Holding Holliday accountable

More from the mailbag:

    Matt Holliday has been awful so far this season. Yes, it's still early but it's really not THAT early anymore. He went from superstar to black hole in the course of one winter and I've seen almost no media coverage of it. Where are the interviews by columnists asking the tough questions? David Wright hasn't been nearly as awful and he's on the verge of getting roasted by the New York media and he's their golden boy! Can you shed any light on the subject? -- Jay, Queens, N.Y.

I (or rather, a friendly blogger) will have something to say about David Wright tomorrow morning. As for Holliday, you haven't heard anything about him because he plays his home games in a media backwater known as "Oakland" (or sometimes, "the East Bay"). Can you remember the last time anybody wrote anything about the A's? Lately they've not been good enough to rave about or bad enough to revile, which would leave them out of the news even if they played in a more notable city. Like Pittsburgh. Or Kansas City.
No, I kid Oakland because I love Oakland. Or the East Bay, anyway.

The question about Holliday is a good one, and will be better in a month if he's still not hitting. Today, as you probably know, he finally hit his first homer as an Athletic. There was every reason to think that Holliday's performance upon moving from a hitter's park to a pitcher's park in the Big Boy League, but this is ridonculous. Nobody thought this. At least nobody that I know about.

It's too early to figure Holliday's a bust, but on the other hand it's not early early, you know? April is a whole month, and you shouldn't have to wait a whole month for your (supposed) power-hitting outfielder -- and your highest-paid player, to boot -- to hit his first homer.

My guess? Holliday has a solid May, hits five or six dongers over the fence. If he doesn't? It's going to be a long, long season on the other side of the bridge. And considering how the A's young pitchers have fared, it might be a long season anyway.