that cause players to miss time, often a lot of time;

3. Money-- Part 1. Players making too much money and are increasingly unwilling to risk major injury and thus tend to sit out more. This might be the Garciaparra explanation (and so might Number 1 as well, come to think of it);

4. Money--Part 2. Front offices in time of economic difficulty may be more willing to shelve certain players and play cheaper alternatives, thus denying the veterans ability to earn more money in the future;

Or all of the above. Bad training staffs wasn't mentioned. Maybe that's more of a local rather than universal problem.

or Sweeney every day, for that matter.

There is an obvious reason, which all their advocates around here seem to be ignoring.

So far, as major league hitters, individually and collectively, they all suck. The only above average stretch for any one of the four was Travis Buck's rookie year, which he has followed up with injury and a declining curve ever since.

Sweeney has a 650 OPS this year and a career mark of 684. (Still better than Patrol Craft at 638, btw)

Barton was handed the reins last year,r esponded with a 674 OPS season, horrific for a !Bman, and has followed it up in limited duty with a 485 this year. And he hasn't really been hitting all that well at AAA

Cunningham raked to the tune of 481 when allowed to play OF this season.

Buck has been 666 this season after 723 last season.

These are all pretty putrid numbers and makes me wonder if Beane isn't afraid of totally killing their trade value by playing them more this season when, after all, the team isn't going to come close to a playoff spot. Why not let them all amass ABs in AAA, but for Sweeney, and then clear out all the dead and veteran wood after this season and start fresh next year?

Why can't our team be a "Thriller" again?

Where are the hitters that can simply "Beat It"

"Billy Beane... Is Still my Hero.

He's Just a Guy who tries for the games to be won

Holliday is not the One.

We want the games to be won but Holliday is not the One"

Can't we go back to Hitting as simple as "A..B..C"

And Lew, if you open the 3rd deck again, don't you know that "I'll be There", because we loyal A's fans

"Never Can Say Goodbye".

I just can't get my hands around "Wanna Be starting Something" when O Cab or Hannahan leads off an inning.

I know we could have the right mix of players, a little "Ebony and Ivory", I just wish they could Play Play Play like they "Say..Say..Say.."

Instead of being good, they are so "BAD".

Since they may no longer be an intact quintet (and the loss of Outman makes the acronym a whole lot harder), we should examine their collective performance, with special emphasis on the last 5 weeks.

For the season:

341.2 IP  336 H/107 BB  WHIP of 1.23   ER 144 for an ERA of 3.79

215/107 K/W ratio of 2/1   5.67 K/9 innings

Since May 19th:

193.1 IP 171H/47BB  WHIP of 1.13   ER 69 for an ERA of 3.21

129/47 K/W ratio of 2.7/1   6.03 K/9 innings

Simply put, this is so far one of the most impressive collective performances by a young rotation in recent memory. Of course the entire season will be the more complete test, including the dog days and when some of these guys start to hit the wall in terms of their experience. I don't expect them to be able to repeat the last five weeks in the next five weeks. But the fact is that a rotation consisting of 4 first-year starters and 1 second year starter has been among the best in the entire sport for the last 5 weeks and is clearly above average for the entire season.

Seasonal ERA+ are: Braden 126, Outman 118, Cahill 112, Anderson 72, and Mazzaro at an other-worldly and small sample of 234. Only Anderson is pitching substandard, akin to Mulder most of his rookie season. Cahill, Outman and Mazzaro are, so far, approaching what Hudson, Zito and Harden were able to do in their rookie/2nd year campaigns. (Hudson was 142 in ERA+ in 1999, 113 in his first full season in 2000; Zito 172 in 2000, 125 in his first full season in 2001; Harden 100 in 2003; 114 the next year; Mulder 86 in 2000 and 126 in 2001) I said approaching because a) they're not quite at level, unless the last 5 weeks becomes the norm and b) the bar is even higher down the road, and we have no idea how their injuries or further development will pan out.

That said, so far the grand experiment does seem to be a pretty unqualified success.

In light of the (so far) poor performance of Holliday and Giambi, and the injury to Garciaparra, setting up a potential Triple Crown of veteran busts in terms of offense this season, I decided to go back over the last decade and analyze just what happens when the A's acquire a veteran position player. (Note: This is first level numbers only. I have not yet studied OPS+ to account for the obvious park effect, but instead am just trying for some general conclusions before it can get massaged more carefully)

I do this in full knowledge that the A's system itself did produce some pretty good hitters-- Giambi, Chavez, Tejada-- and that early in their contending run, there were very good retread pickups in the likes of Jaha and Stairs. There is a disturbing and pretty obvious thread that may run through most, if not all, of those players (add Jeremy Giambi, Velarde, Menechino as clear or potential additions to that thread) and it may of course provide one very simple answer to the hitting woes that have plagued this franchise for many years now. When they juiced, they hit, going back to Bash Brother Days. When they don't, they don't.

But here are the key findings-- and I have limited to this established veterans who had more than 100 PAs in their initial, or only,. year with the A's.

2000

Velarde  OPS  754  Prior Year: 845 (822 as an Angel; 880 as an A)   Following Year 780  Career  760

Velarde would return for a worse outcome of 656 OPS in 2002   Given the initial impact on the last two months of 1999, I would rate this a SUCCESS, though of course PEDs were involved;

2001

Damon  OPS  687  Prior Year: 877  Following Year: 799  Career  792  A clear FAILURE

Dye      OPS  913 (final 2+ months-- he was only 749 in KC that season) Prior Year 951  Career  831  The problem with Dye were the three succeeding years of 792-514-793 OPS. The acquisition was fine, the contract extension was a FAILURE given his solid performance in Chicago ever since

Myers  OPS 727 Prior Year 800  He had a 723 OPS in 2002  Career  708  modest SUCCESS

Gant  OPS   764 (813 before the A's) Prior Year 891   Following Year  827  A's brought him back for a disastrous cup of coffee in 2003 (401 OPS)   modest FAILURE   End of career type

2002

Hatteberg OPS 807  Prior Year 678   P. Machine then spun off 725 and 787 OPS years for the A's. Career mark was 772   so this was basically as expected  modest SUCCESS

Justice  OPS 785  Prior Year 763   He then retired. Given situation, a modest SUCCESS, despite his career mark of 878

Durham OPS 806 (836 earlier in year)  Prior Year 804  Following Year  807  Career 788  Consistent, including his time ehre. modest SUCCESS

Mabry  OPS  846 (590 earlier in year)  Prior Year  821  Following Year  684  Career  727  John F'ing Mabry was a big time SUCCESS

So far more hits than misses, don't you think?

2003

Singleton OPS 641  Prior Year  706  Following Year-- retired  Career  726  A's hastened the beginning of his broadcast career. modest FAILURE

Durazo  OPS 804  Prior Year  944  HG then followed up with a big year of 919 and a bust of 674 and then disappeared. I don't know what to call this. I'd say a wash overall.

Guillen  OPS 770 (1013 with the Reds that year)  Prior Year  659  Following Year 849  Career 768  Another wash

2004

Miller  OPS  742  Prior Year 680  Following Year 753  Career  740 Whatever his impact on the pitching staff, the offense was in line with his career. Modest SUCCESS

Kotsay  OPS  829 Prior Year  726   Kotsay then went steadily downhill with the A's-- 746-719-575. The acquisition wasn't the problem-- like Dye, it was the contract which must be rated a FAILURE

McLemore  OPS  683  Prior Year  632  Following Year-- Ret.  Career  690  Fine for what he was

Kielty  OPS 691 Prior Year 758  Ronald followed up with 746-770  All in all, a wash but Lilly proved more valuable of course

Karros  OPS  554  Prior Year 786  Goodbye A's, hello retirement  FAILURE

2005

Kendall  OPS  666  Prior Year 789  Jason followed up his stellar sign of the devil season with a 709 and 542 before being sent back to the NL. His Cubs and Brewers eprformance has been no better, so it wasn't anything specific about the A's or the Coliseum- the guy simply stopped hitting sometime in the middle of the decade. Still a clear FAILURE

Payton  OPS  753 (741 for Red Sox that year) Pror Year 691  He followed it with a 743 OPS in the ALCS season, then left the A's and slipped to 668 and 637 since. Career  747   This is a SUCCESS and he was an underappreciated player

Ginter  OPS  497  Prior Year  812  Career 751  The time with the A's essentially ended Ginter's fairly brief major league career.  FAILURE

2006

Thomas  OPS 926  Prior Year 905  Following Year  857  A clear SUCCESS, and the 2008 comeback at 751 was not horrible, either

Bradley  OPS 818  Prior Year 835  Following Year 819 with A's, 1004 with SD  Career 822  A real lightning-rod (he didn't get the outs messed up here, did he?) but forgetting all the externals which surround him, the on-field performance was as expected. A wash, I guess, but at the expense of Ethier

Perez  OPS 389  Prior Year  758  Limited playing time but the other part of that deal was not a wash. FAILURE

2007

Stewart  OPS  739  Prior Year  715  Following Year  628  Career  790  modest SUCCESS

Piazza  OPS 727   Prior Year  843   Retired   A modest FAILURE, meaning better than Singleton and Karros and not as good as Justice or certainly Thomas

2008

Brown  OPS  682  Prior Year 647  Following Year 533 as DFA got DFAed.  Career 721  A meh wash

Sweeney (Mike, that is)  OPS  728  Prior Year  719   Following Year  673 (so far)  Career  854  Another wash at the end of a career.

We'll see about Rajai Davis.

By my scoring it was 6-2 in favor of success through 2002; 5-2 in favor of failures from 2003-05; split since but obviously leaning failure given this year's results.

So says Slusser. I for one think it is the right thing to do. Assuming the 4 kids plus Braden continue anywhere near their current success- and no, I'm not saying they have to pitch lights out every time- and assuming some combination of Springer, Casilla and Ziegley continue anywhere near their current lack of success, well where else should Duchscherer go? He is a proven quality ML reliever over several seasons; he was a solid ML starter for most of one season, and then got injured.

This team could be in a few weeks time in the midst of a real race for the AL West crown. At that point all bets are off as to how Beane and Co. proceed. Holliday may not be traded; Duchscherer may not return to the rotation, but rather to the pen; and the team might be a buyer in mid to late July as opposed to a seller, or perhaps both a la 1999. They need someone to play 3B who can actually hit-- and they might need one more bat to play in the OF. And they have a surplus of young arms despite the injuries.

"Are we human.... or are we dancer?

Our staff is vital.  Our bats are cold.

And we're asking Beane to supply the answer.

Are we human..... or are we dancer?"

First time all year I can put the "A's" and "Killers" in the same sentence without a cringe. And there are certainly several signs of life all of a sudden.

15 of 17 the last starts either quality by the technical definition, or solid, if incomplete, 5+ inning efforts. Haven't had that kind of run very often since the original Big Three departed.

Two-thirds of a bullpen functioning well, and if Casilla and Springer don't get their act together, there are replacements ready in Sacramento.

A reluctant past, present and future superstar has now posted a 1000 OPS over the past month-- haven't seen that kind of sustained excellence since the original G and a bit of Thomas.

And speaking of G, his OPS is approaching 900 for the past month.

A pretty good OF defense when Cust DHs, and a servicable infield D even without Ellis and Chavez.

And the opposition within the division doesn't remind one of the 27 Yankees, 01 Mariners, or even the 07-08 Angels.

Of course there are all kinds of caveats. This is one of the youngest rotations this or any other team has ever trotted out there-- inconsistency or worse could still be part of this season's story. The offensive production from 3B, SS, and two OF positions has been horrendous, and 2B and C have come crashing back to earth recently as well. All of this good pitching has simply moved the team above .400, with .500 still weeks away, if that. The incredible comeback runs of 2001-02-05 seem like pretty distant memories. Texas can hit a lot better; and the Angels have veteran pitching bound to improve over the summer.

But at least we can have the discussion about how good the A's might be. I don't know about you, but I've got a little bounce in my step. Call them "protodancers". Maybe the real thing is coming. We can only hope.

This could be this team's salvation.

There are 3 certifiable disaster areas on AL mounds this year.

Baltimore is allowing 5.8 runs a game; Cleveland 5.6; and the Yankees 5.4. In the latter case the new ballpark is obviously partly to blame, and they've got the offense to overcome it (Yanks would be the WC team if season ended today). Baltimore is not surprising but Cleveland was a popular pick to win their division and unless they keep making up 6 run deficits in the 9th inning that isn't gonna happen.

There are 7 teams in mediocre land-- Twins (5.0 runs/game), Angels (5.0), TB (4.96), A's (4.93), CWS (4.76), TEX (4.76) and Boston (4.74).

Red Sox have werewithal and talent to get better. Can Rangers survive the summer Texas heat? History says no. White Sox are Danks, Buerhle and then a lot of pray for rain types, hence the Peavy attempt. TB accelerated the call-up of Price, but have a bigger defensive problem with both of their middle infielders now hurt. And their pen as the 10-2 choke vs Cleveland the other night shows is nothing like last year's. Twins have no anchor in the rotation as Liriano has not returned to his rookie form. SiegnA now have Lackey and Santana back but Shields and Arrodondo have been problemmatic this year.

In fact, there is evidence to suggest that the A's don't belong in this mediocre group. Every team will weed out the lame and otherwise untalented during this phase of the season, but I wonder if other teams have as dramatic a difference as with Oakland.

Eveland/Giese/Gallagher/Blevins and Gio Gonzalez have combined to throw 73.2 innings (alomst 20% of the team's total) with a WHIP of 1.96 (!) and a collective ERA of 7.21 (!!) They're all hurt or gone.

The pitchers that remain plus Jeff Gray have a collective WHIP of 1.36 and an ERA of 3.68. In other words, the A's current staff may be the best in the league, and worst case is close to the best in the league. (Top 4 teams in runs allowed are Seattle (4.57), TOR (4.39), DET (4.39) and the Greinkes at 4.35. Converting the ERA of the current A's staff to runs allowed would put it at about 4.3) Of course this is "cherry-picking" to some degree, as the A's unloaded the worst performers who might be expected to regress back to a better mean, and kept the best performers who could do the reverse. And other teams could be in similar situations. But the current staff has racked up over 300 IP which is starting to be a significant sample size.

Even allowing for park effects I think there is a fair chance that the A's staff will be among the top 3 or 4 in the AL going forward, and possibly the best overall staff in the league, at least until Boston starts buying in July. I think they are better than even the Lackey-Santana improved Angels.

The hitting looks like it will not be what BB anticipated-- and I think the defense won't be either with Chavez and Ellis spending so much time on the shelf. But this pitching staff just might be good enough to keep this team in contention a lot longer than most people expect.

This team is kind of like the Dutch boy trying to plug the holes in the dike. No sooner does he stick a finger into one hole than another pops open.

The impact of guys like Gio and Gallagher having no ability to throw strikes and an offense that can't achieve separation in a low-scoring game is a bullpen that is over taxed. Geren tried to coax more than one inning out of Bailey two days after he did the same and saw Bailey survive despite 5 baserunners. Today it blew up-- and then he made the only move left which was to turn the game over to an increasingly ineffective Brad Ziegler, to a predictable result.

Pennant contention is probably not very realistic this season. but I do think a team will benefit if the bullpen roles can be more firmly established. Ziegler was a wonderful story last year, but he simply is not a closer. his stuff isn't good enough.. he can't get lefties out consistently.. and darn if that WBC curse which seems to afflict pitchers at an alarming rate didn't strike again. I can't prove it had anything to do with him getting sick, but he did... and he is simply not the same pitcher. I don't think he's deserving of even the prinxipal set-up role. If it wasn't for Sweeney's heroics he would have blown last night's game as well.

Make Bailey the closer-- and a one-inning closer to maximize the impact of his stuff. Make Wuertz the principal set-up man, along with Breslow in LHB situations. Put Ziegler along with Casilla and Springer in the 5-7 inning slot. And stick with it. This team needs consistency. We seem to have at least 3 starters capable of going 6 innings now, so maybe the pen can get a much needed break.

As for allowing the likes of Crosby and Hannahan to get critical ABs in late inning pressure situations with RISP, that's the next project. I don't think Geren is capable of much multi-tasking-- let's see him stabilize the bullpen first.

In the last 20 years, there have been several examples of teams that made quantum leaps in their first contending year, essentially with little or no warning from the previous season(s).

NOTE: Of course the perennial contenders don't really fit here, nor do those teams that are always sort of hanging around (White Sox/Phillies come to mind) before winning a pennant or a WS. These are the rags to riches stories. I have also excluded the DBacks and Marlins, for their stories are acutely different and very much guided by how they handled expansion;

Braves-- Won 63 games in 1989; 65 in 1990, before exploding to two straight pennants and a 15 year period of playoff appearances;

Indians-- won 76 games two years running before exploding in the strike year to a playoff-worthy record and then winning over 100 games in a shortened season in 1995 and enjoying many years of playoff contention

Tigers-- 72 and 71 wins in 2004-05 (after just 43 in 2003) before exploding to a pennant in 2006

Angels-- 75 wins in 2001-- WS title in 2002

Brewers-- a more steady increase, but still 81 and 75 wins in 2005-06 before holding the lead for most of 2007 until the Cubs ran them down-- now seem like a perennial contender

Twins-- 69 wins in 2000; then 85 in 2001 and a contender ever since

Rays-- 61 and 66 wins before winning the AL pennant last year

A's-- and of course the A's themselves won 65 and 74 games in 1997-98 before contending in 1999, ushering in an eight year period of contention.

One might counter that teams such as Pittsburgh or Kansas City or Washington/Montreal have been in the dregs for 15 years or more. And that even some of the above franchises were down for nearly that long. And one would be right. We don't know if we have plunged into the depths of mediocrity, or worse, for many years; or whether salvation is just around the corner.

But all for the frustration in A's land, and count me among the frustrated, the fact is that salvation, in the form of young talent, could be just around the corner.

20% of the season done? Not too early, but proceed with caution.

There has been one very good team in the AL so far this year-- coincidentally or not, it is the one out-of-division team the A's have played in two different series. So are we cause or effect? Human, or dancers??

TORONTO  +54

Five pretty good teams-- three of which the A's have played and the other two are coming up soon:

BOSTON  +23

TEXAS  +21

KANSAS CITY  +18 (this took a hit last night)

TAMPA BAY  +13

DETROIT  +11

Six pretty bad teams-- and no, Virginia, the A's aren't in this batch:

CHICAGO  -18

MINNESOTA  -18

SEATTLE  -24

CLEVELAND  -25

NEW YORK (!)  -25

BALTIMORE -26

And then two smack dab in the middle:

LAA   -3

OAKLAND  -1

This is actually some cause for optimism. The A's have a basically even run differential despite several critical cogs in their offense being way off, and with the expectation that Duchscherer's return and the maturation of some of their young starters will improve the pitching staff. The 12-18 is what hurts (cough.. Bob Geren) but eventually they should come back to par. Toronto is the real outlier, but real hard to keep that pace up in that division. They should start coming back to earth in next few weeks. If they are +70 or +80 overall after another 30 games then watch out world.

And to compare pitching staffs, the Indians have allowed 65 more runs (that is two per game!) than the A's; Yankees 64; Orioles 61.

OK-- we've been here before. (NOTE: I'm about two-thirds the way through an examination of all the teams that started 9-16 since divisional play began. So far there are 7 winning seasons out of 42; 2 playoff teams that really aren't comparable to this year's A's: 1987 Tigers, a veteran team on their last legs; 2006 Twins, Johan Santana, Joe Mauer and Justin Morneau, three talents that the A's simply do not have)

But what about the A's teams that started slow in their first 25 games?

Well, I've found one exact match, and five others one game better or worse than the current squad.

The exact match was a 9-16 1993 team, the year after the last Bash Brother appearance. Canseco was gone; McGwire was hurt, Rickey would be dispatched to Toronto at the deadline. It was a veteran team that had run out of gas.

The 1994 team started even worse at 8-17. An entirely forgettable bunch with Mcgwire again mostly shelved by the plantar fascitis.

There were three 10-15 starts, and one actually had a winning record. The 1979 team (Rickey's rookie season and the beginnings of the Norris-Keough, McCatty-Kingman rotation that Martin would wreck in the next couple of years) was (gulp) 54-108. The 1985 team (Jose got called up in September; Chris Codiroli was the ace with 15 wins followed by Sutton at 14 at the end of his great career-- Dave Kingman, Dwayne Murphy and Carney Lansford were the best position players).

And then we can party like it's 1999-- that's right, the year that a lot of us have flagged-- optimistically of course-- as being the most analagous to this one-- started out 10-15 and then changed dramatically, and irrevocably, with the flurry of deadline deals when Beane basically announced this team was now a contender. as it was.

And oh yes, there was one other team that started even worse than this one-- 8-17 and basically out of the division race by May. 2001. The team that from mid June on played better over a sustained stretch of baseball than perhaps any other team in the sport since WWII and certainly since the advent of the divisions. The team that broke our hearts in October.

No this year's team isn't that team. I don't think it's 1979, either, though I suppose there's a chance with youngsters still not developed and veterans struggling that it could be that bad. We hope it's 1999 but to me1985 makes more sense. With Doolittle, Carter and Cardenas as the McGwires and Cansecos waiting in the wings.

Someone started talking Beatles today, and i couldn't resist.

"I am the Jack Cust"

I am Beane as you are Beane as he is Beane and we are last together.

See how they whiff like jeans in a book, see how they fly (out)

I'm crying....

Sitttin on a rally, waiting for the hit to come.

Athletic Nation T-Shirt, stupid damn Holliday.

Man, you've been a lousy boy, you miss your Coors Rock Pile.

We are the goose eggs. They are the goose eggs.

I am the Jack Cust-- k, k, k, kay

Mister Lanny Trainer working, pretty little MRI's in a row.

See how they ache, or maybe they break, see how they hurt.

I'm crying...

What's the matter Buster, Slusser didn't count the staff.

Gio;s up one day, Geren's gonna kill him, Send him back to Sactown,

Man you let the Semen walk.

You were the goose eggs, we are the goose eggs.

I am the Jack Cust-- k, k, k kay

Sitting in the Coliseum, waiting for the crowd

If the crowd don't come, call it 10K, no one's watching the A's pain

We are the goose eggs. they are the goose eggs

I am the Jack Cust--k,k,k, kay

Expert PT, CGV'd

don't you think the GM laughs with you?

See how they lose like Raiders in fall, see how they ball (NOT)

I'm crying..

Anderson and Cahill-- trying to make the show

Chavy and Nomar, collecting social security,

man you should have seen them when they once could play

We are the goose egge, they are the goose eggs,

I am the Jack Cust-- k, k, k kay.

Somebody had better start noticing that maybe the emperor has no clothes. He was brilliant... and the team prospered, despite the postseason failures, for the better part of a decade. But time has a way of changing things-- people wear out their welcomes-- change is necessary-- even the best leaders/managers are no longer what they once were.

When the brains of an organization trades three players, including a top prospect, for a supposed superstar who in 4 weeks time has shown none of that talent and exhibited very little enthusiasm for being here; when that same leader installs his best man in what is essentially a nepotism move as the field manager (and we once thought it was funny how Howe was ordered to stand up straight in the dugout); when that same chief weakens the fan base with a dizzying array of moves that are billed as making the team better/more market efficient/younger/a winner in the future-- but all that happens on the field is disappointment, injury and more disappointment; when that same manager wins his reputation for eschewing big long term contracts, particularly for veterans but then blows nearly every one he can get his hands on (Dye, loaiza, Kendall, Kotsay, Ellis, Chavez, etc, etc...)

well one must start to wonder if the time has come to really shake up the ship. It's listing..sinking.. sailing off course-- you fill in the right metaphor. And it's all on one man's shoulders right now-- Billy Beane. Of course not every move he's been making has been wrong-- but enough have to make us doubt like we've never doubted before.  But he's an owner of the team-- he has to fire himself. What a mess... what a mess.

Since this topic is obviously broader and more consequential than one maddening extra inning loss, I'm going to try to get a real debate going somewhere other than the game thread.

And let me start with a simple and undeniable truth: the principal problem with this team is the lack of impact hitting-- home runs, extra base hits, situational hitting, etc... And the question I'd like to pose vis-a-vis Geren is whether his leadership profile-- or lack thereof-- is a contributing factor in this team's "deadness"-- its inability to hit either with this year's veterans, last year's veterans, or both years' kids. For all the demand that Travis Buck play more-- a feeling I share-- the simple and sad fact is that Buck has not demonstrated that he is anything near a quality hitter at the major league level since his nice beginning in 2007. Nor has Sweeney. Nor Crosby throughout the Geren regime. Nor Chavez in the same time period. Nor an increasingly ineffectual Ellis. Etc, etc. Nor Brown last year nor Cabrera this year.

The actual game decisions Geren is making do not strike me as all that bad. The bunt with two runs down in the 7th  by Cabrera originally had me miffed, but the truth is that if he had popped up insted and Giambi had done as he did do, the A's would have ended up with either zero or no runs rather than the two they got. to tie the game They did steal successfully today. The other late inning bunts made sense in what was no longer a 1 run vs. big inning trade off-- it was a tie game in which the 1 run could, and would, have very easily won the game from the 8th through the 13th. If Holliday, Giambi or someone else would only start hitting the longball these other decisions would either be less important or not even necessary.

As for Gallagher one can only assume after today's ignoring of him that he is in someone's doghouse-- whether Young or Geren or Beane. I agree that it is doing no one any good to have him continue to sit, unless he is going to replace Outman in the rotation. But even if that's so, he could have easily thrown 2+ innings today before presumably a start as the #5 man next week. i can only conclude that they don't trust him a bit-- well fine, get someone else up here.

But I can't blame him for any other pitching decisions-- his starters other than Braden aren't strong or consistent enough to give the bullpen relief-- his bullpen is being forced to pitch so much because of the offense's failure and, ironically, its own success. He's been pressing the buttons pretty well.

The problem is the lack of hitting--- it all stems from that. For all the swing theories and sample size projections and weather conditions and all the other factors that contribute to hitting-- good or bad-- I also think that the ability of the guy in charge to motivate is part of the mix. This guy's team is dead-- so i wonder if we should get another guy.

For all the sturm and drang over failed double steals, poorly executed small ball, Ellis foibles in field, at plate and on bases, I give you two very simple factoids, both from Baseball Prospectus.

Team Defensive Efficiency-- A's, after a slow start, have returned to their accustomed place near the top of this metric-- 5th in all of baseball. They have been among the best in the sport for several years now. That augurs well for a non-strikeout staff;

Team Baserunning-- Someone else can explain precisely how BP arrives at this figure, but our group of crappy baserunners ranks 5th in this calculation as well, meaning that either a whole host of other 3B coaches are making bad decisions or our eyes deceive us, and our guys actually do pretty well motoring from first to third or somesuch.

Not that they've had a lot of chance to do so-- though actually maybe they have with all the singles.

No the problem with this team is pretty simple right now-- no one is hitting, not even Cust in recent days. No one. And it may be a good thing (or more likely bad)that they may only get to play two games in the newly designated Coors Field East that the new not-so-big ballpark in the Bronx seems to have become, and in poor weather conditions to boot. Good because a failure to take advantage of this opportunity could do even more damage to their already frayed confidence level. If 9-10 guys have career bad years, then we have a horrific season on our hands. If 4-5 like Giambi, Cabrera, Nomar and Chavez see age and injury take a toll, and Holliday turns out to be a Rocky Mountain High (Let's start calling him John Denver-- maybe it'll wake his power stroke up) phenomenon untransferable to lower elevation, well then they will struggle to contend.

I for one look longingly at Cardenas, Doolittle, Carter and Cunningham-- I am growing increasingly tired of not just Crosby but Ellis and Sweeney and Suzuki and Barton (even from afar)-- and even Buck though he isn'[t being given much of a chance. We need hitters.. but we may have to wait a little while longer.

I can't type on game thread for some reason-- each new post freezes me-- so parden this indulgence before the recap occurs. Did not see this except thru the lens of Game Day, so forgive me if I missed something:

1) Can anyone remember a 2 out rally in the 9th like this one-- against any team, let alone the Siegna. 4 straight two out hits?

2) Brian Fuentes ain't K-Rod;

3) Kudos to Zook for making up for the throwing error with a key hit;

4) Kudos to Holliday for coming off the bed.. I mean bench.. and giving us insurance;

5) Kudos to Nomah

6) Kudos to Ellis for making up for his less costly error-- wasn't it just 48 hours ago that were disparaging the way the unicorn looked up there?

7) Kudos to Geren for pushing all the 9th inning buttons right-- and Cust worked his way up to #5 tonite. I only regret that we didn't see Bobby chasing down a fly ball.

Boy could Anderson send a huge message to the entire baseball world with a win tomorrow night. I LOVE THIS TEAM!!!!!