1. Trading away Smyley and Jackson isn't what killed the Tigers. The Tigers pathetic excuse for a bullpen is what killed the Tigers.


2. What does the Tigers losing to Baltimore in the ALDS have to do with the Athletics nose-diving after the Cespedes trade? Seems like a red herring to me.

Pretty funny coming from the King of the Caveat.

---

Is that really the best answer you can give?

You and TMD were debating if the Oakland Athletics made a good trade by shipping out Cespedes for Lester. Now, when TMD's been proven right, you respond to him by bringing up the Detroit Tigers? lol...

---

And who is Detroit playing?


Seems the trade had pretty similar results for both teams.

 

Huh? The Oakland trade was with Boston, of which wasn't likely going to make the playoffs (in 2014) before or after that trade. 

---

Huh? The Oakland trade was with Boston, of which wasn't likely going to make the playoffs (in 2014) before or after that trade.

And you were praising the Tigers' trade for Price, and panning the A's trade for Lester. Get it?

---

 

And you were praising the Tigers' trade for Price, and panning the A's trade for Lester. Get it?

 
I question how much you actually follow baseball.

The Tigers didn't get worse because of trading Smyley and Jackson for David Price.
The Athletics got considerably worse because of trading Cespedes for Lester.

At the time of the trade, the Tigers were 59-47 and in 4th place in the AL. (.557 winning %)
At the time of the trade, the Athletics were 66-42 and in 1st place in the AL. (.611 winning %)

In August and September, Detroit went 32-15 (.561 winning %).
In August and September, Oakland went 22-33 (.400 winning %).

Detroit actually had a better winning % after the trade. Their demise was from cold bats and a TERRIBLE bullpen.
Oakland went from being the #1 team in the AL to one of the worst teams in August and September. Their demise was missing their best hitter from the heart of their lineup. Oakland led MLB in runs scored when Cespedes was traded. In August they were 22nd and in September they were 21st.

---

Is that really the best answer you can give?You and TMD were debating if the Oakland Athletics made a good trade by shipping out Cespedes for Lester. Now, when TMD's been proven right, you respond to him by bringing up the Detroit Tigers? lol...

How has he been proven right?


They weren't eliminated because they traded Cespedes away.

---

 

How has he been proven right?

They weren't eliminated because they traded Cespedes away.

He was right in the sense the Oakland was considerably worse without Cespedes. See post above yours.

---

He was right in the sense the Oakland was considerably worse without Cespedes. See post above yours.

That's an easy narrative to go with, but it isn't true


.264/.316/.446

.260./.301/.450


One is the great Cespedes and the other is Josh Reddick.


There were many other other reasons why Oakland faltered the way they did down the stretch.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://grantland.com/the-triangle/oakland-athletics-slump-al-west-race-yoenis-cespedes-factor/'>http://grantland.com/the-triangle/oakland-athletics-slump-al-west-race-yoenis-cespedes-factor/</a> explains much better than I could

---

Its funny how people always seem to search for outlier/ lesser reasons why something happened when the obvious answer is right in front of their face. 

 

If people refuse to believe that Oakland trading Cespedes away wasn't the main catalyst for their collapse down the stretch, then let them be ignorant. 

---

Yes, there were obviously more factors that contributed to the Athletic's being worse.
But these are facts:

With Cespedes, the Athletics were 66-42 (.611). From the trade on, the Athletic's were 22-33 (.400).
With Cespedes, the Athletics led MLB in runs scored. In September and August, they were 22nd and 21st.


I think you are greatly de-valuing the importance of taking one of your best bats out of the heart of the lineup. It changes facets of the game that go deeper than looking at slash lines. I'm sure you've heard the term "lineup protection" before. It's very possible that losing Cespedes' protection contributed to the regression of players that batted around him.

---

lol lineup protection, that's a myth.


So youre telling me the only thing that separates Oakland from being the worst team in baseball is Cespedes? Did you even read the article I posted.


Everything that could go wrong, did go wrong. Gray and Kazmir pitched like crap. Donaldson, Moss, Norris, and Crisp hit like crap. Doolittle missed some time and the rest of the bullpen struggled. Lowrie got hurt. Jaso got hurt. Beane never fixed that blackhole at 2B.


Cespedes was a good hitter, but they had more than enough bats to make up for it.

---

Yes, there were obviously more factors that contributed to the Athletic's being worse.

But these are facts:


With Cespedes, the Athletics were 66-42 (.611). From the trade on, the Athletic's were 22-33 (.400).

With Cespedes, the Athletics led MLB in runs scored. In September and August, they were 22nd and 21st.



I think you are greatly de-valuing the importance of taking one of your best bats out of the heart of the lineup. It changes facets of the game that go deeper than looking at slash lines. I'm sure you've heard the term "lineup protection" before. It's very possible that losing Cespedes' protection contributed to the regression of players that batted around him.

 

 

He's Ruben Amaro Jr....lol...

 

They both probably still scratch their heads today at why the Phillies continued to regress despite those "Four Horsemen" (yawn) of a   pitching staff those years. 

 

Funny how the year the Phillies did win it all, was the year their LINEUP was the most complete and at its peak. - and to go along with hail's point, the Phillies bullpen in 2008 was also one of the best in MLB. 

---

lol lineup protection, that's a myth.


So youre telling me the only thing that separates Oakland from being the worst team in baseball is Cespedes? Did you even read the article I posted.


Everything that could go wrong, did go wrong. Gray and Kazmir pitched like crap. Donaldson, Moss, Norris, and Crisp hit like crap. Doolittle missed some time and the rest of the bullpen struggled. Lowrie got hurt. Jaso got hurt. Beane never fixed that blackhole at 2B.


Cespedes was a good hitter, but they had more than enough bats to make up for it.

 

Maybe the loss of Cespedes had everyone else pressing too much to try and make up for it. Maybe that factored into it. But no.....you don't see that aspect. 

 

Cespedes loss from that lineup was the main reason for their collapse. You can choose to ignore this if you wish. 

 

Not saying they'd have won it all with Cespedes, but I don't see them falling completely out of the playoffs like they did without Cespedes. 

---

Although he struggled this year, Craig was one of the Cards' best hitters the last 3-4 years. They traded him at the deadline and did just fine. Am I doing it right?

---

 

lol lineup protection, that's a myth.

So youre telling me the only thing that separates Oakland from being the worst team in baseball is Cespedes? Did you even read the article I posted.

Everything that could go wrong, did go wrong. Gray and Kazmir pitched like crap. Donaldson, Moss, Norris, and Crisp hit like crap. Doolittle missed some time and the rest of the bullpen struggled. Lowrie got hurt. Jaso got hurt. Beane never fixed that blackhole at 2B.

Cespedes was a good hitter, but they had more than enough bats to make up for it.

I read your article and I've read several other with similar themes, too. Please stop using strawman points. I've already said that "there were obviously more factors that contributed to the Athletic's being worse.".

Lineup protection is a myth? Huh? If you don't realize that the way bullpens and situational pitching is managed is based on lineup strengths, then we really can't discuss this any further.

I am as much as a stats guy as anybody, but you can't simply dimiss those things. You also can't dimiss the psychological aspects involved, like clubhouse chemistry/dynamics. Taking the cleanup hitter out of the best offense in baseball could put a psychological burden on the other players to step up, which could have inverse effects and be tied to the slumping. Is that prove-able by data? No, but it's definitely a factor to consider.

---

Although he struggled this year, Craig was one of the Cards' best hitters the last 3-4 years. They traded him at the deadline and did just fine. Am I doing it right?

 

Huh?? Craig SUCKED this year. 

---

 

Although he struggled this year, Craig was one of the Cards' best hitters the last two years. They traded him at the deadline and did just fine. Am I doing it right?

 
1. Craig was terrible this year. Terrible comparison.

2. Every situation is different. I can look up offenses that nose-dived after losing their stud (whether to trade or injury), too. It wouldn't prove I'm right, just like showing offenses that did fine despite losing their studs would prove you right.

---

He's Ruben Amaro Jr....lol...

 

They both probably still scratch their heads today at why the Phillies continued to regress despite those "Four Horsemen" (yawn) of a   pitching staff those years. 

 

Funny how the year the Phillies did win it all, was the year their LINEUP was the most complete and at its peak. - and to go along with hail's point, the Phillies bullpen in 2008 was also one of the best in MLB.

They regressed because Amaro traded all of his prospects away to win now and gave out a ton of bad contracts. Now they have a below average system with minimal young talent at the major league level and a ton of bad contracts nobody will take off their hands. Beane is nothing like Amaro.

---

Huh?? Craig SUCKED this year.

So. But what about the psychological affect it will have on the lineup. He was perhaps the best Cards hitter in the last 3/4 years. You know everybody in that clubhouse still believed in him after what he has done for that team in the past. How will they ever get through it? See how ridiculous that sounds? These are professional players. If a trade suddenly turned them into amateurs at the plate they wouldn't have made this far into their career.

---

They regressed because Amaro traded all of his prospects away to win now and gave out a ton of bad contracts. Now they have a below average system with minimal young talent at the major league level and a ton of bad contracts nobody will take off their hands. Beane is nothing like Amaro.

 

I don't deny any of the above. 

 

However, the point is the Phillies despite the continually improving starting pitching staff after 2008 continued to regress in large part because the lineup continued to regress. 

---