The Critic Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 See, this is the genius of Billy Beane. I'm sure the fans of EVERY team that feels like they need a shortstop immediately started making lineups and assuming payrolls with the idea in mind of getting Tejada. As the trading deadline looms, any of these teams who are contending will bang on Beane's door to ask about Tejada. Beane can then attempt to empty their cupboard in trade. If the A's are contending ( and it's hard to believe they won't be ), Beane can settle for the draft picks ( as was mentioned earlier, he has no problem doing that ). If they're not, he can pull the trigger and fill multiple holes with prospects or low-paid young stars. If they're on the cusp of contending, Beane has to analyze the situation and make a tough decision. Tejada, meanwhile, plays the whole season as a "contract year". He beats the hell out of the ball, and he gets paid huge somewhere. Meanwhile, the A's get the benefits of Miguel showcasing himself. No one loses. Good move by Beane...again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
method Posted March 16, 2003 Author Share Posted March 16, 2003 The reasoning behind this is they are saving all there money fior the big 3. I was reading elsewhere that beane is saving money each year... that the ownership will allow him to use in future contracts... hse doing this the smart way, hes going to pay his stud pitchers. WIsh we had given all the money we gave kong to bhurle... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 If I'm not mistaken the O's just traded Jay Gibbons to the Rockies for Jack Cust, or was it Chris Richard? I always confuse them. If they had traded Gibbons to Colorado for Cust....their GM should be shot. He would have been shot already. Their GM is alive....because Gibbons is still in Baltimore. It was Richard for Cust. Trading a stud in Gibbons for a guy who didn't hit in Colorado of all places would have been a huge mistake. gibbons is my fantasy lerague 1st baseman..tell me it was him that got sent to colorado Lol, but Helton would be playing over him. Be glad it was Richards. I've always liked Jack Cust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSoxPride3035 Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 Wow, A's won't have much to be looking forward to in 2004, then. Unless they have a HUGE pickup this season or next offseason, they will not have much of an offensive juggernaut anymore. Winning games for them will be all on the backs of people like Barry Zito and Tim Hudson. Think, then in the past 3 offseasons, if they do not re-sign Tejada next season, they will have lost the 2002 MVP in Tejada, and then in the offseason prior to the 2002 season, losing the 2002 Home Run Derby champion in Giambi. It will be a terrible thing, if I was an Oakland resident, to see Tejada go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
method Posted March 16, 2003 Author Share Posted March 16, 2003 They have so many great prospects in there system. Chavez is just now coming into his own... i bet they dont skip a beat.... they have become a factory for elite players... everyone thought they were done for when gaimbi left... Beane is a freaking genius... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 If I'm not mistaken the O's just traded Jay Gibbons to the Rockies for Jack Cust, or was it Chris Richard? I always confuse them. If they had traded Gibbons to Colorado for Cust....their GM should be shot. He would have been shot already. Their GM is alive....because Gibbons is still in Baltimore. It was Richard for Cust. Trading a stud in Gibbons for a guy who didn't hit in Colorado of all places would have been a huge mistake. gibbons is my fantasy lerague 1st baseman..tell me it was him that got sent to colorado Lol, but Helton would be playing over him. Be glad it was Richards. I've always liked Jack Cust. gibbons came up as a rf...i figured colorado wanted him for a corner outfield spot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 Witesoxfan, you said that you would trade Konerko, but you never factored in the salary for who we'd be receiving, or even the individual himself, surely you can't forget about that. Prospects I'd consider trading both Konerko and Lee to Baltimore....but they really don't have many prospects at all. Gibbons is a good player and is cheap....but the don't have much else. Cordova isn't that great and he costs quite a bit....their starting staff is crap....though their bullpen is nice. If we could somehow get Jorge Julio, Gibbons, Geronimo Gil, and 1 good prospect for Konerko and Lee....I'd be all for it. We get a stud reliever, a helluva hitter, a great backup catcher, and a good prospect for Konerko and Lee....if we did this, we wouldn't have to resign Daubach....because he and Gibbons are very much a like.....though having Gibbons for depth would be nice. It is unnecessary though. A lineup of Jimenez, Tejada, Thomas, Borchard, Ordonez, Gibbons, Crede, Rowand, Olivo.....that's still a helluva lineup, and it costs under $40 mill....that is quite possibly the best lineup $40 mill can buy in today's game. I would rather have Rodrigo Lopez than Jorge Julio. Just because we already have a lot bullpen of talent in both the minors and Majors. And adding Lopez to a rotation with Mark, (Potentialy)Colon, Jon, and Dan would give us the best rotation in baseball. Just think of having 3 guys who would be the #1 starter(Mark, Colon, and Lopez) for most teams and another 2 who have the talent to be top #2s(Garland and Wright) in the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliSoxFan Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 was watching the news last night, and he really wants to stay in Oakland, but he understands that they will not be able to keep him because of payroll. Everyone they talked to last night felt the same way that it will be sad to see him go, but Oakland won't have the payroll. Tejada was somewhat keeping his options open, trying to sound optimistic. Of course he could be doing that for PR. Hell the manager flat out said he's not returing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 I think Oakland is one of those teams that will get contracted at the end of the labor agreement if they can't get a new stadium. The Twins are in the same boat, imo. Also, reports came out that last year the Angels were very closed to being contracted and then the A's would of moved to Anaheim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesox247 Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 Joel, welcome aboard, yes I agree we could use another quality starter. Our offense is looking fine, but we could always use help in the rotation. Look for the A's to have good seasons without Tejada, they'll find a way, just like the Mariners do after giving up their superstars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 I think Oakland is one of those teams that will get contracted at the end of the labor agreement if they can't get a new stadium. The Twins are in the same boat, imo. Also, reports came out that last year the Angels were very closed to being contracted and then the A's would of moved to Anaheim. what????? I never heard those rumors - that stuff was really said? are their situations that perilous? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 I think Oakland is one of those teams that will get contracted at the end of the labor agreement if they can't get a new stadium. The Twins are in the same boat, imo. Also, reports came out that last year the Angels were very closed to being contracted and then the A's would of moved to Anaheim. what????? I never heard those rumors - that stuff was really said? are their situations that perilous? The Angels have a new stadium, but Disney doesn't want to own so they figured that would be a good situation. The A's are in terrible situation. They have a crappy stadium, no fan base and have been winning the past couple years and it hasn't done anything. The Angels have a real good fan baes now and even before theres was pretty good and they have a nice facility. The only thing was the ownership didn't want to own and it still doesn't, but they are paying the money to keep the team intact. Oaklands ownership would then go down to Anaheim where there is a fan base, a nice stadium, and they would of been willing to spend money. It came out about a week ago. THey were talking about it all over the place on sportstalk this week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 hadn't heard that all. How can you contract the world series champion? anaheim owners sell to As owners and then As owners sell the As to people who will take the team elsewhere and move the As but why take take away anaheim's team? Owners have swapped teams before, they can do it again about time for the peripatetic As to move again anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 hadn't heard that all. How can you contract the world series champion? anaheim owners sell to As owners and then As owners sell the As to people who will take the team elsewhere and move the As but why take take away anaheim's team? Owners have swapped teams before, they can do it again about time for the peripatetic As to move again anyway No, this came up this year in terms of what was going on last year at the beginning of the season, so it would of been them and the Expos getting contracted and not them and the Twins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 Witesoxfan, you said that you would trade Konerko, but you never factored in the salary for who we'd be receiving, or even the individual himself, surely you can't forget about that. Prospects I'd consider trading both Konerko and Lee to Baltimore....but they really don't have many prospects at all. Gibbons is a good player and is cheap....but the don't have much else. Cordova isn't that great and he costs quite a bit....their starting staff is crap....though their bullpen is nice. If we could somehow get Jorge Julio, Gibbons, Geronimo Gil, and 1 good prospect for Konerko and Lee....I'd be all for it. We get a stud reliever, a helluva hitter, a great backup catcher, and a good prospect for Konerko and Lee....if we did this, we wouldn't have to resign Daubach....because he and Gibbons are very much a like.....though having Gibbons for depth would be nice. It is unnecessary though. A lineup of Jimenez, Tejada, Thomas, Borchard, Ordonez, Gibbons, Crede, Rowand, Olivo.....that's still a helluva lineup, and it costs under $40 mill....that is quite possibly the best lineup $40 mill can buy in today's game. I would rather have Rodrigo Lopez than Jorge Julio. Just because we already have a lot bullpen of talent in both the minors and Majors. And adding Lopez to a rotation with Mark, (Potentialy)Colon, Jon, and Dan would give us the best rotation in baseball. Just think of having 3 guys who would be the #1 starter(Mark, Colon, and Lopez) for most teams and another 2 who have the talent to be top #2s(Garland and Wright) in the league. Damn, I forgot about Lopez(I always do....even if he kicks our ass). Yeah, I'd most definately add him over Julio. Hell, they could keep Gil for all I care....Konerko and Lee for Gibbons and Lopez would be worth it....we'd still have a hell of an offense and, as you said, the top rotation in the majors. That also makes Wright/Rauch available....and then, if we don't resign Buehrle or Garland or Colon....we have Honel in the wings. If we did that deal....our rotation would be like Colon, Buehrle, Lopez, Garland, Wright and our bullpen would be Koch, Gordon, Marte, Almonte, Wunsch/Sanders/Munoz, Glover....and Diaz could come up and eventually replace either Gordon or Glover....making Glover available(because if we decided Diaz would replace Gordon....we just wouldn't resign Gordon). Hell, we could trade Wright in the deal and then get the prospect and Gil too....as much as I like Wright(though I don't like him as much as Garland)....it would be worth it. Maybe, if we dealt Wright in the deal to help them replace Lopez, our rotation would be Colon, Buehrle, Lopez, Garland, and Stewart/Rauch/Loaiza/Munoz/Malone....etc. That's a half decent pitching staff....and we'd still have a killer offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 didn't i brought this up before about oak not going to resign miguel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 didn't i brought this up before about oak not going to resign miguel? "Didn't I brought"? What language is that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 didn't i brought this up before about oak not going to resign miguel? "Didn't I brought"? What language is that? damn, i change it before i submitted it. but i guess not. meant bring this up before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 didn't i brought this up before about oak not going to resign miguel? "Didn't I brought"? What language is that? damn, i change it before i submitted it. but i guess not. meant bring this up before. Heh. A likely story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 didn't i brought this up before about oak not going to resign miguel? "Didn't I brought"? What language is that? damn, i change it before i submitted it. but i guess not. meant bring this up before. Heh. A likely story. this was before you became a member sonny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 this was before you became a member sonny. I didn't deny that you were correct about Tejada. What I'm denying is that you were aware of your grammatical short-comings prior to my pointing them out to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 this was before you became a member sonny. I didn't deny that you were correct about Tejada. What I'm denying is that you were aware of your grammatical short-comings prior to my pointing them out to you. news flash. every one knows of my as you say grammatical short coming unlike my other proud parts of me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 this was before you became a member sonny. I didn't deny that you were correct about Tejada. What I'm denying is that you were aware of your grammatical short-comings prior to my pointing them out to you. news flash. every one knows of my as you say grammatical short coming unlike my other proud parts of me. Well, as you astutely pointed out, I am a "sonny", so I too will soon be privy to your short-comings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 this was before you became a member sonny. I didn't deny that you were correct about Tejada. What I'm denying is that you were aware of your grammatical short-comings prior to my pointing them out to you. news flash. every one knows of my as you say grammatical short coming unlike my other proud parts of me. Well, as you astutely pointed out, I am a "sonny", so I too will soon be privy to your short-comings. when you grow some whiskers, then come an play with the adults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted March 18, 2003 Share Posted March 18, 2003 when you grow some whiskers, then come an play with the adults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.