37 replies to this topic

[GreenGold74]

Which is why I made the point that they undersold the potential and could of commanded a better package of ML players. I am not in favor of the level of risk the Royals took on but the same time I am unsure they could of signed or obtained a SP better than Shields. Only pointed out that sometimes its a better deal to acquire the known commodities and use the unknown as chips in that instance. It was a magnificent deal for the Rays and if and when they decide to trade Price they will have rebuilt as strong a foundation of young talent as the Crawford, Upton, Price and Moore class.

I just feel more than their quest for ML starters that the slow career starts from Moose and Hosmer disillusioned their patience for what the farm was producing and made a knee jerk reaction to lack of instant gratification.

[parrothead]

GreenGold74, on 10 December 2012 - 09:00 PM, said:

The idea is a bold and gutsy call that I feel like is being underrated. They have watched both of their sure fire A prospects for instance(Moustakes and Hosmer) not exactly set the world on fire to this point. So there is absolutely no guarantee Myers or the two pitching prospects they dealt will be any different. Thus they felt rather than roll the dice they panned out they elected to sell them for what they perceived as difference making ML pitching. And given what they still have offensively its a move that could balance out their team as a whole and give them an immediate chance to contend in the Central. The problem I have with the deal is I felt they undersold the prospect package they sent to the Rays and they could of got more. Why did they not call up the Marlins GM during the height of the fire sale and go after Josh Johnson and Buerhle themselves? Surely the price woudln't of been nearly as high prospect wise? But a reality people overlook is that organizations are not keen on trading any starting pitching period of that calibur unless they are dumping salary. So if this was their goal in the offseason and they felt the free agent market wasn't a place they could compete and simply sign someone like Anibal or Lohse then it might of been their only option to obtain their "ace"

Anyway none of us can possibly know what prospects will do at the major league level so its unfair to cast stones on what scouts think players will become. Its likely at the end of the day this will be a devestating trade for the Royals future but if Shields and Davis help add 10 wins and instill some organizational confidence with their younger players not feeling the weight of the world then from the Royals perspective the move won't be as bad as perceived. And if things go absolutely south for KC I can see them simply dealing Shields in July and getting back some decent prospects from a contender as Shields would still have a year left and trade value. All in all the Royals took the most risk witht his deal but only time will tell if was a good or bad one.

Dont forget Alex Gordon either, he was "cant miss" greatest since sliced bread, next George Brett...etc and he was a major disappointment for a few seasons before turning it around in 2011.  Its tough to find pitching, especially if you are not a destination franchise.   Would Haren of signed a one-year deal in KC?  Heck No.  Now we are talking overpaying for mid-level guy like Annibal?  I wouldnt mind it, he has shown 200K type potential, which I think is different than when this team went out and signed Gil Meche about 5-6 years back to big money along with Jose Guillen that offseason both of whom were disappointments

[RNiner]

Not sure I get all the hate for this trade.  There is NO other SP options available out there right now, and KC's starting pitching is just awful.  This trade is the start of improving the rotation, not the end.  The Royals won't have all their youngins around forever either, they have a window, and I can't see a reason to give up yet another year in that window without taking a shot or two.  The rotation they had was a guaranteed at best 75-win season again. What kind of message does that send to Hosmer, Moose, Cain, Perez, etc.  "Just suffer through another year of 'development' guys.  But don't listen to Greinke when he says we're always like this, We just need one more year."  Yeah.  Sure.  But hey, at least they'd have yet another big bat!  They can win 77 games instead of 75!

There is also no reason to believe that Myers is 100% going to be Ryan Braun by 2014.  Hosmer, Moustakas, Gordon...  They Royals themselves have plenty of examples of top hitting prospects flaming out or just being 'decent'.  You think they could've got a 3.75 ERA/200 K SP for Hosmer or Moustakas after the years they put up?  And yet, if Myers does what Moose did last year in his rookie season, I don't think too many people will be calling him a bust... He'd just be another fine prospect taking his time acclimating to MLB.  Myers trade value was very high right now.  Sure, Ryan Braun-like value would be even higher, but how about if he turns into Moose-like value?  Would be a big missed opportunity... and Moose-like value is far more likely from a percentage POV then Braun-like value.

Oakland turned down Myers for Anderson.  Nobody else was dealing starting pitching.  How can you make a bad deal when you deal from strength to fill a weakness, make your team better and trade with the only team offering any options?  Its not an IDEAL trade, sure.  But nobody offered KC an ideal deal, and nobody would've later this year either.  Alot of fantasy baseball players wait around for the IDEAL trade too, never make one and finish in 3rd with their good-but-too-bad-I-didn't-fill-any-holes team.  Sure, making a ballsy trade looks dumb when you finish 7th instead of 3rd.  And maybe that happens half the time, or two thirds of the time, etc.  But when it works it works, and banners fly forever.

I'm not even a big Royals fan, but it took alot of guts for Moore to make this trade knowing that its risky and that everyone would call him dumb from day 1.  He only gets vindicated if the risk pays off, but at their juncture the risk was by far their best move, regardless if it works or not.

[dzemens]

I agree with a lot of the talk regarding how KC can win the trade, but I think the point being overlooked is that KC's result from this trade is independent of how it fares for Tampa (from their perspective). They have a goal in mind, which is making the playoffs, if the trade can get them there, then independent of Tampa they win. Its similar to the Tigers trading Smoltz for Doyle Alexander, the Tigers goal was to get to the playoffs that year, they traded a good player to do so and long term it hurt more than it helped, but hindsight being 20/20, the immediate goal is the more important of the two.

Its a tough spot for KC to be in, as others have cited they arent a destination franchise, they are never going to attract FA, unless they start winning and even then its unlikely (see Tigers, Detroit). Therefore, when they have a need for pitching and think they are close they are going to get burned, especially by a team like Tampa which had the leverage like crazy. Hopefully the pitching gets them where they want to go and they can contend for the AL central, it would be nice to see one of these lower revenue teams make a move (instead of sitting on their thumbs like so many) and have it break the right way.

[Baseball Jonze]

Reports have Tigers deep in negotiatons to acquire Shields from TB themselves - but obviously came up short.

[os_gamejunkie]

RNiner, on 11 December 2012 - 02:52 AM, said:

Not sure I get all the hate for this trade.  There is NO other SP options available out there right now, and KC's starting pitching is just awful.  This trade is the start of improving the rotation, not the end.

Well, if there are no options (at least good ones) than why go for a bad one. Even if Myers isn't half of what he's projected to be, the Royals acquired a 31-year old pitcher for just two years guaranteed. This is the kind of move the Tigers should be doing, or other teams needing to put themselves over the top.

Saw this in an ESPN article, a list of the last 20 MiLB Player of the Year winners:

1992: Tim Salmon
1993: Manny Ramirez
1994: Derek Jeter
1995: Andruw Jones
1996: Andruw Jones
1997: Paul Konerko
1998: Eric Chavez
2002: Rocco Baldelli
2003: Joe Mauer
2005: Delmon Young
2006: Alex Gordon
2007: Jay Bruce
2008: Matt Wieters
2009: Jason Heyward
2011: Mike Trout

We all know Baldelli's issue and at least Young is a starting player. Scary list.

[RNiner]

I just don't see this as a bad option though os_gj.  Its not great, but its definitely not terrible.  They now have mediocre starting pitching instead of horrid, and are in a position to trade for more SP arms as the season goes on and teams drop out of the running.  Other teams could wait until July to shore up their rotation.  KC still needs to do that, but if they had waited until July to do that it would've been too late for 2013.

Baltimore last year and countless other teams have proven that the odds can break your way.  Getting to the playoffs would be a huge coup for KC.  Could even change the way FA's, agents, other teams, their own players, etc. view the franchise.  Even just a push for the playoffs could do the same.  Sadly, I'm not really liking their chances of being a 3-4 year powerhouse anymore with their 'core'.  Not enough pitching emerged from their prospect pool, and their young hitters are taking too long to develop.  But for the sake of the franchise, they need to go for it at some point.  2014 really won't be a better window then 2013.  And waiting that long might just kill any momentum they've built up with fans, their younger players, agents and FA's wondering if they're worth a damn, etc.  So from that standpoint, I think this is a very good trade for them.  Its not signing Gil frickin Meche, or adding 3-4 mediocre level vets like 2011, its adding a legit top 30 SP (that makes him an 'ace' guys, even if its a bottom-tier ace) and another arm that is still highly thought of and is MLB ready.

Long term, KC is going to have to work on their farm system not developing pitching.  Sometimes you can chalk it up to the kid failing, or bad luck health-wise, but I think KC needs to start looking at the coaching/development program/whatever, because they haven't had a legit emergance since Greinke ages ago, and they certainly have had alot of potential Greinke's come through their system lately.

[RotoRaysfan]

RNiner, on 11 December 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

I just don't see this as a bad option though os_gj.  Its not great, but its definitely not terrible.  They now have mediocre starting pitching instead of horrid, and are in a position to trade for more SP arms as the season goes on and teams drop out of the running.  Other teams could wait until July to shore up their rotation.  KC still needs to do that, but if they had waited until July to do that it would've been too late for 2013.

Baltimore last year and countless other teams have proven that the odds can break your way.  Getting to the playoffs would be a huge coup for KC.  Could even change the way FA's, agents, other teams, their own players, etc. view the franchise.  Even just a push for the playoffs could do the same.  Sadly, I'm not really liking their chances of being a 3-4 year powerhouse anymore with their 'core'.  Not enough pitching emerged from their prospect pool, and their young hitters are taking too long to develop.  But for the sake of the franchise, they need to go for it at some point.  2014 really won't be a better window then 2013.  And waiting that long might just kill any momentum they've built up with fans, their younger players, agents and FA's wondering if they're worth a damn, etc.  So from that standpoint, I think this is a very good trade for them.  Its not signing Gil frickin Meche, or adding 3-4 mediocre level vets like 2011, its adding a legit top 30 SP (that makes him an 'ace' guys, even if its a bottom-tier ace) and another arm that is still highly thought of and is MLB ready.

Long term, KC is going to have to work on their farm system not developing pitching.  Sometimes you can chalk it up to the kid failing, or bad luck health-wise, but I think KC needs to start looking at the coaching/development program/whatever, because they haven't had a legit emergance since Greinke ages ago, and they certainly have had alot of potential Greinke's come through their system lately.

I think everyone agrees with the fact that KC can't attract FA's without huge overpays.  And yes, pitching is the hardest commodity to find.

The issue comes down to this - if Shields & Davis net the Royals 6 more wins (which would be a very optimistic if not absurdly high #), but they keep playing Frenchy, then they look like a .500 to 83-85 win club.  And they miss the playoffs.  And that's only if Davis breaks through and Francieur doesn't decline further (because again the Royals can't spend tons of $ & can't find great FA upgrades - which put them in this bind in the first place).

So if Dayton Moore can leverage this with other upgrades to really sniff the AL Central crown - then the Doyle Alexander-for -John Smoltz comp works.  If they pull a Marlins 2011 then Moore likely never gets a head GM gig again (although the guy can develop a farm system so head of scouting would be a lifetime gig somewhere).   It's just as things stand now, most don't see KC as having enough to compete.  If you are in June and 2 games out, the Alexander-Smoltz deal is rational - but still a huge gamble.  It just has greater odds of panning out short-term.  The fundamental negative reaction is based more on the perceived gain the Royals obtained short-term as insufficient to make them contenders - which then leads to the uproar.

As Dave Cameron even said - he's not convinced Myers will be an elite player - but he doesn't have to be elite to make this a bad deal.  It's that the perceived gain wasn't worth the cost - and that's before Odorizzi is involved.  

If KC contends the next 2 years - they prove the doubters wrong.  But if they just go the middle of the pack - the potential for disaster-level outcome is huge (TOR dumping V-dub on ANA for Napoli recent example, AA re-gifted Napoli to lessen the optics but wow).

[RNiner]

RotoRaysfan, on 11 December 2012 - 05:03 PM, said:

RNiner, on 11 December 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

I just don't see this as a bad option though os_gj.  Its not great, but its definitely not terrible.  They now have mediocre starting pitching instead of horrid, and are in a position to trade for more SP arms as the season goes on and teams drop out of the running.  Other teams could wait until July to shore up their rotation.  KC still needs to do that, but if they had waited until July to do that it would've been too late for 2013.

Baltimore last year and countless other teams have proven that the odds can break your way.  Getting to the playoffs would be a huge coup for KC.  Could even change the way FA's, agents, other teams, their own players, etc. view the franchise.  Even just a push for the playoffs could do the same.  Sadly, I'm not really liking their chances of being a 3-4 year powerhouse anymore with their 'core'.  Not enough pitching emerged from their prospect pool, and their young hitters are taking too long to develop.  But for the sake of the franchise, they need to go for it at some point.  2014 really won't be a better window then 2013.  And waiting that long might just kill any momentum they've built up with fans, their younger players, agents and FA's wondering if they're worth a damn, etc.  So from that standpoint, I think this is a very good trade for them.  Its not signing Gil frickin Meche, or adding 3-4 mediocre level vets like 2011, its adding a legit top 30 SP (that makes him an 'ace' guys, even if its a bottom-tier ace) and another arm that is still highly thought of and is MLB ready.

Long term, KC is going to have to work on their farm system not developing pitching.  Sometimes you can chalk it up to the kid failing, or bad luck health-wise, but I think KC needs to start looking at the coaching/development program/whatever, because they haven't had a legit emergance since Greinke ages ago, and they certainly have had alot of potential Greinke's come through their system lately.

I think everyone agrees with the fact that KC can't attract FA's without huge overpays.  And yes, pitching is the hardest commodity to find.

The issue comes down to this - if Shields & Davis net the Royals 6 more wins (which would be a very optimistic if not absurdly high #), but they keep playing Frenchy, then they look like a .500 to 83-85 win club.  And they miss the playoffs.  And that's only if Davis breaks through and Francieur doesn't decline further (because again the Royals can't spend tons of $ & can't find great FA upgrades - which put them in this bind in the first place).

So if Dayton Moore can leverage this with other upgrades to really sniff the AL Central crown - then the Doyle Alexander-for -John Smoltz comp works.  If they pull a Marlins 2011 then Moore likely never gets a head GM gig again (although the guy can develop a farm system so head of scouting would be a lifetime gig somewhere).   It's just as things stand now, most don't see KC as having enough to compete.  If you are in June and 2 games out, the Alexander-Smoltz deal is rational - but still a huge gamble.  It just has greater odds of panning out short-term.  The fundamental negative reaction is based more on the perceived gain the Royals obtained short-term as insufficient to make them contenders - which then leads to the uproar.

As Dave Cameron even said - he's not convinced Myers will be an elite player - but he doesn't have to be elite to make this a bad deal.  It's that the perceived gain wasn't worth the cost - and that's before Odorizzi is involved.  

If KC contends the next 2 years - they prove the doubters wrong.  But if they just go the middle of the pack - the potential for disaster-level outcome is huge (TOR dumping V-dub on ANA for Napoli recent example, AA re-gifted Napoli to lessen the optics but wow).

I'm just not so sure middle of the pack is a disaster though. For one, it lets them become buyers come deadline day. Two, it can energize a fan base that hasn't had anything to talk about for a quarter century. Three, it shows FA's and their own players that they actually will take shots at winning. (Just read some of the posts in the Yahoo! story from KC fans)  Four, it puts them in position for a luckbox season.

Or...

They could do nothing, let Myers develop, post another 75 win season, let their young players wonder wtf is going on (and probably stagnate), let FA's look past KC yet again next year, etc. Given these choices, it seems like a no brainer actually.  He had to make a move, and he made the best one he could.  A+ handling imo, even if the net result isn't what others think is ideal.  Put another way, if your ceiling while doing nothing is a 5/10 score, and this move gives you a shot at 7/10 and a floor of 4/10, do you really care if everyone is saying you suck because you didn't achieve a 9/10?

As to your bolded part, this is true... but is (ironically) short-term thinking.  Why does KC have to be done yet?  If KC is 3-4 games out in June, Moore can make another move or two and go for it. But he can't if they're 10+ games out already because their SP's are awful.
KC unfortunately can never be a TB:
1) Their owner is going to spend even less then they are in TB.  
2) They aren't able to develop players like TB is, despite being handed an even better pool of talent.

Which means their window to compete is actually pretty small.  So, with such a short, you have to give it a shot. IMO.
I actually disagree with you on Moore's future.  I don't think he's developed talent all that well at all, given the kind of picks he was handed.  Alot of their young players have alot of flaws that other teams seem able to train out of them in the minors.  Yet his track record as a GM shows him to be decent, given his crappy hand.

[crazy47larry]

But how close is KC to becoming a playoff calibre team? That is the key question. They are pretty lucky to be in that division though because even division winner Detroit didn't post that great of a W-L record for playoff team (tied for worst playoff record with 88 wins). KC also had the 3rd worst scoring offense in the AL (only 9 runs more than second last CLE) so this move is simply too soon. They are rushing their plan but it is heavy on player development after drafting all those offensive players. We all know player development takes time and you can never be sure until it is actually done. They are giving their plan a kick start but it goes completely counter to everything they have done to this point. They should have established their offense and gradually built their staff from the back end. Then once that is in place it would be much easier to entice a FA to sign or resign someone you traded for. If they had a rotation that only really needed 1 Ace piece then enticing him would be easier and even overpaying him could be easily rationalized. They definitely couldve traded Myers anytime in the next few years and his value would still be high.

This move really emulates what Toronto is doing but KC just isn't there yet. Nobody was looking at this team like it was right on the cusp but that is what the talk is of. The Myers trade does remind me of the Brett Lawrie trade though, only in reverse heh.

[GreenGold74]

One can argue the A's had less on paper than the Royals currently do after the trade and faced the same ridicule for their offseason moves last winter as the Royals are right now. But guess what those players and alot of the guys Beane acquired gelled and had one of the most unlikely and amazing seasons ever and won a division that was a bigger heavyweight than what the AL Central is currently. The pitchers they acquired will eat a ton of innings, put less wear and tear on the bullpen through the season and take some pressure off their young hitting core to outscore teams on a day to day basis. Luckily baseball isn't won on paper and little things like chemistry, unpredictable surges and spikes in player performance and some luck all are big factors in a how a season unfolds. The Royals I think we can all agree overpaid for the package of players they got. But they likely would of been looking at adding guys like Capuano and Juirjens and suffer through another uninspiring 74-77 win season. This move at the very least gives them a chance that they can catch lightning in a bottle and at the very worst they can parley Shields this summer into a package of prospects to restock their farm.

[RotoRaysfan]

GreenGold74, on 12 December 2012 - 12:01 AM, said:

One can argue the A's had less on paper than the Royals currently do after the trade and faced the same ridicule for their offseason moves last winter as the Royals are right now. But guess what those players and alot of the guys Beane acquired gelled and had one of the most unlikely and amazing seasons ever and won a division that was a bigger heavyweight than what the AL Central is currently. The pitchers they acquired will eat a ton of innings, put less wear and tear on the bullpen through the season and take some pressure off their young hitting core to outscore teams on a day to day basis. Luckily baseball isn't won on paper and little things like chemistry, unpredictable surges and spikes in player performance and some luck all are big factors in a how a season unfolds. The Royals I think we can all agree overpaid for the package of players they got. But they likely would of been looking at adding guys like Capuano and Juirjens and suffer through another uninspiring 74-77 win season. This move at the very least gives them a chance that they can catch lightning in a bottle and at the very worst they can parley Shields this summer into a package of prospects to restock their farm.

Fair enough on A's breaking through - but they didn't trade away their youth to get their 2012 results - they traded their more expensive assets to get younger - and as it turns out, better.   If the A's didn't make the playoffs, their moves would have been seen as great long-term moves (trading away Bailey & Gio & Cahill cleared $ and got them a bunch of guys back - and because they weren't seen as contenders with those guys in the fold, reloading was the right call even before 2012 happened).   Here, the Royals are all about the short-term, and for a shorter period of control.

And don't get me wrong - I understand why the Royals acted - as you said, though, it was a huge overpay.

[GreenGold74]

The players the A's dealt last winter were all under control for very reasonably low salaries for the next few years which is why the moves were so startling to pundits. The observation I was simply making was that Beane  faces the same situation from a free agency standpoint than the Royals and trades are the only way teams such as them can improve and fill holes in their organization. Beane decided to use his assets to fill holes on the big league roster along with the point you made long term financial flexibility. The Royals made a trade few GM's would of made but their big league weaknesses happen to be a position they can't fill on the free agent market and the most expensive to trade for. But the move for them in the short term has a better chance of being the kind of pieces that was needed to balance with the strengths of their young core of hitters they have that can take big leaps this season. And if they win early they gain confidence that might of been another missing ingredient in being a serious contender. And that domino can continue into players at the deadline wanting to be a part of potentially great story and want to actually be traded to the Royals to bolster their club.

Of course I speak of the best case scenario but my argument simply has been the Royals if they seriously wanted to move up the ladder needed an established ace at the top of their rotation. And Wade Davis from all I read seems very hungry and excited about the prospect of starting again and that excitement could turn into him reaching some of his early prospect potential that was stagnated on a reduced role with the Rays. All of his just speculation and theory on my part and we'll see how this plays out. If I was a Royals fan I'd be ecstatic that a move like this signifies they aren't interested in just using their revenue sharing to overpay for below average players and willing to make bold moves for bigger rewards for the team can achieve the next couple years.

The only criticism is that I feel like the GM showed his cards to blatantly for his desire of SP and allowed himself to be leveraged into paying too steep a price. He broke a golden rule for GM's by showing his cards and desperation. But I do agree with the principle of the idea and hope as a fellow mid market team it works out for them and their fans.

[Theoneupper]

Now if only the Royals could go out and get a Cespedes type bat they would be in business. Beane is just something else as a GM. The Royals will probably end up in third in the Central unless they get some cheap offense or Frenchie comes back in a big way this year.

[crazy47larry]

I don't think this compares with the A's at all. Oakland traded away older, established talent to get younger, cheaper, more dynamic players. Oakland seemingly embraced their role in the majors as a small market and this trade supports what a small market needs to do to survive for more than a short period. They got really great packages of young talent, some who were on the cusp of being major league ready. What KC did flies completely in the face of this. In fact I could not think of a more opposite scenario to 'compare' than with Oakland. Another, probably more important, aspect is that Beane is probably the best GM in MLB and Moore is nowhere near entrenched the way Beane is.

To put it bluntly, Oakland knows what they are. Oakland knows what they need to do to win and to survive. KC clearly does not and are trying to create something from nothing. If they embraced their role and stuck with the way they were building instead of flipping the script midway a veritable run of sustained success seemed much more likely. They mortgaged their future even though all their top assets won't mature until just then, the future.

[parrothead]

crazy47larry, on 12 December 2012 - 03:00 PM, said:

I don't think this compares with the A's at all. Oakland traded away older, established talent to get younger, cheaper, more dynamic players. Oakland seemingly embraced their role in the majors as a small market and this trade supports what a small market needs to do to survive for more than a short period. They got really great packages of young talent, some who were on the cusp of being major league ready. What KC did flies completely in the face of this. In fact I could not think of a more opposite scenario to 'compare' than with Oakland. Another, probably more important, aspect is that Beane is probably the best GM in MLB and Moore is nowhere near entrenched the way Beane is.

To put it bluntly, Oakland knows what they are. Oakland knows what they need to do to win and to survive. KC clearly does not and are trying to create something from nothing. If they embraced their role and stuck with the way they were building instead of flipping the script midway a veritable run of sustained success seemed much more likely. They mortgaged their future even though all their top assets won't mature until just then, the future.

Oakland cant afford much until they are allowed to move to San Jose.  What it seems Billy Beane has been trying to do for many years, and seemed to accomplish last year is that he is trying to get his core group of young players essentially on the same service track.  Yes they controlled Gio and Cahill for a while, but they didnt have much else with them that was going to be major contributor when those guys really start to make money.

Now...they have core group, which really has somewhat equal service timeline: Milone, Parker, Reddick, Cook, Norris, Straily, and some of the other good young guys are all coming up as a core within similar clocks of their debuts.  Beane has done this before, just hasnt come together like it did in 2012.

[crazy47larry]

parrothead, on 12 December 2012 - 04:06 PM, said:

crazy47larry, on 12 December 2012 - 03:00 PM, said:

I don't think this compares with the A's at all. Oakland traded away older, established talent to get younger, cheaper, more dynamic players. Oakland seemingly embraced their role in the majors as a small market and this trade supports what a small market needs to do to survive for more than a short period. They got really great packages of young talent, some who were on the cusp of being major league ready. What KC did flies completely in the face of this. In fact I could not think of a more opposite scenario to 'compare' than with Oakland. Another, probably more important, aspect is that Beane is probably the best GM in MLB and Moore is nowhere near entrenched the way Beane is.

To put it bluntly, Oakland knows what they are. Oakland knows what they need to do to win and to survive. KC clearly does not and are trying to create something from nothing. If they embraced their role and stuck with the way they were building instead of flipping the script midway a veritable run of sustained success seemed much more likely. They mortgaged their future even though all their top assets won't mature until just then, the future.

Oakland cant afford much until they are allowed to move to San Jose.  What it seems Billy Beane has been trying to do for many years, and seemed to accomplish last year is that he is trying to get his core group of young players essentially on the same service track.  Yes they controlled Gio and Cahill for a while, but they didnt have much else with them that was going to be major contributor when those guys really start to make money.

Now...they have core group, which really has somewhat equal service timeline: Milone, Parker, Reddick, Cook, Norris, Straily, and some of the other good young guys are all coming up as a core within similar clocks of their debuts.  Beane has done this before, just hasnt come together like it did in 2012.

Its funny how KC thinks they are 'one piece away' so to speak. Selig should pinch their cheek and give them a hard candy.

[Stickfig13]

Do they get rained on every day?