The flurry of trades has certainly taken the wind out of the A's sail for another playoff spot this year. Of course, the trade deadline is still a few days away, and everyone keeps waiting for the other shoe to drop.  This reminded me of 1999.  That was the beginning of the A's run. Hudson's first year.  Giambi in his prime. We still had Stairs and, er, Jaha. Gil Heredia was the staff Ace.  But Miggy was showing some pop and Chavez was following close behind.  The shocker that year for me was the trade of Billy Taylor to the Mets for some oft-injured ex-prospect Jason something, a last name I still can't spell. I was disappointed that year, not understanding why we just gave up on the race after so many years of misery in the mid 90's.  Yes, I have resigned to the fact that Street may be gone.

I'm a born pessimist, and I feel that the team this year is not good enough to win the pennant. I actually like the trades 2007-2008--it sounds like we have pretty much pilfered two or three farm systems' best prospects. Yes prospects are just that. Compare to 1999, I don't know if I see a Giambi or Tejada that can both lead and produce.  I just don't know if I can expect another quick turn around, and see another run like the A's had in the early 0's.  What do people's think?

P.S. It's bittersweet to see Harden pitch in my new home town, striking 10 and still get a ND.

How about it?  I am just floating the idea out there.  Sweeney has one year left on his hometown discount contract with the Royals, at 11 million per x5y.  The 1B/DH position on the A's is jam packed already, but no one we have is a sure thing.  Sweeney is.  Check out his three year split from Dave Pinto's day-to-day database:
http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/BatterSplits.py?StartDate=04%2F03%2F2004&EndDate=09%2F30% 2F2006&GameType=all&PlayedFor=0&PlayedVs=0&Park=0&PlayerID=634&BatterType=1

I had thought Sweeney was over the hill, but his numbers still looked fantastic for any A's fan.  Sure, he may not hit .300 any more, but you can count on roughly 850 OPS from him.  Now that Royals have a second 55 million dollar man in Gil Meche I am sure they are willing to shed a few millions here and there.  The only thing is that the A's don't have much of a high minor farm talent for trades.  Wait, I thought that's what the Royals were for having given us the likes of Damon and Dye.  That could be another problem--I am sure the Berrora trade still stings.

I think almost everyone believes the most dominant pitcher on the A's is Rich Harden, but who's 2nd?  Rich Lederer of baseballanalysts.com came up with a new metric to assess pitcher dominance.  It's so simple yet elegant and intuitive, I'm surprised I haven't thought about this before.  It's K per 100 pitches.  It has a higher correlation of defense independent pitching than either K/9IP or K/batter faces.  This metric obviously favors power pitcher rather than pitch count efficient, contact pitcher.  I know in the dream world the best pitcher is someone who throws 27 pitches and induces 27 ground balls and get 27 outs, and not someone who throws 91 pitches and get 27 strike outs.  In reality, most would take a K pitcher over a groundball pitcher.

And the 2nd place winner is...

Loiaza.

Here's the list of ratios:
          K/9IP   K/27BF  K/100P
Harden    8.51    6.36    6.17
Loiaza     7.18    5.12    5.18
Haren     6.76    4.91    4.84
Zito        6.74    4.84    4.49
Blanton   5.19    3.75    3.78

I admit that I was hugely disappointed and skeptical about Loiaza's signing, but maybe there is so method to this madness.  And remember, this should have nothing to do with the pitcher's park that he pitched in last year.

Also, one should note Loiaza is quite efficient.  His K/100P is actually higher than K/27BF which meant he used less than 100 pitches on average to face 27 batters.  Only Joe could say the same thing, but he hasn't developed the strike out capability yet.

In case anyone cares, the projected Angles' rotation is around the turn

Continue reading this post »

What will Thomas do at age 38?  Some have commented on the aging flops in bay area history.  So I looked up the "most similar players" to Frank Thomas (career-wise through age 37) based on baseball-reference.com:
   1. Jeff Bagwell (884)
   2. Fred McGriff (872)
   3. Larry Walker (829)
   4. Duke Snider (818) *
   5. Willie McCovey (812) *
   6. Rafael Palmeiro (790)
   7. Reggie Jackson (790) *
   8. Ted Williams (789) *
   9. Willie Stargell (779) *
  10. Ellis Burks (765)

As you can see, Thomas is HOF--first ballot to me, but a shoe-in for everyone else at the very least.  The list is made up of HOFers and aging stars, so what did these players did at age 38 (except Bagwell, next season, and Snide, retired)?
                G      AB       R       H     2B     HR    RBI    BB     SO      BA     OBP     SLG
McGriff    146    523     67    143     27     30    103     63     99   0.273   0.353   0.505
Walker     100    315     66     91     20     15     52      41     64   0.289   0.384   0.502
McCovey    82    226     20     46      9      7      36      24     43   0.204   0.283   0.336
Palmeiro  154     561     92   146     21     38    112     84     77   0.260   0.359   0.508
Jackson   143    525     67    117     17     25     81     55    141   0.223   0.300   0.406
Williams   132    420     96    163     28     38     87     119     43   0.388   0.526   0.731
Stargell   122    390      60    115     18     28     97      50     93   0.295   0.382   0.567
Burks       55     198      27     52     11      6     28      27     46   0.263   0.360   0.419

average    117    395     62    109     19     23     75      58     76   0.276   0.369   0.509

Is this a realistic expectation of a DH? 38 yo DH? 38 yo DH that, by my calculation, would make at most $1.8 million with that line of stats (assuming he does not go on DL but miss the 400 AB bonus)?  Without looking at the ratio stats, which would be inflated by players with productive seasons with lots of AB, the 40+ XBH alone is definitely what the A's needed.  I personally love the signing.  The history study dampened my expectation for the Big Hurt, but the bargaining price made it still a very good deal.

What are his chances?  

Andros controversy.  His charity work.  His number at Oakland (a pitcher park).  Home run and strike outs.  Everything counts.  What is your PREDICTION (not your feeling) whether and when he will be elected.  I will put up another poll for peoples own feelings.

And how much longer do I have to write to allow this poll to go up?

Bradley's last three years:
18, 17, 11 = average of 15
age (2006)28

Durazo last year:
1
age 32

Hatteberg:
8
age=54?

As you can see, the A's get a player enter his baseball playing prime, replacing two players who are existing it, and adding at least 6 more win shares, which roughly translate to 2 more wins on paper. also, remember that's just his average over three previous years--really two years if including injuries in 2003 and 2005--and NOT projecting for growth, and assuming Coliseum is AS BAD a hitter's park as Dodgers Stadium.  The 2 games aren't enough to catch the 2005 Angles, but it's a step in the right direction.

P.S. It is difficult for me to believe Ethier in 2006 would be getting much playing time with the A's in the first place.  Even if he survives AAA, AND gets called up in the second half, AND perform like Swisher did last year, that would mean half of Nick's win share, which would be 12/2=6.

Well it looks to be an Insider only story.  So anyone who have ESPN Insider could tell us what Buster Olney and gangs are reporting?
http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/features/rumors?CMP=ILC-INHEAD&action=login&appRedirect=http% 3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fmlb%2ffeatures%2frumors%3fCMP%3dILC-INHEAD

It seems that Twins are looking at the same group of hitters (including Piazza) as the A's.  I guess this is good news/bad news.

I don't understand why Tejeda is ripping the Orioles right now.  It's not like they didn't spend any money--himself, Lopze (2003), Sosa and Palmerio (2004).  Just because they didn't spend 100 million last week?  That's no reason.  With Hernandez and their young pitching, the O's are certainly better now than two years ago, when Miggy first signed.

This has led some people to speculate that there are problems between him and Hernandez.  Any ANer know about this, which would be news to me?

This is prompted by the excellent diary by LCJ on quality starts and Loiaza.  The question in many people's heads is how well does this correlate with team winning.  A quick google search turned up this Baseball Prospectus article.  Interest and informative, and the charts at the bottom definitely summed things up.
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1623

Main points:
1.Quality starts is not what it used to be.
2.There is a steady decline in QS% since 1992, corresponding to the beginning of the high offense era.
3.No-decisions in quality starts have been rising steadily.
4.Team winning percentage in quality starts hasn't shown a consistent trend over time, usually around 70%.

Another article from Diamond Minds.  It is a bit outdated (only stats from pre-1992):
http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/qstart.htm
But it showed that ERA differential and IPs are quite dramatic.  Of course this is the pre-Palmerio era.  Enjoy.

I know it's unlikely, but it's more realistic than getting Miguel Cabrera to the A's.  Thomas is the prototypical A's hitter and DH, when healthy (OPS .905 last season).  Thomas would not have a regular job at Sox, but would get the full-time DH at Oakland for at least a year.  yes, he is 37, but he can still rake.  Anyway, he will not be cheap like Hatty, but signing the "Big Hurt" would be an indication that the new management is willing to open their wallet occasionally for a short-term hole in the roster.