OK, here's a curious move: the A's are bringing back Keith Foulke, who had retired last year. It's an eyebrow-raiser in that it's a major league deal, and the A's 40-man roster is full. So unless they cut Alan Embree, someone younger than Foulke will have to be cut to make room for him. I suppose they think they can sneak someone like Wes Bankston, who has been waiver wire fodder twice this year already, through on waivers to the minors without losing him. Still, Foulke isn't going to be around for the next good A's team, so what's the motivation? Is this a prelude to a trade of Embree or Huston Street?
It's also curious in that when asked at the FanFest if the A's had any interest in Barry Bonds, Billy Beane said he wouldn't comment on free agents, but pointed towards the new direction of the club for a hint. But isn't signing Foulke just as contrary to the new direction of the club as signing Bonds would be? It's a move strictly for 2008; you can't expect any payoff beyond that.
On another note, Beane also said during the FanFest that he always roots for the other teams in the AL West to trade away their young players. He must be happy today as the Mariners sent off four youngsters (including Adam Jones) plus George Sherrill for two years of Eric Bedard. Since the A's are punting the next two years anyway, the deal is nothing but good news for A's fans.