Quote of the Day: Athletics' owner Lew Wolff


“This idea we’re trying to discourage people from coming is a bunch of
crap. Every Wednesday, we have almost 9,000 $2 tickets. … It should be
embarrassing to all of us that we can’t draw people at $2.”

— Lew Wolff, bristling at the suggestion that he and the Athletics have tried to sabotage the Athletics in Oakland in the interest of propping up their case to move to San Jose.

The comments — and several other pithy ones — come in the course of an article in today’s Chronicle, telling the story of the A’s attendance apocalypse from the perspective of ownership.

California business and politics — especially when it involves large-scale real estate development — is an impossibly complicated subject, burdened with an overlay of left wing (“Don’t build here! We saw a rare salamander here last year!”) and right wing (“Don’t tax us! Taxation in all forms is theft!”) sentiment that is often hard to reconcile. In light of that I don’t know that I fully understand all of the dynamics in play with the Athletics’ situation.

But from what I do understand, this is not a situation in which any one party comfortably wears a black hat. I don’t think Lew Wolff has done everything conceivable to make Oakland work, but nor do I think he would ignore workable solutions or go out to sabotage the team.

Meanwhile, I feel for Athletics’ fans who root for a team whose owners make a tidy profit that doesn’t appear to be reinvested all that well, but at the same time I don’t think the A’s fans have always been such ardent supporters of the team that they are really entitled to play the wounded fanbase card.

This team is ultimately going to San Jose. Of this I’m fairly certain.  It seems, though, that getting from here to there is going to be an increasingly acrimonious experience.

Report: Yasiel Puig started a fight at a Miami nightclub

Yasiel Puig
1 Comment

When last we posted about Yasiel Puig it was to pass along a rumor that the best player on his team wants him off of it. If that was true — and if this report is true — then expect that sentiment to remain unchanged:

Obviously this report is vague and there has not been, say, a police report or other details to fill it in. Perhaps we’ll learn more, perhaps Puig was misbehaving perhaps he wasn’t.

As we wait for details, however, it’s probably worth reminding ourselves that Puig is coming off of a lost season in which he couldn’t stay healthy, so trading him for any sort of decent return at the moment isn’t super likely. Which leads us to some often overlooked but undeniable baseball wisdom: you can be a distraction if you’re effective and you can be ineffective if you’re a good guy. You really can’t be an ineffective distraction, however, and expect to hang around very long.

Are the Padres adding some yellow to their color scheme for 2016?

Tony Gwynn

We’ve written several times about how boring the Padres’ uniforms and color scheme is. And how that’s an even greater shame given how colorful they used to be. No, not all of their mustard and brown ensembles were great looking, but some were and at some point it’s better to miss boldly than to endure blandness.

Now comes a hint that the Padres may step a toe back into the world of bright colors. At least a little bit. A picture of a new Padres cap is making the rounds in which a new “sunshine yellow” color has been added to the blue and white:

This story from the Union-Tribune notes that the yellow also appears on the recently-unveiled 2016 All-Star Game logo, suggesting that the yellow in the cap could either be part of some  special All-Star-related gear or a new color to the normal Padres livery.

I still strongly advocate for the Padres to bring back the brown — and there are a multitude of design ideas which could do that in tasteful fashion — but for now any addition of some color would be a good thing.

Brett Lawrie “likely to be traded” by the A’s

Brett Lawrie

Oakland’s re-acquisition of infielder Jed Lowrie from Houston makes it “likely” that the A’s will now trade infielder Brett Lawrie, according to Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle.

Slusser says Lowrie’s arrival “all but ensures” both Lawrie and Danny Valencia are on the trading block, adding that Lawrie “is considered the better bet to be traded.”

Acquired last offseason from the Blue Jays in the Josh Donaldson trade, Lawrie hit .260 with 16 homers and a .706 OPS in 149 games while playing second base and third base. At age 25 he’s a solid player, but Lawrie has failed to live up to his perceived potential while hitting .263 with a .736 OPS in 494 career games.

At this point it sounds like the A’s plan to start Marcus Semien at shortstop and Lowrie at second base.

Gammons: The Red Sox could go $30-40 million higher on David Price than anyone else


Peter Gammons reports that the Red Sox are on a mission to sign David Price and that they will pay some serious money to get him. Gammons quotes one anonymous GM who says that he expects the Sox to “go $30-40 million above anyone else.”

The man calling the shots for the Sox is Dave Dombrowski and he knows Price well, of course, having traded for him in Detroit. But there is going to be serious competition for Price’s services with the Jays and Cubs, among many others, bidding for his services. It would be unusual for a team to outbid the competition by tens of millions as Gammons’ source suggests, but the dollars will be considerable regardless.