The Indians definitely are one of the teams that will be calling to inquire about Street, as are the Brewers and pretty much every other team that doesn't have a reliable closer, and he'll be a great pickup if he's dealt. But he's under club control via arbitration, so the A's have all the leverage here. If they don't get exactly what they're looking for, I can't imagine they'll be all that bummed about having Street, Joey Devine and Brad Ziegler anchoring the back of their 2009 bullpen.

What, exactly, will the A's want in return for Street? Well, it's no secret that they'd like an impact bat, but looking at the Indians' 40-man roster and making an educated guess about whom they'd be willing to deal, I don't see any great fits. Second baseman Asdrubal Cabrera would work, but he's only 22 with a ton of upside, and I doubt if the Tribe would part with him.

Do you know why the A's did not bring Tony DeFrancesco back? I thought he was a good coach.
-- Dan B., Woodland, Calif.

The A's reassigned him to an undetermined Minor League gig. But that's putting earrings on a pig. He was let go from the big league staff, and while I'd love to tell you exactly why, I truly have no idea. What I can do is speculate a little bit, based on each coach on the 2008 staff's area of true expertise.

As far as I can tell, there wasn't a coach with a great deal of experience working with infielders. Ostensibly, that was DeFrancesco's responsibility this past season, but it certainly isn't something he'd spent a great deal of time doing during his long and successful coaching career. His first job with the A's, in fact, was as a roving catching instructor.

Given the number of young and relatively inexperienced infielders on the current roster, the A's need a seasoned hand. I'd be shocked if the coach who replaces DeFrancesco isn't a veteran infield coach.

Hey Mychael, you don't have to put this in the mailbag unless you feel it would serve other fans. What does it mean when a player is eligible for arbitration?
-- Jason B., Lehi, Utah

I've gotten a few of these e-mails lately, so here you go. In general, a player must accumulate three years of big league service time before he becomes arbitration-eligible; there are exceptions, but I'll stick with the basics for the purpose of the explanation. Once a player is eligible for arbitration, the club no longer unilaterally dictates the terms of his contract, which typically means the player ends up with a pretty nice raise.

Have a question about the A's? E-mail your query to MLB.com A's beat reporter Mychael Urban for possible inclusion in a future Inbox column. Letters may be edited for brevity, length and/or content. First Name, Last Initial: Hometown: Email Address: Question:

If the player and the club can't reach an agreement on a deal before the scheduled arbitration hearings, which usually are set for some point during Spring Training, each side submits a proposed salary for the upcoming season. They then make their case in support of that figure at the hearing, after which the arbiter must pick one number or the other -- there is no middle ground. Those hearings can get ugly, by the way, and the A's are among the clubs that seem to avoid them as much as possible.

Anyway, a player is eligible for arbitration for three years before he can become a free agent. The A's have had a lot of success this decade in signing their young stars to multiyear deals that take them through their arbitration years, providing the player with security in the event of an injury and providing the club with some cost certainty.

Some players -- Ryan Howard of the Phillies is a high-profile example -- roll the dice and refuse to sign multiyear deals, looking to cash in at arbitration after putting up big numbers. Howard won $10 million in arbitration last spring, and he'll probably get another fat bump come February.

Why keep Ty Van Burkleo as hitting coach when the A's are last in the American League in most offensive categories?
-- Bob L., Shady Cove, Ore.

For the same reason the A's are probably going to go out and get an infield coach with a track record of success in working with young players.

I understand -- kind of -- why some fans are down on Van Burkleo. The numbers are flat out ugly, no two ways about it. But be honest with yourselves: Did you expect the A's to be an offensive juggernaut? I sure didn't. Way too many young guys, and way too many injuries to the guys we already knew could hit.

Van Burkleo came from the Angels organization, where he was the roving Minor League hitting instructor for six years. The way I see it, he was a glorified non-roving Minor League hitting instructor in 2008. That's not intended as a slam on the players' abilities; it's the truth. Look at how many players made their big league debuts this year.

The A's have gone through a lot of hitting coaches in the past several years, and now that there's a commitment to rebuilding with what appears to be a solid core of young talent, the carousel needs to stop for a while. Continuity is a must in development, and Van Burkleo has spent the bulk of his career developing young talent. That's why he's getting another year.

Any chance the A's would be interested in taking a chance on Andruw Jones? He only has one year left on his contract, and he flopped in Los Angeles.
-- Jesse P., Bangor, Maine

Wow, Jesse, that would be taking a huge chance. Jones is due to make $15 million in salary next year, and that doesn't include two installments totaling $7.1 million still due on his $12.2 million signing bonus.

What you're proposing would require a trade or some sort, and I can't see the A's giving up anything in exchange for a $22.1 million outfielder who hasn't had a good year since 2006.