Hot Stove Thread 2014-15

Brett Lawrie will do a more than adequate job at third base, and from the sounds of it, the A's got three very promising young players in addition. Sure it hurts to lose Donaldson, but looking at the bigger picture, the A's may have gotten a steal out of this.

 

We won't truly be able to evaluate it until we see the three guys they get for Lawrie in two years.

 

From what I've read about the two pitchers, their upside is Tommy Milone (i.e., innings eaters). The shortstop prospect (Barreto) can hit, but probably is not a good enough fielder to stay there long-term.

Then you have Lawrie, who's OK defensively, getting worse every year as a hitter and can't stay healthy.

The Blue Jays get four years of an All-Star third baseman who is among the Top 20 players in the game.

On the contrary, I think this is a steal for Toronto.

 

Donaldson should mash in Toronto.

 

I agree with most of that assessment, but Lawrie could thrive in Oakland if he gets healthy. Granted, that is a very big if given his history, but he has the talent and he will only be 25 opening day.

 

Also , have to remember that Lawrie will now play on grass instead of that awful turf in Toronto.

 

This has happened to a degree before, especially when the A's offloaded Mulder and Hudson at the same time, but some writers out here are saying the fan outrage/I'm-sick-of-this is peaking around the Donaldson move. For the last three seasons Donaldson and Cespedes have been their two most popular players; Donaldson has also been far and away their best. And I know the response is always that "people love winning," but I don't think that's true. The A's have been winning a lot lately, but their marketing is for shit.

The Beane acolytes are already warming up the Internet about how this was the right baseball move, of course.

Someone said earlier that Wolff and Fisher, not Beane, are the problem. I've come to think lately that that isn't true. First off, Beane is a part-owner, so he has a voice there. And the A's by all accounts have at least $10M-20M they can devote to payroll and still be profitable, same as the Pirates and Marlins have always had, and that's before counting whatever marketing and ticket-sales boost they might get from the team being more popular with fans.

I think Beane just likes the action and is always in change mode.

 

I'm still waiting to see one good justification for how this was a good trade for Oakland.
I respect Beane and his building model, but this was not a good deal.
And if he wanted to unload the most valuable 3B in baseball so badly he could have found a better suitor, and gotten better parts in return.

 

That would fit with acquiring Lawrie, who has enough ability to make this deal look decent if he can stay healthy. I don't think he is worth the risk given how well Donaldson has played the past two seasons, but if Lawrie finally puts it all together and becomes the star many projected he would be, it would make Beane look good. If not, he has his reputation and falls back on the excuse of saving money.

It's just a theory and not one I'm particularly attached to. I still think it was a bad deal for Oakland.

 

Nelson Cruz to the Mariners, reportedly for 4 years, $57 million:

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2014/12/1/7313583/nelson-cruz-free-agent-rumors-mariners

 

Four years? Ugh.

Especially considering he's going from a home run haven to a park that is anything but that.

 

I'm assuming the argument will be that Cruz has the kind of power to put the ball out of any park consistently, but four years for a 34-year-old with a history of injuries and PED use is definitely a concern. The Mariners did need a bat and I'm not sure what other route you would want them to go.