Baseball Toaster Catfish Stew
Help
STOP CASTING POROSITY! An Oakland Athletics blog.
Frozen Toast
Search
Google Search
Web
Toaster
Catfish Stew
Archives

2009
02  01 

2008
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2007
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2006
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2005
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  01 

2004
12  09  08  01 

2003
12  11  10  09  08 
Email Us

Ken: catfish AT zombia d.o.t. com
Ryan: rarmbrust AT gmail d.o.t. com
Philip: kingchimp AT alamedanet d.o.t net

Ken's Greatest Hits
28 Aug 2003
12 Jan 2004
31 May 2005
11 May 2005
29 Jun 2005
8 Jun 2005
19 Jul 2005
11 Aug 2005
7 Sep 2005
20 Sep 2005
22 Sep 2005
26 Sep 2005
28 Sep 2005
29 Sep 2005
18 Oct 2005
9 Nov 2005
15 Nov 2005
20 Nov 2005

13 Dec 2005
19 Jan 2006
28 Jan 2006
21 Feb 2006
10 Apr 2006
16 Apr 2006
22 Apr 2006
7 May 2006
25 May 2006
31 May 2006
18 Jun 2006
22 Jun 2006
6 Jul 2006
17 Jul 2006
13 Aug 2006
15 Aug 2006
16 Aug 2006
20 Aug 2006
11 Oct 2006
31 Oct 2006
29 Dec 2006
4 Jan 2006
12 Jan 2006
27 Jan 2007
17 Feb 2007
30 Apr 2007
27 Aug 2007
5 Sep 2007
19 Oct 2007
23 Nov 2007
5 Jan 2008
16 Jan 2008
4 Feb 2008
7 May 2008
20 Jun 2008
4 Feb 2008
Payton-For-Bradford
2005-07-08 10:24
by Ken Arneson

I'm not going to get all worked up about the rumored Jay Payton-for-Chad Bradford trade until I hear the other shoe drop. This is not the first time these two have been involved in a trade rumor with each other; there was a similar rumor at the Winter Meetings when Payton was still with San Diego. That deal fell through, but we can guess that Beane indeed likes Payton. This is one trade rumor that does seem to have teeth, but it still doesn't seem that this is all that Beane has in mind.

Since Payton is a likely free agent at year's end (there's a team option), and since it's unlikely Bradford would have been around next year, either, on the surface this would be strictly a trade for 2005. Does this trade, on its own, improve the A's playoff chances?

Justin Duchscherer and Kiko Calero have a tight grasp on the A's RH set-up jobs, so Bradford would probably have been competing with Keiichi Yabu for playing time during mop-up duties, which would not have added much to the A's playoffs chances.

Jay Payton is essentially Eric Byrnes with better defense. But Byrnes isn't playing much, except against lefties, so just upgrading Byrnes doesn't help much. Would Payton replace Kielty or Swisher in the lineup? Unlikely; Payton's gone after this year; you'd still want to play the guys who are still going to be around next year.

The only thing that makes sense is if Payton pushes Kielty or Swisher to DH, and Hatteberg gets sent to the bench. That improves the A's offensive power and defensive range (at the likely expense of some OBP), yet doesn't kick any part of the A's future out of the lineup. Relegated to bench duty: Byrnes, Hatteberg, and Durazo (if/when he gets back from the DL), all of whom would be gone next year anyway, (as would Payton).

It would be an incremental improvement, but what's the point of that? The Angels are running away with the AL West, and there's a gazillion teams ahead of them for the wild card, including the Yankees and the Twins. Beane should be focusing on improving the team for the future, and if it also helps the present, too, that's a bonus.

Getting Payton gives Beane choices. He could flip Payton elsewhere, or keep him and trade Byrnes or Kotsay without appearing to give up on 2005. If they trade Kotsay, that might give them the money to exercise Payton's option, and he could play CF in 2006 while the A's wait for Javier Herrera to mature. Or whatever.

Payton-for-Bradford? Meh. Not bad, but not exciting. Payton-for-Bradford and then Byrnes/Hatteberg/Durazo/Kotsay for prospects--OK, wake me up when that happens.

Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.