Oakland A’s 2018 Center Field: 3 Possible Approaches

Due to a preponderance of young players matriculating to the Big Leagues, the Oakland A’s entered the 2017-18 offseason with few glaring holes, but many areas where question marks certainly remained.

In a slow-moving MLB offseason, the moves have gradually started to come in, with the A’s being a relatively active participant through the first two months of the offseason. The A’s addressed their leaky bullpen with the trade for Emilio Pagan and the signing of veteran Yusmeiro Petit. They struck for the right handed corner outfielder they have been looking for in local product Stephen Piscotty. Each of these moves addressed areas that had previously been question marks for the franchise.

However, one area they have not addressed, and that was a major black eye for the Big League club in 2017 was the critical position of Center Field (CF). Based on FanGraphs data, the A’s had a, how do we say, piss poor collective effort in CF in 2017, with a combined -0.6 wins above replacement (WAR) from the position. Offense and defense from the position were equally bad.

The A’s CF position has been a gaping hole (aside from a Billy Burns flash in the pan) since Coco Crisp’s neck injury brought an unceremonious end to his previously very productive career.

While there have been some moves that may have “pre-addressed” the CF position, this article will discuss three potential routes for where the A’s can go from here at CF in 2018. With such a critical position in terms of defensive leadership and ability, as well as its contributions to the offensive side, it is important to the A’s franchise success to get the position right.

Option 1: Stay In-House

In this option, which many have speculated is the route the A’s brass will follow, the A’s stick with internal options led by Boog Powell and Dustin Fowler.

Positives:

• This duo (and any other internal players who may fill some of the role, such as Chad Pinder or Jake Smolinski) is very inexpensive in terms of 2018 salary. This is good if you invest the payroll elsewhere, or if you own an ownership stake in the team and are focused on conservative ROI.
• Fowler and Powell have definitely done enough as prospects, and in Powell’s case his MLB cup of coffee, to be looked at with excitement at what they may potentially become.
• Not acquiring any outside talent would ensure that these young players get a heavy dose of opportunity at the big league level. The A’s would essentially be saying “sink or swim” with little blockage to big league playing time. You would have a clear chance to evaluate on the fly.

Negatives:

• Dustin Fowler has zero MLB plate appearances, is coming off surgery and rehab for a ruptured patellar tendon, and various evaluators have questioned whether he is a better fit in the corner than in CF. He is also just 23 years old and has three option years, so you are putting a lot of potential responsibility on the shoulders of a player who is young, inexperienced, rehabbing from major injury, and has the potential to be getting right in AAA, with no risk of running out of options any time soon.
• Boog Powell, though he looked good and energized in 29 games for Oakland prior to missing the last two weeks of the season with a bone bruise on his knee, remains a player who has several question marks, including 130 games worth of suspension in his minor league career and the fact he has never played over 117 games in a season since being drafted by the A’s in 2012. I am a big fan of Boog, he can run, he has shown a strong ability to get on base, and he is a real spark plug. But he has risk factors and may be a fit more as a jumpstart 4th OF type.
• Given the above and lack of high potential OFs in the depth chart behind these two players, you are putting a good amount of defense and leadership in the hands of players who may need time and/or who are likely to be better fits in other less demanding roles, especially in the near term. While “sink or swim” is a fine perspective to have for an individual player, when you are talking about such a critical position as CF, which dictates defense to the whole back 7, it is risky to the strength of the budding young A’s core and their psyches if you are unstable or not ready in a position that is fundamental to the success of your pitchers and your defense.
• Psyche is an important one here, because I think for both these individual players and the team as a whole, if you faceplant in 2018, how is the response going forward? These players may do well, or they may run into predictable challenges and need time to re-calibrate in AAA or a more appropriate role. If the CF position is an issue, how does this affect the young pitchers you are also hoping to take a step? What about the other young players (Chapman, Olson, etc) who are CERTAIN to get a shot and are counting on to be developed.

Summary:

I believe it is highly risky to take this route. If Powell and Fowler existed in a vacuum, I would more likely say, “Sure, let’s throw them to the wolves and see if they can hang.” But the position they are potentially playing is so integral to success in baseball, and there are so many other young players relying on that position, it seems a bit irresponsible to go into the year without a bolstered CF position. Especially given that all the young alternatives have options and you would not be losing them from the organization if you add at the position.

Option 2: The Big Splash

Anyone who has spent time on Athletics Nation since the offseason began probably knows 510SportsTake has been an advocate for acquiring the biggest CF fish on the free agent market in Lorenzo Cain. This is option two of the three presented today.

Positives:

• Lorenzo Cain has averaged 4-5 WAR per year over the last three years. He compiled 4.1 fWAR and 5.3 bWAR in 2017. He would be a clear immediate major upgrade for the A’s heading into the 2018 season. Conservatively, he would add an estimated 2-3 wins to the team just by his individual presence.
• The A’s may be a long shot to compete in 2018, but with a central two-way player like Cain upgrading the CF position, they would be far more likely to be competitively relevant.
• Cain would help the young (fragile) pitching staff, in that he is still one of the best defensive CFs in baseball. He was 5th in the MLB in OF Outs Above Average in 2017. His presence would be an investment in the pysches of the A’s pitching staff, which is probably the most critical asset to develop in the entire A’s personnel organization.
• Cain moving to full time CF would mean the A’s depth would improve, as Powell would slot over to a dynamic 4th/5th OF spot, and Fowler would presumably open in Nashville with plenty of time to hone back into physical and mental shape to maximize his long term development.
• Having Lorenzo Cain as the CF would certainly spur more interest and attention from the broader actual and potential fanbase than much lesser known players. It would also be a signal to the portion of the fanbase who thinks ownership will not spend on proven veteran players.
• The CF market is not active this offseason and a player like Cain may be available at a much better value than most years, as most big-money franchises are set at CF, and others are either wary of the luxury tax and/or the qualifying offer penalty (which is higher for other teams potentially in the market than the A’s). While most years, there may have been several active bidders for a player like Cain, this year there may not be and that means relative value.

Negatives:

• The main negative by far (which some segments of the A’s fanbase will tell you until they are blue in the face) is that Cain costs a lot. And yes he does relative to the A’s currently sub-$60 million payroll. It would likely take a multi-year commitment that would possibly break the A’s long-standing record contract issued to Eric Chavez many (many, many) moons in the past.
• Limits opportunities for other players to play CF (although I am not sure this is bad if it is Lorenzo Cain there).
• Aging curve, how will Cain, who will be 32 opening day, hold up over the length of his contract?

Summary:

Yes, it would be a financial risk to sign Lorenzo Cain. But there is almost zero financial risk on the books. And yes, he may not even choose to sign with the A’s if they made a push. But you miss every shot you don’t take. Finally, the age factor is legitimate. But we are talking a player who still was in the top 20 in sprint speed in all of MLB last year. For what it would bring in terms of potential competitiveness in the short term, leadership and excellence at a critical defensive position, and the boost to the comfort of our pitching staff, I couldn’t do anything but applaud if the move was made. Also, on a side note, if the A’s conserve future payroll flexibility (currently there is $12.8 mil on the books in 2019), does that mean they will have chances to spend better then? As noted above, there are big sharks circling 2019, it will be a frenzy, so Cain may be a value in a calm market before next year’s storm. It would be frustrating to wait until 2021 to spend any money, especially when A’s ownership will be receiving a $50 million windfall payment from the league this spring.

Option 3: The Bridge Veteran

The A’s are veterans of The Bridge Veteran. Last year they did a lot of it to mixed results (including at CF with Rajai Davis who was on the lower end of the bridge vet scale). It has been a calling card of the personnel department. Finding short term veterans to fill holes, bridge gaps to prospects, and use some available payroll. The goal is to help the team compete and possibly to have a flippable deadline asset if the team is out. It is a... middle of the road strategy. It is certainly a strategy the franchise will need far less of in 2018 than it used in 2017, and that is a good thing.

In this scenario, the A’s sign a lesser CF than the big fish Cain to a 1-2 year deal. Some options on the market include: Carlos Gomez, Jarrod Dyson, Austin Jackson and Jon Jay. These are, frankly, the type of free agents the A’s usually do end up with. Solid, but flawed, but serviceable; some having upside for more.

Positives:

• The payroll is definitely there and even a larger one of these (say, 2 years $22 mil) is pretty easy for the franchise to handle with the minimal commitments on the books.
• These players would be easy enough to move on from if the youngsters are banging down the door.
• Similar to Cain (but to a lesser extent), these players would slot the Powells and Fowlers into more appropriate short term roles. In some cases, they may set up platoon situations, although platoons in CF are not ideal in my book (plus for Cain).
• Similar to Cain, the CF market may be depressed for these players. I do not believe you would get the same relative market value as for Cain, but I do think there can be some effects of few teams being in the CF market.
• Possible ability to flip a player on a short term deal if he is playing well and the team as a whole is not.

Negatives;

• Some money cost, although, come on...
• Similar to Cain, there would be some pushing around of younger players. Although, again, this is arguably a plus.
• These type of players can be major upgrades, or not really do much. See 2017 A’s. One would hope the A’s, with their payroll room versus recent baselines, would be able to play towards the deeper end of the bridge vet pool.

Summary:

Option 3 feels very pragmatic and the A’s front office does pragmatic quite often.

So Athletics Nation, what say you?

Should the A’s go with competitive and psyche risk letting the youth sink or swim? Should they go with a little “John Fisher Risk” on a targeted, but relatively pricey, major upgrade? Or should they try to walk a sort of balance in the pragmatic middle they have so often?