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

Here's Dave Newhouse's column

OAFC BBS - All Topics: Archive: Here's Dave Newhouse's column
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 05:34 pm:

Yeah, I know the Beane cult followers will not agree but for what it's worth...

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/ci_2491614

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 05:43 pm:

and here's the CocoTimes Gary Peterson

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/10453534.htm?1c

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By rocket on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 09:27 pm:

I am not a worshipper of Beane, but I think he
realized after the Kendall deal, that there
would not be enough money in the budget to field
a strong team. He knew Hudson would be gone,
and that Mulder would be gone shortly as well.
He just decided to start rebuilding one year
early, when he saw that the increases to keep
the rest of the team was not going to fit in
the budget.

The A's were able to make their run because many
of the young players came together and were still
reasonably cheap. That was ending, and it was
better to have the new core be young and cheap
together to try for another run in a few years.
So he obtained a lot players that were at the same stage in their careers. If he had dealt them
years apart, part of the core would be getting
too pricey when the rest of the young players finally developed.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 10:10 pm:

Rocket,

I believe Beane only got the word about drastically cutting payroll until after he got Kendall. Otherwise it makes no sense for him to invest that much on a catcher if he is conceding the next couple of seasons, at least...
there is no way that he just realized that he couldn't stay within budget after he signed the guy. He is way too experienced to make such a mistake.

I'm waiting to see how much more dumping he'll have to do with the non tenders deadline coming up and then I expect him to trade Kendall as well.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By eyleenn on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 11:31 pm:

Here's an article from the NY Times. Even Billy doesn't sound convinced.

December 20, 2004
ON BASEBALL
Economics Wilt 'Moneyball' Fantasy
By MURRAY CHASS

HOSE of us who do not subscribe to the "Moneyball" approach to baseball, the theories laid out in the book that celebrates Billy Beane and the Oakland Athletics, have been quick to point to the real strength of the Athletics in recent years, the pitching triumvirate of Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder and Barry Zito.

And then there was one.

Beane, a talented general manager whatever his philosophy, traded Hudson to the Atlanta Braves last Thursday and 48 hours later traded Mulder to the St. Louis Cardinals. In making those deals, Beane contributed to the likelihood of those teams repeating as division champions.

The Athletics cannot repeat as division champions next season because they didn't win a division championship last season. In fact, they failed to make the playoffs for the first time since the 1999 season.

The Yankees make the playoffs perennially but have not won the World Series since 2000. In the Yankees' world, that kind of failure calls for drastic action, and that's why Randy Johnson is expected to become a member of the Yankees' rotation this week.

The Yankees add Johnson; the Athletics subtract Hudson and Mulder. That's the difference between having an unlimited payroll and a severely restricted payroll. Nobody said baseball economics were fair.

Beane did not trade Hudson and Mulder because he discovered a flaw in the team's makeup. He did not trade Mulder because he staggered to an 0-4 record and a 7.27 earned run average in his last seven starts, dooming the Athletics to their final resting place - one game behind the first-place Anaheim Angels.

Why did Beane shred his vaunted starting rotation?

"We needed to," he said in a telephone interview yesterday.

"We're constantly playing a shell game here," he added. "The status quo was not within our means. We need to be in a situation where our team is getting progressively better, and the status quo could have put us in a position where we'd be worse."

The status quo would have meant holding on to Hudson and Mulder along with Zito. In the past five seasons, the four playoff years and the near miss this year, those three pitchers combined for a 234-119 record, a sparkling .662 winning percentage.

If a team played at that percentage over the course of a season for several seasons, it would produce 107 victories a year and more than a few division championships.

Now look at some other numbers. The Athletics had a payroll of about $58 million this year. They could not keep all of their star players and maintain that payroll. Hudson's salary was $5 million this year and goes to $6.75 million next year. Mulder was at $4.45 million this year and will go to $6.5 million next year. Together, they will escalate from less than $10 million to more than $13 million.

The Yankees could sell a few more hot dogs and keep both pitchers. The Athletics don't have that luxury.

"We couldn't afford the status quo," said Beane, who likes his Yankees counterpart, Brian Cashman, and doesn't begrudge him a dollar. "We were getting into the position where even with the loss of Jermaine Dye, it wasn't within our means. We were beyond our means to keep the status quo."

The Yankees let players leave as free agents, as Oakland did with Dye, and pretended they had to make those moves because of some imaginary budget. They are reminiscent of the story that when Edward Bennett Williams owned the Washington Redskins, he gave George Allen an unlimited budget, then said that Allen had exceeded it.

Beane can be accused of being a bean counter, but he has to keep a calculator handy to make sure his payroll doesn't start with a 6. If Cashman used a calculator, it would have to be one of those fancy nine-figure models. Once Johnson is added to the payroll, the Yankees will have a payroll approaching $210 million, more than 15 percent higher than this year's record payroll.

And that $210 million doesn't cover a complete roster. One name noticeably missing from it is Carlos Beltran, the free-agent outfielder the Yankees covet. If Beltran's agent gets what he wants, $20 million a year, make the Yankees payroll $230 million, nearly 30 percent higher than this year's.

If the Yankees' rotation is Johnson, Mike Mussina, Kevin Brown, Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright, the combined 2005 salaries of the starters will be $67 million. That total is more than the 2004 payrolls of 18 of the other 29 teams.

The anticipated Oakland rotation would fall a little short of that total. It doesn't figure to earn much above $6.7 million, let alone $67 million. And Zito's $5.6 million will account for most of it. The other four projected starters - Rich Harden, Danny Haren, Dan Meyer and Joe Blanton - have a combined major league service of two and a half years, with all but Harden less than a year each.

"It's a risky thing, but we've taken risks before," Beane said.

Could any three younger members of the starting corps evolve into Hudson, Mulder and Zito?

"The three guys we had together were pretty historical," Beane said. "If they became half of those guys, they'd be pretty good pitchers. But it's not fair to make that comparison. We had a pretty historical group. Nevertheless, we feel they can be very good big league pitchers."

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 11:57 pm:

Very early this morning I sent a rather long email to Newhouse. I agreed with some of what he said and disagreed with the rest of it. Ratto has it figured out; I'm not too sure Newhouse does. Maybe my comments about Schott's master plan will get him to thinking. But wouldn't bank on it.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By rocket on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 11:22 am:

Lil,
I tend to agree with you. Beane probably thought
he would go for it for the last year of Hudson,
like he did when Giambi and Tejeda left. Then he
was told the budget had to go south, not north, and he shifted gears to rebuild for another run.
I was a bit shocked by the Kendall deal, knowing
that there was a good chance there would not be
enough money in the budget to retain the arb eligible players. But as it turns out, the budget
is going to be much lower than last year, so Beane
decided to take the bitter medicine right away.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 04:46 pm:

A lot of people were a bit shocked about the Kendall deal for all the reasons you were.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By filthyslurve on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 06:46 pm:

I find it fascinating that, generally speaking, the beat reporters hint at a favorable view of the New Deal while the columnists are downright looney tunes over these moves. I honestly think the papers are playing it that way, so the columnists placate the fans.

Newhouse's column is just visceral bulls**t. And somebody make up my mind for me: am I supposed to blame the ownership or the GM? Newhouse claims Beane has gone off the deep end solo. Most of you, in fact the aim of this site, want to tar and feather Schott.

For the life of me, I can't see how we don't compete next year. If we don't, it'll be for the same reasons as any other club: injuries, lack of a few prominent streaks, bad/overused bullpen, etc.

Some think there's some cult of Billy, but he sure has Mulder and Hudson snowed then...they are on record supporting Billy's plan when they would in fact be completely suported by Newhouse, Ratto and fans by skewering his moves.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 07:49 pm:

Most of you, in fact the aim of this site, want to tar and feather Schott.

You just don't get it filthyslurve. This site has been up since 1997 when we first noticed Schott lied to Mr. Haas . The ink wasn't even dry on the contract and we found out he had no intentions of honoring the word he had given to a dying man.

The aim of this site is to keep the A's in Oakland

The one who has consistently tarred and feathered the Oakland fans and the City of Oakland is Schott.

Every year he has threatened and boycotted any chance for the A's to remain in Oakland. Until he sells the team or changes his agenda, we will be tarring and feathering Mr. Schott.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 08:25 pm:

Lil,

The Haas family is a large group, and still very active and prominent in the Bay Area, especially with UC Berkeley. In the years since Walter Haas and family sold the A's to Schott and Hoffman, has one Haas family member -- a son, a daughter, a nephew -- ever publicly stated to the media that Walter Haas was lied to by these guys? I can't recall one instance when any family member, whether it was his wife, or one of his three kids, or Roy Eisenhardt, ever said, "THOSE GUYS LIED TO WALTER!!" The Haas's sold the A's to the only group around here that promised to keep the team around. And that promise has been kept. They are STILL here. The A's were sold close to a decade ago now and they have not moved. And, realistically, they're probably not going anywhere for another decade. Some day, however, the rubber will hit the road, and the team will either be relocated to a new park in Oakland, or it will move. But you figure this -- if the Haas family felt they were egregiously wronged, they would be public about it and we haven't heard a peep. Not one scion of Walter Haas has made noise about how Schottmann screwed them and lied. So maybe don't feel they were wronged, and if they don't feel they were wronged, maybe they weren't... Have you ever considered that?

As far as Dave Newhouse is concerned, he's a bush-league writer at a bush-league paper. Always has been and that is why he is still toiling at the Tribune and writing columns that nobody reads. So is Art Spander, who actually went from a San Francisco paper that nobody reads (The Examiner) to an Oakland paper that nobody reads. Ray Ratto is another worthless hack. He wrote his column in Sunday's Chronicle in about 60 seconds without bothering to call Beane to ask him to explain the trade. Ratto started making references to Charlie Finley even though this is a completely different situation and different circumstances. Don't listen to these hack writers. If you are going to listen to anybody in the media, listen to the writers who really specialize in baseball and follow the game closely, and who know and understand the talent of ALL the players involved: writers like Ken Rosenthal of The Sporting News, Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune, Tom Verducci of Sports Illustrated, Tom Boswell of the Washington Post, and until recently, Ross Newhan of the LA Times. All of these writers have been unanimous in their praise of Beane and his strategy -- because they understand the game and what Beane is up against. Beane is treasure to the A's. There, but for the grace of Beane, goes the KC Royals, or the Brewers, or the Devil Rays. Beane is creating an A's team that will be peaking in the next three or four seasons, just as the first crew peaked in 2001 and 2002. Instead of paying big $$$ to have a bunch of injury prone vets at the end of their prime. (Especially the starting pitchers!) Why does this not make sense to some people??

When this team is competing for the division in the second half next year, and everybody is calling Beane a genius again, will any of these local writers write columns saying they were wrong? I doubt it. They never do.

Dan Meyer has never had in ERA over 3.00 in any minor league season. Danny Haren was one of the only Cardinals pitcher who could pitch to the Red Sox in the World Series. Daric Barton, according to the experts who follow the minor leagues, is one of the most special young hitters of the past decade. He has displayed a combination of patience and power that is truly rare for a teenager in professional baseball. He is like Chavez was as an 18-year-old hitter, except even MORE advanced. Meanwhile we traded a left-hander who we almost pulled out of the rotation when the games mattered MOST last season because he couldn't get anybody out. Beane is a brilliant executive. He is the Branch Rickey of this age...

Another thing -- I seriously doubt that Beane traded for Kendall and then got a call from Schott and Hoffman informing him to lower payroll. Beane is completely informed -- always. I wouldn't be surprised if the idea to trade off Mulder and Hudson was hatched a year ago. These guys have long range plans. They don't fly by the seat of their pants.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 08:51 pm:

The City of Oakland was wronged. Schott sued the City for 48 million when he KNEW the Raiders were coming back and had received a huge reduction on the asking price of the team. He later even admitted he sued the City because he wanted to get out of the 10 year lease.

The Haas family wasn't wronged. Oakland A's fans were wronged. The Haases were selling the team for 85 million and ended up selling bellow the asking price because of the return of the Raiders. Mr. Haas wanted the team to stay in Oakland. And he wanted to sell the team to local buyers.

But Mr. Haas also wanted to settle his family affairs and distribution os his wealth due to capital gains and other reasons. The family wouldn't complain because they could care less.
Wally Haas Junior knew the team was going to be sold and agreed to it and went on his merry way.

The McClatchy (sp) group wanted to buy the team for 85 million (later bought the Pirates) but Mr. Haas didn't want to sell to them for fear they would be relocating the team.

The rest of the Haas family didn't want to keep the A's and were glad the old man sold the team so
they were not going to take issue with Schott.

The City of Ooakland was wronged because with the 48 million laswsuit, Schott broke the 10 year lease they had with the City and played rent free with full control of the Parking and Food Concessions.

Schott started to try to move the team the moment he bought it. Ed Alvarez, his hired front man, who later sued Schott, told the courts how he was promised money to relocate the team and was fired by Schott when he failed.

I don't have to read Newhouse or Ray Ratto to know what Schott is all about and what he has done as an owner.

My gripe is not with Billy Beane. My gripe is that unfortunately he works for Schott and he has to follow his orders.

Billy has done the best he can under the circumstances.

PS: I don't have to read the newspapers to know the story buzz. The OAFC was there at City Hall and dealing with the issues and we helped write the story of how Schott and Selig pulled the rug from under the City by tabling the Dolich/Piccinini group.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 09:05 pm:

Lil,

So while we're hating Schott, let's hate Walter Haas too for growing old, getting sick, and dying. And let's hate his heirs for selling the team and not giving a darn about their future. Oh wait a sec, didn't we used to love the Haas family? It gets confusing.

I ran a search in local newspapers, cross-referencing "Haas and Schott" over a ten year period, and could find not one public comment by the Haas's on Schott. Not one. They don't seem to feel that their dad's will has been breached by Schott/Hoffman.

All I know is that 10 years have passed, and the team is still here. Promise kept. And by the way, there's nowhere to go. Look at the fiasco in Washington. MLB is up the creek because there is no viable alternative to DC. No other city is MLB-ready.

I just want to see the A's in the Bay Area somewhere. And I've always believed that outside of a downtown ballpark that would help transform Oakland's civic center, the best place is probably a beautiful spot on the peninsula that can benefit from the kind of public/private partnership that is necessary to get a ballpark built. End of story. You need corporate money or it can't happen. To expect anything less is to be disconnected from reality. It's going to be Oracle/Compaq/HP/Intel park, and it's going to be near those companies and that revenue base, or it's not going to happen here.

The Dolich group didn't have the money to pull the deal off. That rarely gets discussed. Neither did that group in Washington DC a few years back, the group that Selig allegedly asked Schott to speak with. It's hard to buy a MLB team. They are very expensive these days...

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 09:22 pm:

{The Dolich group didn't have the money to pull the deal off. That rarely gets discussed.

Buzz, I don't know how long you've been following the OAFC website. We've documented with facts and documents all that went on since the team was sold by Walter Haas.

We followed and have hundreds of articles and reports in our archives. Please don't expect to convince some of us that what we have been pointing out all along is all a fantasy or made up stories.

The Dolich group was very well funded. They had several investors who were worth 1 billion, starting with Goodby, the 'got milk' guy and ending with the Lugar family from Boston.

Now, you just admitted that you don't care if the A's leave Oakland and in fact you feel they would be better off elsewhere in the Bay Area.

There is where we disagree. The Corporate support is no longer mom and pop that teams need to be next to the corporations. Corporate support is regional and the team can have support from corporations in a central region of the Bay Area like Oakland just as well or better than in the Peninsula somewhere.

BTW, I don't hate Schott. If tomorrow he decides to make a committment and comes to the table with the City of Oakland to make a ballpark happen, I'll be the first to send him flowers.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 09:32 pm:

I've been posting on this site since 1999. Check your archives. And I love Oakland (I'm a native, and I've been attending A's games at the Colesium since 1971), but to quote Sinclair Lewis, "It can't happen here." Not enough money in Oakland. Incompetent city management. Bizarro politics. Lack of will to get a complex deal done. No faith in the potential rewards. I could go on and on. I want my A's in a "can-do" city, and I want it done soon. Something's cooking on that front, by the way....

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 09:44 pm:

buzz,

I know a lot of good policians in Oakland and I have not lost faith in them. Some are bad and corrupt or imcopetent, but not all. I know a lot of good honest people in Oakland who are working very hard behind the scenes to keep the team in Oakland.

I have however no faith in the Lords of Baseball. MLB to me is a mafia of the worst kind and Bud Selig is the most corrupt and imcompetent commissioner the game ever had.

But I am not going to give up the fight and I will not stop lobbying to keep this team where it belongs.

And I will not stop supporting the team because I consider Schott just a temporary custodian of the Oakland A's. One day he'll be gone and the A's legacy will still remain, hopefully in Oakland.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By joseozzie on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 09:44 pm:

Who does Newhouse write for, the Oakland Tribune???

And you are taking what he says seriously??

The Tribune?? The Oakland Tribune??

Don't they GIVE AWAY newpapers?

Dave Newhouse!!??

hahahahahahaha

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 09:47 pm:

joseozzie, please go to bed, it's past your bedtime.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 09:51 pm:

Lil,

I have always felt a downtown ballpark would transform Oakland in a way that no other civic project could. It would bring tens of thousands of people through the downtown area 81 days per year. The level of corruption and stupidity in the city's civic leadership, however, is so appalling and far-reaching that it is astounding. I have truly lost faith that they could get this deal done, even though it would benefit Oakland in a way that no project has in the past 30 years. (Not even the JLondon Square development.) These are morons and crooks. And Jerry Brown didn't help things either. He hates pro sports, a legacy from his father who also hated it.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 10:10 pm:

I haven't given up buzz. I agree it isn't easy to keep the faith but believe me, there are people working behind the scenes right as we speak. Nto just politicians but some civic leaders with corporate support.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By eyleenn on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 11:37 pm:

Buzz, just because the Haas family hasn't made any public statements about the Schott ownership doesn't mean they aren't unhappy with they way the team has been managed. It's not their style to criticize Schott publicly. But I happen to know that they are as frustrated with the Schott regime as the rest of us.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By washfan on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 01:26 am:

Heck, Ellison just overtook People Soft so now WhOracle has an east bay presence. Time for him to make an offer and build an effigy (ballpark) to himself...Oh & I bet he'd let Billy spend some $$$

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 11:03 am:

buzz, you continually blame the politicians and the city but it was Schott who refused to come to the table or show any interest in the ballpark proposals being offered by Robert Bobb's ballpark group which was comprised by many city leaders and business people as well.

The Mayor had no interest in a ballpark because he knows he never saw any interest from the owners either. In fact he went to pick up Steve Schott by helicopter to visit different sites and was stood up by Schott without any explanation.

Yet buzz, you seem to be willing and ready to be a Schott apologist at every step of the way, including buying into the lies about Dolich's group lack of funds. That sale was never meant to be and you refuse to see Selig was behind Schott in order to extort more money from the already strapped City of Oakland.

If you claim to have posted here since the mid or late nineties, you shouldn't have to use search engines to find out what went on. It is all in our archives.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 12:09 pm:

"The already strapped city of Oakland" is the operative phrase, Lil. There is no future for the A's in a city that is teetering on bankruptcy and can't even fund their public schools up to base-line levels. Oakland has always been a basket case, financially and politically. It was when the A's moved here in the late '60's and it is today. But remember this, as much as we don't like to say so, professional sports has changed. Without the corporate money base, without new stadiums, there is no way to survive in the long run. In this new age, a city like Oakland would never be considered for a team. It doesn't have what it takes. There are, however, much wealthier communities in the Bay Area, that with public funds and corporate money, could probably get a deal done. We need to get a deal done, before some other city gets their act together (Portland comes to mind) and puts together a deal that MLB likes. Oakland is a city in decay and the future lies elsewhere in the East Bay, or the South Bay. Here's something else -- the Colesium site, in all truth, sucks. The whole area sucks. Just like Hunters Point. Nobody wants to be out there at night. The neighborhoods are horrible. It's a hideous looking place. If a new park doesn't go downtown, we are wasting everybody's time looking in Oakland. And as far as Schott is concerned, he probably didn't get to be a billionaire wasting his time, and spending an afternoon with the mayor in a helicopter, viewing pie-in-the-sky building sites that will never come to pass, is probably not a productive use of time.... "Hey Steve, here's another great site that we will never build a stadium on!"
To quote Burt Bacharach: "Do you know the way to San Jose?"

Here's something else -- outside of a few years in the late 1980's and early 1990's, before they disfigured the Colesium, the A's always had problems drawing crowds, even in the early 1970's. My dad and I walked up and bought tickets to the 2nd game of the '73 Series, and I went to 2 of the 3 home games of the '74 Series, and tickets were not scarce. And those were championship teams with 3 HOF players and all-stars all around!! It's always been a struggle to get fans to Oakland, especially mid-week night games...

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By filthyslurve on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 12:30 pm:

'Lil:

I think you read too much into my post and perhaps took it as a personal attack. I dont think you have been one of the unreasonable posters in the tirades the last week. It seems many just want somebody-anybody's- head.

I also think you clarified some things about Beane. Often you are very critical of him (or those that believe)- so I just wondered. Nice, informed posts...as always.

I agree that Newhouse is a fan more than a columnist when the A's are involved. He's much more poised when it comes to golf. And the Trib is a second-rate scab paper.

Please, I have also been here since '99 and I do get it...I often just disagree, but not as often as you'd like to think. Perhaps borrowing your "cult of Beane" idea was misinterpreted? Sorry about that.

Regards-

The Swami, Billy Beane Cult, Lake Merrit, Oakland, California :-)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By filthyslurve on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 12:34 pm:

Oh, and I make no apologies for agreeing with nearly everything buzz throws out there or falling out of my chair laughing everytime finleyshero posts.

I also think that the OAFC is doing a terrific job. I'm willing to separate the Board from the activism.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sactodavey on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 12:39 pm:

Buzz great post that told it like it is, even though it would be nice for Oakland to get a new stadium no way will it ever happen the city is to indebt and still paying for mt. Davis its not going to happen.

i do not think San Jose will get one either to far down in the south bay to bring fans from Marin and sacto, the area might have corporate but is to confined to one area not centralized enough.

i do not think it will be easy to move the A's since they draw realtively well and have history in Oakland look how difficult it was to get the expos moved.

To me if the A's move anywhere it might be to Sacramento this town is exploding and i mean exploding with new homes buisnesses and population, the corporate is comming and in 4-5 yrs will be major league ready, just look at the Rivercats drawing 900k for minor league ball, the A's would attract the valley cities Redding and East bay with Marin it would be a winner in the #19 tv market, a real sprots town this would be and the A's would have a whole area community all to themselves, this town would make the A's gods and feast media tv radio on them 24-7 like they do the kings unhlike what they get in Oakland .

Still it will be very difficult to move the A's given the problems with the expos and there are teams with worse attendance and situations then Oakland (look at Tampa bay or even Florida)so getting a new stadium is probably not going to happen and moving niether so get used to losing players when thery get real good.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 01:01 pm:

I love the A's and I love what the OAFC is trying to do. In a perfect world, that park would be built up by Lake Merritt and people would actually start living and working in downtown Oakland again, and the area would be transformed.
It would be a huge win for the city, a huge win for the East Bay, and it would change the way the city is perceived. But it's not going to happen.
So let's find the best alternative. Sacramento is not beyond the realm of possibility. They get 20,000 to overpay to watch the Kings 40 times each season, so it would not be unrealstic to think that the city could bring out an average of 30,000 people to watch a baseball team 80 days each year....

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 01:13 pm:

buzz,

You tell me that San Jose is not closing schools and hospitals? You tell me that corruption is not present in other City Halls?
Tell me other cities who will be willing to build a ballpark because their schools and hospitals are thriving?

What city can you show me, outside of Vegas that will be willing to rip taxpayers like MLB wants to favor corporate welfare with no benefits in return.

As for your disgust for Oakland. Sorry but I don't share it and I don't agree. I happen to think the atmosphere at the Coli is one of the best in MLB and I've been to many ballparks in my life. The diversity and the baseball savvy of Oakland A's fans are unique in MLB in my opinion.
And the city has dangerous and bad areas like any big city in the World. But there are beautiful areas and beautiful people in Oakland, the birth place of the civil rights movement in the west.

And I'm glad you brought up the 70's and what Charley Finley did and not do for the franchise.

He was the most knowleageble baseball person I've ever seen. He knew talent like Beane Beane couldn't even start to dream about. Finley put together, without scouts, three World Championship teams. And when he got disgusted with MLB and decided to sell off... he still left the A's the greatest player in franchise history, Rickey Henderson.

So excuse me if I don't do the 'I'm not worthy' to Billy Beane. I've seen the A's destroyed and back from the ashes before. This is nothing new and the A's legacy can't be touched because it's in the books.

And another thing that is in the books...
the A's outdrew the Giants in attendance in 10 of 17 seasons until the Giants built their PRIVATELY funded ballpark with Selig's help.

Selig has been trying to get rid of the A's since they arrived and yes, it is still here, but not for long, especially when/if Oakland's native sons turn their backs on their legacy and their city.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 01:25 pm:

filthyslurve

I don't know if you were being complimentary to me or not, but thank you in name of the OAFC board... :)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 01:42 pm:

Lil,

The truth is that the other owners, and Selig, were furious at the Giants ownership for not putting together a publicly-funded deal. Selig didn't help them do that deal. HE WANTED IT TO FAIL. THAT is the truth. It made all their pan-handling to their own communities look bad. (Like Selig's own pan-handling in Milwaukee.) I recall, several years ago, when I lived in Manhattan, that Fred Wilpon was on WFAN, and Chris Russo, the host of the sports program, challenged him on his request for public funding of a new Mets ballpark. "Why don't you build it yourself like Peter MacGowan in San Francisco?" he asked Wilpon. It was a great question and Wilpon got flustered and started rambling about how the Mets were in a different situation, and Russo said, "Yeah, you just want somebody else to pay for this and not yourself. THAT'S the only thing that is different. Stop begging the city for money and do it yourself like the Giants!"
In the minds of the owners, the Giants set a dangerous precedent. And they made it work.
Look how attractive private funding was to MLB in Washington DC. They couldn't even stomach HALF the park being financed privately, let alone the whole thing. Think what you want about the Giants ownership group, but they did it right. I give them a lot of credit.

As far as San Jose having civic problems, every city does. But they can still get a deal done in spite of it. Sacramento probably could too. Oakland can't, and that's why there is no future for the A's here. Never will be.

Before you start ripping Billy Beane, you should send him a Christmas card thanking him for the fun and competitive teams he's put on the field for the past five seasons, while other small market teams, outside of the Twins, have SUCKED and have NO hope. He's a treasure.

I don't think you lived in Oakland in the early 1970's, but I did, and followed that team with the intensity that every kid follows their favorite club. Let me tell you this: Charley Finley was not a nice man. And he could have given two cents about Oakland. He cared less for Oakland than Schott and Hoffman. He didn't even live here -- spent most of his time on his farm in Indiana and had his lackeys send him game reports. But he was a great judge of talent -- I'll give you that. As a man, however, he made Schott and Hoffman look like Nobel Peace Prize winners. He hated ballplayers. And he didn't think much of minorities, and that is the hard truth. He was a poor excuse for a human being. And the team existed, in his eyes, only to glorify HIMSELF. The way he treated Dick Williams (a truly great manager) and his other coaches was appalling. He treated the players worse. He is not missed, and the game was made better when he made his exit. And that's saying something, considering how many scum bags are in the baseball business...

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 02:32 pm:

The truth is that the other owners, and Selig, were furious at the Giants ownership for not putting together a publicly-funded deal. Selig didn't help them do that deal.

Buzz, I really don't know where you get your information, but you are completely wrong. It was Bud Selig and Reinsdorf who bloqued the sale of the Giants to Tampa Bay and it was Selig who helped Magowan put togehter the investors to purchase the Giants. It was also Selig who made a deal with Magowan giving them the South Bay territory as guarantee for the building of the ballpark.

And for the last time....

I am not ripping on Billy Beane. I think Billy Beane is a very good GM and he flourishes working with a tight budget.

I just don't worship Billy Beane and I think he has made some serious mistakes which are passed over because of the budget.

I do think the A's could do a lot worse without Billy Beane. For sure. Especially with the likes of Schott as the owner.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By buzz on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 02:41 pm:

From a Peter Gammons article 4 years ago:

"Most fellow owners, however, aren't too happy with Magowan. As a whole, they want to be able to blackmail cities out of public funds and put schools in receivership (as they did in Cleveland for a football stadium). Or better yet, they want to rob the taxpayers, which is exactly what happened in Maryland when they had to build two football stadiums -- one for the Redskins and the other for the Ravens."


Lil -- Do you think Selig liked that McGowan financed the park privately while he was trying to blackmail Milwaukee in to giving him a sweetheart deal. (Which he succeeded in doing)? McGowan made all these guys look like highway bandits, which they are!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 02:50 pm:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/columnist/bodley/2004-08-20-bodley_x.htm

Here's an article where Magowan explains how Selig and his close friend Reisndorf was helpful and supportive in convincing the other owners that it was the only way the Giants would get a ballpark after failing 4 times to get public financing.

Selig has been protecting the Giants from the start and continues to state it was a horrible mistake to allow the A's to come to Oakland because it HURTS the Giants.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By bigthree17 on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 03:39 pm:

Lil, I believe that you do think Billy is a good GM, and that he is making the most of the resources he has. It's just when you call people who are more, shall we say, supportive of his moves and philosophies "cult followers" and "worshippers", it's a bit degrading, and it comes off as not so objective. When that happens, many of the insightful and salient points you bring up get lost in the translation.

Just my opinion, and I'm only raising it since it's part of the subject of this thread. I'm sure we're all a bit guilty of it.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 04:31 pm:

well big3, I'm making reference to the ones who are willing to accept with blind faith, any move Beane makes...thowing out criticism on the fans who dare criticise or disagree...

The same people who get offensive when a writer or two dare to make a criticism...i.e. Ratto or
Dave Newhouse, a columnist who has followed the A's for more time than most here are alive.

I don't believe I singled out a poster per name when I said that some people here show a tendency to idolize Beane as a super-human or a god-like being that makes no mistakes and that any possible mistakes are due to lack of money.

Beane does have a good track record, but I think he has made some very costly mistakes which are hidden by the excuse of lack of budget.

However, I do say I'm still glad we have him and he is way above many GMs out there. But I don't think he is infallible.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 04:39 pm:

And I do repeat that in comparing the fielding of winning teams through sheer talent evaluation, there has never been anybody better in the history of the A's organization than Finley.

And I know he was a penny-pinching unpopular guy...and so on and so on...

Sure it was a different time...but he did it as cheaply as he could, just like Schott likes it, and he won 3 WS... and he didn't have any scouts either.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By joseozzie on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 09:19 pm:

go Buzz go.

You absolutely kicked her tush.

very very nice info my friend.

Keep it coming

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 10:08 am:

Here's Art Spander's column:

http://www.insidebayarea.com/athletics/ci_2491960

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By bigthree17 on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 10:46 am:

Something from Skip Bayless for the cult followers among us:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=bayless/041223

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By oakfan on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 12:49 pm:

Simple:

Sell HIGH

Buy LOW

If Hudson and Mulder break down this year so many of these writers will look very foolish.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By mroakland on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 09:58 pm:

Mr. Buzz, Oakland is not a city in decay. Oakland leads the nation in in-fill housing. Downtown Oakland is currently booming in the development of market rate condos and commercial properties.

One 198 unit development in historic Old Oakland, is already 50% sold without the models even being available. The developers were forced to speed up construction of the second phase because of incredible demand. Across Broadway, Chinatown is also booming with new units. On upper Broadway near Grand Avenue, developers have broken ground on 400 more units. As everyone on this board knows, Forrest city is building 1000 uunits in Uptown. There has never been greater demand for housing in Oakland.

Also, City Center is thriving with an occupancy rate of 98%. Ask Jeeves has just relocated their corporate headquarters from Emeryville to the brand new Shorenstein building in City Center,
joining Clorox, APL, Golden West Financial, Kaiser, APL, Cost Plus, and Dryers, as part of the Oakland corporate community.

Also,The Hegenberger Corridor near the Coliseum is going through a renaissance, as Oakland International Airport continues to be one of the fastest growing airports in the country.

Mr. Buzz, Oakland is a thriving diverse city of 400,000 people with the best weather in the country. Oakland is also the capital of the Oakland Metropolitan Area which consists of 2.4 million residents in Alameda and Contra Costa counties.

So, Mr. Buzz, before you denigrate Oakland, a city which you proclaim to "love," please inform youself. Regurgitating what passes for common wisdom in certain parts of the Bay Area as to what the City of Oakland is suppose to be, does nothing to enhance your credibility as an authority on the City of Oakland and its capability to support the Oakland A's or MLB.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 10:20 pm:

Well, I must say somebody did his homework; and it wasn't Mr. Buzz. :)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 10:38 pm:

good stuff mroakland


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


 

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