Dan Johnson!
Matt Watson!
Keith Ginter!
oh my!

I detect a lack of Mark Ellis. Did I miss some offseason move/ grievous injury to Ellis, besides his finger?

Anyone else up for giving Zito 100/6???

Marcus McBeth

What, will the bullpen stretch out to the crack of doom??

Poor Jerome Williams. Oh yeah, that's right, Zito used to be on the A's...

This team lacks... hitting. Especially if Crosby lives up to that projection, they're so screwed. (But where's Durazo? REINSTATE ERUBIEL DURAZO!)

Yeah, I don't like that Mark Watson projection...and I definitely think Swisher will be better than Johnson. I think ZiPS is underestimating Swisher's power.

Initial observations:

1) Hard to believe Johnson projects better than Swisher.
2) That's a lotta HR for Blanton and Haren.
3) Is there anything Embree can do that Flores (or even Erasmo) can't?
4) I wouldn't be surprised if Durazo is Piazza's equal.
5) I'd be very happy with those performances out of Kennedy, Halsey, Gaudin, and Windsor.
6) A HR for Kendall!
7) Looks like Melhuse is wasting a $1M that could go to Brown or Baker, and Suzuki will have to take one of their spots in AAA anyway.

God that's an awful offense. And none of those projections seem out of whack to me -- at least not in the A's favor. Crosby might be low -- good lord, he's 27! -- time for him to go all Tejada on the league.

Nice staff though -- well, if Harden is healthy and Haren doesn't get hurt. Saarloos hasn't had an ERA that bad since 2002 so I'll take the under.

Oops! I skipped Ellis! I'll do and add him and Durazo.

Is there anything Embree can do that Flores (or even Erasmo) can't?

I thought Flores had trouble with left-handed hitters -- 2006 .323 BAA, .273 Career BAA. Not good for a LOOGY. Embree is .240 lefty BAA in 2006, .239 Career. Erasmo was .239 lefty 2006 BAA in AAA, so I'm guessing that he's not quite as good as Embree.

Like number6 in #1 I'm amazed that Johnson, Watson, Durazo and Ginter are all going to be better than Kotsay, Ellis, Kendall and Crosby. Not that I think it can't happen, it's just pathetic.

Wiley Piatt (981) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 C
Dave Ferriss (959) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 C
Juan Marichal (966) * 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 C
Mike Hampton (971) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 C
Mike Hampton (976) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 C
Mike Hampton (963) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 C
per BB-Ref
fertile stuff for soothsayers and neo-historians
does the Boras Corp. sell the future,the past or tack to intangibles
love to have spycam on this negotiation

Does anybody else think Durazo-DH + Piazza-C is clearly better than Piazza DH-Kendall-C against RHPs?

Can you ask ZIPS what Kennedy looks like as a starter? Or does it not work like that?

I thought Flores had trouble with left-handed hitters -- 2006 .323 BAA, .273 Career BAA. Not good for a LOOGY. Embree is .240 lefty BAA in 2006, .239 Career. Erasmo was .239 lefty 2006 BAA in AAA, so I'm guessing that he's not quite as good as Embree.

Embree's allowed a .238/.299/.371 career line against LHB. In a very small sample (46 PA), Flores is at .273/.304/.364. That's pretty equal. Flores was also at .238/.347/.262 against LHB in AAA last year.

I think the A's could put a very good bullpen together without Witasick and Embree. I don't think they're bad to have around in the abstract, but I think guys like Flores, Halsey, Saarloos (who has a 3.50 career ERA as a reliever), and hopefully McBeth could do just as well--and the money would be much better spent on an OF that can play everyday when Kotsay or Bradley goes down.

Eyeballing it, I'm taking the over on Swisher, the under on DJ, the over on Chavvy (if he's finally healthy, I think he could still be a significant offensive producer. That's probably a big if, though), slight over on Piazza, slight over on Ellis, and the under (yes, under) on Crosby. (Dude sucks.)

On the pitching side, over on Street, under on Duke, over on Calero, under Haren, over Blanton, under Loaiza.


Team's got a lot of question marks, much like last year. I don't see us being particularly better, either. The only turnover we're looking at right now, is, what, Thomas and Zito to Piazza and Kennedy? That's a pretty significant downgrade, and you'd have to get some nice gains out of Crosby, Ellis, Chavez, and even Swisher just to make up that difference. Then you'd need Blanton and Loaiza to improve, and a healthy Harden before you can think about improving at all on 2006. I try to stay optimistic in the offseason, but that's a whole lot to ask.

The A's are going to regret passing on Bonds. That offense might struggle to reach 725 runs.

I don't think anyone is going to pick Bobby Crosby for MVP this year.

I will right now. Dorian hits .308/.395/.544 next year.

4) I wouldn't be surprised if Durazo is Piazza's equal.

I would. Shocked, in fact. Piazza will be outstanding, Danny. Not Thomas-like, unfortunately, which is going to make it a downgrade from the A's POV. But I believe he'll take to DH'ing very well and have an excellent year, outperforming that ZiPS.

I would. Shocked, in fact. Piazza will be outstanding, Danny. Not Thomas-like, unfortunately, which is going to make it a downgrade from the A's POV. But I believe he'll take to DH'ing very well and have an excellent year, outperforming that ZiPS.

I wouldn't bet on this. The successful late-career switch from C is always seen as a boon to hitting, but it's rarely been the case. (Of course few have hit this well this late in their careers to even think about it) Piazza had a nice little bounce back last year (OPS+ of 120) but given his previous two seasons I get a quick Marcel OPS+ of 112 without any age decline. Add age and Piazza 2004-2005 seems more likely than Piazza 2006. Last year, that would translate to an OPS in Oakland of about 800.

Durazo's career OPS+ is 125 and in his last full season (granted, that was 2004), it was 136. He's no spring chicken and a huge question mark because of the injury, so I'm not saying I'd project him to hit better than Piazza, but I wouldn't be surprised, much less "shocked." And he just might project to hit righties better than Piazza.

But there should be enough playing time for both (especially if Durazo can fake 1B or Piazza still play some C) so at the moment this is a "tacos or beer" sort of question.

Piazza had a nice little bounce back last year (OPS+ of 120) but given his previous two seasons I get a quick Marcel OPS+ of 112 without any age decline.

With an age adjustment and regression I have him projected for a 106 OPS+ next year, which works out to an RCAA of +7 per 150 games (not that Piazza's likely to sniff 150 games)--about three runs better than the average DH.

The successful late-career switch from C is always seen as a boon to hitting, but it's rarely been the case.

FWIW, Piazza has done well as a DH, even though these games (49) have disproportionately come during the declining phase of his career as a hitter. In 191 career ABs, Piazza has hit .304/.363/.529. I think that's at least some evidence he will experience a rejuvenating effect, a la Joe Torre. Minimal evidence, perhaps, but he is Mike Piazza. Bet against him at your own risk.

I'll take the over on the Bradley projection.

These projections better match a typical 1968 club than a 2007 one. Well, until you get to that Zito line. And the Mets want him why, exactly?

I think the A's could put a very good bullpen together without Witasick and Embree. I don't think they're bad to have around in the abstract, but I think guys like Flores, Halsey, Saarloos (who has a 3.50 career ERA as a reliever), and hopefully McBeth could do just as well--and the money would be much better spent on an OF that can play everyday when Kotsay or Bradley goes down.

I think they're looking for Buck to fill this role, for better or worse, possibly in a platoon with Kielty, but maybe even playing every day. It makes some sense to let your best (albeit not great) prospects develop while stockpiling pitching depth. I'm less optimistic about next year than any since 1998.

I think that's at least some evidence he will experience a rejuvenating effect, a la Joe Torre

Torre made the permanent switch from C at age 30 after spending the majority of age 28 at 1B and half of 29 at 3B, which is probably different. Even so, other than his miracle age 30 season, he hit no better and really a bit worse after making the switch -- i.e. a relatively normal age-based decline. Of course we have no idea how long the move may have extended his career and, if nothing else, getting his bat in 150-160 games instead of 130-150 was nice.

Not that you were necessarily using Torre as a comp for Piazza, I was just pointing out that it's not clear Torre's bat rejuvenated with the move.

Piazza's been a great hitter of course and it's certainly possible that, like Thomas, he's got 1 or 2 seasons of his old self left in there. Just don't forget that Durazo was a very good hitter (never as good as Piazza) and Piazza hasn't posted an OPS+ above Durazo's career average since 2002. Of course Durazo hasn't done anything since 2004, so he's no sure bet. It's Piazza's age-based decline plus any DH rejuvenation from a 110ish OPS+ base vs. Durazo's age/injury/inactivity-based decline from a 125ish OPS+ base. Looks pretty even to me.

I'll say that I might well have rather rolled the dice on a platoon of Durazo and Phelps for $1 M (again especially if Durazo can play some 1B or Phelps can play some C/1B ... and I'm not sure either of those is true) and spent my Piazza money elsewhere if I was the A's.

By the way, if Durazo can't play 1B and Piazza can't/won't play C (or the A's won't let him), then it seems impossible for the A's to carry both on their roster.

Not that you were necessarily using Torre as a comp for Piazza, I was just pointing out that it's not clear Torre's bat rejuvenated with the move.

And by the time Torre was the age Piazza is now, he'd been retired from playing for over a year.

The offensive numbers seem low, even for the A's. The only one who looks optimistic is Dan Johnson.

I don't think anyone is going to pick Bobby Crosby for MVP this year.

I would settle for for Comeback Player of the Year. Any word on his health, Danny?

What's the optimistic on Zito? Because, obviously that's the pessimistic...

I know that this is only relevant to us Indians fans, but that Goleski line coupled with Watson's line makes me pretty confident that we will get Go-go back (probably after giving extra compensation for his injuty) and even if we don't that he's not to big of a loss.

Watson got shipped to Japan months ago. He'll have no impact on Goleski's status.

Rats!!

Still wouldn't worry. I don't know how Goleski could hit like that and still stick around. He's gonna have to hit on some nice sort of optimistic projection to hang around all year.

I think that few doubt a healthy Goleski couldn't top that projection. Not ZiPS' fault - Ryan was awful in '05 (covered in other threads), dragging his numbers down considerably.

There's no way the A's will go into 2007 with that lineup. They must make a trade for a hitter. Almost any hitter. I believe we haven't heard the last of Mets/A's rumors.

BTW, is it me or is Daric Barton starting to look like the next Scott Hatteberg, as opposed to the next John Olerud?

BTW, is it me or is Daric Barton starting to look like the next Scott Hatteberg, as opposed to the next John Olerud?

That's a little premature, isn't it? Barton just turned 21 in August after all.

That's a little premature, isn't it? Barton just turned 21 in August after all.

Dan, no, it's WAY premature. I fully expect him to outhit Hatteberg. But the continued lack of power gets a little more concerning each year, and as a 1B/DH with no defensive value, it's pretty important for him to develop some pop. Do you view him in the same light you did two years ago?

The continued lack of power consists of 147 at-bats in AAA at age 20. Dude slugged .511 in A at 18 and .469/.491 between A+ and AA at 19.

Wow... Rangers clinch at the All Star Break...

I'll emphatically take the under on Durazo. I wouldn't be surprised if his days as a useful ballplayer were over.

Hillenbrand isn't that much worse than Rivera... the Rangers won't clinch until the first week of September.

Every mainstream sportswriter will pick the Angels unless the Rangers acquire a top starting pitcher.

No way Zito will have an ERA that high, unless he ends up on the Orioles and has to play the Yanks, Sox and Jays all the time.

the under (yes, under) on Crosby. (Dude sucks.)

Crosby has a career SLG of .405, and ZIPS has him at .394? It sounds like ZIPS is overweighting last year's injury influenced .338. How does ZIPS adjust for seasons performed while injured?

Because if Crosby isn't hurt, why isn't a return to somewhere near his age 25 line of .346/.456 not likely?

the under (yes, under) on Crosby. (Dude sucks.)

Crosby has a career SLG of .405, and ZIPS has him at .394? It sounds like ZIPS is overweighting last year's injury influenced .338. How does ZIPS adjust for seasons performed while injured?

Because if Crosby isn't hurt, why isn't a return to somewhere near his age 25 line of .346/.456 not likely?

The problem with miscounting 2006 because, unless I'm missing something, Crosby said he hurt his back while swinging on July 21st. At the time, he was hitting 231/296/348.

The problem with miscounting 2006 because, unless I'm missing something, Crosby said he hurt his back while swinging on July 21st. At the time, he was hitting 231/296/348.

Well Crosby was supposedly lying about his injuries last year. I prefer to think he hurt his back in spring training (picking up soap?). That would make his projections a bit better...