 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » Wagner, Loaiza sign
hobos
The more bizarre signing, Beane signed Loaiza. The A's already have Zito, Harden, Haren, and Blanton, and numerous 5th spot options. Now they will pay $21 mil over 3 years to Loaiza to fill that spot. This doesn't seem like a Beane type signing, but maybe he sees something special in Loaiza. Now the A's will lose a 1st rounder for a mid-30s starter with only 2 good seasons (one seemingly a fluke, the other RFK-induced, his road numbers were mediocre). I still can't find exact terms, although an option is probably included. Maybe Zito is gone?
Wagner, Loaiza sign
November 28, 2005 at 11:37PM View BBCode
Wagner signed a deal that guaruntees him slightly less than Ryan, although he can make more. He'll get $43 mil over 4 years, and has an option. He makes $10.5 mil a year, with an $8 mil option or a $1 mil buyoutThe more bizarre signing, Beane signed Loaiza. The A's already have Zito, Harden, Haren, and Blanton, and numerous 5th spot options. Now they will pay $21 mil over 3 years to Loaiza to fill that spot. This doesn't seem like a Beane type signing, but maybe he sees something special in Loaiza. Now the A's will lose a 1st rounder for a mid-30s starter with only 2 good seasons (one seemingly a fluke, the other RFK-induced, his road numbers were mediocre). I still can't find exact terms, although an option is probably included. Maybe Zito is gone?
whiskybear
November 28, 2005 at 11:44PM View BBCode
For clarification, it might be good to note it's the Mets that signed Wagner.
barterer2002
November 29, 2005 at 12:01AM View BBCode
Yeah, four years is too much for Wagner. He's beginning to lose his fastball and while he can still bring it, is mixing in many more off speed pitches (read hittable pitches). He'll be fine for the next two seasons but after that, another contract the Mets will have to live with.
BrutusKhan
As to Loaiza, I can say after watching him do well in Chicago, and then suffer, and do well in Washington, I know have an idea as to why he did as well as he did. He is primarily a cutter picher that is quite dependant on the park to keep his mistake pitches in the stadium. The year he did well for the White Sox, '03, was a cold, wet season and he got off to a great start. Once it warmed up, his numbers didn't fair as well. The next season, the Sox made changes to their park, and it really became a homer dome type stadium. The Yankees tried toiling with him probably too much, and by then his confidence was gone. He goes in the off season to Washington, who happens to have the best pitchers park in ages. And obviously, his stock is rising again.
As to Beane, I'm sure he knows all this if I do, and probably looked at his road record, figured in Oakland's stadium being a great pitcher's park as well, and figured 200 + inning starter w/ an ERA in the mid 4's and a decent whip for 7 million is a good deal. Don't forget, Harden has injury issues, Zito has been up & down, and the rest are all real young pitchers that can't be counted on for much of any consistancy. In addition, if he doesn't get a no trade clause, and does even half as good as last year, he can always dump Loaiza without having to give up cash.
Doug
November 29, 2005 at 12:34AM View BBCode
The Mets seem to have the philosophy that if they can break into New York's massive resources by creating a winning team, that finances won't be a factor in 3 years. But, they made the World Series against the Yanks, and couldn't keep a team together then, so what's to change that now???As to Loaiza, I can say after watching him do well in Chicago, and then suffer, and do well in Washington, I know have an idea as to why he did as well as he did. He is primarily a cutter picher that is quite dependant on the park to keep his mistake pitches in the stadium. The year he did well for the White Sox, '03, was a cold, wet season and he got off to a great start. Once it warmed up, his numbers didn't fair as well. The next season, the Sox made changes to their park, and it really became a homer dome type stadium. The Yankees tried toiling with him probably too much, and by then his confidence was gone. He goes in the off season to Washington, who happens to have the best pitchers park in ages. And obviously, his stock is rising again.
As to Beane, I'm sure he knows all this if I do, and probably looked at his road record, figured in Oakland's stadium being a great pitcher's park as well, and figured 200 + inning starter w/ an ERA in the mid 4's and a decent whip for 7 million is a good deal. Don't forget, Harden has injury issues, Zito has been up & down, and the rest are all real young pitchers that can't be counted on for much of any consistancy. In addition, if he doesn't get a no trade clause, and does even half as good as last year, he can always dump Loaiza without having to give up cash.
Doug
rkinslow19
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2239730
It came down to the A's and Giants, I'm sure glad he didn't sign with my Giants. For that money (slightly less probably), I'd rather have Morris or maybe even Weaver
November 29, 2005 at 05:52AM View BBCode
Phew:http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2239730
It came down to the A's and Giants, I'm sure glad he didn't sign with my Giants. For that money (slightly less probably), I'd rather have Morris or maybe even Weaver
whiskybear
As usual, your analysis is cogent and possibly cream-filled.
November 29, 2005 at 07:31AM View BBCode
Originally posted by BrutusKhan
The Mets seem to have the philosophy that if they can break into New York's massive resources by creating a winning team, that finances won't be a factor in 3 years. But, they made the World Series against the Yanks, and couldn't keep a team together then, so what's to change that now???
As to Loaiza, I can say after watching him do well in Chicago, and then suffer, and do well in Washington, I know have an idea as to why he did as well as he did. He is primarily a cutter picher that is quite dependant on the park to keep his mistake pitches in the stadium. The year he did well for the White Sox, '03, was a cold, wet season and he got off to a great start. Once it warmed up, his numbers didn't fair as well. The next season, the Sox made changes to their park, and it really became a homer dome type stadium. The Yankees tried toiling with him probably too much, and by then his confidence was gone. He goes in the off season to Washington, who happens to have the best pitchers park in ages. And obviously, his stock is rising again.
As to Beane, I'm sure he knows all this if I do, and probably looked at his road record, figured in Oakland's stadium being a great pitcher's park as well, and figured 200 + inning starter w/ an ERA in the mid 4's and a decent whip for 7 million is a good deal. Don't forget, Harden has injury issues, Zito has been up & down, and the rest are all real young pitchers that can't be counted on for much of any consistancy. In addition, if he doesn't get a no trade clause, and does even half as good as last year, he can always dump Loaiza without having to give up cash.
Doug
As usual, your analysis is cogent and possibly cream-filled.
barterer2002
November 29, 2005 at 02:42PM View BBCode
Somewhere Pat Borders is bleeding into his coffee
Isaiah4110
That said, I'm not going to jump to conclusions yet and say it was terrible since I'm sure beane has some sort of plan. However, I remember the Singleton signing was supposed to be trade bait, and he flopped. Rhodes flopped. But the A's certainly got the better end of the Mulder deal and the final results of the Hudson trade are yet to be seen. I'll have to wait and see the rest of Beane's plans before passing judgement.
November 30, 2005 at 07:29AM View BBCode
I would take Zito over Loaiza any day of the week (ERA difference > 1, and age difference as well). I sure hope Beane isn't planning on trading away Zito, Harden, Blanton, or Haren. I don't see much point in signing Loaiza since the rotation is full and since I also expect him to be about as good as Redman.That said, I'm not going to jump to conclusions yet and say it was terrible since I'm sure beane has some sort of plan. However, I remember the Singleton signing was supposed to be trade bait, and he flopped. Rhodes flopped. But the A's certainly got the better end of the Mulder deal and the final results of the Hudson trade are yet to be seen. I'll have to wait and see the rest of Beane's plans before passing judgement.
ME
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4631
December 03, 2005 at 01:01AM View BBCode
Baseball Prospectus says the Loaiza signing isn't all that dumb:http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4631
FuriousGiorge
December 03, 2005 at 02:38AM View BBCode
That's because they have a hard-on for Billy Beane. It's a bad and unnecessary contract from a team which didn't need to add pitching in the first place.
Isaiah4110
December 03, 2005 at 06:29AM View BBCode
I say trading Zito and expecting Loaiza to fill his shoes is not smart. Zito is coming back big time. He now has 4 pitches and his primary three have returned to form. Loaiza is old and has had a dismal career with the exception of 2-3 seasons. Right now I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that he's meant to be June trade bait. Of course, Singleton was supposed to be June trade bait and he did nothing.
rkinslow19
"In Beane we trust"
December 03, 2005 at 06:44AM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
I definately don't agree with the signing at face value, but as they say in Oakland:
"In Beane we trust"
Pages: 1