When the A's got involved in Hisashi Iwakuma's posting process, the explanation was that they were doing so in an effort to create a surplus of arms, some of which they could exchange for a bat. That sounded perfectly sensible to me, but I don't think anyone expected them to pull the trigger on something this quickly.
Just a little bit ago, they dealt Vin Mazzaro and a young guy named Justin Marks to the Royals for David DeJesus. With DeJesus coming over and Iwakuma presumably as good as locked up, the A's have already made two big offseason splashes, and it's only November 10th. This isn't the kind of behavior we've come to expect from Billy Beane, who seems to be making an effort to make 2011 a strong year.
Now, I'm not planning on writing up every single move the A's, Angels, and Rangers make all offseason. I only plan to write up the moves I find interesting. And, on the surface, this one isn't very interesting. Mazzaro is a dull young pitcher with a dull repertoire and a limited ceiling. Marks is miles away and seems to top out around 90 miles per hour. And I've long considered DeJesus to be the most boring good player in baseball, as he does few things wrong but nothing exceptionally well. He's consistently all right, and he's been hidden in Kansas City all this time.
What makes this trade stand out to me, though, is how perfect a fit it is. Not for Kansas City. Mazzaro isn't good. But for Oakland, as DeJesus might have been the most A's player in the league who didn't play for the A's. He's decent. He's not great, and he's not bad. He's unknown. His eye is okay. He plays strong defense. He runs fairly well. He's battled some injuries. He has mediocre power. You know who that sounds like? Ryan Sweeney, and Travis Buck, and Rajai Davis, and Coco Crisp, and Mark Ellis, and Cliff Pennington, and Kevin Kouzmanoff, and Kurt Suzuki, and Daric Barton, and Gabe Gross, and Adam Rosales, and some others, too. They don't all fit all the criteria, but they all at least fit most of them.
Everything about DeJesus playing in Oakland just feels right. Had I been drinking, I might have even suggested to you that he was already there. The skillset and the whole package just belong on the A's, who Beane seems to think have to play stealth baseball. They are designed to hang around and get the job done, but they aren't to be noticed. God help them if they're noticed.
As far as the on-field impact is concerned, DeJesus should make the A's a bit better, which of course is bad news for us. But then, he isn't great, and the offseason's just beginning, and he's in the last year of his contract anyway, so it's not a big deal.
The off-field impact, though? Now I'm growing suspicious. If the A's go get Chase Headley or Placido Polanco then I'll know for sure something's up.
0 recs | 20 comments
Sounds a lot like Jack Hannahan too
Matthew - November 10, 2010
I love their infield
JLC - November 10, 2010
does this infield have the highest combined UZR?
it seems like everyone here is at least +5 on defense
BrendanHarrisLives - November 10, 2010
In 2010? Looks like it.
A quick glance through Fangraphs’ UZR shows Kouz was +16.1, Pennington was +9.9, Ellis was +9.9, and Barton was +12.1. No regular infield was better than that. And now the A’s have an OF of Crisp, DeJesus, and Davis/Sweeney. They’re like us, only they’re making it work!
JLC - November 10, 2010
God I hate this division.
JLC - November 10, 2010
The A's are going to get compensation draft picks for DeJesus in 2012 that are going to rival Mazzaro and Marks for total value
What a Royals trade.
Matthew - November 10, 2010
How can that be right?
I don’t think any pick short of the #1 overall can be as valuable as a big-league pitcher at minimum salary for two seasons. It’s unlikely the A’s will even end up with a top-40 pick.
Jay - November 10, 2010
Vin Mazarro was a third round pick.
OlSalty - November 10, 2010
was
Jay - November 10, 2010
in addition to the crapshoot aspect
Jay - November 10, 2010
sorry, computer going haywire here
Meant to say, in addition to the crapshoot aspect of draft picks — which must be acknowledged even in the case of a team that does very well in the draft — the time value of an asset must be considered as well. Mazzarro was drafted in 2005 and didn’t deliver a full season worth of starts until 2010. We’re talking about compensation picks in the 2012 draft.
What I’m getting at is, even if we assume the A’s can turn one of these picks into Mazzarro, it’s considerably more valuable to have a “Vin Mazzarro” cheaply for 2011-2013 than for 2017-2018.
Jay - November 10, 2010
An analogy...
If I win $5 in the lottery, I don’t pocket the money and say “Yeah! I’m $5 richer!” I keep playing until I win something decent.
Vin Mazzaro is a $5 lottery ticket. Yeah, you’ll probably be better in the long run by keeping it. But you don’t really play the lottery to win $5.
hunterfan - November 10, 2010
I think most
if not all GMs would take Vin over two second-round picks in a heartbeat.
Keep in mind, too .. who paid Vin’s 380K signing bonus? The A’s, not the Royals. If/when the A’s get that compensation pick, who’s paying that signing bonus, around 750K? Again, the A’s, not the Royals.
So if all we’re comparing is those two players, it’s worth noting that the Royals paid to sign neither and the A’s paid to sign both. Incidentally, the A’s did get DeJesus, too, so I’m not necessarily defending the trade.
Jay - November 11, 2010
The most important point here is that Vin Mazzaro isn't particularly good
Overall, though, this isn’t a major trade. The Royals won’t get much, and the A’s have slightly better odds of finishing in second place in 2011.
Jeff Sullivan - November 11, 2010
He's cheap
and potentially good, and probably a decent complementary piece. And definitely cheap.
There is no more valuable commodity in baseball than a healthy, established, major league pitcher, pre-arbitration. Even one who isn’t that great.
Jay - November 11, 2010
Fangraphs puts Mazzaro's career WAR at 0.7
I don’t care how cheap 0.7 is. It isn’t very valuable.
Jeff Sullivan - November 11, 2010
There's no guarantee DeJesus is a Type A again at the end of 2011.
And a Type B supplemental pick may or may not be better than what they gave up.
The Typical Idiot Fan - November 10, 2010
I think the fact that Mazzaro isn't very good
makes him a perfect fit for the royals.
boyonthedock - November 11, 2010
I found a very thoughtful analyses of the trade at Beyond the Boxscore
economics of baseball-david dejesus trade
I have to agree with the author — having Vin Mazzaro’s surplus value now outweighs the expected benefit of the compensation pick a few years from now. Theoretically, he’d have to play better than he did in 2009 to bump himself up into class A territory, which might swing the balance if a good team signs him after 2011.
It looks like this should help the A’s next year, albeit by a small margin. I have a sneaking suspicion that Beane is looking for some kind of extra boost from this trade — such as the possibility of another team desperately needing an outfielder, either during the offseason or at the trade deadline, or maybe hoping DeJesus has a big year and nets him that class A status. He’s got something up his sleeve.
nathaniel dawson - November 11, 2010
The A's have something up their sleeve:
a combined 0.1 WAR for their entire outfield, excluding Coco Crisp.
DeJesus essentially adds 2.5 – 3 wins to the team all by his middling lonesome.
Go A’s!
sleepingcobra - November 14, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.