East Bay Envy: Six Interesting Oakland A's Prospects

I always enjoy the Bay Bridge Series. Not because I consider them hated rivals like some Giants fans (in actuality, I really like the Oakland A's and don't buy into the whole "it's Black and Orange vs. Green and Yellow" hoopla) or like interleague play in general (other than a couple of matchups, they do spend way too many games on Interleague play during the year and matchups like Rockies-Orioles are a bit of a yawn). But it's nice to see the Bay Area neighbor in action and in a forum where you can watch both teams at once. I went to an A's-Giants game a couple of years ago at the Coliseum and I admit, the environment was pretty rabid as it was half-Giants fans and half-A's fans. You really don't get that kind of environment for a ballgame outside of the visiting big bandwagon teams (e.g. Yankees and Red Sox).

Anyways, in honor of the Giants-A's series which just ended, I'm going to take a look at six prospects in the A's system whom I find most interesting. The A's system isn't as deep as in years past due to graduations (Tyson Ross for example), trades, and some weird happenings (like Grant Desme, the AFL MVP in 2009 quitting baseball to join the priesthood...I can kind of relate on some issues, but novitiate/seminary life isn't all it's cracked up to be), it took a bit of a hit this year. (Baseball America ranked the A's 28th in their Talent Rankings and the Minor League Baseball Analyst in their 2011 annual ranked them 25th.)

Still, they have some interesting talent in their organization. Here are six guys you should most be aware of in the A's organization.



1. Grant Green, SS. (1st Round Draft Pick in 2009)

Green was the consensus top player in the A's system, ranking as the No. 1 A's prospect in BA and MLBA. The shortstop out of USC is coming off a fabulous year in the California League, as he hit .318 with 20 home runs, 87 RBI and an .883 OPS in 2010 with the Stockton Ports.

Green's hitting has been considered his strongest attribute according to scouts. Baseball America graded his batting a 60 and his power a 55, good grades considering his position (middle infield). Rob Gordon of the MLBA was also high on him as a hitter, grading as a 8B prospect and saying this about him in his writeup:

"Lean and athletic infielder who has very pure hitting instincts and abilities. Makes consistent, hard contact and will hit for BA with at least average pop, but can also shorten stroke in certain situations. Chases breaking balls early in count and batting eye needs work."

Gordon is onto something in terms of describing his plate approach. In his first full year of professional ball in 2010, Green drew only 38 walks and struck out 117 times, good for a BB/K ratio of 0.32. He still makes contact at a decent rate (0.79), but he is going to have to cut down on the strikeouts or draw more walks if he wants to have more value as a hitter as he moves up in the organization. Unfortunately for Green, even in college he didn't walk much (he had a walk rate of seven percent and nine percent his last two years at USC), so his plate approach is always going to be an issue for him unless he can cut down the K's.

Green's defense may be the weakest aspect of his game overall. Baseball America rated him a 45 in their scouting grade, and his arm also earned a 45 as well. There is heavy speculation that Green probably would make a transition to second base in the future, simply because his arm and defense may not be strong enough to play shortstop or third base. Statistically speaking, his numbers in Stockton weren't very spectacular, as he posted a fielding percentage of .920 and a RF/G of 3.75.

This year in the Texas League, there has been some improvement defensively (.952 fielding percentage; 4.16 RF/G), but as expected with the promotion, there has been a bit of regression offensively. He is currently hitting .282 with a .736 OPS and has two home runs and 24 RBI. The most glaring difference from a year ago is the lack of power (.107 ISO), but then again, he really didn't flash his big-fly potential until the second half last year, so he may just be a slow starter. He is walking a little bit more (his BB percentage is 8.0), but he is also striking out just as much as last year (24.4 percent), and thus, his BB/K ratio still looks pretty pedestrian (0.37). Nonetheless, despite this offensive regression from a year ago, Green is still a top prospect in the A's system and could be the heir-apparent at second base in a year or two in Oakland.



2. Michael Choice, OF. (1st Round Draft Pick in 2010)

Choice is the third-best prospect in the A's system according to Baseball America and the second-best A's prospect according to Rob Gordon of the MLBA. The rankings are well-deserved, as Choice is an athletic outfielder who is coming off a very impressive campaign in his first year of professional ball.

In 27 games, Choice tore up the Northwest League as he hit .284 with seven home runs and 26 RBI. Power was the strongest attribute of Choice's 2011 campaign, as he posted an OPS of 1.004, an ISO of .343, and an extra base hit percentage of 66 percent. While these numbers were posted over a short sample size (only 121 plate appearances), it still displayed the significant power upside Choice presents as a professional.

There were some concerns of course with Choice's tools. His contact rate was pretty subpar a year ago (58 percent) and it was a major concern his last year at Texas-Arlington (71 percent). Also, he struck out in bunches a year ago, as he had a strikeout percentage of 42.2 percent (yep, you read that right) and a BB/K ratio of 0.35. However, Choice has always been a patient hitter, as he posted a 0.60, 0.97, 1.41 in his three years at Texas-Arlington. Much like Chuckie Jones of the Giants, once Choice faces more professional pitching, it is likely that the strikeout rate will go down and the contact rate will go up.

He is off to a good year with the Stockton Ports of the California League, once again displaying the power he showcased in the Northwest League a year ago. His OPS is .841 and he has seven home and 28 RBI in 187 plate appearances. He is still striking out a lot (57 times, a 33 percent rate), but his batting eye has improved from a year ago (0.48 BB/K ratio).

Defensively, Gordon notes that despite Choice's athleticism, he projects more as a corner outfielder than centerfielder (his current position). He doesn't make many errors (.968 fielding percentage this year and last year), but he could be better at making plays (2.24 RF/G average the past two years). Without elite speed, and considering the dimensions of the Coliseum, it would probably be predictable that Choice will make the transition to the corners in the next couple of years.



3. Jemile Weeks, 2B (1st Round Draft Pick in 2008)

The younger brother of Major Leaguer Rickie Weeks, Weeks is an athletic infielder who has extremely enticing offensive upside for a second baseman. In his first year out of the University of Miami, Weeks tore up the California League in 232 plate appearances with the Ports. He hit .299 with an OPS of .847 and hit seven home runs, 31 RBI and stole five bases on six attempts. Weeks however struggled through injuries in 2010, as leg and hip injuries only limited him to 77 games in the Arizona League and Texas League. In his injury-plagued campaign a year ago, he still manage to hit .267 with a .752 OPS in 356 plate appearances.

This year, Weeks earned a promotion to Triple-A and has been an offensive catalyst for the Rivercats. He is hitting .309 with a .833 OPS and has two home runs, 16 RBI and seven stolen bases on 10 attempts. This year, Baseball America Ranked him as the fifth-best prospect in the A's system, and Gordon ranked him as the sixth-best A's prospect. Here is what Baseball America had to say about Weeks in their prospect handbook:

"When healthy, Weeks shows promising tools. He has a quick, explosive swing and can do damage from both sides of the plate. His strength and outstanding bat speed give him the capability to hit for more power than his body would suggest...He's not the smoothest second baseman, but he has worked hard to improve his throwing and double-play pivot. Weeks draws some Ray Durham comparisons and has the potential to be a top-of-the-order catalyst."

Considering the A's current offensive woes and Weeks' hot start in Sacramento, it wouldn't be surprising to see the athletic second baseman get a shot in the bigs at some point this year. He has the tools and ability to have a career in the Majors much like his older brother, Rickie.



4. Max Stassi, C (4th Round Draft Pick in 2009)

A fourth round pick in the 2009 draft, Stassi gained a lot of national attention when the A's signed the catcher out of Yuba City to a $1.5 million signing bonus (the highest for a fourth round pick at the time). Stassi presented a lot of interesting tools for a catcher, and he had youth on his side as he was coming out of high school.

In his first full year last year in Kane County in the Midwest League, Stassi struggled as a 19 year old at the plate, as he hit only .229 with a 684 OPS in 465 plate appearances. While he displayed good power for his position (13 home runs, 151 ISO) and drew walks (9.7 percent walk rate), he struggled in terms of making contact, as he struck out 34 percent of the time and sported a contact rate of only 66 percent and a BB/K ratio of 0.32.

Still, the power numbers were enticing for his age, and he earned a promotion to Stockton this year. Offensively, he hasn't fared much better against the better pitching, as he is hitting .231 with a .662 OPS. Stassi is suffering from a bit of bad luck (as his BABIP is .268) and his plate approach has improved a bit (0.72), as he has cut down the K's (18 percent strikeout rate) from a year ago. However, his power has declined dramatically (.099 ISO), and he has hidden behind the designated hitter role a majority of the year. Stassi isn't a terrible defensive catcher as Gordon noted that Stassi "owns quick hands and is a good receiver behind the dish." Thus, it is kind of concerning why Stassi hasn't played much time behind the dish this season in the California League.

Stassi is still an interesting prospect because of his position and youth. Baseball America ranked him as the A's sixth-best prospect and Gordon ranked him 10th in the A's organization. That being said, his offense needs some work and one has to wonder if the power he showed last year will re-manifest itself this year at some point this season. If it does, then Stassi could really rise as a prospect because his approach is much better at the plate from a year ago.


5. Fautino De Los Santos, RHP (Signed out of the Dominican Republic in 2005 by the Chicago White Sox)

De Los Santos is a live-armed right handed pitcher who burst on the scene in 2007 at the Futures Game when he was hitting 97 MPH on the gun. However, that was just the tip of the iceberg, as de Los Santos put together an impressive campaign in 2007 in Winston Salem of the Chicago White Sox. He struck out 32 hitters in 23 innings pitched and posted an ERA of 3.72, a WHIP of 1.10 and an xERA of 3.17. His advanced numbers were the most impressive, as he posted a 11.9 K/9 and a K/BB ratio of 4.6. De Los Santos was a pitcher who could make batters miss and miss in bunches. The A's ended up trading for him after his 2007 campaign, as de Los Santos was involved in a deal (along with outfielder Ryan Sweeney) that sent fan favorite Nick Swisher to Chicago.

Baseball America was so high on him that they ranked him the 60th best prospect in baseball going into 2008. However, de Los Santos wasn't able to parlay his impressive 2008 campaign in the Carolina League to the California League. His BB/9 rate increased to 4.3 and though he still had a good a K/9 (10.3) and K/BB ratio (2.36), his other numbers weren't very impressive (5.87 ERA, 1.74 WHIP, 5.96 xERA). What was even more concerning was the injury problems, as he made only five appearances in 2008 with the Ports and only seven starts in a Rookie League rehab stint in the Arizona Rookie League.

Finally healthy, de Los Santos had a solid year in 2010 in a split campaign in the California League and Texas League, making the transition from starter to reliever. With Stockton, he struck out 22 batters in 15 innings pitched, and sported an ERA of 2.37, a WHIP of 1.05, a xERA of 2.02, and an unbelievable K/BB ratio of 7.3 (compounded by a 13 K/9). Of course, it was his third year in High-A ball, but he remained solid in Midland, as he struck out 55 in 31 innings pitched and posted a K/BB ratio of 3.2. His ERA wasn't impressive at 6.63 and his WHIP was 1.51, but he suffered from a high BABIP (.350) and his xERA was more tolerable at 3.79.

The A's added him to the 40-man roster this year, and he has been good this year in Double-A and a recent promotion to Sacramento. He has pitched 15.1 IP, and he has struck out 21 batters while posting an ERA of 1.76 and a WHIP of 1.24. His walk rate is still a little high (4.7 BB/9 combined), but he has never had a K/9 rate lower than 10 in his minor league career. At the very least, de Los Santos has the upside of a strikeout specialist out of the bullpen.

Gordon had this to say about de Los Santos in his writeup:

"Never posted a K rate below 10 and keeps ball on ground when contact is made. Hard, sinking fastball thrown from whip-like arm action and has knockout slider."

De Los Santos may be a pitcher in the Santiago Casilla mold, whom the A's also developed in their system. While he may or may not make the jump to the Majors this year, he is one of the few interesting arms in the A's system (which is very weak, as the MLBA graded their pitching talent a D) and he would added much needed bullpen depth to a team that is heavily reliant on their pitching for overall success.


6. Yordy Cabrera, SS (Drafted in the Second Round of the 2010 Draft)

Cabrera is a prospect I had a lot of interest in when he was eligible for the draft last year. On my old blog Remember '51, I had hopes that the Giants would draft him in the first round. However, he slid to the second round, and the A's snatched him up and awarded him with a $1.25 million signing bonus.

Cabrera is a toolsy infielder out of Lakeland, Florida who showed a lot of promise in various showcases a year ago. He has good size and a sweet swing, though many people think he may be too big and not athletic enough to play shortstop full time at the Major League level. Jonathan Mayo of MLB.com had this to say in his scouting report about Cabrera leading up to draft day.

"Cabrera certainly looks the part of a ballplayer in terms of his build and how he carries himself on the baseball field. He's got the raw tools as well -- it's just a question of whether he'll learn to use them consistently. He's got plenty of power, but there is some concern about his ability to recognize pitches well enough to tap into that power. His days as a shortstop are likely numbered, with a move to third or an outfield corner in his future. His athleticism and upside will have many teams interested, and the team who believes it can tap into that will be the one to take him."

Cabrera made the move up to A-ball this year and he has been decent at the plate, as he is hitting .252 with a .737 OPS and has three home runs and 16 RBI in 113 plate appearances. He could still make better contact at the plate (70 percent contact rate this year) and he could cut the strikeouts down a little bit (31 in 103 AB) and flash a better eye at the plate (his BB/K ratio is 0.26). However, those things are to be expected for a kid just out high school.

His defense hasn't been that stellar at shortstop as expected (.908 fielding percentage, 4.19 RF/G), but he has shown some ability on the basepaths as he has nine stolen bases on 12 attempts. Overall, his year so far in the Midwest League has been a solid showing for his first full year in professional ball, though age isn't that big of a factor in his favor, as he was an older kid playing high school ball (he was 19 when he was drafted).

I like Cabrera and the tools he brings as a prospect. While Gordon didn't think too highly of him (he didn't rank him on the Top-15 prospect list for the A's), Baseball America did rank him as the 8th best prospect in the A's system. He is raw, but Cabrera does flash Hanley Ramirez potential with his hitting, power and ability on the basepaths (though defensively he may not be as good as Ramirez). If the A's remain patient with him, he could develop into the kind of prospect that will be on everyone's radar in a year or two. His upside is that promising.

The Bay Bridge Series: A Worthwhile Interleague Rivalry That Needs to Continue

(First off, before I start this post, what an awful game to watch today against the Diamondbacks. The Giants had it, lost it, had it again and then lost it again. Jeesh...it's going to be a long season for Giants fans.)

Starting Friday, the Giants will play their first Interleague series of the year against the Oakland A's at Oakland-Alameda County Stadium.

There should be no excuse for Bay Area Baseball fans to miss out on this one. Sure, the A's stadium stinks. Sure, the A's don't have the marquee names they once used to.

Nonetheless, this is a great rivalry, and should be further reason why the A's should stay in Northern California (preferably the Bay Area).

Last year, I went to my first Giants-A's game in Oakland. First off, you can't beat the ticket prices. I got a pair of tickets in the lower section for $26 bucks. $26! You can't beat that, even if Oakland's stadium isn't the greatest place in the Majors. Major League Baseball and Giants baseball is still baseball.

Secondly, there is a unique environment at a Giants-A's game. There is a special kind of environment that you just don't get when the Giants or A's play other teams. Last year, the stadium was half-full with Giants fans (and this was an A's home game mind you!) and after Nate Schierholtz hit a home run over the right field wall, you would have thought you were at AT&T Park by the roars of the crowd. Throughout the game fans alternated between "Let's go Giants" and "Let's go A's" chants, and exchanged playful trash talk, which happened to be delightful to eavesdrop on.

Early in the game, A's third baseman Chad Pennington made an error, bobbling a slow roller. A few rows in front of me, a Giants fan in a Barry Bonds jersey (a rather large one to be frank) stood up and looked to his right at two, younger Oakland fans. He cupped his hands together and said this:

"Walt Weiss would have made that play! You hear me? He is no Walt Weiss!"

Really? The one home run per year Walt Weiss? I gave the guy kudos for the retro reference, even if the two younger fans probably didn't know Weiss played for the A's.

The Giants won the game 6-3. However, I learned something more important after the Giants win: Bay Area fans need this rivalry. Sure, there is the Giants-Dodgers and nothing can top that, but the A's-Giants is a close second. You can't beat that half-and-half split at AT&T Park and Oakland-Alameda County Stadium. You can't beat the coverage in the San Francisco Chronicle or San Jose Mercury. You can't beat that inevitable trash talk at bars after games when guys are decked out in black and orange or green and yellow after games.

Because these two franchises are so close yet so different. Look at the way the Giants have run their organization the last decade and look at how the A's have run things. Look at the difference between Brian Sabean and Billy Beane. Look at the difference between Bruce Bochy and Bob Geren. Heck, look at the difference between Athletics Nation and the McCovey Chronicles, the two main fan blogs for each team.

These two franchises are meant to continue this rivalry. They are meant to continue this rivalry in such close proximity. It would be a shame if the A's not only left Oakland, but left Northern California altogether. Bay Area baseball would not die, but it would be a little less interesting because the rivalry would lessen, if not die altogether. I mean, you think anybody cares about the Toronto Blue Jays playing the Washington Nationals, even though the Nationals used to be the Montreal Expos? No, because the Nationals are not in Canada anymore. The Blue Jays don't have that great "Battle of Canada" rivalry anymore, and baseball has suffered in Canada because of it.

I do not hate the A's. I actually like watching them. I really like players like Kurt Suzuki and Daric Barton and I really respect Billy Beane as a general manager after reading "Moneyball." However, when they play the Giants, all bets our off. I not only want the Giants to win the series, but I want them to win as many as possible, so I can gloat to my fellow friends who happen to be A's fanatics. That luxury would not exist anymore if the A's were gone.

The A's can move to Fremont or San Jose. Or they can stay in Oakland. It doesn't matter in my mind. However, the "Bay Bridge Series" needs to stay in Northern California. It's a series of pride for baseball fans in Northern California, a series the Northern faithful can call their own in the midst of the more popular "Subway Series" and "Chicago Series" that seem to dominate all the headlines come Interleague time. As a matter of fact, it's rivalries like the "Bay Bridge Series" that make me continue to pine for Interleague baseball each and every year.

Let's hope the Giants can bounce back and take this series from the Athletics after a painful sweep by the Diamondbacks. With Zito, Cain and Sanchez going on the hill for the Giants, they certainly have a chance.

That being said, Giants fans should have that soft spot for the A's. We will be sorry if they are no longer in Northern California.

From (500) Days of Zobrist: Billy Beane and the Mystery of the "Abnormal" GM

It's Easter, and I have to do a lot of cooking soon, but I wanted to write a bit on Beane, who just released Jack Cust yesterday. I find this fascinating because it's just another layer of one wacky off-season by the once "genius" general manager from the Oakland A's. I'll let this piece speak for itself, but check it out in its original form at the Fantasy Baseball Blog I run with fellow writers Luke and Prof Sox at (500) Days of Zobrist.


Amazingly, general managers can have worse off-seasons than San Francisco Giants general manager Brian Sabean (and I know this because I am a Giants fan).

Dayton Moore of the Kansas City Royals is slowly making his case for baseball's most questionable GM after signing Coco Crisp and trading for Yuniensky Betancourt last year, and signing Scott Podsednik and Brian Anderson this off-season.

However, one of the most questionable off-seasons may have come from the team on the other side of the Bay Bridge and their general manager: the widely-hailed Billy Beane.

How big is Beane? He was the focus of a book ("Moneyball") that had a profound change on how people looked at baseball and baseball statistics, and had Brad Pitt slated to play him in the film adaptation of "Moneyball," a much better fate than Paul DePodesta, who has Jonah Hill playing his part (whether or not the movie will come out is a different story, however).

Yet the GM who could do no wrong in the early 2000's, has showed some questionable decision making the last couple of years.

He signed Matt Holliday and Jason Giambi in the off-season, though it was widely hailed by critics that neither guy was a fit for the young up-start A's. Holliday was traded away for a couple of prospects before the Trade Deadline (including top Cardinals third baseman prospect Brett Wallace), but Giambi performed so poorly that he was released by the A's in August, after it was obvious that no team was willing to trade anything for him by the Deadline.

2009 though pales in comparison to what Beane has done this off-season.

First, he traded away Brett Wallace to the Blue Jays in a three-way deal that involved Roy Halladay with the A's receiving top Phillies prospect, centerfielder Michael Taylor. A couple of weeks later, Beane signed outfielder Coco Crisp, another centerfielder.

To bolster the team's pitching, Beane signed Ben Sheets to a one-year deal. Not necessarily a bad deal until you see the price tag: $10 million. He signed Frank Thomas to a one-year $500,000 dollar deal in 2006 and he couldn't sign Sheets, a guy with injury history for anything less than $10 million? (What happened to the "Don't overpay for free agent pitchers" mantra he stuck by in "Moneyball?")

A couple of months later, he traded for Adam Rosales and Wily Taveras, another outfielder, whom they released a week later, (probably because there was no room for him in the A's outfield).

And if that wasn't enough, Beane re-signed Jack Cust, who was non-tendered earlier in the off-season, to a one-year, $2.65 million deal in January. Yesterday, the A's waived Cust in order to make space on their 40-man roster for Tyson Ross.

I can only say one thing.

What...the hell...is Beane...doing?

Though he doesn't have to deal with Wily Taveras, the outfield is stacked beyond belief, but stacked in a questionable way. The A's have Rajai Davis, Ryan Sweeney and Travis Buck returning from last year's squad. Eric Patterson tore up Triple-A Sacramento and is a candidate to be a platoon outfielder should he be given the opportunity. Add Crisp and Taylor to the mix and you have one confusing outfielder situation.

What's going to happen? Who knows. What do I think about it? I would be very cautious if you have an Oakland A's outfielder on your fantasy team (Rajai Davis comes to mind). With this kind of depth and competition, a slow start by any starting outfielder (Davis, Coco Crisp, Ryan Sweeney) might not be tolerated. Don't be surprised to see manager Bob Geren yank guys quickly and replace them with up and comers such as Taylor and Patterson. That hurts especially if one of those guys he yanks is starting on your fantasy team (cough...Davis...cough).

The outfield situation though is just the tip of the iceberg. The Sheets signing and the Cust release-sign-release to me are unfathomable. If anything, all it shows is that Beane has no idea what he wants. He knows the A's time in Oakland is ticking, so you get this feeling that he's trying to put all the chips in so he can win right away in what could be their last year or two in Oakland. However, he knows his reputation as a general manager and he doesn't necessarily want to break from that either (thus explaining why he is stocking his team with so many outfielders; it's assets to trade at the Trade Deadline).

That being said, Beane has to make a decision. This tip-toeing from one side to the other isn't going to cut it, especially for Oakland fans, who have had to suffer some mediocre seasons since their ALCS run in 2006.

I find all of this sad though because at the heart of it, I have a lot of respect for Billy Beane. "Moneyball" changed my outlook on baseball and for years, I envied the A's cost-effective, younger teams that always achieved better than expected results year after year. To see Beane be lost like this and look closer to Sabean and Moore rather than Theo Epstein of the Red Sox (a guy he groomed for the most part) and Andrew Friedman of the Rays is just confusing, almost unfathomable.

What has been the reason for Beane's decline? I think I can point that to a possible reason:

The rest of the league (or at least most of the league anyways; the Royals, White Sox, Giants, and Mets still are going old-school, for worse unfortunately) adapted to advanced stats and cost-efficiency in terms of building a ballclub, including the richer teams like the Red Sox, and Beane didn't have the leg up anymore on the competition like he did in the Early 2000's.

So what does Beane do? Instead of continuing the course, it seems as if he has been panicking these past couple of years, almost like a teenager going through an identity crisis. ("What everybody is going Goth too since 'Twilight' was released?")

Without things coming as easy as they used to, he resorts to deals that were uncharacteristic of him before, hoping that they "will make a splash" despite what popular people think. Beane is a super-contrarian by nature. He doesn't want to succeed they way everyone else does, and if he has to go against what got him to be successful in the first place than he'll do it, because it seems as if he is more concerned about doing something "different" rather than doing something "right." How else do you explain the Giambi, Crisp, Cust, and Sheets signings?

Maybe all these questionable signings are just ammunition for something big. After all, you can never doubt the ability of Beane, a GM whom some other GMs refuse to negotiate with (because they know he will ask and GET a lot in trades).

But it just doesn't feel like the same old Beane, and like Macbeth, it seems as if we are seeing the last, crazy days of the abnormal, unique, once widely hailed, now dubious, baseball front office mind.

It may be early, but thanks Beane for everything you've done for the game of baseball. Baseball fans appreciate it.

(Except Toronto fans who had to have J.P. Ricciardi, your former assistant, as their GM from 2001 to 2009. He guided them to ZERO playoff appearances in his tenure. They are probably enjoying this Macbeth-esque fall almost sadistically after what they experienced during the Ricciardi-era.)

Is Rajai Davis of the Oakland A's that Much Better Than Fred Lewis?

I got in a heated argument with a commenter on an article on Bleacher Report a couple of days ago. The piece was mostly about Giants general manager Brian Sabean not giving young guys like Kevin Frandsen and Rajai Davis that much of a chance, and that his unwillingness to go with younger players is the main reason why the Giants are going to struggle to be successful in the long-run.

For the most part, I liked and agreed with the article...except for the part about Rajai Davis.

Like I said in my comments, hindsight is 20/20. In all reality, nobody expected Davis to be that good, the Giants especially. Davis was a pickup by the Giants in 2007 in the Matt Morris to Pittsburgh trade and in all honesty, the Giants were more concerned about getting rid of Morris and his contract rather than acquiring anyone. Davis was a nice player, but the Giants weren't expecting him to have much of an impact (he was a 38th round pick after all).

Furthermore, what made Davis expendable at the time was that he happened to be very similar to another player on the Giants roster when he arrived in San Francisco in 2007.

That player happened to be Fred Lewis, a player the Giants drafted in the second round of the 2002 MLB Draft and had high hopes for after solid minor league campaigns from 2002-2007.

Going into 2008, after the acquisition of Aaron Rowand in the off-season, the Giants basically had a choice to make: whom do they go with in left field? Do they go with Lewis or Davis? With Rowand patrolling center and Randy Winn in right, the Giants couldn't afford to have both.

Lewis got off to a good start in 2008. Davis didn't. Thus, Davis was released and he wound up with the Oakland A's. Lewis went on to have a solid year with the Giants in 2008, while Davis posted pretty mediocre statistics the remainder of the season across the Bay in Oakland.

And then, last year happened.

While Lewis didn't have as bad a year as many people would like to believe, he still regressed nonetheless. He struggled defensively (though not as much as I think people would like to believe), lost his spot in left field, and dealt with the endless harping of Giants fans who wanted Lewis to be more aggressive at the plate like fan favorites Nate Schierholtz and Pablo Sandoval (granted, that was never Lewis' style of hitting, but fans still harped about it nonetheless).

As for Davis, well...he broke out in a big way. While he played for a struggling Oakland A's squad last year, Davis earned a spot in center field thanks to some pretty impressive numbers at the plate. In 2009, he posted a .305 batting average, .360 OBP, .784 OPS and stole 41 bases.

As you can see by those numbers in 2009, you can understand why Giants fans would be upset that Sabean released Davis instead of Lewis back in 2008. However, I can give three reasons why Giants fans shouldn't be so quick to thrash Lewis and put Davis on a pedestal:


1. Other than stolen bases and batting average, Lewis' numbers were actually comparable with Davis'. Davis was just luckier than Lewis in 2009.

In 2009, Davis had 41 stolen bases; Lewis had eight. Davis batted .305 last year; Lewis hit .258. So, Davis has been a better base-stealer than Lewis over his career and probably will be so again next year (or at least that's what Rickey Henderson is saying). Also, Davis may hit better than Lewis in terms of batting average because Davis is better at making contact than Lewis (Davis made contact 80.2 percent of the time last season while Lewis only made contact 77.4 percent of the time).

Other than that though, you can really debate how much better Davis is than Lewis.

For starters, Davis benefited from an unusually high BABIP (.361) last season. He had never had a BABIP over .321 at the Major League level until last year. As for Lewis' BABIP, it came down to .348 after it was also crazy high at .365 in 2008. (That being said, Lewis has been prone to high BABIP numbers, for he also had a .344 BABIP in 2007 over the course of 58 games.)

Now, high BABIP numbers aren't necessarily a bad thing (especially with guys who have a lot of speed). Usually, hitters who tend to have high groundball rates are more likely to post high BABIP numbers on a consistent basis.

Lewis' groundball percentage in 2009 was 52.1 percent (the lowest percent of his Major League career). He also posted a 1.96 GB/FB ratio and owned a line-drive percentage of 21.3 percent, the second highest percentage of his Major League career (which explains his drop in groundball percentage).

Now, you think that Davis, a speed demon on the base paths, would have similar groundball numbers to Lewis, right? Not exactly. Davis' highest groundball percentage in his career was 48.2 percent in 2008 (Lewis has never had a groundball percentage under 52.1 percent), and last year he only hit the ball on the ground 45.6 percent of the time.

To make matters worse, Davis sports an unusually high fly ball rate as a speedster (he had a 34.4 percent fly ball percentage last year, while Lewis had only a 26.5 percent fly ball percentage). That doesn't bode well concerning his skill set, and therefore, it would not be surprising to see his BABIP fall in 2010, which would crash Davis' offensive numbers back to earth.

2. Lewis' "patient" approach at the plate is better than Davis' "free-swinging" mentality.

The most interesting numbers in the Davis and Lewis comparison have to come in terms of plate patience.

Davis posted better numbers at the plate in 2009 in comparison to Lewis, there is no doubt about that. However, even though his numbers were impressive, his plate approach might not be conducive to consistent success. As for Lewis, while he might frustrate fans who are used to seeing the Giants' "free-swinging" hitters, his patient, more efficient plate approach might produce more consistent success in the long-run in comparison to Davis.

In 2009, Lewis had a four percent advantage in walk percentage (10.7 percent for Lewis, 6.7 percent for Davis) and even though he had a much higher strikeout rate than Davis in 2009 (28.5 to 17.9 percent), Lewis still had a better BB/K ratio (0.43) than Davis (0.41).

Also, Lewis' disciplined approach at the plate was evident in 2009, especially in comparison to Davis. Lewis only swung at 19.4 percent of pitches outside the strike zone last year. As for Davis? He swung at 30.6 percent of pitches outside the strike zone. (For a team that has had players swing at pitches that actually hit them in games, I think the Giants would benefit from Lewis' more disciplined approach rather than Davis' hacking mentality.)

Davis may have gotten to have more hits to fall for him in 2009 in comparison to Lewis. However, if he doesn't improve his free-swinging approach and understand the strike zone better in 2010, then it is highly likely that his stats will look closer to his 2008 numbers (e.g. mediocre) rather than his impressive 2009 ones.

3. Davis will have less opportunity to succeed in 2010 than in 2009.

Lewis will have a tough time cracking the lineup in 2010. Every Giants fans pretty much acknowledges that, even Lewis himself. He is playing behind Mark Derosa, Eugenio Velez, Andres Torres and John Bowker in left field going into Spring Training, and therefore, he will need to make the most of his opportunities this Spring Training if he wants to stay on the Giants' 25-man active roster come April. As for Davis, he seems to be the main man in center field for the A's in 2010.

Or at least that's what everyone thinks. In all honesty though, he will have little room for error once the season starts in April. This off-season, the A's signed Coco Crisp and they still have the highly-touted Ryan Sweeney, whom many people project to have a better season than both Davis and Crisp in 2010.

So, if anything, it is very plausible to think that Davis is capable of being Fred Lewis ala 2009. There are a lot of solid, if not better options around him (think Schierholtz, Velez for Lewis in 2009 and Crisp, Sweeney for Davis in 2010), and considering the A's have a lot less invested in Davis than they do in Sweeney or Crisp, Davis is a very expendable player despite his solid 2009.

Can Davis handle the pressure of being the front runner after coming out of nowhere in 2009? Can he produce a good enough start to keep off guys like Crisp or Sweeney, whom A's fans will easily clamor for if Davis does not produce in 2010 like he did in 2009?

Now, we won't know until the season starts, but if I have to guess, it wouldn't be surprising to see Davis be a scapegoat for A's fans in 2010 like Lewis was a scapegoat for Giants fans in 2009.

Should the Giants have signed Orlando Cabrera over Edgar Renteria?

Orlando Cabrera (left) would have been a cheaper, better fit for this San Francisco Giants team than current slumping shortstop Edgar Renteria.

From Bleacher Report

First off, let's get one thing out of the way before I make this argument.

I'm assuming that for whatever reason, we couldn't sign Orlando Hudson, even though he would have come at a bargain of a price that we certainly could have afforded. Hudson would trump this argument automatically because of the better season he is having in comparison to both the Oakland A's Orlando Cabrera and San Francisco Giants' Edgar Renteria (not to mention his youth in comparison to those two).

That being said I'm assuming that we couldn't sign Hudson because we needed a shortstop to replace Omar Vizquel, and in GM Brian Sabean's eyes, Emmanuel Burriss simply wasn't a formidable fit as the everyday shortstop going into 2009 (which would've been so as it turned out). Being that Hudson is a second baseman, he would've been out of the fold.

However, I think Sabean, who made the right decision in acquiring a shortstop in the off-season, simply made the wrong call in terms of what shortstop he signed in December. In retrospect, Sabean would have been better off if he signed Cabrera instead of Renteria.

This isn't the first time Renteria has overshadowed his fellow Colombian-born infielder. In 2004, after the Red Sox captured their first World Series title in 86 years, instead of signing Cabrera, who batted .294 with six home runs and 31 RBI after getting traded from Montreal, the Red Sox opted to sign Renteria from St. Louis. The move by the Red Sox spectacularly tanked. Renteria only batted .276 with eight home runs and a .720 OPS, and he lasted just one year in Boston's pressure-packed media scene.

As for Cabrera? While playing for the Angels, he statistically had a worse season than Renteria (Cabrera only batted .257 with eight home runs and a .309 OBP).

What made the difference, however, between the two players came in terms of salary. Renteria made $2 million more per-year with the Red Sox than Cabrera did with the Angels in 2005.

In addition to the difference in money, Cabrera was a better fielder than Renteria at this point in their careers (as evidenced by Cabrera winning the American League Gold Glove in 2007, while Renteria hadn't won one since 2003), and Cabrera's teams ended up doing better in the playoffs.

The Red Sox were eliminated in the ALDS in 2005. The Angels made it to the ALCS in 2005. The Red Sox won a World Series title with Cabrera in 2004. The Red Sox didn't win a playoff series with Renteria in 2005.

Four years later, we're seeing the same things with these two.

Renteria is overpaid and underachieving (even though I hold a slight glimmer of hope in one of my previous articles), while Cabrera is playing hot and proving to be a steal considering how much the A's signed him for in the offseason. Cabrera makes $4 million this season in Oakland. Renteria makes twice that at $8 million this year across the bay in San Francisco.

And yet, despite being paid more, Renteria pales in comparison to Cabrera in every statistical category this season. Cabrera is batting .276 with four home runs, 41 RBI and a .313 OBP for the A's. Renteria is only batting .252 with two home runs, 38 RBI and .305 OBP for the Giants.

It's crazy to think how consistently overlooked Cabrera is in comparison to Renteria. Sure, Renteria has put up some great stats in the past, and is a much better physical specimen than Cabrera (Renteria's six-foot, one-inch, 200-pound body towers over Cabrera's five-foot, nine-inch, 185-pound frame), but Cabrera has proved to be a better bang-for-the buck player over his career.

Furthermore, when it comes to the Giants, Cabrera would have fit perfectly with the already goofy, laid-back personality of this team. He would have found a great niche in between the "Kung-Fu Panda" Pablo Sandoval at third and the Mohawk-sporting Juan Uribe at second.

The trio would be doing all kinds of handshakes that would make even Victor Martinez's head spin.

Intangibles and handshakes aside, the fact of the matter is that Cabrera would have offered more production at a cheaper price than Renteria. However, because of Renteria's physical attributes, and his overly-acclimated success with the Cardinals and Braves, Sabean overvalued him and paid way too much, even though he could have gotten a player with more spark and better chemistry issues at half the price.

Cabrera may not have been the more ballyhooed offseason signing, but he would have gotten the job done. When you consider how meager this San Francisco offense has been this season, especially at the shortstop position, we certainly could have used a guy like him on our squad this season.

And with the cheap price we undoubtedly would have gotten him at, who knows what possibilities we could have last offseason, this trade deadline or even next offseason.

Unfortunately for the Giants, with Renteria's mediocre play and contract still dragging the organization down going into next year, we'll never know those possibilities.

The Giants may have won the Bay Bridge Series this season, but the A's sure as heck kicked the Giants' butt when it came to signing a shortstop this year.

With Holliday a Cardinal, the Giants need to improve without outside help

With St. Louis saying adieu to the Chris Duncan era and acquiring Matt Holliday today, the Giants will be forced to enter the playoff run without that marquee offensive upgrade.

With Matt Holliday going from Oakland to St. Louis for a high-value trio of Cardinals prospects (including Bret Wallace, the main prize of the deal), the chance of the Giants getting a player of real impact at the Trade Deadline suddenly vanished.

Don't get me wrong. I was against the Holliday deal for a variety of reasons. I knew we would have to give up too much to acquire him because A's GM Billy Beane always holds such leverage in these kinds of deals. In addition, I didn't want to deal with Holliday's agent, Scott Boras, in the off-season either because if Holliday helped us get into the playoffs, he would command Manny Ramirez-esque money because Boras could point to Holliday having the kind of impact Manny had on the Dodgers when he arrived from Boston last August.

Thus, we would only have had him for two months, because we would've been unable to afford him, and he would be in a Mets, Red Sox or Yankees uniform next season while we missed the prospects we lost to acquire him in the first place.

So, when it comes to what happened with Holliday: yeah Brian Sabean! (Believe me, that is one of last times I will say that for the rest of the year).

That being said, with the Holliday sweepstakes officially over, it means only one thing: the Giants are going to have earn the Wild Card team with the squad they currently have, blemishes and all.

Granted, who knows what can happen with this squad. Things can change. The Giants could acquire Freddy Sanchez (whom I've advocated for a very long time), or they can do the "Gammons" route and trade for Nick Johnson (whom I've not been a fan of ever since the notion was made).

However, let's be honest with ourselves as Giants fans: are those guys going to make any real impact if acquired?

Sanchez could make some impact if his acquired from Pittsburgh, but he won't be a "Holy crap did you see just who they got at the deadline? They're the real deal now" kind of a player. He's a nice complement in the infield. He solidifies the lineup at the top of the order. He gets Matt Downs demoted.

I admit it. Those are a lot of great pluses with Sanchez in the Giants lineup.

Yet despite the positives Sanchez brings, the probable cheap price in attaining him, and my overwhelming desire to keep Downs off the team for the rest of the season, he's just not going to make us a "favorite" to win anything anytime soon, unlike Manny with the Dodgers or C.C. with Brewers last season.

The same thing goes with Johnson or anybody else the Giants acquire before or by the July 31 deadline. Holliday was the only kind of player on the market with that kind of "I'll carry you on my back" potential, and he's now in St. Louis in place of "Mr. April" Chris Duncan.

So what does that mean for the Giants come August and September?

The Giants are only going to make the playoffs with the current team fans are seeing right now, much to our chagrin. If this team wants to do something special, and have a chance for a World Series ring, they are going to have to do it themselves, without the big-name acquisition.

It's a tough pill to swallow because most of the time, this Giants offense makes me fume in disgust. The way fly balls fall short of the fence off Bengie Molina's bat. The way Travis Ishikawa follows up three hit performances with 0-for-4 fiascos that literally takes years off your life if you watch every at-bat. The way every hitter on the Giants can't lay off a curve ball in the dirt.

Believe me, nobody wanted that "offensive savior" at the deadline more than me. Unfortunately, just looking at the current market, that isn't going to happen. That "savior" just isn't available.

Granted, it may be a good thing in the end. ESPN writer Jayson Stark wrote an article about how the last ten World Series champions didn't win by acquiring big-name talent at the deadline, but rather with complimentary players, and lesser-known veterans who were hungry for to prove themselves in the postseason.

The problem for the Giants, however, is those teams that did win the World Series had very good foundations as far as talent-wise. The same can't be said of the Giants. The holes on the offensive end are so glaring that to consider this team a World Series contender is absolutely ludicrous.

Yet despite how meager their offense is, the fact remains the same: chances are, the Giants are going to need improvement from their own players, not improvement from a new player, to make a jump into the postseason. That may be a tall order to ask from this squad, and it is likely they will fall short of accomplishing that given task.

Unfortunately though for the Giants players, management and fans, this cadre of players have no other choice.

I imagine that leaves Giants fans not feeling too good about the future. It probably makes Giants fans feel kind of like the whole world in the scene in the movie Armageddon when the one spaceship with Ben Affleck crashes, and the NASA thinks they lost that one spaceship and everyone and everything in it for good.

(Of course, ten minutes after that gut-wrenching scene, we find out Affleck, Michael Clark Duncan and Dino Velvet from 9 MM, did survive the crash. They end up driving the drill, locating Bruce Willis and Co. in less than four hours according to the movie despite having no idea where they are, and do indeed split the asteroid and save the world, with the drill that never was supposed to be available in the first place after the ship crashed. Unless something that crazy, unrealistic and utterly insane happens on a baseball level with the Giants, we as fans are at the scene in the movie where Liv Tyler is crying with her head down and putting her hand on a television of static.)

(Sorry...I have a love-hate relationship with Michael Bay's Armageddon and couldn't resist the urge to make a reference to Bay's Magnum Opus of crap.)