I'm on record as not being a fan of the DeJesus trade. I don't understand the timing and I don't think Moore got a great return back for DeJesus. I don't think Moore ever thought DeJesus was really worth a damn, and I can imagine that at some level he had to have been surprised when teams appeared to be interested in him. Weren't they really interested in Rick/Dick Ankiel?
Greg Schaum's insight into the trade all but confirms that what many of us fear about how Moore makes decisions is true. Year after year, it's really always the same: he builds a roster like he's casting a movie. Guys have to look the part, and the lineup is always being pulled to some ideal of what a "baseball team" from an uninteresting 1980s movie would look like. How guys act is also important. You've gotta be leader, you've gotta be a badass. You've gotta act like a ballplayer.
But alas, the trade has happened. DeJesus is an Athletic. Moore is still in charge. Everything is what it is.
Over the last day there's been significant discussion about how good Vin Mazzaro is. For all the benefit that a catch-all value stat like WAR provides, in a way it is a distorting stat. The fact is, there's a huge difference between a 1.5 and a 2.5 WAR player. When we talk about a guy's future it's easy to be unclear or push the numbers 0.5 in whatever direction we want. Nevertheless, there's really no one out there that's saying, "Mazzaro's going to be good, just you wait. He's going to be one of the best pitchers on the team." No one. No, Mazzaro's value is nearly entirely that he's cheap, with a dash of "he's young and you never know" thrown in. He's cheap and probably isn't unbearably bad to watch. Cool. I'll order my shersey tonight.
I wonder how important Justin Marks is to this deal. Marks is a young left-hander (which means he's on chance 2 of 35 in his career) who had a career of some prominence at Louisville. He hasn't really pitched superbly in the minors, but he was drafted in the 3rd round. This, at the very least, means that Oakland kinda sorta thought highly of him not too long ago. I haven't heard anything of this ilk, but it's highly possible that the A's player development people were executing a specific plan with Marks (pitch selection, mechanics, etc) that may have distorted his numbers. Who knows? He certainly didn't show up as a polished college pitcher and immediately dominate the low minors, which is what would have been expected.
Do you view Marks as a throw in? Is he more than a throw in but less than something more? Is this trade really about just getting Mazzaro's adequacy for a low price? Today is November 12, and I demand your thoughts on this matter.