| By Chris Crawford |  | By 01-26-2010 |
If you close your eyes and clear your mind of all thoughts (not hard for me) you might be able to hear a fungo bat. Spring Training is getting really, really close -- and it's getting pretty intense.
A couple of weeks ago, I posted the major moves made by the AL west, to go along with their CHONE 2010 projected Wins Above Replacement. If they did not have a CHONE projection, I went with what they produced last year.
A lot has changed since the post -- but it still illustrates how good the M's off-season has been.
Oakland Athletics:
Coming: Coco Crisp (1.6), Jake Fox(1.7), Aaron Miles (-0.3),Kevin Kouzmanoff (2.0) Ben Sheets (2.7 from the fangraphs fans) TOTAL: 7.7 wins
Going: Nomar Garciaparra (0.9), Bobby Crosby (0.4), Jeff Gray (0.2),Scott Hairson (0.6) TOTAL: 2.1 wins
Limbo: Adam Kennedy 0.8 wins
Summary: It's not quiet anymore. If the Athletics can find a way to score runs, this could be the sleeper team in the AL West. You're still asking an awful lot out of young pitching and while Sheets is potentially an ace, hes potentially a $10 million dollar landfill, too.
Los Angeles Angels Of Anaheim
Coming: Hideki Matsui (1.1), Fernando Rodney (0.3), Joel Pineiro (3.4 fangraphs fans)TOTAL: 4.8 wins
Going: Chone Figgins (3.2), John Lackey (3.8), Kelvim Escobar (1.3) Darren Oliver (1.5 last year, it should be right around the same this year), Vlad Guerrero (1.6) TOTAL: 11.1 wins
Summary: Still looks like a bad off-season, but not the disaster it was before. While Pineiro has his obvious detractors, he also had the best command and highest GB rate of any starter in baseball last year. He's no where near the pitcher of John Lackey, and the loss of Chone Figgins hurts the defense and the top of the lineup,but should probably still compete for the AL west.
Texas Rangers
Coming: Rich Harden (2.9), Chris Ray (-0.2 last year), Darren Oliver (1.5), Vlad Guerrero (1.6) TOTAL: 4.3 wins
Going: Kevin Millwood (2.2), Marlon Byrd(2.4), Andruw Jones(1.0), Ivan Rodriguez (1.2), Eddie Guardado (-0.4) last year TOTAL: 6.4 wins
Limbo: Hank Blalock 0.5 wins
Seattle Mariners
Coming: Cliff Lee (6.0),Chone Figgins (3.2), Milton Bradley (1.8), Brandon League (1.1), Casey Kotchman (1.2)
Total: 13.3 wins
Going: Brandon Morrow(1.6), Carlos Silva(0.7), Bill Hall(-0.9), Adrian Beltre (2.7), Russell Branyan (1.2) TOTAL 5.3 wins
Summary: It's still a great off-season. Ben Sheets would have been a great get -- but ten million dollars is just too much of a risk...theyre still probably going to add three to four wins to the team, and they're still going to compete for the division.
Let me know if I missed anyone, and who is the new favorite in the AL West?
the-al-west-off-season:-part-ii
Comments
The following 37 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: pwhit44 on 01-26-2010 18:02:57 No idea. Weirdest, most-competitive, and thus most-annoying division in the league. |
| 2. By: Rudolf on 01-26-2010 18:10:25 Angels have to be the favorites. M's are their primary source of competition, especially if we add Harang/Willingham/whomever. Texas could challenge for the crown with a magical year. Oakland has quickly become a pest. |
| 3. By: universalguru on 01-26-2010 18:16:18 If Sheets, Duchscherer and Harden all stay healthy (big ifs), then this division will be by far the most competitive in baseball. Jack Z now more than ever needs to make a move or two, though if he has confidence in Saunders in left than I do too. Also, if Damon ends up costing than $5 million than I say we have to pick him up and find a place for him. |
| 4. By: rightwingrick on 01-26-2010 18:47:06 I'd take a chance on Chein Ming Wang and Erik Bedard both, thinking they probably open in AAA. If you can get those two, and add Washburn to start the season (he ususally starts fast and finishes badly), you might end up with quite the rotation in July or August. |
| 5. By: Edman on 01-26-2010 19:22:12 I can't imagine Johnny "Granny Arm" Damon fitting Jack's defensive profile. rick, I'm not sure how likely it would be that Bedard, Wang and Washburn all would agree to sign in Seattle, and fight it out for one roster spot (at least by appearance), but I think it's incredibly slim. I suspect it's probably gonna be Washburn, but who knows? |
| 6. By: universalguru on 01-26-2010 19:36:53 I'm hoping Bedard stays out of the game for a couple months giving us some time to evaluate Snell. If that's the case I'd love to bring him back if we have a spot open for him (which I imagine we'd make unless everyone's healthy and on fire). |
| 7. By: Blowgun7 on 01-26-2010 19:53:42 Although we need a right handed bat, if Damon is asking for only a year and 4-5 million, I don't know how you can't make that move. I hate his arm in LF, but the guy can hit and get on base. Plus you just play Bradley in LF when we're in big ballparks, and let Damon play out in some of the smaller left fields. You stick Ichiro-Figgins-Damon-Bradley at the top of the lineup and those guys are gonna be on base constantly. I guess at this point I'd lean towards a Willingham/Harang combo to fill our needs, but if they want to just spend the money on free agents, I'd look at Damon and Washburn for a combined 8-9 million. That would likely add 3 wins to our squad. |
| 8. By: Lailoken on 01-26-2010 20:11:50 One move that was missed was the Gary Matthews Jr. for Brian Stokes trade. Trading -.8 WAR for -.2 WAR. Kind of a meh trade but the Angels likely get a net gain out of the deal because Matthews can't play in the OF anymore & his swing is slowing down too. The Rangers have signed some spare parts in Colby Lewis (Japan so no WAR but w/ 2.75 mill he's likely a SP) & Khalil Greene (-.8 WAR). The A’s traded Aaron Cunningham (-.5 WAR) along w/ Hairston to SD. While Cunningham (23 yo) is six years younger, Hairston has performed better in the bigs so they're almost equal in terms of value as pieces. Sidenote: The Macier contract is crazy. The Angels really got a good deal on his first two years of free agency. |
| 9. By: Adam T on 01-26-2010 20:17:37 Re: Damon's arm. I don't think it is so much an issue to turn away from his production with his bat and still average range in LF. Honestly, how much damage does his arm do? How many extra runs does it allow? And are those extra runs enough to say no to a possible 3-win player? Damon would be just fine at the right price (<$5 MM). |
| 10. By: Edman on 01-26-2010 21:10:43 I don't mind the idea of Damon being in Seattle. I even like him paired up with signing Washburn. It's not a huge improvement, but it's improvement. I just don't look forward to the complaints when runs start scoring on routine flies to left, or score standing up from second, and singles to left. |
| 11. By: marinerseric on 01-26-2010 22:22:48 The question is are we done baring any trades? |
| 12. By: Saltydawg05 on 01-26-2010 23:23:25 A Damon signing would be good (if 4 or million). You would probably expect he would add 2 to 3 wins...and is good Milton Bradley insurance. You all know his history...and even if he stays in line this year he has only played 120 games once in his career. Having said that they need one more pitcher...I'm really disappointed it wasn't sheets. |
| 13. By: Saltydawg05 on 01-26-2010 23:24:36 *4 or 5...sorry |
| 14. By: SethGrandpa on 01-26-2010 23:31:08 No marinerseric, we're not done. I don't see anyway that the team would just stand pat when there is available payroll. //dodges nasty look from Z |
| 15. By: Edman on 01-27-2010 03:15:19 I have to give Jack a lot of credit. He runs a tight ship. You don't see a lot of leaks from his people. It only helps him to maintain his poker face. I thought it said it well the other day to Shannon Drayer, when he said to talk about how much payroll he has left, could hurt his ability to negotiate and deal. I don't know who Jack is going to target. But, I don't think he'll foolishly spend money. He's made a lot of deals, but he hasn't gone overboard with any signing. I think the A's could have spent that $10+ million a bit better, but Billy Beane has been lucky before. When his luck was good, everyone called in Moneyball. I beg of everyone, please don't come up with something like Z-ball......let's just call it wise investment and planning. |
| 16. By: MarinersFan on 01-27-2010 06:57:05 Adding Johnny Damon and Jarrod Washburn for under 10M would really put the ribbon on this great off season. These signings would add 3-4 Wins at a low cost. Someone made a good suggestion of playing Bradley in the field at parks with more ground to cover and Damon in parks with average or shorter LF. I really like the idea of an Ichiro, Figgins, Damon and Bradley top four in the line-up! |
| 17. By: DKulich44 on 01-27-2010 09:21:09 Edman, Just wondering, have you ever read Moneyball? Didn't really have much to do with luck, had to do with finding undervalued talent (guys who had high OBP vs. power, pitchers that didn't throw 95 but were effective) and mixing it with home growing talent via solid drafts. A.K.A. what almost any successful organization that uses a tight budget does (hmm, sounds familiar, maybe defense being the undervalued talent now?). In the time when Moneyball (a book about Billy Beane, often misunderstood as his "way of doing things") came out, Billy Beane was one of the only guys doing things this way. Now, people have caught up to him, and he's really moved away from those thoughts, and has spent a little money. He's spending on commodities people will want for the stretch runs that he can trade for prospects later, while putting a decently competitive team out there. If Sheets stays healthy, he'll be able to get 2-3 impact prospects back for him come the deadline and make an already deep youth movement deeper. |
| 18. By: Hammy47 on 01-27-2010 10:01:16 Billy Beane is only signing Sheets because he is gambling that Sheets will look good all year so he can trade him at the trade deadline. Almost the exact same thing he did with Matt Holliday. There is no way the Oakland A's will be in contention for the AL West at the trade deadline. |
| 19. By: micahjr on 01-27-2010 11:24:17 Sheets won't fetch 2-3 impact players. He is an injury risk, and not the caliber of player that Matt Holliday is, and Matt only got them 3 prospects, with only one being an impact prospect in Brett Wallace. The other two players are role-players at best. |
| 20. By: Edman on 01-27-2010 11:25:43 I disagree. $10 million is a lot to spend for prospects, no matter how good. If Sheets does have a great year, he's still highly likely to yield a team any better than a supplemental pick. That decreases his trade value. Great prospects don't get moved as much anymore, even at the trading deadline. All teams are trying to budget effectively. I don't know exactly what Beane's motives were, but I suspect he believes he can compete in this division, if a few moves turn out right. Who expected the turnaround that the M's made last year? Or, perhaps Oakland fears that they might be the next low payroll target for the MLBPA, after Florida. Especially since they're trying to get a new stadium built. Personally, DKulich, I find Beane's philosophy a bit flawed. The idea that you view your most valuable players as trading chips, creates inconsistant results year-to-year. After you've traded your best players, you end up like Oakland the last couple of years, where you're in a developmental role. It takes time to weed out the successes and failures. That rollercoaster isn't good for continued success. Granted, Billy has had to work within tight payroll restrictions. He had to work within his budget, which meant he couldn't spend to keep his best players. I don't think it was as much a choice, as a way to try to survive. |
| 21. By: Adam T on 01-27-2010 11:26:20 Washburn - ugh. If he pitches like he did in 2009, he's worth $5MM or so, but I just really don't care for the guy. And I'm not convinced he's one who can repeat a strong performance. |
| 22. By: Edman on 01-27-2010 11:32:28 micahjr, I agree. You never see more than one potential impact player returned in any trade. The Yankees of old, aren't giving up that kind of talent anymore. You think the Indians got enough for Sabbathia? Or, Oakland for Haren? How did they do on the McGuire trade? Those trades seldom bring back the same kind of players that are given up. Few prospect ever meet the stellar projections that are given them. They might be decent players, but when you give up more than that, it's hardly a good return. |
| 23. By: universalguru on 01-27-2010 11:40:21 But Edman you have to consider two things. One, Beane had the money to spend anyhow and he probably didn't see any other way to spend it on the future. Two, the A's will only pay his salary up to the point that they deal him (if they do). However, you could very well be right and they could be stealthing their way into the playoff hunt. I wish the West would be a breeze for the M's to win but you have to admit it'll be tons of fun to watch all of the games this year. |
| 24. By: maqman on 01-27-2010 12:07:39 I’m glad we won’t be spending $10MM on Sheets; the risk/reward ration was too risky for my taste. You would have thought that the Holliday Affair would have taught the As to stay away from Big Money Ball, it doesn’t seem to be their kind of game. I don’t think that they are a team that will showcase him as well as the Ms would have, but they do have a big park and the second best defense in the AL West, so if they are willing to pay obviously he’s willing to play. Can’t blame him, but I think they are rolling the dice there. Let’s see what Z thinks is a better option. With Sheets and Garland gone and Wang and Bedard not ready to show anything yet Washburn may be the way the Ms go; considering what we have paid for his poor past performances you’d think he would sign cheap this time. Lotsa luck! |
| 25. By: d2ret on 01-27-2010 12:13:13 The A's did very, very well in the Haren deal Edman. Go back and look at the players they got. Not such a good example, for your point at least. |
| 26. By: Edman on 01-27-2010 13:04:02 d2ret, no, they haven't, yet. They got a lot of nice pieces. However, Haren is a #1 starter and Anderson may very well be one someday. But, it may be another two years, at least, before he makes that jump. Long-term, perhaps so. But, to take your team out of future division races, to build for the future comes at a cost. And, you do that too often, you become a supplier and developer of talent. Where is the sustainability? |
| 27. By: Edman on 01-27-2010 13:12:30 In addition, d2ret, would you support Jack not trying to resign Felix, so he could get some kewl beans that might turn into a beanstalk? There's nobody in Seattle that would congratulate Jack for all the prospects he got in return. Beane gets away with it because he's sold his budget limitations to the public. Here, they'd want Jack fired. |
| 28. By: DMac33 on 01-27-2010 13:39:27 Some random thoughts: The winner of the AL West will be whatever team plays best within the division (and maybe in the games against the AL Central). At this point, I would have to put Seattle as the favorite because of a) the strength of the rotation/pen; b) they are a team that knows what its identity is; and c) knowledge that there will be some improvements still to be made. Texas will be interesting because they've got the best lineup in the division. The pitching will be the deciding factor. Can Harden stay healthy? Can Feldman repeat what he did last year? How do their young pitchers continue to develop? Anaheim is in between the extremes of Texas and Seattle. Oakland is the potential talented spoiler in that they've got a lot of young talent. I don't think that the division is at the point yet to be able to 2 playoff berths. But I could see it in the next year or two as the Yankees and BoSox have to start rebuilding a bit. |
| 29. By: Edman on 01-27-2010 13:41:53 Sorry for another post, but I just read that Sheets' contract stipulates that the A's can't offer him arbitration should he somehow manage to become an "A" type free agent. Hense, unless that ONLY applies to Oakland, it may not be too bad. But, if that also applies to a team that trades for him, it could mean that any team he goes to, will get no draft pick compensation for him. Kinda deplete his value. It's nearly impossible for him to become an "A" type free agent, but if he does, it hinders their ability to trade him. Way to go, Sheets. So in essence, he's screwing Oakland for his own self interest. |
| 30. By: DMac33 on 01-27-2010 14:20:00 Then Edman, that'd tend to lead to the theory that Oakland thinks that if some things break right for them that they can throw their hat into the ring in what is shaping up to be a very competitive division. |
| 31. By: d2ret on 01-27-2010 14:30:55 So is your point that MoneyBall sucks Edman? I'm not sure what your points are sometimes. Not that I disagree with them, I just dont know what you're pointing out. Its apparent that the biggest thing hindering long term success in Oakland is their budget. They havent made too many bad moves in the last 10 years. Im not a fan of the turnover rate either and I would be frustrated to be an Oakland A's fan as I'd be rooting for different players every two years, but they still manage to get good to great value out of most of the moves they make. Not sure you can complain about the job Beane has done there if you are an Oakland fan. |
| 32. By: d2ret on 01-27-2010 14:42:02 But then again, Im an M's fan, so... Who cares what model the A's are using, or if they are getting a good deal with the Sheets signing, or if Sheets is screwing them. They BOTH agreed to terms. They are CHOOSING this. |
| 33. By: CrimsonNW on 01-27-2010 14:45:53 Yankees just signed Randy Winn to a one-year deal. No figures yet... This means no Damon to NYY and should really set the market for him. Here's hoping the M's make a run if the price is right. |
| 34. By: Lailoken on 01-27-2010 14:50:19 SP: Sheets, Duchscherer, Brett Anderson, Braden & Gio Gonzalez RP: Bailey, Ziegler, Breslow, Outman, Meloan, Blevins, & Devine/Gray/Rodriguez/Cahill/? C: Suzuki 1B: Fox 2B: Ellis SS: Pennington 3B: Kouzmanoff RF: Sweeney CF: Crisp LF: Davis DH: Cust Bench: Powell (C), Miles (IF), Buck (OF), & Patterson (UT) Other Position Players: Chavez (1B/3B), Barton (1B/DH), Jemile Weeks (IF), McPherson (1B/3B), Michael Taylor (OF), Adrian Cardenas (2B), & Grant Green (SS) That team could sneak into the playoffs but the lineup isn't going to score a ton of runs. Plenty of competition all around though so if someone comes on like gangbusters in the minors & someone isn't producing on the big team internal upgrades could be available. Also, plenty of worthwhile piece to buy &/or sell with at the deadline. Beane is not my favorite GM but he accumulates talent. By sheer quantity alone he can stay active with tweaking his roster for present or future results. A lot of things need to go right but this isn't a team with a bunch of weaknesses. Without a big name outside of Sheets he was likely added in part to sell tickets to the new stadium. Fiscally astute move. |
| 35. By: Edman on 01-27-2010 14:58:48 As far as Moneyball goes, I have no problem with some of its theories. But, it for a while was the flag many carried as a glaring example of how to succeed. At the time, the A's were on top of the division. It's easier to be successful when you're aided by a few very high draft picks. Now that they aren't so successful, perhaps there are holes in the original concept. I might not complain about Beane if I wasn an A's fan, but I'd sure complain about the franchise. There are few people who'd be proud of driving a Hyundai Accent with no options, and feel great about the value involved. The Royals get good value too. I can't imagine going to the game and walking away at the end saying, "We lost, but what a great value we've got with those players." Beane's doing the best he can. It's not his fault. But, I'm not buying into his genious anymore. He got praise when everything fell right. And, I feel he was stupid to allow any inclusion in the contract that prevents Oakland from potentially getting unforseen value. That, is not Moneyball. And, considering he was paying far more than anyone else in the market was, I'd have told Sheets to take it, or leave it. $10 million+ should be enough to not bar them from accepting arbitration should he become an "A" type free agent. Thankfully, Jack's not that stupid. |
| 36. By: universalguru on 01-27-2010 15:04:51 We definitely need to go for Damon... The only reason I'd not consider a deal like that is if Jack thinks Saunders is ready to start everyday. Otherwise Saunders should spend 2009 in AAA. I do think we're missing a bit of hitting from the right side, but if you ever thought Saunders would fit then Damon seems like a no-brainer (hitting-wise... obviously minus the defense). |
| 37. By: Hammy47 on 01-27-2010 15:42:23 Damon just doesn't seem like like a Jack Z kinda guy. I hope the Mariner's dont even get close to signing him. We already have anough guys like Damon on offense (I don't think he would bring that much more to our lineup) and his defense is atrocious. I wouldn't be able to stand watching almost every player on the opposite team getting from first to third on a ball hit to Damon in left field. If you watch when he was with the Yankees and Red Sox, runners contstantly got an extra base off of him, because even if he makes an accurate through (which he never does), it's going ot take forever and a day to get there. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
| ESPN MLB Draft Blog 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Mar. 19 | Scouts vs. conf games | ||||||||||||||||||
| Mar. 18 | Talent or Cash? | ||||||||||||||||||
| Mar. 17 | Preps rule '10 Draft | ||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright 2008-2009 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox |