I wrote Lew Wolff a short note Sunday morning and dropped it in a box, but did not hear back. Here was my comment/question, paraphrased:

"Do you plan to keep payroll at $40-50M over the next four seasons, and then splurge with a major-free agent acquisition right as a new stadium opens, pushing payroll to $80M+? If so, I'm very excited about the team's vision and future. Thank you for your contributions to this franchise."

Continue reading this post »

With the news that MLB's newly ratified Collective Bargaining Agreement will move the Astros to the AL and lead to year-round Interleague Play starting in 2013, it's a good time to think about how that will affect the league's schedule.

Continue reading this post »

My hunch is that Matsui will be back, and none of the team's other five free agents will. A theme of my writing here the past two years is that the A's are beholden to MLB more than any other team in the league until their stadium is sorted out. So if MLB wants them to travel to Japan to open the 2012 season, and re-sign their aging, unproductive DH for some good publicity, and sign all their draft picks to slot-level deals, and pick up the scraps of free agency (Ben Sheets, Brian Fuentes) to keep the ML payroll at $60M+ and placate the MLBPA, we can be sure those things will happen.

Unfortunately, the draft pick situation has soured a bit since my last post here on Aug. 16. Crisp and Matsui have definitely dropped below Type B status, and Dejesus' continued struggles make it unpalatable to offer him arb, unless he were to agree to decline an offer from the team. While it is possible Dejesus would agree to this, those types of handshake agreements are usually struck in a previous contract negotiation, or with a player who has years of tenure on the team and lots of goodwill built up. This is not the situation with Dejesus and the A's, so I don't think the team can risk the empty-handed arb offer and be faced with Dejesus returning for ~$6.5M.

This means that Willingham is the only A's free agent who will yield compensation picks in the 2011 draft. As a Type A, Willingham would yield two picks if he were to sign with other team. I actually think the team is encouraging this scenario, given their public 'woe is me' statements about the stadium situation. It's the perfect excuse, and much better than holding a press conference and announcing, "We would much rather have two high draft picks than to pay injury-prone 33-year-old J.W. on a 2-3 year deal in an obvious non-contending year." So, this hypothetical is assuming that the A's best hitter is gone.

There are currently 45 guys on the 40-man. If you decline wuertz's option, and let djj, crisp, Willingham, and Harden all walk, that's 40. But the outfield is painfully thin: Taylor, Sweeney, and Jai Miller are the only true outfielders remaining. However, Brandon Allen and Adrian Cardenas can play left field very capably, and I expect one or both guys to make the Opening Day roster. Matsui can play left in a pinch, and Carter can as well. What that list is missing is one more Cf candidate, since we can't rely on Sweeney and Jai Miller to play 162 games there. My vote would be to remove Sean Doolittle and Pedro Fugueroa from the 40-man roster, since both guys have burned two precious option years with injuries and are unlikely to contribute going forward. This team will already be carrying several injured pitchers on the 40-man over the offseason. You can absolutely justify that with Anderson, Braden, and Devine; with two lower-tier guys, I don't think you can.

With those last two roster slots, I'd like the team to protect Jermaine Mitchell from the upcoming Rule 5 draft, then stash him AAA to start the year as a guy who gets called up when the outfield inevitably suffers an injury. The last slot? I've got my eye on Jordan Danks of the White Sox, a good defensive center fielder who hasn't hit enough to break through. Danks is Rule 5 eligible this offseason, but the Sox haven't protected him yet, so there's a chance he remains freely acquirable in early Dec, in which case I hope the A's pounce. If the Sox do protect him, I would still like the A's to swing a deal from him, since he's the 6th guy on the Sox 2012 depth chart and would have a chance to be the A's starting cfer or 4th Of. Danks has just enough warts as a hitter to possibly be acquirable from the perennially win-now White Sox.

I like Anthony Gose of the Blue Jays more - probably everyone does - but I see three problems there: the Blue Jays are building for the future, we're unlikely to come out ahead in a trade with AA, and Gose is good enough that the return cost would be painful.

So, that's my update guess at the 2012 roster. No grandiose moves, mostly internal promotions, lots of wide-open competition in camp. $50Mish payroll, as the team braces for another year with the lowest attendance in the league. The glass-half empty view - a projected sixth straight season of no playoffs, with no end to that streak in sight. Half-full: this low-budget franchise has somehow avoided any 90-loss seasons since 1997. That streak will grow to 15 years next season, with a new stadium and increased revenue and competitiveness finally on the horizon.

Last night was the deadline for teams to come to terms with the amateur draft picks they selected in June.  For many high-profile players, this August 15th deadline is quite significant and many teams had negotiations go down to the wire.   For the players who did not come to terms - typically these are high-school guys, Juco players, or draft-eligible sophomores, since those groups have more leverage to return to school than do college juniors and seniors - they retain their amateur status, go back to college, and the drafting team loses their draft rights. 

This is meant to be a "Tidbits with Taj"-style post with some bullet-point reactions to this year's draft signings, and I hope you'll share your own in the comments below.

*There were four high school players drafted from Santa Clara County : 

-Shawon Dunston Jr. from Valley Christian, who was taken in the 11th round by the Cubs (No. 339 overall) and who signed for more than $1.2M, an incredible overslot figure for that draft slot.  This pick is all projection, family pedigree and tools; I'm pretty sure that Dunston wasn't even all-league in the very competitive WCAL (granted, sample sizes are very small in a 30-game high school season, but the cream still rises to the statistical crop typically at that level).

-The last three Santa Clara County high school draftees all came from Saint Francis High in Mountain View - 3b Tyler Goeddel, who was drafted No. 41 overall by the Rays and signed last night for $1.5M to break his commitment to UCLA; 1b Richard Prigatano, was was drafted by the Jays in the 16th round, No. 499 overall, but couldn't come to terms and will attend Long Beach St.; and shortstop Alex Blandino, taken in the 38th round by the A's (pick 1,156).  

I paid particular attention to this local high school angle, having had the opportunity to watch my alma mater a few times this year.  When the A's drafted Blandino, the Mercury CCS Player of the Year with a section-leading nine homers (more impressive given the new BBCOR bat restrictions that have drastically suppressed amateur offense), and a 90 mph fastball, I was intrigued, even though I knew Blandino was a Stanford commit and that he'd be an extremely difficult player to sign. 

*Even though I shouldn't have had my hopes up, I was a little disappointed when I refreshed MLB Trade Rumors last night and saw that the A's were one of the few teams that did not appear to make any over-slot signings of draft picks in the last 48 hours. 

You couldn't help but feel that there was a really exciting party last night and the A's weren't there.  Click on the first three pages of MLBTR, and you'll read headlines like "Pirates Break Draft Records," and "Nationals Spend Big in Draft." There were all kinds of records made in the last two days, and the Pirates, Nationals, Rays, and Blue Jays all added a ton of potentially high-impact talent to their systems. The Rays had 10 of the first 60 picks, and if you study this list from MLBTR, they managed to sign all of them, and none of them look like Jeremy Brownesque, drastically-below slot pre-draft agreements.  I love what the Rays did.  They slashed $20M off their major-league payroll this year, perhaps in part because they knew they would need to budget an additional $10M more than usual to prepare for the historic opportunity they would have in this year's draft.  And, now that they have signed 10 of the top 60 picks without having to sign below-slot talent, I think they should feel very good about how that plan worked out.  They won't make the playoffs this year, but retaining Carl Crawford for $18M a year wouldn't have changed that.

*Some other stats from last night:  The Pirates spent a record $17M+ on their 24 signees; top overall pick Gerrit Cole signed for a record $8M and second-rounder Josh Bell signed for a record $5M, more than double the previous record (prior to this year) for any player selected outside of the first round.  The Nationals also spent nearly $17M, including a $4.4M major-league deal for third-rounder Matt Purke.

*In the A's defense, they were left out of this spending orgy partially because of circumstances.  The team didn't have a 2nd-round pick, as a result of signing Type A free agent Grant Balfour last year.  They also didn't have the benefit of any compensation picks in the sandwich round, like the Rays and Jays used to bolster their very strong drafts.  As such, the A's had a Grand Canyon-sized gulf between pick No. 18 overall, Sonny Gray, and their 2nd pick - No. 105 overall B.A. Vollmuth.  Both players received approximately slot-level deals - Gray for $1.54M, and Vollmuth for about $300K. 

But the A's created those circumstances for themselves.  They signed Balfour, which cost them the opportunity to draft another high-impact talent at pick No. 75, such as Austin Hedges ($3M to the Padres) or Purke, who went at pick No. 96 overall to the Nationals.  Both Hedges and Purke were widely considered first-round talents, and they were paid accordingly. 

They also could've acquired a comp pick, as the Blue Jays did last winter when they traded $500K for Miguel Olivo, a pending Type B free agent, solely to acquire the comp pick he would garner in the sandwich round once he signed elsewhere. 

I would've been much more excited about the A's draft if it yielded Gray, and Hedges or Purke, and Vollmuth, instead of just Gray and Vollmuth, which is basically what the A's 2011 draft depends upon, since they signed only one high school and JuCo kid and didn't pay anyone well over slot.  Granted, Hedges or Burke would've cost somewhere between $3-4.5M, which means the team probably wouldn't have had enough money to sign either Balfour or Fuentes.  Aw shucks. 

In review, I am slightly disappointed, because I feel the team should've compensated for the lack of high-end opportunities - only one pick in the first 100 - by taking tons of high-upside high school kids in the next 15 rounds and signing most of them to well-above slot contracts.  Basically, exactly what the Blue Jays did. 

Blandino, the 38th rounder, is a great example.  I realize a Stanford scholarship is an incredibly difficult one to break, but I hope the A's offered him high six figures, and that this wasn't just a ceremonial pick - like Geren's kid, or Scott Boras' kid, or the 79-year-old ticket lady at the Coliseum's kid, or Beane's neighbor's kid (only two of those are ridiculous things that didn't happen, by the way).  Signing a few players of this stature - there are only 10 sections in California, which produces ~15-20% of the future major league talent, and Blandino was the Section Player of the Year in one of them - late in the draft is a great way to buttress an otherwise bleak draft. 

Instead, the A's seemingly did the opposite of the Blue Jays approach:  The A's took almost all three-year college kids for the first 20 rounds.  The one high schooler they did take, a lefty in the 9th round, they didn't sign.  Then they took a bunch of high school kids in the last 25 rounds, including Blandino, and signed only one of them, Chris Bostick, their 44th rounder who had a full ride to St. John's.  The A's raised their initial bonus offer "significantly" after watching him play more in the summer.  This probably gives us an insight into how they handle many of their late-round high school draftees:  treat it as a mini "draft and follow" - draft him in early June, then watch him more closely for two months to see if he does indeed warrant a bonus worthy of a higher-round pick. 

Anyway, I'm a big fan of how the Blue Jays are doing things, and their GM seems tireless and very willing to think outside the box, and I don't think it's a good thing when I find myself typing "Instead, the A's seemingly did the opposite of the Blue Jays approach." 

*This draft may have been the last opportunity, ever, to go "over-slot," which may partially explain the spending craze of yesterday.  The new Collective Bargaining Agreement, expected to be announced sometime around the World Series, may include hard-slotting of draft picks and even a worldwide draft.  This might have a huge impact on the future decisions of high school prospects - if a 5th round pick is a hard-slot $100K, very few kids are going to turn down college scholarships.  Suddenly, the only HS talent that goes pro are top-200 picks, guys drafted in the first four rounds.  MLB powers-that-be wouldn't mind this at all, because they save on development costs while the NCAA operates as a free farm system for them, just as NCAA football does for the NFL.  I think hard-slotting would cost baseball some really good amateur athletes, especially elite African-American players, which baseball already struggles to attract.  NCAA D-I baseball teams can only offer 11.7 scholarships spread amongst 27 players, so most players are on partial, 25-50% scholarships.  The only thing that lures a Dominic Brown-level athletic talent away from playing big-time college football and pursuing an eventual career in the NFL is that high six figure, low-seven figure bonus he is offered out of high school in the draft.  If baseball cuts those late-round bonuses off in the new CBA, teams will only be able to sign high-upside, toolsy high school talent in the first 3 rounds.

Because of this I hope the hard-slotting aspect of the new CBA is some type of hybrid system that "hard slots" the first 2-3 rounds and then follows the current open-ended model for the remainder of the draft.  That way teams can better project and control their costs in the draft, and yet the sport of baseball doesn't lose out entirely on the next generation of toolsy multi-sport talents.  And I hope that teams are allowed to trade the hard-slot picks (rounds 1-3) as well, because I don't think a team should be forced to pay an $8M signing bonus to the first overall pick if they don't believe there is a player at that slot worthy of $8M. 

*The A's should know their own "backyard" really well in scouting.  I hope they saw Blandino, Prigatano (BA's top 200 overall pre-draft), and Goeddel (No. 89) at least a few times before reaching an evaluation of them.  Instead of drafting family members and your next-door neighbor's kid in the last 25 rounds, why not draft the best HS prospects from Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa counties?  It's cheaper to scout those guys, and they should be able to get a better read on them than anyone else, like the Braves did with Heyward.  Maybe the prospect will have some sentimentality after being drafted by their local team, and maybe it's a little bit easier to break his college commitment as a result. If the guy does make it to the pros, it's a terrific local story, and he becomes a fan favorite because he's a local boy.  I think one of the Giants' significant advantages right now is that they have so many marketable personalities, and the A's have none.  But what if you hit a home run with one of these late-round local guys and Blandino fills out and becomes the next Tulowitzki, and part of the fanbase is because he's a local guy who professes to love the area, lives in the community and has all his life, etc.  The thing about signing him now is, it might be the one chance you have to sign him.  Because if he does blow up in college, you never even get a chance to draft him again, like Tulo did after leaving the South Bay, going to Long Beach and turning himself into a top-10 pick.

*Last thought:  Next year's team will not be a playoff team.  So, I hope they offer arbitration to Willingham, Matsui, Crisp, and DeJesus.  If one of them accepts, fine, but I wouldn't be surprised if all four decline, because you don't try to rebuild your offensive value on a one-year deal in Oakland.  If all four decline, that's five compensation draft picks. I don't really think any of the Type A free agents are good fits for the A's this off-season, so they'll keep their 2nd rounder next year. So now we're looking at potentially as many as 7 of the first 70 overall picks in the 2012 draft, 8 of the first 100 picks, as opposed to this year's draft, which only provided the team with one of the first 100 picks, Sonny Gray, who is really their only draft pick this year that I feel optimistic about.  (Some would argue that Vollmuth is worthy of excitement, but look at the bust rate of guys who get $300K signing bonuses after pick No. 100, and it tempers your expectations.  I'm expecting the A's get 1.5 major leaguers out of this 2011 draft).

Seven of the first 70 overall picks.  Not seven quirky, plucky odd-looking guys that only the A's could appreciate, and for the low, low price of $300K apiece.  Seven guys that every team in major league baseball legitimately liked and had somewhere on their top 200 Big Board.  Seven guys that will cost a combined $10-15M.  That's the type of draft this team needs to turn the corner long-term, I feel.  Next August 16th, I hope the A's fan base is buzzing with the type of excitement that is surrounding the long-term futures of the Nationals, Pirates, and Rays right now.

Devoting that much money to the draft would mean signing no major league free agents for anything more than a Brandon McCarthy or Rich Harden one year, $1-1.5M deal, which is fine.  It's easier to sign pitchers to come to Oakland than hitters, anyway, and the team has enough intriguing offensive talent talent that it's time to go all internal candidates for 2012, add Recker, Mitchell, and Miller to the 40-man  to protect them from the Rule 5 draft and let our 18-20 cost-controlled offensive players on the roster all duke it out equally to make the big club.  Literally no offensive position guaranteed a spot entering camp, with battles everywhere and the losers headed to the bench or Sacramento.  They wouldn't make the playoffs but I think they'd play hard and be fun to watch.

On the brink of an NBA title, the Heat will have the opportunity to get even stronger this offseason by adding 1-2 players around their core of three stars. 

For the sake of the post, I'm going to assume a few things that might be unlikely:

1.  The NBA will ratify a new CBA and play a complete 2011-2012 season.

2.  The new CBA will be retain the mid-level exception provision, allowing teams to go over the cap.

3.  The dollar figure of the mid-level exception will remain almost exactly the same.

The Incumbents:

The Heat currently have 15 players on the roster.  Seven of those players are under contract for next season:  LBJ, Bosh, Wade, Haslem, Anthony, Miller, and Dexter Pittman, whose contract isn't guaranteed.  The first six make up a pretty damn good core.  We'll assume all seven will be back on the roster next season.

Eddie House and Zydrunas Ilgauskas both have player options for the league minimum next year.  Both seem to have enjoyed the ride, and neither is good enough to seek out a higher-profile, higher-paying role elsewhere at this stage of their career; my bet is that both will return.  That puts the roster at nine.

Mario Chalmers is a restricted free agent, and I think he should be retained.  He's taken some huge shots this postseason, and is the rare player who doesn't seem intimidated playing alongside the Big 3.  He makes mistakes, but I love the combo of youth, great defense, and the moxie to take and make open threes.  That's puts the roster at 10, seven of whom are clearly rotation-worthy (with House, Ilgauskas, and Pittman as suit-wearers and towel wavers).

Juwan Howard, Dampier, Magloire, James Jones, Mike Bibby:  Here's where things get tricky.  Will the new CBA still allow teams to go over the cap to retain ALL of their free agents?  The Heat's commitments for next season already total $65.3M.  I figure that re-signing Chalmers will bring that figure up to $70M.  If they brought in a full mid-level exception guy from from free agency, like the Lakers did with Ron Artest two years ago, that takes them to about $76M.  So, if we assume the rest of the four roster spots all go to league minimum guys, we are looking at about an $80M payroll team, which this year would've made them the fifth-highest payroll team in the NBA. 

If Howard, Dampier, Magloire, Jones, and Bibby are willing to come back for the minimum, I think they'll be invited to do so.  But I don't think Bibby has done enough in his time with the team to justify a major investment in him, even though he waived his guaranteed $6M for 2011-2012 to join the Heat.  His PER has been terrible, and he hasn't been the knockdown shooter the team had hoped.  I hope the team goes in a different direction with that crucial eighth rotation player next year.

The Draft:

The Heat have no first-round pick this year, part of their purge for cap space last offseason (first-round picks count against cap space; 2nd-rounders do not).  However, the Heat have the 31st overall pick - the very first pick of the second round.  Because 2nd-round picks are not subjected to the rookie wage scale, some of the savviest teams use these picks on very young international guys.  Here's why:  the team can stash them in Europe for a few years, and then, if the player blossoms, sign him to as big a deal as necessary to help offset the buyout agreement the player will need to make from his club team overseas.  The Spurs have done this effectively with several players.

Since the Heat already have a good 1-7 rotation of returning players (assuming they re-sign Chalmers), and couldn't get a rotation-worthy player with the No. 31 overall pick, this is exactly the strategy I would advocate.  Draft an 18-19-year-old foreigner with tremendous upside, then let him play in Europe for a few years. 

Free Agency:

Again, this assumes that the full mid-level exemption still exists next year, after a new CBA is ratified.  That's a pretty big leap. But if it does, that means the Heat could offer at most a five year, ~$34M contract to one player this off-season outside their organization.  Or, they could split their mid-level exemption and offer smaller pieces of the pie to multiple players. But they don't need several rotation guys; again, they have seven good ones.  They need a good 4th scorer, or a legit center.  That's my opinion anyway.  And they won't get those things by splitting their mid-level exemption into smaller pieces.  So let's assume for the sake of this post that they are going shopping for one guy, and offering him a five year, $34M check for the opportunity to be an NBA champion, live in South Beach, and pay no state income taxes.

The most likely name you've heard here is Samuel Dalembert.  Big Sam is 6'11", 250 pounds, and played center for the Kings last season.  He made $12.2M, and would be cutting his pay almost in half if he were to accept the full mid-level.  Most likely, he will be offered a contract that pays him more than ~$6.7M per year.  But he's never had a chance to play for a winner, and Miami affords him an opportunity to be as close as possible to his native Haiti, so maybe he could be enticed to join the Heat.

That would create quite a formidable defensive team, and would quell any concerns about the Heat's front line:

Wade
Lebron
Miller
Bosh
Dalembert
Chalmers
Haslem
Anthony

And yet, that's not my first choice for a free-agent splurge.  To me, that's the fallback option.  My favorite free agents for the Heat this offseason are all restricted FA's.  My hope is that the Heat signs one of these guys to an offer sheet of five years, $34M, and that their own team decides not to match:

Aaron Afflalo, SG, Denver:  The beauty of having Lebron James and Dwayne Wade in your lineup is that both guys are so versatile, you don't have to worry as much about position.  You can put the five best guys on the floor.  The Heat have shown this in the post-season, as their most effective lineup has been five guys between 6'5" and 6'10" who can all play at both ends of the floor (LBJ-Bosh-Wade-Miller-Haslem).  With Afflalo, they could basically do this all the time.  He's a 6'5" lockdown defender who has shot 40% or better from 3 for three straight seasons.  He also hit some huge game-winning shots this year, which tells me that he would be unafraid of those moments in future playoff games for the Heat.  He'll turn 26 just before the season starts, so a five-year deal would cover his entire peak.  It's easy to see why he's the top of my list...but sadly, Denver would very likely match a 5 year, $34M offer to him.  But perhaps they'll be too bogged down by a very expensive Nene extention and will decline to match.

Rodney Stuckey, SG, Detroit:  You could take most of the paragraph I just wrote and put it here, too.  25 years old, good defender, would become a great fourth option on a title team...but unlike Afflalo, he can't shoot the 3 (an average of 27% over his three full seasons).  On the other hand, you love the 18.46 PER, 15.5 points per game, 5.2 assists, and 86.6% from the line.  I used to think the Heat needed to surround LBJ with three-point shooters, but I think they can just mercilessly attack the basket every possession.  This postseason has basically proven that.  Like Afflalo, Stuckey's current team probably matches a five year, $34M offer.  But hey, it only takes one of these teams to refuse to match.  We can only have one of them anyway.  

Aaron Brooks, PG, Phoenix:  This is a bit of a weird recommendation, considering I love the Heat's "versatility lineup" of Miller-Haslem-Big 3.  Signing Brooks would practically commit the team to using a full-time PG (Chalmers or Brooks playing a combined 40-48 minutes), which I'm not sure is their most effective group.  This postseason has shown that Lebron, Wade, and Miller run the point plenty well enough that a full-time PG isn't really necessary, and the team certainly rebounds and defends better when Bibby is removed in favor of taller players.  Since I've already committed to bringing back Chalmers, signing Brooks would be my least favorite of the recommendations.  Then again, he's 26 years old, and he's a year removed from a season when he scored 19.6 ppg, shot 40% from the three point line, averaged 5.3 assists and was virtually unguardable for opposing PGs.  He's blindingly fast and would be a terror running fast breaks with LBJ on one side and Wade on the other.  He, like the two guys above him, would probably have his current team (the Suns) match an offer sheet for him.

DeAndre Jordan, C, Clippers.  23-year-old centers with upside are so scarce, it's virtually certain that Jordan will receive greater than $34M guaranteed from the Clips.  But it's also pretty easy to squint and see Jordan being the same thing that Mark Blount was before him, or countless other centers:  a below-average player who parlays one good season in his walk year into an obscenely large deal that overpays him as he spends more than half of each game on the bench in future seasons.  He's one of the worst free-throw shooters in the league, has no offensive polish, and even in his "breakout" year, he played 25 minutes a game and averaged 7 points.  Then again, he averaged 1.8 blocks.  Compare him with Dalembert, and you probably say, Jordan's age 23-28 seasons will probably be much better than Dalembert's 31-36.

Wilson Chandler, SF, Denver, and Thaddeus Young, SF, 76ers.   Grouped together here merely because they are both 6'8", 220 pound small forwards in their mid-20s who play pretty good defense.  This fits my preference of making the "eighth rotation guy" someone very versatile.  Chandler and Young could both play multiple positions, switch a lot of screens defensively, and fill that role I keep referring to:  the fourth scorer, or the guy who helps carry a second unit along with Bosh when Lebron/Wade are on the bench or (God forbid) miss time due to injury.  Chandler is the better three-point shooter, while Young is younger (23), more athletic and a bit better defender.  With Afflalo and Chandler, the Heat could play sort of a cruel game by signing one to an offer sheet immediately, forcing the Nuggets to match, then immediately sign the other to an offer sheet.  Can the Nuggets really afford to give Nene $60M, and Afflalo and Chandler $34M each this offseason?  They also need to make decisions on K-Mart and J.R. Smith (both free agents, too).  I don't think they can afford that whole group.  Philly, too, might run into some difficult decisions, with $53M already committed for '11-12 and both Young and Spencer Hawes to re-sign in restricted FA. 

If, and only if, those six guys were all snatched back by their original teams would I make the move to unrestricted FA for the Heat.  And then Dalembert becomes the logical choice.  But I love the idea of adding an athletic player in his mid-20s to the core if the opportunity presents itself, rather than an aging 30-year-old center. 

What are your thoughts?

This is the team I really, really wanted to root for this season:

PG: Rose
SG: Wade
SF: Lebron
PF: Gibson
C:  Noah

6th:  Deng  (getting about 35 minutes a night, spelling Rose/Wade/Lebron). 
7th:  Asik  (Getting about 30 minutes a night, spelling Gibson/Noah).

If Lebron and Wade were willing to take the same below-max-salary contracts that they ended up taking in Miami ($14M and 14.5M, respectively), that team could've been fit under the cap.

Those seven players are so good, you could fill out the rest of the roster with league-minimum vets and still run through the rest of the league.  In the playoffs, you'd only need those seven men.  

That would be the best defensive team in the league, by far.  They would also lead the league in fast-break points and free throws.

That team would've won 70 regular season games.

That team would have the potential to run off 5 straight championships.

Instead, the Bulls ended up using all that cap space on Korver, Boozer, CJ Watson, and Bogans.  Literally, the combined salary of those four guys is almost exactly the same as what Lebron and Wade are making this year.

I am not mad at the Bulls for this, because they obviously attempted to sign both Lebron and Wade prior to settling for Boozer and the "little 3". 

But I lament that we, as basketball fans, didn't get to see what I believe would've become the greatest basketball team in NBA history, with 3 of the league's top 5 players on the same team.

I feel guilty for it.  It's not something I'm proud of.  It probably represents the worst part(s) of my personality.  But I'll cop to it.

When I open a Yankees' boxscore and see this performance from Eric Chavez, it actually bothers me a little bit.  Angry is too strong of a word; perhaps annoying is what I'm looking for. 

Maybe Chavez's 3-for-5 day, highlighted by a pair of doubles, is a fluke, but it comes on the heels of numerous reports this spring that Chavez finally feels healthy, and that scouts are impressed by how he looks both physically and at the plate.

This is a feel-good story, right?  Why am I rooting against this guy?

Here's my case:

*The A's are paying him $3M in buyout money this year.  That's on top of the ~$80Mish they had already paid him.  He contributed virtually nothing for the A's since the end of the 2006 season, yet he was paid ~$50M during that time. 

*Now that he is finally healthy, he is a bargain...and who is he a bargain for?  The Yankees, a team with a $205M payroll and an amazing offense.  Meanwhile the A's have their usual meager offense and payroll, and would love to have a great contributor at $1.5M.

*His myriad of injuries, while obviously not his fault, decimated the A's for the past several years.  Chavez averaged 5 WAR per season from 2001-2004, from age 23-26.  Then he entered his theoretical peak and his health and performance fell off a cliff.

*I really like Billy Beane.  I think he has a great process and hasn't been rewarded with great results.  This extension should have ended up being a feather in Beane's cap.  He locked up a great hitting, steroid-free, outstanding defender at a premium defensive position for six years of his prime at below-FA prices.  Eric Chavez should've become a guy who OPS'ed between .875-.925 in his mid-to-late 20's, a guy who averaged 6-7 WAR a year in his prime.  He should've been Longoria.  Instead, critics can point to this deal and say, "It should've been Tejada.  It was a mistake," in the same way they can criticize him for making the playoffs on a small budget but never winning the World Series.  But I like his process and I can rationalize his moves, and that's part of why I enjoy rooting for this team.  I just want him to get lucky for once, partially so that results-oriented people come to appreciate him more, too.  And Chavez's extension and ensuing struggles are a great example of Beane having a good process and not getting good results. 

I watched Eric Chavez fail too many times over the last four years for my team; I can't root for him to finally do well for someone else.

Maybe that's not much of a case to root against a player.  But I think it's enough for me.  How about you?

It's time to make the switch.  Bosh himself is basically asking for it, with comments after tonight's loss that he wants to be in the post more often. Wade is saying that he wants to run more late in games. 

What are these guys  crying out for?  A smaller, more athletic lineup.

The Heat have lost 5 straight games, and they have 18 games left.  That's just enough to time to hopefully "get right" before the playoffs.  And the team has plenty of incentive to radically alter the rotation now, because they've clearly established that they can't beat elite teams with their current rotation.

Here's the fix:

Continue reading this post »

Bump to a good man, and something I was going to write about anyways! - Zonis

A few days ago I wrote a post predicting and analyzing the decisions that the A's will be faced with in 2012.  I was grateful for all the great feedback from the community; it gave me some ideas for reflection and revision.  In the interest of narcissism continuing the conversation, here's Part II of a plan for 2012. 

Continue reading this post »

ZiPs, Marcel, CHONE, and CAIRO all project the world will not end in 2012.  With the world's fate secure, here's some analysis and predictions about the A's front-office decision-making a year from now.

Continue reading this post »

It surprises me that so many bloggers and commenters here love Joel Anthony unabashedly.  Granted, he's a hustle player with great work ethic and a good defender.  He blocks shots and he rebounds. 

Lost in the shuffle of his 16-rebound performance in the last game, however, was the fact that Anthony scored zero points and took zero shots in 43 minutes.  Some fans actually praise this, citing his unselfishness and awareness of his role. 

There's a problem here.  When Lebron James and Dwayne Wade have bad shooting nights, and someone else on the court plays 43 minutes and doesn't take a shot, it isn't a coincidence.  The Heat are basically allowing opponents to play 4-on-5 all night. 

I'll just come out and write it, definitively:  The Heat will not win the 2011 title if Joel Anthony is a significant part of the rotation.  Or Erick Dampier.  Or Juwan Howard.  They simply will not be able to get past the Celtics if they have a non-offensive entity on the court.

The Celtics are a great defensive team, and they make outstanding defensive rotations.  Putting a terrible offensive player on the court is magnified against a good defensive team, because they are more disciplined - they follow their scouting reports, they don't rotate hard out to bad shooters, etc.

The point of my fanpost here is this:  This team should be trotting out lineups that are higher risk, but higher reward - lineups that actually have a chance of beating the Celtics in four months.  That's all that really matters anyway.  People can beat their chest over a Joel Anthony loose-ball dive, or a 10 rebound night against the Raptors, but it's literally meaningless if his game won't translate against the conference's top team.  And I don't think it will.  He brings too many deficiencies to the court.

So, what lineup should the Heat be experimenting with?

Effective immediately, these five guys should be getting the most minutes on the team:  LBJ, Bosh, D. Wade, James Jones, and Mike Miller.

The first three are obvious, while the last two completely fly in the face of common wisdom.  Mike Miller and James Jones can't be on the court together - they play the same position!  Miller and Jones are Wade and Lebron's backups!  You need a hulking center for defense!  You need a true point guard! 

And this is a case where I completely disagree with the common wisdom.  Lebron and Wade are two of the most versatile, multi-dimensional players in the game.  Now that they are acclimated with each other, it is time to test that versatility.  Lebron needs to truly test the limits of his unselfishness here.  Is he willing to (gulp) play some minutes at center?  Is he willing to be the backup at power forward?  Because if he's not, this team probably can't get past Boston.  Their best chance to get past Boston is by running the Celtics off the court with a blazing fast, small lineup, and Lebron taking his lumps against the Celtics' centers.  Sure, he'd get banged and bruised up in the half court, and the Heat would allow some offensive rebounds.  But the Heat have the talent to dictate the pace of a game.  They proved it against the Clippers.  The Clippers were so scared of the Heat's transition attack that they actually stopped crashing the O-boards.  This is the power of the Heat's "small" lineup - it can dictate the pace of the game on its own  terms.

Is it really even a "small" lineup?  Really, what I'm suggesting is only that the Heat eschew the typical lumbering NBA center.  At every other position, the Heat is actually quite big.  Bosh (6'10"), Miller (6'8", and a great rebounder), Jones (6'8"), and Wade (6'4") would actually make a huge 1-4.  The mismatch is only in the paint, where 6-8, 260-lb. Lebron James is guarding Kendrick Perkins and Shaquille O'Neal.  This lineup is daring Kendrick Perkins to beat the Heat.  Daring him to score 30 points.  I don't think he can.  What I do think would happen, is that he and Shaq would miss a lot of chippies, the five good-sized Heat on the court would scrap for the boards, and I think they would run the Celtics off the court in transition. 

This is their best, nay, their only chance to win.  They will not win a half-court game against the Celtics.  Their offense isn't good enough, and the Celtics' half-court offense is too good.  So, the Heat might as well start training and preparing now to play in the way that gives them a chance to win it all in 4-5 months. 

So, here's the eight-man rotation for the playoffs that I'm envisioning:

LBJ  (C!)
Bosh
Jones
Wade
Arroyo

Bench:
Ilgauskas
Miller
Chalmers

Some notes:

*Between LBJ, Bosh, and Ilgaukas, I'm suggesting that exactly two of the three are on the court at all times, manning the C and PF positions.  Never all three on the court (not enough shooting and floor spacing, IMO), and never only one of the three (too small). 

*Bosh gets his wish of avoiding minutes at center, because I'm suggesting that Ilgauskas and Lebron get pretty much all the minutes there.  Bosh guards the other team's PF, which he is very successful at.  Lebron is much beefier than Bosh, anyway. 

*Chalmers and Arroyo are never on the court together (pretty much the current arrangement).  However, there will be occasional times when neither player is on the floor.

*The "crunchtime 5" might be LBJ/Bosh/Jones/Wade/Miller.  There's plenty of ballhandling there, even without a true PG.  Come playoff time, I think all five of those guys should be playing 35+ minutes a game.  That's how much better I think they are than the rest of the rotation.  

What do you guys think?  Clearly, I am a small-ball proponent, and I admit that's my bias.  The common wisdom is that small-ball doesn't work in the playoffs, but my rebuttal is that teams seldom try it with truly great players.  For example, the Cavs always went big with Lebron in the playoffs, and I think it was huge tactical error.  They tried to play the Celtics straight up, tried to put Shaq on Garnett, and it was a tactical disaster.  Never once did the Cavs try to just blow the Celtics off the floor with a small lineup that featured Mo Williams and Gibson on the court at the same time to stretch the floor, with Lebron/Varajao at the 4/5.  They continually played two offensive liabilities at the same time, and not coincidentally the Celtics tore them apart. 

I hope the Heat will not make the same mistake this season. 

I'm not guaranteeing the "Lebron at center" plan will work.  But I want Lebron to be courageous and unselfish enough to try it, and I want Coach Spo to have creativity to give it a chance.  We will never know what Lebron looks like at center, with four great shooters surrounding him, until someone gives it a try.  

The past two days have been significant for the Western Athletic Conference, and there is definitely a Mountain West connection to this news.

This article by Dan McCarney of the San Antonio Express-News has some good details and quotes from WAC Commissioner Karl Benson.

More info and analysis below the fold.

Continue reading this post »

With the holidays over, it's back to work for me.  I won't have the time for an extended post for a while, but I do have a couple of topics that AN might want to run with, either here in the comments or in your own extended fanpost: 

Continue reading this post »

UPDATE, Thursday Evening: We have just learned that the A's haven't been contracted yet, so today MLB Bonus Baby has published its summary/analysis of Oakland's most recent draft. Enjoy.

It's a terrible topic.  But there's no sense dancing around it.  If - and it's a very unlikely if - MLB ever made a decision in the next 20 years to contract, these two things are true:

a.)  They would contract two teams at the same time, due to the nature of daily MLB baseball.
b.)  The A's and the Rays would be the two teams that were contracted.

This post will discuss the possibility of the A's and Rays being contracted out of MLB.

Continue reading this post »

This post begins with two connected theories: 

a.)  Defense ages better at certain positions than others, due to the specific physical demands of each position.

b.)  Paying 37-year-old Adrian Beltre $13M in 2016 wouldn't be as bad as you might think.

Obsessive A's fans (and Angels fans?) are wondering what Adrian Beltre's game will look like at the end of a five or six-year contract.  Let's say the A's up the ante tomorrow and offer Beltre a six year, $78M deal - $13M per season. The scariest part of this deal is Beltre's age 36-37 seasons in 2015-2016.  Clearly, he will be in his decline phase...but what if he's still an above-average defender at that point? 

Is it more likely for a 37-year-old corner infielder to retain their defense skills than an OF, 2b-SS, or C? 

The discussion continues after the jump. 

Continue reading this post »

From MLBTR, via Mike DG of the LA Times.

This makes sense.  The Angels entered this offseason expecting to be a player for at least one major talent.  They whiffed on Crawford, and have publicly said that they are content with their bullpen after signing Downs, which means they are passing on Soriano.  Clearly, Beltre is the guy they intend to pursue at this point.

The significance of this development is that it means that the A's aren't the only bidder, and it also means that their previous reported offer would not be sufficient to lure Beltre to Oakland.

If the money is equal, Beltre will choose LA.  He played in the area for much of his career, his family lives there, the facilities are better, the attendance is higher - there's basically no reason one could rationalize him signing with Oakland if the money is equal.

So how much more money would it take, and is that increase justifiable?  Where would you draw the line for Beltre?  Would you offer him that sixth year?  Would you offer him $80-90M? 

I think this Angels development puts the A's team in a situation where they can publicly say, "Well, shucks, once again we offered a free agent a lot of money and they didn't take it, because of the facility."  Counterintuitive as it sounds, it bothers me that the team continues to make these types of market-rate offers to good, desirable players.  The team should simply acknowledge that good players don't want to play here and either a.) Offer the Jason Werth/Nationals-style overpay, or b.) ignore them altogether.

To take the "woe is us" middle approach bothers me. They've already proven their point.  We get it, the stadium makes it difficult to sign players. 

So, at this point, with the new Angels information, if you were in Beane's shoes - do you offer the $10-15M increase on the Angels offer, and/or an additional year?   Or do you think it's time to call it an offseason?

By non-tendering Cust and Encarnacion, and by failing to come to terms with Iwakuma, one could argue that the A's have staked their offseason to the hopes of making a powerful and wise investment of their remaining $20-25M.  In this thread I would like you to think about making a gigantic financial commitment to one of the three elite Type A free agents that remain on the market - Cliff Lee, Carl Crawford, or Adrian Beltre.

Continue reading this post »

I love all the off-season action so far.  Our favorite team has been, unquestionably, the most active team in baseball during the first two weeks of the Hot Stove Season.

It seemed like a good time to take an in-depth look at where the team stands. 

Continue reading this post »

67M Asks: Can you hide a bad writer alongside two great ones? I mean, seriously, 67MARQUEZ promoting notsellingjeans to the front page is like Justin Bieber opening for Zepellin.  Only I have better hair.

Hey, speaking of hiding, that's exactly what I have been doing since Monday night. Oh, I kid. I am up to my eyeballs in work. So many ideas, so little time. As a sneak preview, there is a 3-part post on Charles Oscar Finley coming to a site near you.  Ok, it's actually this site.  In the meantime, enjoy discussing the outfield possibilties for your 2011 Oakland Athletics.

***

I don't know the answer to the question in the title,  but I'd like you to think about it and discuss this in the comments. 

By the way, if you haven't read danmercury's excellent analysis piece on Jorge De La Rosa, please do.

Continue reading this post »

A week ago, I wrote a fan post that predicted the destinations of the top five free agents.  If you didn't get a chance to read it, I'd be grateful if you clicked the link above to read my rationalizations for those predictions.  But the Cliff's Notes version was this:

Yankees:  Cliff Lee, Andy Pettitte, Mariano Rivera, Derek Jeter
Red Sox:  Jayson Werth, David Ortiz's option exercised, Carlos Pena (not a top-5 free agent, but I mentioned him and Ortiz in that first post to help explain my prediction that I foresee the Red Sox pushing Youkilis to 3b and going with a temporary option at both 1b and DH for 2011 in hopes of landing Adrian Gonzalez, Al Pujols, and/or Prince Fielder in a year.
Angels:  Adrian Beltre

I wrote in the previous post that, if those three teams prioritize their off-season signings in exactly way I've predicted, that would be the lone opportunity for the A's or any other surprise team to make a serious play at signing Carl Crawford.  Because realistically, if the Yankees/Red Sox/Angels prioritize him at the top of their list, I see no chance of another team outbidding any one of them significantly enough to sway his decision elsewhere. 

Now, keeping those predictions in the back of your mind, I'm going to throw out some 2nd-tier free agent predictions.  Please do comment on the ones I've provided, and make your own predictions in the comments below. 

Carl Pavano - Nationals.  Washington is reportedly very interested in acquiring a front-of-the-rotation ace.  At their current stage of rebuilding, it makes no sense to strip the farm in pursuit of Zack Grienke, which means they'll be looking to invest heavily in starting pitching.  Unfortunately, I'm virtually certain that they'll experience Mark Teixiera deja vu in their pursuit of Cliff Lee; they'll make an incredible offer for Lee, maybe even the best offer by a few million, and ultimately Lee will accept an offer from the Yankees or the Rangers instead, because the dollar figures are close enough and he wants to play for a perennial contender.  This will put the Nationals in the unenviable position of pursuing Carl Pavano as their "staff ace". 

Adam Dunn - Cubs.  The Nationals allow Dunn to walk as part of their renewed commitment to defense and redistribute his salary to Pavano, a pitch-to-contact strike-thrower.  But Dunn still wants to play a position, and he can guarantee he'll get that opportunity by staying in the NL.  The Cubs have a LHH power vacuum and created an obvious 1b opening with their Derrek Lee trade.  Similar to the Nats' signing of Pavano, this is the Cubs' "get the casual fan base excited, at least we added one name-worthy player this off-season" signing. 

Victor Martinez - Tigers.  Several National writers are theorizing that the Tigers are one of the top three front-runners to sign Crawford, along with the Red Sox and Angels.  I am skeptical about this.  I cannot see the Tigers adding a $100M salary commitment this off-season, even though they have significant salary coming off the books.  I also think they have far greater needs elsewhere besides left field.  Signing V-Mart allows them to upgrade the putrid offense that Gerald Laird has been providing them and, sticking with the theme, add a "big name" that casual fan can get excited about as consolation for losing out on the bigger fish.  V-Mart could open the year as their primary DH/backup catcher and take over the everyday role if Alex Avila busts behind the plate.

Jorge De La Rosa - A's.  Ok, I'm blatantly cheating here:  Each previous prediction was meant to build on the ones before it - i.e., Adrian Beltre signs with the Angels, causing a chain reaction that leads to Carlos Pena signing in Boston, etc. Now, I'm switching the rules mid-stream and stating what I think the A's should(?) (I'm incapable of off-season A's objectivity) will do assuming that Hell remains very warm and that Carl Crawford does not in fact sign with my favorite team.  De La Rosa makes a ton of sense for the A's as a free agency Plan B, assuming the Rockies don't lock him up before he officially reaches free agency in a few weeks:  he's 29, he induces a ton of groundballs for Oakland's great infield defense, and his value is depressed by his Type A status, which gives the A's a slight competitive advantage in pursuing him relative to other desirable, contending teams.  Ted Lilly's 3 year, $33M deal helps establish a market for JDLR; I think that he too will garner three years, but at slightly less than $30M.  I made my Plan A for the A's off-season clear in this post, the first in a multi-part series.   But my Plan B involves signing De La Rosa and trading pitching for offense.  That's a topic I'll explore in great depth next week (I would be very grateful for some PitchFX/graphing help from danmerqury, ElCroata, PT, or dfa to sabermetrically analyze JDLR in that post, if any of you have the time).

Hiroki Kuroda - Japan.   Kuroda is a very popular target of ANers who seek a 5th-starter upgrade over Mazzaro.  Unfortunately, at 35, I see him headed back to Japan to finish his career.  He's hinted as much in interviews, and even if he does return, I think he's more likely to stay where he's comfortable, in Los Angeles, than to jump to a new franchise.  The Dodgers still have two SP vacancies even after signing Lilly, so he Kuroda stays stateside, that's a logical fit.  

Paul Konerko (White Sox), Derek Lee (Braves), Vlad (Rangers), Kubel and Thome (Twins) - All re-signing with their respective italicized teams. 

Players and topics I have no prediction for, but would be interested to hear your thoughts on:

Rafael Soriano - Undeniably great, but what non-Yankees team is going to give multiple years at greater than $10M for a closer anymore?  The last 5-6 teams that have done that have all gotten burned. 

Red Sox Catcher - One of the great mysteries of the off-season.  Are they ballsy enough to enter the year with Saltalamacchia and no safety net?  Are the Angels crazy enough to actually non-tender Mike Napoli and then wince as he hits 30 bombs for Boston?  Is Chris Iannetta or Russell Martin really available?  Do they consider free agent John Buck an acceptable Opening-Day starter in building a playoff team on paper?

Who do the Giants bring back once this feel-good run is done?  It feels like half their offense is going to become free agents.  And many of those free agents out-hit their projections over the last half-season.  Will the team end up paying huge money to bring the aging vets back, or make the very hard decision to waive those players goodbye?   

What will happen with Orlando Hudson (Type B) and Mark Ellis (Type A)?  As the two best FA second basemen, their fates are probably intertwined. 

I'll be the first to acknowledge that the odds of the A's signing Carl Crawford are very slim.  But I'm going to lay out the set of circumstances that gives the A's a slightly better opportunity.  What follows below is a "Major Free Agent Predictions Thread" - after you've read mine, please post your own predictions in the comments. 

I've organized these by team.  The player and signing team is listed in bold, with the analysis for each in italics underneath.

Cliff Lee - Yankees

I think the Yankees will build their off-season around this signing.  He is rumored to want "CC Sabathia Money," and while the $23M per year is reasonable, the $161M total value probably isn't.  It's hard to imagine a 31-year-old pitcher getting a seven-year deal like Sabathia did at age 27.  Sick of being traded, Lee is going to want no-trade protection, and the Yankees are more comfortable giving that out than small-market teams are.  Five years, $115M, with a vesting option for a sixth year that could bring the total value to $138M would get it done. No other team would be willing to take that risk, and the Yankees can afford to.  Lee's bargaining position is incredibly strong this off-season. Not only is he the lone ace on the market, but the extensions of Felix Hernandez, Justin Verlander, Roy Halladay, and Josh Johnson have left the "Ace FA Starter" cupboard bare for the next two years.

Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettitte - Yankees

They wouldn't sign anywhere else, and they have too much left in the tank to retire.  But collectively, they'll cost enough that retaining them and adding Lee amounts to the extent of the Yankees' off-season splurges this winter.

Adrian Beltre - Angels

His family lives in LA, and he recently said that his family sacrificed for him on his last free agent choice (Boston), but that he would make the decision for his family this time.  The Angels received terrible 3b performance this season, and the drop-off from Beltre to the second-tier in the free agent and trade markets at the third base position is very steep.  This match just makes too much sense.  Four years, $56-60M.  At that price, the Angels are (hopefully) forced to stand pat in the outfield and DH, with Torii/Burgos/Abreu/Rivera/Napoli. 

Jayson Werth, Carlos Pena, David Ortiz (option exercised) - Red Sox

This is my Red Sox prediction that no one is making right now.  If their plan truly is the one that Peter Gammons and Nick Cafardo and every other Bostonian has been shouting from the rooftops - to go "full bore" after Carl Crawford - then why would they make that so transparent in the media?  What would they gain from that?  I don't buy the Gammons bluster one bit on this one.  I think it's more likely that whatever is being leaked to media at this point in the free agent game is in fact just a smokescreen. Crawford doesn't make much sense for the Red Sox anyway - they have three left-field options internally with Cameron, Ellsbury, and Kalish.

Now to sell you on these Red Sox predictions:  The Sawx love them some draft picks. I think they'll let Beltre and V-Mart walk to collect the four high draft picks they'll garner as compensation.  This more than offsets the first-rounder they'll lose for signing Werth, who seems to be a perfect fit for Fenway:  right-handed power, awkward facial hair, full of grit. I think that Werth will be more important to the Red Sox than Crawford because ultimately the team needs a long-term replacement for soon-to-be-35-year-old J.D. Drew, who enters the final season of his deal in 2011 coming off a down year.  There are no elite outfielders on next year's FA class and the Red Sox lack a RFer internally, so signing Werth now and putting him in left for a year makes the most sense to me.  Convers

If the Red Sox can persuade Carlos Pena to take a one year, "rebuild your value" deal similar to the one they gave Beltre, I think they'll do a handstand.  This pushes Youkilis back to third, where he might remain for a while, because...these off-season moves set up their plan for 2011-2012 off-season - to sign either Adrian Gonzalez or Albert Pujols to a huge deal. This would push them into luxury-tax territory, but accumulating that kind of talent over the next two years would also help ensure that they regained a stranglehold on an annual playoff berth (along with the Yankees) for the next several years.

At catcher I think they'll tolerate a second-tier option like John Buck, Gerald Laird, or a trade candidate in hopes that Saltalamacchia can develop into a starter. 

If each of those players sign in exactly that location:

To me, that's the scenario that gives the A's a sliver of hope in signing Crawford.  Because those signings would mean that the Yankees, Angels, and Red Sox - three very desirable teams to play for - had all spent their money elsewhere. If the cards fall differently, I gave the A's zero chance whatsoever.  For example, here's an alternate universe prediction, and its resulting chain of events:

The Rangers re-sign Cliff Lee.  Andy Pettitte retires.  The Yankees have $33M+ to burn but a crucial SP hole. They trade Brett Gardner, Jesus Montero and Joba Chamberlain to the Royals for Zack Greinke, who has two affordable years left on his deal.  Trading Gardner creates a left-field void filled by...signing Crawford. 

So, that's it for me - I'll end optimistically by stating that the A's will indeed sign Crawford to a 7-8 year deal, using almost every penny of their off-season money. 

But how about you?  Where will those elite players mentioned above land?  I'll also mention some second-tier guys in the comments below.

According to Eddie Bajek's formula, Mark Ellis has qualified as the last non-pitcher Type A free agent. 

This is mostly due to Ellis' huge September resurgence.  Ironically, Ellis' recent performance should have helped his market value, but it will actually hinder it.  Ellis could be this year's version of 2009 Orlando Hudson, where his status as a non-elite Type A free agent dramatically suppresses his market value.  (Hudson and his agent were so disenchanted by this that they ended up having it signed into Hudson's 2010 contract that he couldn't be offered arbitration if he qualified as a Type A after 2010). 

This might have a significant impact on how the A's deal with Ellis this off-season. 

If the A's didn't have enough motivation to decline his $6M option already, now they definitely do.  The team can now decline his 2011 option, offer him arbitration, and go a few different ways, each of them desirable:

a.)  Simply let Ellis walk.  If they do this, they stand to gain two high draft picks when Ellis signs with another team.  One of those picks will be in the #40-#60 range overall - a pick in the sandwich round.  The other pick could be anywhere from #19 overall (Detroit's unprotected first-rounder) all the way to around pick #120, depending upon whether the team that signs Ellis has a protected first round pick and/or also signs additional Type A free agents ranked higher than Ellis.

b.)  Re-visit Ellis much later in the off-season, after the market has played out.  If, similar to Hudson, Ellis' value ends up being dramatically suppressed by virtue of qualifying as a Type A, and the A's have struck out on the big-ticket free agents the fan base clamors for, the A's can then swoop in with a bargain offer.

However, something could throw a wrench in either of these plans: 

The A's could decline Ellis' option, offer him arbitration, and then have him turn around and accept their arbitration offer.  In this scenario, the A's are left with Ellis on a one-year deal for about the same price as the $6M option, and no compensation draft picks - basically the same spot they are now.

So, what if the A's instead did this:

"Mark, we have a longstanding relationship with you and appreciate your contributions here.  We are unwilling to make a multi-year commitment to you at this time, however, we are going to offer you arbitration.  We would prefer you not accept the arbitration offer.  However, if you find yourself in January without a multi-year offer, we will, at that point, offer you a two-year, $8-9M deal."

If Ellis trusts the team, this perhaps gives him some incentive to decline the arb offer and the surefire $6M award.  Then, if another team is willing to give him a very generous two-year offer - say, $11-12M - he accepts it and the A's get the picks.  Or, perhaps if he wants the opportunity to play for a team with better World Series prospects, or in a better hitter's park, or closer to his South Dakota roots, he takes a one or two year offer that's comparable to the ones Oakland has on the table.

I really like Ellis, but him declining an arb offer and signing a contract with another team is my ideal scenario right now.  It saves an additional $6M for the pursuit of Jarl Crawferth, and it puts two additional high draft picks into the system. Then Rosales gets a shot at full-time 2b duty and Tolleson slides into the super-utility/backup MIF role, where he held his own the last month.

Now, a quick note about Jack Cust's contract, which became its own meta-thread earlier today:

These are 5 myths that need to be dispelled about Jack Cust's contract (please don't discuss his stats or style of play in the space below, that's a topic for a different thread):

#1  "He's gonna get like $5M in arbitration this year."

No he's not.  He was re-signed at $2.65M this year.  Arbiters value counting stats, and Cust's counting stats are depressed by virtue of him spending six weeks in AAA this year.  Cust finished with 13 homers, 50 runs, and 52 rbi's at the major-league level this year.  Arbiters will also be made aware (by the A's side) of the fact that, after the team non-tendered him last December, every team in the game had the opportunity to sign him at a higher price than the one Oakland gave him last year - $2.65M - and obviously none of them did.  My prediction is that Cust would win a $3.75M award in arbitration this off-season.  Thus, I believe that the team will offer $3.5M, Cust will ask for $4M, and they'll settle before a hearing at $3.75M.  That's still a terrific price for his performance as a DH.

#2  "Nobody wanted him last off-season, so nobody will want him this off-season, either."

This off-season is drastically different than last off-season.  About ten AL teams will have their 2010 DH roll off the books this off-season.  Ken Griffey Jr., Jose Guillen, Eric Chavez, Nick Johnson, Pat Burrell - all of that dead money is off the books, and those teams will probably be seeking new, productive DHs. Additionally, Hideki Matsui, Vladimir Guerrero, Jason Kubel, and David Ortiz could be free agents this year too, and their teams will either retain them or look for cheaper DH options - like Cust.  The point is this:  Cust will be more desirable, even with the exact same skillset - now that about 10 AL teams have a DH opening this winter.

#3  "Kenny Williams didn't want Cust last winter, and he was an idiot to go into 2010 without a true DH."

That was Ozzie Guillen's decision.  Guillen told Williams that he wanted more flexibility at the DH position - hence not re-signing Jim Thome, or pursuing a Thome-like replacement.  Williams doesn't think Kotsay is a better hitter than Cust...if anyone does, it's Ozzie.  And really it was just that Ozzie wanted lots of bench flexibility, which Cust doesn't provide.  Williams has distanced himself from that decision at every possible opportunity this season in the press. 

How this relates to Cust:  There's no way Williams will let Ozzie make that decision for him again this year.  Expect the White Sox to once again utilize a true DH.

#4  "Next year is Cust's last year before reaching six-year free agency."

it would've been, had he not spent six weeks in the minors this year.  But because he did, Cust accrued less than a full year of service time this year.  He began the season with 4.002 years of service.  So, he will head to arbitration this winter as a 4th-year arbitration player.  Assuming the team doesn't non-tender him again, he won't be a free agent until after the 2012 season.  So, in theory, Cust could make $3.75M in 2011 for the A's, and then $5M in 2012 before reaching free agency, with the two parties avoiding arbitration in both seasons.  This is exactly how I think his situation will play out from here. 

#5  "The A's non-tendered him last winter, so obviously they'll non-tender him this winter, too."

I kind of already covered this one, since it ties into the previous four, but it's worth its own bullet point.  He was non-tendered last year in part because of a calculated gamble - the team knew that other teams league-wide did not value his services at the same dollar figure that arbiters would.  This does not mean that the A's did not value his services at a higher dollar figure.  It means that they are smart businessmen who are unwilling to pay an asset more than its market-established worth.  Now that situation has probably changed - other teams would not leave Cust unsigned at $2.65M this off-season, because roughly 10 teams will be searching for new DH's.

(This post will be updated later in the evening, pending result of the A's game).

The final day of the regular season had some significant draft and free-agency implications for quite a few non-playoff teams, including the A's.

The Detroit Tigers' win early Sunday ensured that they would end up with the No. 19 overall pick in the 2011 Draft, having finished with the 15th-best record in MLB.  The Tigers finished the season at 81-81, and held a tiebreaker over the A's because the Tigers finished with a superior record the season before (2009).  Thus, regardless of the outcome of the A's game Sunday afternoon, when the A's took the field Sunday they were assured of having a protected 2011 first-round draft pick, even if they signed a good free agent such as Carl Crawford, Jayson Werth, Adrian Beltre, Victor Martinez, Adam Dunn, or Jorge De La Rosa this offseason.  

The Tigers' win locked the A's into a draft pick somewhere between No. 14 to No. 18, all of which would be protected.

In other MLB action, the Marlins, Angels, and Dodgers all won as well.  This meant that each of those three teams finished the year at 80-82, and all three of them held tiebreakers over the A's, because each of them finished 2009 with a better record than the A's as well.

Thus, if A's were to lose their final game of the year and finished 80-82, they would slide in front of the Marlins, Angels, and Dodgers in the draft order...and they'd even slide in front of Milwaukee's No. 15 overall compensation pick for the Brewers' failure to sign 2010 first-rounder Dylan Covey.

If the A's were to win their final game of the year, then the results of the Marlins, Angels and Dodgers games would all be irrelevant to the A's - the A's would finish a game ahead of each of them in the standings, at 81-81, and thus would clinch second-place in the AL West, and the No. 18 overall pick.

Now, here's how all this affects free agency:

If the Tigers were to sign an elite Type A free agent this offseason - and they'll be looking to upgrade some of the same positions the A's need to - they would now need to give up the No. 19 overall pick in the draft.  The Tigers have shown a willingness to do that before - just last year, they forfeited the No. 17 overall pick to sign Type A FA closer Jose Valverde. 

But if the A's were to sign an elite Type A free agent, they would not have to give up their No. 18 overall pick - they would instead give up their second-rounder, which will end up being approximately pick No. ~65, because there are typically about 15-20 sandwich picks between the first and the second rounds. 

One could argue that this gives the A's a small competitive advantage in free agency this offseason, because it's obviously less of a hit to forfeit the No. 65 overall pick than it is to forfeit the No. 19 overall pick. 

My larger point is, this is the A's best window to sign an elite free agent for the next half decade, because this team is on an upswing.  Even with the current talent and no additions, this team is likely to finish in the top half of the standings for the next several years, which would mean that their first-round picks would not be protected on the next several future FA markets.

67M Says: A day-late promotion is in order for this fine- and convo-inspiring- work by notsellingjeans. Enjoy, and we'll see you at game time. The Rangers are in town, and rumor has it, they brought some bubbly with them.

(Apologies if placing this on the fp negatively impacts the poll)

When I wrote the first of a multi-part series on possible paths for the A's offseason a month ago, my primary argument for pursuing Carl Crawford was clear:

I believe the A's are on an upswing.  They won 75 games last year, they'll win a few more than that this season, and next year they project to improve again.  This year will be the last season in which they'll finish in the "bottom 15" in MLB for the foreseeable future.  Why is that significant?  Because a team that finishes in the bottom 15 has a protected first-round draft pick when pursuing elite, Type A free agents such as Crawford.  Instead, those teams cede their 2nd-round pick when they sign an elite Type A free agent.  In the A's case, this would mean giving up approximately the No. ~55 overall pick in the 2011 draft if they sign an elite Type A free agent like Crawford this year.   That No. 55 overall pick is far less valuable than one in the #16-24 range, which is where the A's will be drafting in the foreseeable future as they continue their upswing with their young core of talent. In other words, this coming off-season is probably the A's last opportunity in the current contending window to pursue elite free agent talent with no major long-term talent penalty attached to it. 

 I still believe all of that, but the A's have played well enough that the third sentence of that paragraph is in doubt, as the A's now own one of the 15 best records in MLB.  At 76-74, the A's have 12 games left in their season, exactly 150 in the books, and they currently do not have a protected first-round pick, based on their place in the standings.  If the current standings were to hold for the season's final two weeks, and the A's signed an elite-tier free agent like Carl Crawford or Jayson Werth, the team would forfeit the No. 19 or No. 20 overall pick in the 2011 draft.  That is a hard pill for a perpetually low-budget team to swallow - and it's probably bitter enough to make the chances of such a signing even more remote.

Continue reading this post »

I've come up with five potential directions for the A's upcoming off-season, each with their own merits and faults.  This is Part I in the series.

Continue reading this post »

Apologies for this being a brief, underdeveloped fanpost, but I would like for this to be a place were can aggregate our collective knowledge about Chris Carter's defense.

Here's the update: 

Through July 27th, Chris Carter had played first base almost exclusively for the Rivercats, with 94 appearances at first out of a total of 101 games played.  On July 28th, Chris Carter played left field for the Rivercats.  Since then, he's DH'd once and played left field in five other games.  It would appear that he has, for the time being, been moved exclusively to left field.

Like many ANers, I'm excited by this development.  Carter projected as a poor defensive first baseman anyway, and the team already has a sold first baseman that I don't think could be traded for anything much of value, anyway.

If Carter does well in the month of August, he could conceivably get a September call-up and the opportunity to start in LF every day for the A's during the season's final month.  The A's 2011 outfield is pretty much wide open, and Carter has a chance to assert himself.

Carter's defensive stats:

You can look at Carter's minor league fielding record, including games played at each position and errors, here.

But I would be grateful if the community could chime in with the following info below:

*Have any of you seen him play left field in Sacramento the past week?  If so, how did he look?

*Do you have any relevant scouting links on the Internet to recent reports about his defense?

*How is Carter's arm?

*Is he slow, fast, or average as a runner?

(My perception has been that his "tools" defensively are fine, and that he can't play infield because he struggles fielding ground balls and taking throws, but that those tools would play better in the outfield).

Thanks for contributing!

1.  Are the A's out of the AL West race? 

2.  Can prospect Chris Carter be an adequate major league left fielder defensively?

Your answers to those two questions have a huge impact upon how you'll feel about this trade idea.

Continue reading this post »

As the A's reach the All-Star break, they are projected to have a 6% chance of winning their division and virtually no chance of winning the Wild Card, which appears destined for one of the three AL East juggernauts.  Overcoming the AL West deficit became even harder this week when the leading Rangers acquired Cliff Lee.

I am ready for the A's to waive the white flag on 2010.  Here's a trade I'd like them to explore over the All-Star break:

Jack Cust, Ben Sheets, and Mark Ellis to the White Sox

Dan Hudson, Brent Morel, and a C/C+ relief prospect to the A's

I'll discuss the rationale for the trade below, and you can vote in the poll at the end of the thread.

Why the deal works for the White Sox:

1.  Jake Peavy went down with a season-ending injury earlier this week, leaving the White Sox with a hole in their rotation.  In his place they called up Hudson to pitch Saturday, and Hudson was roughed up to the tune of five earned runs in only four innings of work against the lowly Royals.  The White Sox came back and won today, but they can't afford that type of performance down the stretch in their fight against the Tigers and Twins for the division.  Do they consider Sheets more "reliable" and "veteran-y" for the playoff stretch?  My hunch is they do. 

2.  Hudson, as a prospect, is the type of guy GM's are willing to deal if it puts them over top.  He's not a special physical talent.  His upside is considered to be limited because of a lack of velocity (I've read that he tops out at 90; if anyone has anything more recent, please correct me). 

3.  Kenny Williams has a pattern of being unafraid to make big deadline deals.  He enjoys making a splash, and he's willing to trade his prospects to do it.

4.  The White Sox have a gaping hole at DH, and a real lack of left-handed hitting, that Cust would fill admirably.  Granted, this hole existed in the off-season, and the Sox attempted to fill it with a "floating DH" of unheralded hitters like Vizquel, Kotsay, and Andruw Jones.  In short, it hasn't worked very well.  Acquiring Cust would be somewhat of an admission that their previous strategy was wrong, which might be a reason that this trade wouldn't happen.  But I think that Cust would be a useful piece for them, getting the occasional start in LF, at DH, and even in a pinch-hitting role.  He also would give them a very affordable option at DH going forward in 2011, as Cust will be arby eligible again next year and would only figure to get a raise of ~$500K for a salary of ~$2.5M. 

5.  Gordon Beckham has struggled mightily this year.  The White Sox are in a tough spot, because they absolutely don't want to deal him, and they don't have a decent alternative to play full-time at 2b.  So instead they've run him out at the 9th spot in the order to the tune of a .564 OPS. He rose to the big leagues with minimal minor league seasoning; perhaps some additional AAA would do him some good. Acquiring Ellis would be a big boost to their lineup and give the Sox the luxury of sending Beckham down for two months before a September call-up and the opportunity to make the postseason roster. 

Why this deal works for the A's:

1.  How quickly starting pitching depth can evaporate.  Duke is out for the year, Outman has had a slow rehab, Anderson suffered a scary injury, and Braden has been nagged by injuries as well.  Hudson could provide a nice replacement for Sheets in '11.  Hudson has had good control in the minors, but he is homer prone, and would benefit from the spacious confines of Oakland.  He'd give the A's a nice balance of young right-handed SP's, along with Cahill, Mazzaro, Mortensen, and Ross, to counter the quartet of talented lefties. 

2.  Morel is long-term option at 3b, where Cardenas has stalled a bit in '10. Low upside, maybe at best a future league-average guy, which obviously has good value at $400K. 

3.  Ellis' range has declined.  He's in the midst of a second straight season of being a league-average defender.  Meanwhile, Rosales' limited sample suggests that he could become an elite defender himself, and that he has been one thus far.  His presence gives the A's the luxury of dealing Ellis. 

4.  This is the most important reason to me:  In yet another non-playoff year, I'd like to get something that gives hope for the future.  If the A's don't trade Sheets this month, his acquisition ends up being a failed move, IMO.  If the team waits to trade Ellis, it's easy to foresee his value declining next season if injuries continue to bug him.  Cust's value has already been proven to be very narrow, as the entire league let him pass through waivers this spring.

I see the White Sox as a very unique opportunity to extract value from these three A's players.  In an emotional sense, all three of them are guys I really like, and I'm sure they've contributed positively to the clubhouse atmosphere.  But in a pure future-value sense, the analytical side of me wants to receive some future considerations in return from these guys before they walk, and I see this as the best opportunity.

Dan Gilbert has proven that he is willing to do what it takes to win.  If he's willing to take on an extraordinary commitment financially, he can surround Lebron James with the pieces necessary to make Lebron's decision easy later this week.  Here's how:

Trade #1:

Cavs re-sign Shaq to a one-year, $21M deal with 30% of the money deferred and immediately trade him to Washington for Gilbert Arenas ($17.7M) and Andray Blatche ($3.3M).

Why Trade #1 works:

*It matches up salary-wise, which is necessary because the Cavs are over the cap.
*The Wizards get to unload the worst contract in the game, the $80M owed to Arenas.
*Cavs would really help their case to woo James if they added impact talent.
*The Cavs would become the highest payroll team in the league, near $100M…but, if re-signing Lebron James is a ~$250M windfall in franchise value, it’s worth it.
*The Wizards would be thrilled to unload more than $60M in future salary commitments.
*The Wiz would only owe Shaq $13.6M in 2010-11, thanks to the salary payments being deferred 30% (this is the max amount of salary that can be deferred in an FA contract; Shaq would agree to it because it’s still far more than his market value).
*The Wizards clear tons of cap room for 2011-2012, when they could make a play for Baltimore native Carmelo Anthony and one other near-max FA to come play with John Wall. With so many teams positioning themselves for the 2010 offseason, the Wizards would have less competition next offseason.
*The Wizards unload their two biggest personality headaches.
*The Cavs acquire two very talented pieces. Blatche averaged 20 and 8 during the last 3 months of the season, and he’s 6′11” and 23 years old. Arenas, 28, could potentially start at the 2 and represent an upgrade over Anthony Parker since he’s so much more physically gifted.
*Blatche, with his great talent, size and low ($3.3M salary), could be thrown into a potential Chris Paul deal or Chris Bosh S&T.

Trade #2:

Trade 2a:  Blatche ($3.3M), J.J. Hickson ($1.5M), Mo Williams ($9.3M), Christian Eyenga, and a future No. 1 pick for Chris Paul ($14.9M); or,  Trade 2b:  Blatche, Hickson, Williams, Eyenga, Future No. 1, plus the expiring contracts of Delonte West, Sebastian Telfair and Anthony Parker ($10.2M) for Paul and Emeka Okafor ($11.5M.

Why Trade #2 works:

Okafor is clearly just a straight salary dump in this one, the Cavs basically taking on his huge deal for the right to get Paul. The Hornets would probably waive Delonte before August, saving an additional $4M, since his contract is non-guaranteed.

The Hornets essentially get the chance to start all over with some young, very cheap pieces led by Collison, Blatche, and Hickson, and they now have plenty of money sign David West to an extension as he enters the final year of his deal, if they so choose.

In trade #2b, there is $24.3M in outgoing salary for the Cavs for 2010-11, and they are taking on $26.48M from the Hornets for the same year, meaning the trade works for salary cap purposes, The Cavs can take on 125% of the salary they send away in trades, meaning that they could, just barely, offer the same package and receive Peja Stojakovic’s $15.336M salary instead of Okafor’s.  The Hornets would probably prefer to unload Okafor, who is owed $11.5M in ‘10-’11 and a whopping $52M over the next four years, one of the worst contracts in the game.  Peja's contract is its last year, making it an asset.

The $100M payroll Cavs, led by Lebron James

This would be the Cavs’ roster after those trades (league requires a minimum of 13 players on your roster):

PG: Chris Paul
SG: Gilbert Arenas
SF: Lebron James
PF: Antawn Jamison
C: Anderson Varajao

Bench

Okafor or Stojakovic
Mid-level-exception FA
Daniel Gibson
Jamario Moon
Leon Powe
Danny Green
Zydrunas Ilgauskas?
Jawad Williams?

That’s a great 9-10 man depth chart, with much clearer, more consistent roles than last year. I think these surrounding upgrades would be enough to convince Lebron to re-sign. I also think this is a dramatically improved team. By taking on an enormous increase in future salary, becoming a $100M payroll team, and turning some of the cheap depth into more top-tier talent, that team is an NBA champion.

This thread is meant to start today's discussion for Day 2 of the MLB Draft, which covers round 2 through 30 today.  I'm sure it will require an overflow thread eventually and hopefully someone else can handle that.

I was very pleased with the A's selection of Michael Choice at No. 10 overall yesterday. As soon as I saw Colon taken by the Royals at No. 4, I had a feeling that a better-than-expected talent was going to drop to the A's, and indeed it did.  I'm glad the organization didn't spend the pick on Zack Cox, despite Cox's pre-draft hype.

Signing bonus demands aside, what scares me about Cox is the lack of isolated power, even with an aluminum bat.  Too much of a risk that he hits like Sean Burroughs at the pro level for me.  I'm reminded of the Moneyball maxim that "power is the last tool to develop," but I also remember that logic was being applied to a young Jason Giambi in the book, and hindsight helps us realize that lots of young mid-90s slugging prospects saw their "power tool develop" for a different reason.

In the post-steroid era I have a theory that only the very best natural athletes are going to be able to generate legitimate, year-to-year home run power at the Major League level.  Carter, Taylor, and Choice all fit the bill.  They are very impressive physical specimens who can generate more bat speed and power than just about anyone at the minor league level.

I think the organization has made a conscious effort to target more athletic players in the last three years through the draft and through trades and Choice fits the profile.  This approach works for me, because ultimately the A's need to hit a home run on a few position players in the draft.  The best way to do that is to draft some guys that have high ceilings, despite their low floors.  I think we've seen the end of the Danny Putnam, low-ceiling, high-floor, "great pitch recognition and all-around average tools" draft picks at the top of the draft, and I for one am pleased about that.  You can find those guys in free agency at prices that even the A's can afford every year.  They need to draft potential stars, even with the high(er) bust rate of toolsy, low-floor guys.

Now, on to some Day 2 thoughts...

Continue reading this post »