Main Sections:
Main Site
Discussion Forum
    All Topics
    New Messages
    Search
    Last Day
    Last Week
    Tree View
    Edit Profile
    Create Login
    Guidelines
    Help
Game Chat
Fund Raiser:
Order Merchandise!

Suggested Reading:
(click cover for info)

cover

Beanes ratings are sinking ..

OAFC BBS - All Topics: Archive: Beanes ratings are sinking ..
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By dorrit on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 08:07 am:

I've heard from different sports shows that Beane is looking less and less as a "genius." You can brag all you want, but until you make it all the way,over the years it's less impressive.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By asch on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 08:15 am:

That is TOTAL FREAKING BS!

What morons are running these shows?

Those morons aren't taking the facts into account:

1. payroll
2. lineup
3. replacements

That's just 3 things - there are many. Are you telling me that those mediots expected us to win 90 games? Sorry! From what I read at the beginning of the year, we were gonna be 3rd place at best - with Seattle and Anaheim running away with it. This team comes back and wins 90 games and it's not good enough?? SORRY! WRONG! Anaheim had a good enough team and should have won this division months ago - they stunk. BUT NO - instead of them sucking and not playing to their ability, we get labeled chokers.

That's an outrage and drivel. Don't believe the hype. Those same morons predicted us to place 3rd - now they call us chokers cause we couldn't beat out the Angels, a team with 2.5 times our payroll.

That's BS.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 08:24 am:

Well, who else is responsible for the team HE put together and for the type of baseball HIS TEAM played and lost with this year.

No scapegoats. No Nostalgia!
Just Moneyball!!!!!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sactodavey on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 08:27 am:

Beane is voer rated he busted on 2 of 3 trades this yr the keilty for Lilly and roades trade, his no bunting sacrafinceng aproach stinks even chevy is critical of this in papaer this mornin.

i say bring la russa back home since he lives in Danville he is a winner and get rid of beane and Macha.

changs start at the top.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By asch on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 08:34 am:

He got rid of Lilly - Lilly was overrated and would have been our 5th starter on this team. Redman did pretty well for a 5th starter. Lilly will make more money next year - Redman is where he's at for atleast another 1 or 2 seasons. Sure, we could have gotten more for ted, maybe - but we also got him to take on Frankie - and that was the deal of the century!

I am sorry, but BB put together a pretty good team under the circumstances. Yes, there were mistakes, but some of you act like it's his fault he can't add another 10mil in payroll!!!

There were NO closers left - he had to sign Rhodes - and if Rhodes works out, he's a complete bargain at 3mil/year. It just didn't work out....he stinks, get's hurt and that's that. He brought in dotel which was a good move and only move we could make and he doesn't do so hot either. BB's fault? WHO WAS LEFT?

How many other teams won 90 games on a 50mil payroll?? Not many right....especially with Texas as good as they were and Anaheim as good as they are. This was ANOTHER impressive season!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 08:52 am:

Lilly was overrated? Hmm, last time I checked (granted, before his last one or two starts), he was #3 in the league in ERA. And don't forget he pitches half his games on unforgiving turf, not to mention one of his more recent starts at Yankee Stadium, where he shut them down. But I do agree, Redman was not that bad. I mean look back ... sure he was mostly good only on the road ... but I recall several pressure games, must win games (and after losses, to boot) where he took the ball and gave excellent performances. His Thursday game certainly comes to mind. Fact is, he had more balls in those situations than any of the big 3 ... like it or not.

As for Beane, regardless his deals ... which I am not criticizing at this time, plus the fact the $ situation is well documented. He is definitely not able to get the most qualified managers or even try one who would likely be better than Macha ... Washington, for example ... because if anyone is his own man, forget it. Beane does have to make up his mind whether he wants to be GM or field manager. And as gutless (more so than Howe) and other negatives I think about Macha, many of his (poor) decisions were the fault of Beane's interference. See my thread on Lowell Cohn's column this morning. Besides other things, Macha is a CS manager.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 09:09 am:

Here's Ray Ratoo's column on the A's:

Billy Beane can't hide behind payroll issue....

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/10/03/SPG5J936QG1.DTL

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By mulder4cyoung on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 09:13 am:

OH COME ON! Look, were we saying this when we were up on the division for most of the year? No. Don't blame Billy for the Big 3 forgetting how to pitch in the second half, esp September, because that was the main reason we lost.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 09:20 am:

I saw Ratto's column yesterday and while I agreed with much he said he failed to do his homework on a couple things. Like the issue of Dye's salary freeing up almost $12mil, when that was why they were able to sign Chavez. And his comment about needing to give Dotel lots of runs (I paraphrase), when in fact, 5 of his 6 BS, came with more than one run. I sent him an email pointing this out. Unlike Dickey, this guy does not respond to emails and refuses to discuss things, even when he is wrong. I am not much of a Ratto fan, at all. Some of his stuff is funny, but a lot of it is off the wall, IMO.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 09:45 am:

Although I don't agree with all of what Ratto had to say, he is correct in pointing out how intrusive and intimidating Beane can be in running his ship.

Maybe with this loss and lack of production he got from his chosen personnel (coaches,players and manager), Beane may come to realize nobody has ever really mastered this game. He could use a little less arrogance by hiring and allowing a good baseball man to run his team on the field instead of managing by proxy. He must come to realize it didn't work out with Howe and it didn't work out with Macha.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By bigthree17 on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 10:23 am:

Lilly is #13 in the league in ERA at 4.06. At one point he cracked the top 10, but he's never been near the top 5.

Regardless, Lilly had 6 great weeks here, while the rest of his tenure was wholly inconsistent. Billy sold high to get a young, cheap, middle-of-the-order, switch-hitting bat. I don't blame him.

I pretty much agree with Asch. Sure, BB is responsible for the team he put together, but given the constraints, I think he did an admirable job. With those pieces, and the way the Angles stumbled and bumbled until the last week of the season, Macha should have been able to turn it into a division winner.

However, I do agree with Lil and DJ that we need a stronger presence as a field manager. I love and respect everything that Billy has done for this franchise, but if all the players know that Billy runs the show, no one will respect the manager. We need a guy the players will respect and go to war with. Macha is not that guy.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By jtraeg on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 10:34 am:

I think I heard that one of the Angels bench coaches are available, if that is true we should definately check it out if we want to reamain competative because Anaheim is gunna be stickin around at the top for a loooooong time.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By yc2578 on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 11:09 am:

569 wins in six years. He's fine.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By dansward on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 11:37 am:

Billy Beane will be gone by next season.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By bigthree17 on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 02:27 pm:

I don't think so. If he didn't leave for Boston or L.A., I'm not sure there's a job he would leave for, at least in baseball. He would have been a hero in Boston if he could have won the Series there, an icon for life, and the Dodgers would have gotten him closer to his daughter with a bigger payroll. So he passed up two plum gigs to stay.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By asch on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 03:57 pm:

deajay,
Look at who Lilly beat and lost to with us. He couldn't beat any good teams - the bulk of his wins were basically against the crappiest of crap teams.

He WAS overrated - that's not to say he wasn't good or that the Kielty trade was a smart move, but he was certainly overrated last year.

He had a very similar year this year to last year (slightly better this year) and certainly I felt we could have gotten more for him, but I don't think he's as good as we all thought. Again, look at who he beat last year and who he couldn't beat.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 04:17 pm:

Really, bigthree? I could swear I saw a graphic a few weeks ago (Yankees game?) showing him as #3 in ERA. Could be they were showing that in relation to some specifics; but I don't know what. I was quite surprised; guess now I know why. Hmm, or maybe it was more than a few weeks ago. You know, time flies. :)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By bigthree17 on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 04:35 pm:

Time flies...no kidding. It seems like it was just last weekend that my brother and I were at spring training, and now it's all over.

I just checked Lilly's game log. His low point ERA was 3.66 on Aug. 23. He had a great June (3.03), a pretty decent July (3.56), but every other month was mediocre at best. He's a good starter, but I don't think he'll ever be great. Not a huge loss, and definitely replaceable.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 04:41 pm:

Yeh, it was 3.something; it must've been for a specific month then. Maybe he was third in August? Whatever.... Oh, I agree, I don't think he was any great shakes ... especially with re to consistency. But he certainly appears to have been worth more than Kielty. But if Kielty dumps the switch-hitting, who knows, he may end up being pretty decent. The thing about trades is, sometimes it takes a while to really know how they turned out.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ronc on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 06:02 pm:

Lilly had a good year according to Baseball Prospectus' ball park adjusted stats "http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/snva_pitcher2004.html" According to those stats he had a better year than any of the A's starters.
Looking at VORP Hudson(46.1) was the only A's starter to have a better year than Lilly (45.0)
"http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/vorp_pitcher2004.html".

I agree with DJ it takes a while to see how things turn out but so far it's one of Billy's worst trades

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By 5thtimethecharm on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 06:07 pm:

The temptation for Billy B. to ply his trade with a big, fat $100 million or $120 million payroll must be enormous. I think he'll bolt within the next two years.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By whoknows77 on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 06:25 pm:

The Lilly trade was not about talent for talent - it was about freeing the money to be able to resign Foulke - it was a risk. You have to gamble sometimes to make your team better. This particular risk didn't work out - that's part of life - BB isn't perfect, nobody is, but that doesn't mean he's not the best GM in baseball.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 07:54 am:

Who else has this level of success as a GM with the conditions Billy has been under?

Maybe DePodesta.

The Billy/DePodesta/Forst team is really not on the field yet (but getting there). Let's see what they field over the next 2-3 years.

People need to get off Billy's jock, he has been great for us.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 09:43 am:

You know, people talk about the success, after all, of DePo's moves, in spite of the initial criticism. Actually, those trades ... the ones that sent LoDuca, and more importantly, Mota to FL ... did not turn out so hot. Especially with Brad Penney going down and his failure to garner Chas. Johnson. The only deal which made a difference ... a pennant winning difference ... was picking up Finley. And that deal did not require their moving LoDuca and/or Mota. Unless it was a 3way; I don't recall that it was, however.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 09:45 am:

If Beane is gone after next year, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't to pursue something outside of baseball ... at least for a while.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By bigthree17 on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 09:50 am:

DePo knew the Dodgers' rotation couldn't compete in the playoffs, so he got Penny, a proven playoff starter. Then, he was going to use Penny as a piece to get Unit. That would have been a coup. Unfortunately, the D-Backs changed the terms of the deal, and DePo couldn't pull the trigger. I think Penny was still a good pick-up even though he got hurt - you can't foresee an injury like that.

Mota was tradeable because Dreifort was having a great year before the trade and he got hurt (okay, that was foreseeable). But Yhency Brazoban has been very effective for them. DePo traded some young talent to take a shot to go deep in the playoffs, not just make it - I commend him for that.

As for Billy, I still have the utmost confidence in him.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By dorrit on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 07:24 pm:

If your satisfied with just making the first round of play-offs for the years ahead,(and we didn't do even that this year), that's fine. Maybe I'm selfish, but I don't go just to be "entertained." I want us to win!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By bigthree17 on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 08:09 pm:

No, Dorrit, I've said before that I believe our window of opportunity is almost completely shut now with the Big Three, and we need to go for it. If that means trading away young minor league talent for some guys who can help us win it all now so be it. I'd much rather win one WS and risk sucking for a few years than be a perennial contender but with no real shot of winning it all. Let's face it, 2001 was our only real chance where we were as good as, or better than, every other team.

However, the problem is not Beane. He does all he can given his financial constraints. He had a deal ready to get us Kent. He got us a closer in Dotel. The problem is ownership's unwillingness to give Beane the resources necessary to make us great, not just good. I've also said that I don't expect an owner to lose money, so I undertand us not having a $100M payroll. However, nixing the Kent deal over $1.7M is short-sighted idiocy by Schott. And the fact that we had to get KC of all teams to kick in dough for the Dotel deal is just plain embarassing. If Schott invested a little bit before the season to create a buzz the fans would come out in droves, creating more revenue. Schott's problem is that he is reactive (at best) and not proactive.


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.


 

Questions? Comments? Corrections? Please contact info@oaklandfans.com.