While the overall message comes as no surprise -- the A's announced that they will not re-sign Miguel Tejada -- the timing is extraordinary. I can't remember a situation where a team has pre-emptively said it will not retain a player because of financial reasons before the player's walk year has even begun. Political posturing for the A's to get a new stadium out of the city of Oakland? Perhaps. A depressing scenario being replayed again? Definitely.
Certainly this will pump the rumor mill, but it is unlikely the A's will trade Tejada unless a catastrophic injury or four knocks them out of the race in July. They will contend this year, let Tejada walk, use the two draft picks to select two college pitchers, and shove Mark Ellis or Freddy Bynum of Bobby Crosby out there at shortstop in 2004. It's worked in the past, but, as I've said before on this board, at some point it would be nice if the A's stopped supplying other teams MVP-calibre players and were able to retain a few on their own. I see no way the A's can sign Tim Hudson or Eric Chavez after the 2004 season, either, and it's conceivable Chavez could have a career year either this season or the next, win an MVP, then follow Giambi to New York. Certainly Hudson is capable of winning a Cy Young, as well. Combined with Giambi and Tejada's departures, that's a lot of (theoretical and real) trophies stripped from the walls.
Look, I know I'm beating a dead horse, but how can we take joy in this kind of system? By the start of the 2006 season, it is not inconceivable the A's will have lost the following home-grown players: Jason Giambi, Miguel Tejada, Eric Chavez, Tim Hudson, and either Mark Mulder or Barry Zito, maybe, heavens, both. The Seattle Mariners notwithstanding, no organisation can absorb that kind of punishment. I don't care how brilliant Billy Beane is; these kind of franchise players don't come around often, certainly not with talent spread out over 30 teams. You can find all the Scott Hattebergs and Rontrez Johnsons and Mario Valdezes and Cory Lidles you want; sooner or later, this is going to decimate the A's. Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but, assuming Chavez leaves next year, the A's have a two-year window to get it done, maybe three years if hitters like Crosby and Nick Swisher and Jeremy Brown develop. Odds are they won't.
If you've never seen Tejada play, he is truly a treasure. Jason Giambi was fun, too, but in a different way. Miguel plays his tail off, despite a couple of well-publicized run-ins with Art Howe. It looks like he's having fun out there. In short, he's just a helluva baseball player, sabermetricians be damned. Did he deserve the MVP last year? Probably no more than Barry Zito deserved the Cy Young. Nonetheless, it's not out of the question Tejada will take another step up this year -- he's only 26, though there are question about his age -- and hit 40 bombs with peripheries (except for OBP, perhaps) to match. Tejada is not just an MVP: he's a leader. Jason Giambi was a leader, too, but, as I said recently, never expressed a desire to stay in Oakland. The general feeling after he left was, "Well, he didn't want to be here anyway; we'll miss him, and it's too bad, but we'll survive." Somehow, I don't see that kind of reaction this time. Shortstops with 35-homer power and leadership skills aren't found often. Greedy, egocentric first basemen with power and the ability to draw walks, are. Witness Mark McGwire. Before he went to St. Louis, McGwire was as surly as Barry Bonds, to fans and the media. That is a topic for another essay, however; suffice it to say, there are interesting conclusions to be drawn from that analogy.
No matter what I said earlier about us all being replaceable, no matter how ironical I intended to be, Miguel Tejada is not replaceable.
https://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20030315073035999