ML/v0’s liveblog Sketchy Oak Trib writeup, with obligatory Grunwald appearance Sketchy KTVU writeup, with an amusing objection to The Grunwald Plan Less-sketchy Chron writeup De Mause checks in Calcaterra checks in

This is an … odd post from Marine Layer, and I think it deserves its own dedicated discussion thread here. ML duplicates some (but not all) of grover’s recent work in profiling the A’s salary situation for 2011-2012. He makes a couple idiosyncratic assumptions (um … what “slugger” available this offseason will sign with Oakland ...

Hunh. How did we miss this? FoS claims it was posted last Wednesday, but there’s no clear indication of date (either on the page or the source code, that I can see). Is this new? If so, why now? This sure feels like a first-shoe-dropping sort of thing to me — prelude to … something. ...

Jesus fucking Christ, Lew, take the maximalist position, why doncha? Here are the owners’ relative stances (just heard recently): Wolff’s preferred position: Make the Bay Area a shared two-team market, with no county designations for individual teams. No compensation to the Giants. Wolff’s fallback position: Minimal compensation to the Giants, but only after the move ...

From Matt Artz in the CoCoTi: new Tesla-Toyota NUMMI deal doesn’t change anything, Fremont not happening: Wolff told me today that Fremont isn’t an option for the A’s, because the team can’t finance a Fremont ballpark without the ability to sell entitlements to build the 3,150 housing units that were part of the original ballpark ...

Ah, geez. Shea never disappoints, does he? I mean, I guess this tedious rehash of the attendance “issue” is serviceable enough, in an obligatory-base-touching/written-for-people-who-have-never-paid-attention-to-the-issue/J-school-identikit way, but, really, what’s in here that we haven’t heard a million times from every conceivable side (surprised there were no San Jose or Magowan quotes) over the last 5 years? ...