Things that I don't get

[SteveB]

yeah i am kind of in the "Beane got the better half" of these trades camp. I think they could be better than what they gave up starting NEXT year. Plus when Anderson comes back that staff could be very solid. Finally they refilled the farm with a lot of chips so i have a feeling that Beane may continue to tweak over the next year and a half as pieces start to fall into place.

To me its likely they were trying to get the public support and make the Giants the villians. A "its not our fault" to the fans. They were hoping maybe to influence the desicion coming down from MLB with public support. Maybe Beane did throw in the towel for 2012 and this was his way of selling it to the fans. Its possible that a little of Beane's ego came into play as he was trying to be the "genius" during the whole Oscar coverage on Moneyball. Seriously if the As contended NEXT year how would all this trading look then? Probably the truth is a little of everything.

The most amazing thing to me, and i have said it before, is that we are even talking about the As after what the other teams in the division have done.

[Captain Hook]

No matter what they did they weren't beating the Angels or Rangers this year - so why not load up for better days ahead - with or without the new ballpark

[da_big_kid_94]

So, in other words, become the Pittsburgh Pirates West and to hell with the paying customers and advertisers.

[AllstonRockCity]

So, in other words, become the Pittsburgh Pirates West and to hell with the paying customers and advertisers.

Kid, I know you play in keeper leagues. I'm sure you've had seasons where it was June and you knew it was time to play for next year. Then, maybe, due to some back luck and some injuries, you were forced to play for next year 2 years in a row. I tend to think this is exactly what happened in OAK.

Now, in the roto game, we can rebuild over the course of 3-6 months and make huge changes, but this is obviously not so in MLB. You can't really 'play for next year', it is more like playing for 2 or usually 3 years from now. So if the 1st rebuild fails, you need to do a 2nd rebuild just like in the preceding example.

They won the west in 06. Then started to rebuild, but that rebuild didn't go as planned and in the meantime TEX (who'd been a perennial cellar dweller in years past) got good and LAA remained strong, so it was time to rebuild again (the rebuild that's currently going on).

I understand what you are saying and while I am not an A's fan, I would much rather have a GM who looks at things objectively and bides his time waiting to strike rather than a GM that tries and fails to win it all every year leaving my team with a barren farm system which will inevitably lead to a decade long drought.

Of course, in this particular example, it probably will be a decade long drought in terms of ALWest titles, but its not due to shortsightedness or poor decision making.

Also with a payroll as low as theirs they can't afford to screw up in the rebuilding process as they cannot afford to 'pay away' their mistakes.

I hardly see what's going on in OAK as a team throwing in the towel and saying 'eff you' to the fans so much as I see a good GM accepting the reality of the division in which his team resides and choosing to address this reality rather than take the easy road just to appease the fan base.

Lots of times in life the easy choice is not the right one.

[da_big_kid_94]

So, in other words, become the Pittsburgh Pirates West and to hell with the paying customers and advertisers.

Kid, I know you play in keeper leagues. I'm sure you've had seasons where it was June and you knew it was time to play for next year. Then, maybe, due to some back luck and some injuries, you were forced to play for next year 2 years in a row. I tend to think this is exactly what happened in OAK.

Now, in the roto game, we can rebuild over the course of 3-6 months and make huge changes, but this is obviously not so in MLB. You can't really 'play for next year', it is more like playing for 2 or usually 3 years from now. So if the 1st rebuild fails, you need to do a 2nd rebuild just like in the preceding example.

They won the west in 06. Then started to rebuild, but that rebuild didn't go as planned and in the meantime TEX (who'd been a perennial cellar dweller in years past) got good and LAA remained strong, so it was time to rebuild again (the rebuild that's currently going on).

I understand what you are saying and while I am not an A's fan, I would much rather have a GM who looks at things objectively and bides his time waiting to strike rather than a GM that tries and fails to win it all every year leaving my team with a barren farm system which will inevitably lead to a decade long drought.

Of course, in this particular example, it probably will be a decade long drought in terms of ALWest titles, but its not due to shortsightedness or poor decision making.

Also with a payroll as low as theirs they can't afford to screw up in the rebuilding process as they cannot afford to 'pay away' their mistakes.

I hardly see what's going on in OAK as a team throwing in the towel and saying 'eff you' to the fans so much as I see a good GM accepting the reality of the division in which his team resides and choosing to address this reality rather than take the easy road just to appease the fan base.

Lots of times in life the easy choice is not the right one.

That's true ...but there's a big difference between April and June/July. I never went into my auction looking to throw my team for the next three years. And if I made trades - they were to strengthen NEXT year's team - not the one two or three years from now.

If they went into rebuilding mode? Who trades for things they already had instead of things they still need? They're speculating that three kids come up big for them and aren't after thoughts by 2014-15. And their offense still sucks and doesn't look to get a helluva lot better on the horizon. Who's their business model - the Royals of the last decade? I see a team whose ownership took someone in MLB's hierarchy at face value and now are stuck with decisions they made based on a move they couldn't support.

[AllstonRockCity]

Now, in the roto game, we can rebuild over the course of 3-6 months and make huge changes, but this is obviously not so in MLB. You can't really 'play for next year', it is more like playing for 2 or usually 3 years from now. So if the 1st rebuild fails, you need to do a 2nd rebuild just like in the preceding example.

They won the west in 06. Then started to rebuild, but that rebuild didn't go as planned and in the meantime TEX (who'd been a perennial cellar dweller in years past) got good and LAA remained strong, so it was time to rebuild again (the rebuild that's currently going on).

That's true ...but there's a big difference between April and June/July. I never went into my auction looking to throw my team for the next three years. And if I made trades - they were to strengthen NEXT year's team - not the one two or three years from now.

If they went into rebuilding mode? Who trades for things they already had instead of things they still need? They're speculating that three kids come up big for them and aren't after thoughts by 2014-15. And their offense still sucks and doesn't look to get a helluva lot better on the horizon. Who's their business model - the Royals of the last decade? I see a team whose ownership took someone in MLB's hierarchy at face value and now are stuck with decisions they made based on a move they couldn't support.

[da_big_kid_94]

And I again state why is this considered a rebuild when you take somewhat proven commodities at a given position and trade them for prospects at the same position? And, as is the case with the Pirates, the A's are getting revenue sharing money from MLB - the object of which is ostensibly to improve their team. How does dumping players who can help them now but who will be arbitration eligible sooner and replacing them with players who they can "contractually control" for many years beyond serve that purpose? Because they play in the same division as the big bad Rangers, they get to plead they aren't competitive and the people in the Bay Area will just have to wait? Why do they get a pass on making an effort before the season even starts?

And meanwhile, the A's fans and sponsors get played for suckers.

[AllstonRockCity]

well, i kinda think you answered your own question. those arbitration years might be small change to many teams, but when your payroll is a low as OAK's, every dollar counts.

I am not saying any of this is right or wrong and I'm glad I'm not an A's fan. My original point was that I think Billy blowing it up had more to do with the West than the new stadium. My point was more about why he blew it up rather than whether or not it was the right thing to do.

I think you and I each love a good conspiracy we just disagree what the conspiracy is and who the puppet masters are.

[da_big_kid_94]

I like intelligent conversation as well. Todd and I have had this argument as well in the past. First - you don't throw $36 mil over 4 years to one unproven guy on a low payroll. Second, Oakland is taking this revenue sharing money (part of which is supposed to be used to mitigate theses type of expenses) and dumping the players that part of that revenue sharing income is supposed to offset. They get the money up front now to offset a cost that is never going to be incurred.

The Pirates did the same thing for years - they dumped guys who were coming up in arbitration and pocketed the money MLB gave them to ostensibly defray THOSE costs so they could pay off bad contracts like they gave to Benjamin and Mears. Then they'd continue to scream poverty and that they weren't competitive, all the while continuing to accept more revenue sharing money from MLB. Really no different than what the A's have done ...they're dressing up their returns in shiny wrappers and selling their potential as fact. Meanwhile, they score on the revenue share and get a pass on being a competitive ball club simply by making a few trades.

[da_big_kid_94]

And there is a reason why there are things I don't get. Mea culpa to Billy Beane and the entire Oakland A's organization. Whether it came out the way you had planned or not, it was productive and entertaining and provided results far beyond anything I obviously envisioned. So, in the immortal words of Arthur Fonzarelli;" I was wrrrr.... I was wrrrrrooooo ......I was wr..... I was whuuurrrnnn" - well, you get the drift.

[Captain Hook]

Good Posting kid and Cespedes certainly exceeded my expectations.

I posted after Lawr's Mastersblog that Bob Melvin did an amazing job this year in Oakland - as did Buck Showalter in Baltimore. The writers should vote them co-managers of the year in the AL because both earned it and neither should go without the award.

OTOH I don't see any competition that would even get votes against Billy Beane as AL Exec of the Year

[da_big_kid_94]

And to be fair ... I DO get Loria ...I just wonder why they allow him to stick around.

[Todd Zola]

Individually, every one of his moves can be justified/rationalized -- but collectively, all things considered, I feel for whatever Miami fans still remain.

Though, I am sort of in the same boat as I am with Boston -- OK, I get it. I'll reserve judgment until I see what's next.

[SteveB]

That was fun to reread the whole post and see how things came out....

[da_big_kid_94]

That was fun to reread the whole post and see how things came out....

And it seems it isn't done yet, Steve;

Have to wonder what it’s going to take for the Oakland A’s owners to realize there’s no way they are ever going to get to San Jose, at least as long as Bud Selig is commissioner.

It was reported by the L.A. Times last week that Selig, who has had a panel studying the A’s stadium situation since March 30, 2009, sent the A’s a list of “tentative guidelines” they had to follow before he could put a move to San Jose before the other 29 clubs. But even then, the report said, he couldn’t guarantee it would be approved.

Bill Madden, NY Daily News, 2/24/13.

Also in this article, Madden takes Luccino to the woodshed about his reactions to Francona's book and to Shaughnessey.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseb ... z2LonFW6Hg