Log in Register

Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Create an account

Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.
Name *
Username *
Password *
Verify password *
Email *
Verify email *

fb mb tw mb

Monday 18th Dec 2017

Let's be clear: I like Billy Beane.

I know him. I have spoken with him on numerous occasions, and although I am not sure whether he likes me or not, I do know he does not regard me as stupid. Which, with Billy is half the battle.

Furthermore, I completely agree with his basic approach to winning in a number of ways. Pitchers who can strike out hitters, and keep runners off base are good, while batters who can get on base are also good.  Signing players long term before they are arbitration eligibile, something Beane pioneered (though not alone) is also a great move, as is trading players as they become more expensive for younger players, turning them over and continuing to rebuild is also not just a good move, it is one borrowed from the Branch Rickey School of "trade 'em with one more good season in them" book.

That said, the last handful of years in Oakland have been beyond frustrating, watching stop gap moves and some good players filter in and out while the real team needs--that of a power source at first base at least--continue to be both ephemeral and effusive.

Ostensibly Beane did a great job in picking up arms like Brett Anderson, and Gio Gonzalez, along with Carlos Gonzalez a few years back.

But turning Gonzalez into the short-lived Matt Holliday fiasco was one move I hated (in fact I have trouble picking up Holliday on any roto team because the three months I saw him play left a terrible taste in my mouth).

Had Beane been a little patient even a little before he parted with Cargo, the potential Athletics outfield of today might have been Andre Ethier, Nelson Cruz, and Gonzalez, and that certainly would have addressed enough power issues that maybe Daric Barton's minimal contributions would have been better exploited.

But, right now, with the swapping of both Gio Gonzalez and Trevor Cahill, I have to wonder just what positive I can possibly expect from the Athletics this coming season.

For, in exchange with two very strong starters, Beane and Oakland picked up six prospects, four pitchers (Tommy Milone, Brad Peacock, Ryan Cook and Jarrod Parker), a decent looking catching prospect in Derek Norris, and hopefully a major league ready outfielder in Collin Cowgill.

Cowgill actually nabbed 100 at-bats last year for Arizona (.239-1-9) and was originally a 29th round pick of Beane's in 2007, though the speedy flychaser chose to attend Kentucky instead.

But, this leaves the Oakland offense even iffier than before, with questions at first base, third base, and all around the outfield, meaning the only givens are catcher Kurt Suzuki, second baseman Jemile Weeks, and shortstop Cliff Pennington.

Certainly among Michael Choice, Jai Miller, Grant Green, and Cowgill, there are some young prospect possibilities, but right now that is all there is. More interesting, the core of a pretty good rotation has been removed, leaving brittle Brett Anderson, Dallas Braden (coming off surgery), and a lot of questions, but very little stability.

Meaning that though Oakland has a lot of really nice looking prospect chips, for now that is all they are, and as such the prospects for Oakland in 2012 point to a lot more rebuilding.

It kind of reminds me of my Scoresheet League, where there are a number of solid competitors each year in the 24-team set up. But, there are also a bunch of owners constantly tweaking and trading for the next big star, rather than focusing on what they have and can realistically build around to be competitive in the short term (and short term means over the next couple of years).

Mind you, I love having prospects and feeling that chest poffering feeling when I indeed nab the next Albert Pujols, but I also like to win and be competitive every year if I can.

For, it is fun to be smarter than everyone else by picking the next big thing, but it is better to be smarter than everyone else by winning.

That said, on this holiday weekend, I wish all of you out there a safe and happy holiday with family and friends. That is where it all is really at!


0 #2 Todd Zola 2011-12-27 19:40
My take isn't so much the trades in a vacuum but more that the A's were (again) in the position to HAVE to do the deals.

What they got was fine, actually better than fine.

But they already went through a bit of a fire sale a couple of years ago and ideally, that should have led to the team being competitive and keeping Cahill and Gio as part of a couple year run at the playoffs.

It did nor work out so they were "forced" to deal them to build up a foundation for another HOPEFUL run.

I think the point is dealing for the future is fine, but at some point it needs to result in a stretch of competing for the playoffs and Lawr is more disappointed that Beane had to deal the arms as opposed to what he got.
0 #1 William Roy 2011-12-27 14:58
I don't get this post Lawr.

I'm a big A's fan and may fault them for Cargo but how were they expected to do much better with cahill and gio under control a couple years?

What's more, this post appears more as an outsiders take on inner workings of Beane, a man you praise. I hate to compare different things but weren't you writing in a previous column defending Obama and Jimmy Carter for not panning out like the public expected and that it would be a shame for Obama's re-election prospects to go the way of Carter's?

Maybe I misunderstood the column. But I know that many pro-Obama guys like to say that being in the office is a different animal.

I don't really understand what's to criticize at this point except the past with regard to Beane.

Add comment

Security code

Latest Tweets

CS 20 ball 600