Son of Title
Finals time, so there's no way I can get together a steaming pile of wisdom for you today. Instead, just a true/false comment starter:
If the Giants were to pick up either Pat Burrell or Richie Sexson without giving up Lowry, and the team signs David Wells for a one-year deal, I believe the Giants would contend in the West.
You can mix and match the names if you'd like, but true or false?
144 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Re: Son of Title
Apparently, Mando wants to go back to the Marlins and they want him as well. Sabean, make it happen.
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
I think the Giants can contend for the NL West (as it currently stands) right now. Do I think they'll be a good team? Of course not. But unless the Dodgers get another big bat, none of the teams in the NL West are all that intimidating. I do think both the Dodgers and Diamondbacks have a chance to be really good by the end of the decade. I just don't think that their youngsters will be all that good this year. I think the Giants can win about 85 games iff:
1.) Cain pitches 75% as well as he did in August/September.
2.) Brian Wilson, Billy Sadler, etc. come of age
3.) Bonds plays about 115-120 games and has an OPS around 1,000
4.) Lincecum makes an impact by midseason.
5.) Armando Benitez injures his pitching arm while shoveling down breakfast burritos.
by brauber on Dec 13, 2006 9:08 AM PST reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 13, 2006 9:12 AM PST reply actions
True
But within those parameters yes the Giants would contend.
Re: Son of Title
Help me, Barry Zito, you're my only hope.
parsing sequels, I know...
by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2006 9:38 AM PST up reply actions
Re: How about Zabka?
by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2006 6:55 PM PST up reply actions
Re: parsing sequels, I know...
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
I guess there's no pleasing you no matter what the team does. You'd call the following lineup "still god awful"?
Roberts (improved leadoff from Winn in 2006)
Vizquel (probable slight decline from 2006)
Durham (probable slight decline from 2006)
Bonds (2nd half results indicate probable improvement)
Sexson or Burrell (probably health would make it a wash compared to Alou)
Winn (probable imrovement over 2006 results)
Aurilia (improvement over Feliz)
Molina (improvement over Notgardo/Matheny)
Re: Son of Title
Bonds is amazing as always, but he's likely to be worse than last year - the man is going to be 42. To expect him to put up an OPS over 1.000 again seems optimistic - as does the idea of his staying healthy .
Winn hit .262/.324/.396 last year - his career numbers of .284/.343/.421 suggest there's likely to be some reversion upwards, but he's also at an age where mediocre players often fall of the cliff. I'm inclined to agree with you that he will improve.
Aurilia over Feliz sounds good, but I don't think it will happen - They would not give Feliz $5 million to be a backup. Aurillia is the super-utility man this year.
Durham hit .293/.360/.538 last year - the highest slugging percentage of his career (he's a career .443 slugger, and this was 50 points higher than his previous high), at age 34. I think he's likely to revert back significantly to form, much like Winn in 2006 as compared to 2005.
Vizquel hit .295/.361/.389 last year - his highest OPS in the last 4 years. What do you think the odds are on him replicating that or coming close to it? I think he's more likely to revert to his 2005 numbers - again, due to the age.
Molina is an improvement, but not much of one on Notgardo - a .284/.319/.467 line as opposed to the .266/.302/.465. Again, it was a career high OPS for Molina, and I'd be surprised if he matches Notgardo's line from last year.
I see a bunch of guys who had good ( to great seasons by their standards, and a lineup that's gotten even older - the same lineup from last year would perform worse. Yes, Sexson or Burrell would improve it, but its still mediocre, at best.
Re: Son of Title
I'd say Durham's bat was far more valuable than Alou'sbecause it was there.
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
this town thinks you're a bastard - Elvis Costello
Re: Son of Title
Scientifically proven. Giants line-up (at least offensively) should be a shade better than it was last season. A Sexson addition would help a fair amount.
by GiantJim on Dec 13, 2006 8:06 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by GiantJim on Dec 13, 2006 8:08 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
True
To me, it's all about sex, son.
Richie Rich
Re: Richie Rich
by CystedTwister on Dec 13, 2006 6:29 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
How can "false' selectors even write that? What do you want? Yankees money and David Wright and Grady Sizemore and Jake Peavy. Jesus, the dogs are out. I can certainly be negative about the situation that we've (well, the Front Office) have put ourselves in, but we're still in DECEMBER.
Many here have made up their mind about Sabean, as if his job is over and he's failed. It's not and he hasn't. He's made good and bad moves and has chosen to construct an elderly roster, etc. We know all of this. But, as I've written here before, he's not done a bad job THIS off-season. It's so much easier to be negative. I can just see some of us reacting to a potential Soriano signing: "Fucking Sabean's going to waste money on HIM!" vs. not signing Soriano: "Fucking Sabean could've signed Soriano and he didn't, fire him."
Baseball's a game of failure. It's a marathon that's very difficult to predict. Again, we all know this. My point (of many) is to give the team a chance for a second. I mean, the freaking Cardinals, a team with one great hitter, a good pitcher, and a bunch of injury woes, scrubs, and 'tweeners just won the World Series. The Cardinals, the team that just about blew it's NL Central lead in an epic collapse. Not only did they retain it, but they pulled their shit together and trudged through the play-offs. The Cardinals? Yes, Pujols is great, but they roster is not that much better (if better at all) than the Padres, Dodgers, Giants, Astros, Mets, Braves, or Phillies. That's just the NL. The Cardinals' roster certainly isn't better than 10 AL teams.
Easy...and Zito's not the "savior" answer.
by Kent @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:56 AM PST reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by Kent @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:59 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Sabean hasn't (thus far) screwed the future this off-season. He's protected the good prospects and signed vets to mostly relatively inexpensive short term contracts. Which is arguably the best he could have done in the situation.
But the fact is, right now, the Giants would field a mediocre team.
by GiantJim on Dec 13, 2006 8:14 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
We really need a draft that gives us (odds-wise) two MLB regulars in the near future.
by Kent @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 8:48 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
But I can't help but think that he got here accidentally, and that he signed Bonds and Roberts for $34M only because he couldn't sign Lee and Pierre for $150M. And that some of the reasons I like these results (there is room for 1,000 at-bats between Linden, Frandsen and Alfonzo on this roster, and almost all of the veterans have tradeable contracts) might not fit with the approach of Sabean and Bochy.
Either way, Sabean has made it through the winter without making any moves that will seriously hurt this team in the future, so God bless him for that.
Son of Title
by Kent @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 14, 2006 7:39 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/10/08/SP21427.DTL
Re: Son of Title
who in the west would better than
3.Durham
4.Bonds
5.Sexton
by cksf on Dec 13, 2006 10:00 AM PST reply actions
Contend in the West
Win? Do not think SF has enough pitching and will not win unless they resolve this issue.
Re: Son of Title
Lurch at First moves Richie Aorta to 3rd and gets Fleas bat out of the everyday lineup. (He is equally worthless against lefties as righties almost so no platoon for Fleas...just utility)
Wells ain't comin here...see elsewhere in somebody's diary on why. Besides I like Sanchez' chances in the rotation better than Free Willy's at this stage of his career. I imagine some pitching will shake out in Spring Training.
I am worried less about the pitching this year than at anytime since 2002 simply because Alou is not around to mangle all the arms. Bochy knows pitching.
Don't forget that Bonds, when healthy, like he was in the second half, was the most disruptive presence in the National League last year. I'm betting he will be again.
I don't look for this team to very good in April to July, unless LA,Zona, Padrox, shit themselves early and often and the Giants break out of the gate by winning 8 out of 10. Remember, under Alou, these guys never put together a big winning streak...The pitching breakdowns contributed mightily to that after 2003. If I'm not mistaken, Bochy has always figured a way to bridge games so as to put together 2 or 3 big winning streaks for the Padres every year. I could be wrong, but I seem to think that is part of his m.o.
Anyway. Play Ball. Winter Sucks.
by E Ticket on Dec 13, 2006 10:09 AM PST reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: winning streaks, if I remember correctly, the Giants didn't win more than four or five games in a row at any time from April to at least August. Maybe all the way through the season. They were consistently mediocre.
Re: Son of Title
by PacBellBoozer on Dec 13, 2006 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
While thats only two games, its a plus 2 games in the standings. Do that 4 times and thats 8 games in the standings for the season. Its 24-0 vs 16-8. Do six games in a row instead of 4 out of 6 about once every 6 six weeks, and voila; same team just went from 8 games under .500 to 8 games over. 77 and 85 just became 85 and 77. Thats just about the difference between the Padres and Giants the last couple of years-give or take. That is a result of putting ALL (not just a favored few) of the players you have, in the best position to maximize their potential to contribute to victory, over the course of a long grueling season.
Goofus points out the definite improvements in the batting order from last year too.
Have the Giants done everything I wanted them to do? Hell no. But right now, I like our chances better than I did going into 05 and 06. By a lot.
The media can make all the noise they want about Lamar, but we've all been through it, been there, done that, nothing new, move along.
I am really excited about Matt Cain, Noah Lowry being healthy all year, Kevin Correia, Brian Wilson, Jonathan Sanchez, and having Barry healthy going into Spring Training for the first time since 2004--which btw, was the last time our guys really competed well. Timmah II will be 22. I give him a good look in Spring Training. If he is dominant and we've not added an established arm to the rotation, I give him a shot to be Justin Verlander, Joel Zumaya, Jonathan Papalbon. Now how exciting would that be to have Timmah II blow some ched by Jeff Kent, Nomar and company?
Down and out about Jason Schmidt? Tough. I'll take Matt "DammitBobby" Cain, next year head to head vs Schmidt. My 330,000 vs. their 15.2 million. Who do you want? Brad Penny vs. Jonathan Sanchez, Big fat slob spoiled baby, or the Puerto Rican Cool Hand Luke? Matt Morris or Jeff Weaver? I'll take a now healthy Morris over the refugee from Deliverance thank you very much. I could go on, but you get the picture.
Bochy is upbeat about Aurelia. He mentioned that Richie made some major adjustments to his game last year to rejuvinate his career. I'm buying it for the time being. Cain made major adjustments, mid season and saved himself a year floundering in AAA. He's still green, and he was astounding. It would not be the first, nor the last time a veteran player has made adjustments in his game and regained form. Richie takes very good care of himself physically. No reason to not expect him to have a good season.
The acrimony between Barry and Magowan is about to become yesterday's news. By New Years Day, most will have forgotten the rancor from the off-season.
One more bat. One more arm. That will help a lot. But there comes a time when the paper shuffling has to stop and flesh and bone, head and heart have to take the field. So much of what happens is predicated upon attitude. The guys in the National League are really close in terms of physical tools. Health plays a part of course. But the tools and abilities are so close that the difference over the course of the season will be of attitude and the baseball gods.
by E Ticket on Dec 13, 2006 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
It can't rain all the time.
by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2006 7:08 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by GiantJim on Dec 13, 2006 8:19 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Er, well, to be honest, just started using conducting fluid.
by howtheyscored on Dec 14, 2006 10:23 AM PST up reply actions
Trade Armando
Lineup would be:
CF: Roberts
SS: Vizquel
2B: Durham/Aurilia
LF: Bonds
1B: Sexon
RF: Winn
3B: Feliz/Aurilia
C: Molina
Rotation: Zito, Cain, Morris, Ortiz/Moss, Sanchez
Bullpen: Worrel, Kline, Lincecum, Correia, Hennessy, Wilson
Bench: Frandsen, Aurilia, Linden
by bschor00 on Dec 13, 2006 10:49 AM PST reply actions
Re: Trade Armando
Re: Trade Armando
I don't think so.
by Katman on Dec 13, 2006 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Trade Armando
They have more young pitchers than they know what to do with, though. With Willis/Johnson/Sanchez/Olsen holding down the rotation, maybe one of their lesser young arms (Nolasco? Petit? One of their many promising arms in the low minors?) would be a better fit.
Re: Trade Armando
I think Moss making the team is a long shot.
Why no Chulk in your bullpen? Dude's good!
Re: Trade Armando
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 13, 2006 11:10 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Trade Armando
by E Ticket on Dec 13, 2006 3:47 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Trade Armando
by amoose on Dec 14, 2006 8:24 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Trade Armando
by GiantJim on Dec 14, 2006 8:50 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Trade Armando
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 14, 2006 10:02 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Trade Armando
The Vinnie Chulk era has only just begun!
Re: Trade Armando
Re: Trade Armando
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
by April3rdLifeBegins on Dec 13, 2006 11:18 AM PST reply actions
Re: Son of Title
2007
Zito/Cain/Lowry/Morris/Sanchez
2008
Zito/Cain/Lowry/Sanchez/Lincecum
I like the idea of starting Sanchez this year so we don't have two first-year starters next year.
Re: Son of Title
by Katman on Dec 13, 2006 12:16 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
I think the Giants would contend with Burrell/Sexon + Wells. But I don't think they'd win.
At the very least, the rotation would have to be:
Cain, Morris, Wells, Lowry, Ortiz.
Re: Son of Title
Whoops , there's lunch. Again.
by victor frankenstein on Dec 13, 2006 2:44 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Am I blind, or is Sanchez not on that list?
by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2006 2:53 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Cain, Morris, Wells, Lowry, Ortiz."
The only Giant uniforms I see Orson and Russ wearing, come off the Halloween Costume rack at Rochesters Big & Fat.
by E Ticket on Dec 13, 2006 3:51 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by GiantJim on Dec 13, 2006 8:23 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by Lyle @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 15, 2006 6:40 AM PST up reply actions
I Don't Think
In the past six years, Giants first basemen, aggregated, (Snow, Niekro, Feliz, Minor, Hillenbrand, Galarraga, Sweeney, Kent, Crespo) have hit .262/.340/.418, with 76.5 RBIs per 600 PAs. That's more or less about what we can reasonably expect from Richie.
I think that Sabean sees a starting pitcher, and maybe some bullpen help, as the final pieces of the 2007 puzzle.
I hope that I'm wrong about that ...
Re: I Don't Think
Or did he make a deal with the devil? Something like this? "You can general manage a team with the greatest player in baseball at your disposal for as many years as you like, but you may never have anything but poor hitting 1Bman. I want you to remember these names: Pedro Feliz, Shea Hilenbrand, Damon Minor, Lance Neikro, Felipe Crespo. People will laugh at you, but to attain control people's will, you must play these fools at 1B."
by GiantJim on Dec 14, 2006 9:27 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
David Wells would be welcome, but Sabean has essentially painted himself in the Zito corner. How do you let Schmidt walk to the Dodgers, and not counter that move?
Contrary to popular belief, I think the Giants have the potential to have a great bullpen next year, as long as Mando is shedded, Worrell retires, and at least two starters are added.
Zito-Cain-Morris-Lowry-Linecum.
Wilson-Sanchez-Kline-Correia-Hennesey-Chulk-Sadler.
Could happen. Don't even need David "I was offended" Wells.
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
I do not think Sabean will have two big ? marks in the rotation. I susp[ect they bring somebody in - Zito, Suppan - and let they young guys battle it out in ST for the #5 spot - Sanchez, Moss, Hennessey, Correia (altho, and I don't know why, they seem to see Correia as a RP).
Personally, I hope Sanchez wins the battle and establishes himself in '07, paving the way for Linececum to start in '08. The reasonaing here is, two rookies puts to much work and strain on the bull pen.
Re: Son of Title
Kelly's Heroes
"Have a little faith, Moriarity, have a little faith..." Oddball added, shaking his head at Moriarity's repeated negativity. Oddball continued with a faint hint of disgust, "...always with the negative waves Moriarity, always with the negative waves." -Oddball (D. Sutherland) to Morariaty (G. McCloud, aka Capt. Stubing [sp?]).
Ya gotta believe.
Go Giants 2007.
P.S. For a cookie (another Kelly's Heroes line) what's the next scene? Hint: It involves a bridge.
by Kent @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 1:46 PM PST reply actions
Uhhh..
by Lyle @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 15, 2006 6:45 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
To me the difference between Zito and Wells is far bigger then the difference between Sexton or Burrell and Aurilia.
Re: finals
For what it's worth, anyway, I go to Cal and I'm studying English. Walking in Spring '07, baby. Thanks for asking.
by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2006 2:52 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 13, 2006 2:57 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Dec 13, 2006 4:29 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 13, 2006 4:33 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Dec 13, 2006 5:11 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
Re: finals
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 13, 2006 6:11 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
Re: finals
I was Political Science '02. I hope you walk at the Greek Theater like I got to.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Dec 13, 2006 4:27 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
by Grant Brisbee on Dec 13, 2006 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
Re: finals
Re: Son of Title
If the answer to all of these questions is yes, please send your resume to Brian Sabean & Peter Magowan as you qualify to work in the Giants front office.
The rest of know that this team will suck again in 2007 and for many years into the future because they've waited one more year to start the rebuilding.
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Delaying the rebuilding: What does that mean? Just playing Linden, Lewis, Frandsen, Ishikawa and whoever else and losing 120 games? I don't see how anything they've done this offseason has negatively impacted the future.
People, People There is Plenty of Middle Ground
Most people seem to think SF needs a slugging 1B. People want Burrell or Sexson. Older players. Expensive older players. Why not any noise for LaRoche who is being shopped daily? He is a perfect way to get younger and healthier.
Why not give Frandsen an opportunity to earn a sport as long as you have a Plan B (Aurilia). Linden seemed to progress and have the light finally go on for him. Why not have him earn a spot for steady ABs and procure a Plan B OF. A player who could possibly platoon with Linden if he continued to hit better from one side.
LOVE Lincecum but SF will make a mistake if it projects him to be in the starting rotation on openind day The City. Lincecum is a player who should not be counted on so when he does arrive (whether opening day or midseason) he is a very pleasant surprise and the Giants will then have a surplus of pitching. The same can be said for Sanchez as a starter. Both pitchers will produce for SF but better to not count on them and then have them surprise and improve the club.
Re: Son of Title
Given Grant's question, it'd be more like Alou for Sexson/Burrell, which is not that big a drop off considering Alou only gave them 2/3 of a season last year.
The other swap is really Roberts for Finley, which should be a marked upgrade.
I think we're all counting on (or at least hoping for) the 2nd half version of 2006 of Bonds for 2007.
Finally, if they do get Sexson/Burrell, it makes them far less dependent on Feliz starting. I'd dare say Richie A. would be an improvement over Feliz.
I've not takne leave of my senses. In fact, I've got 1,2,3,4,5...senses working over-time.
(Never seen an XTC reference here before...hooray for me!)
Sorry, Goofus...
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
"Instead, just a true/false comment starter:
If the Giants were to pick up either Pat Burrell or Richie Sexson without giving up Lowry, and the team signs David Wells for a one-year deal, I believe the Giants would contend in the West.
You can mix and match the names if you'd like, but true or false?"
It doesn't mean we all believe it's going to happen, we're just answering what we think it would mean...sheesh.
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 6:21 PM PST reply actions
Re: Son of Title
LA Rotation: Schmidt/Lowe/Penny/Wolf/Billingsley
SF Rotation: Cain/Lowry/Morris/Wells/Hennessey
Clear Advantage Dodgers
BullPen: Be Real - Clear Advantage Dodgers
LineUps:
Pierre vs Roberts (PA advantage Pierre)
Furcal vs Vizquel (SLG advantage Furcal)
Garciaparra vs Durham (even)
Kent vs Bonds (PAs vs OPS - even overall)
Gonzalez vs Sexton (advantage Sexton)
Either vs Winn (even at best)
Martin vs Molina (even at best)
Betemit vs Feliz (even at best)
So with the offenses basicly tied just how does the Giants inferior pitching rate being a favorite?
The Giants needs to accept slightly less offense then the Dodgers (going with Auilia instead of Sexton) but gain an advantage in starting pitching over the Dodgers by going with Zito instead of Hennessey. Zito and Wells not only strengthen the rotation but the BullPen too with Sanchez and Hennessey moving from rotation to pen.
by giantsrainman on Dec 13, 2006 6:59 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Cain=Schmidt
Wells>Wolf
Sanchez (and it will be him, not Henn)>>>Billingsley
Roberts>Pierre (look at the OBP)
Furcal=Vizquel+ a couple HR
Kent<<<<<<<<<<<Bonds
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 7:46 PM PST up reply actions
Betemit v. Feliz
Giant Fans: Among those players getting more than 350 ABs, Pedro Feliz was one of the 5 worst players in baseball last year. Internalize this. Know it. Make it part of your inner being.
by dodgerfan on Dec 13, 2006 9:10 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Betemit v. Feliz
you may be completely right, but...
ass.
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:12 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Betemit v. Feliz
Flanders sure did a great job keeping J.D. Drew around.
by Kent @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:17 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Betemit v. Feliz
by Punch Rockgroin on Dec 13, 2006 9:27 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Betemit v. Feliz
Your posts are clever, thought-provoking and not the least bit idiotic, dodgerfan, but, please... don't hit us where it hurts. Lay off Pedro Feliz.
I'm with Pants
by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2006 10:33 PM PST up reply actions
Re: I'm with Pants
Wait...
by Punch Rockgroin on Dec 13, 2006 11:33 PM PST up reply actions
Re: I'm with Pants
by Kent @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 14, 2006 7:47 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Sexson, Wells, what does it matter if they get another bat and arm or not? The 2007 San Francisco Giants just might be the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked.
Seventy-five wins? Whoo-hoo! Go 'Topes!
by sdsukat01 on Dec 13, 2006 8:50 PM PST reply actions
Younger and Healthier?
I've been away from baseball for a while: have the Giants followed through on their promise to get "younger and healthier" this offseason?
Let me know when you get a chance. Thanks.
by dodgerfan on Dec 13, 2006 9:06 PM PST reply actions
Bleed Dodger Blue
As we are learning, the phrase "younger and healthier" is a relative term. A little younger and a little healthier. How is Tommy and Ned?
Re: Bleed Dodger Blue
1B (much older)
2B
3B
SS
LF
RF
They got slightly younger at catcher and went from ancient to just plain old in center. I haven't run the math but I think they are, in fact, older. Unless all the other teams in the league signed Steve Finley at once, I think it is safe to say that the Giants got relatively older.
by dodgerfan on Dec 13, 2006 9:23 PM PST up reply actions
The truth is out. Yes WE ARE OLD
Our best hope lies in our pitching staff. Looking for a starter to round out the staff and hoping the cartload of young arms breaks thru. Currently the Dodgers are better positioned than my beloved Giants. Here's hoping to after 162 the Giants will be better. Beat LA. Did you say you are from Hollywood?
So...
In the field, yes the Giants are older. But the pitching staff and the bench will be much younger.
13 years Vizcaino to Frandsen
15 years Finley to Linden
Those are the main drops in age. The whole pitching staff will be younger, losing Fassero, most probably Worrell, with a lot of youngsters coming into the pen and even the rotation. The Giants will be younger.
And for getting "much older" at first, if you call 4 years much older, then yes.
Seriously, I'm all for someone like you to come over here and argue their opinion, but at least respect us and try to do some research.
I admit
by dodgerfan on Dec 13, 2006 9:26 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Younger and Healthier?
fuck off
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:17 PM PST up reply actions
Nick, please do not lower yourself to that level
Re: Nick, please do not lower yourself to that lev
note: if he were padrefan i would not be nearly as aggressive
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 10:21 PM PST up reply actions
Shit disturber
Dodgerfan hasn't done any of this. He's come in and said stupid shit to get us all riled up. He is not presenting debates in s constructive manner. He is acting like a classless idiot and no self-respecting Giants fan should take that shit from a Dodger fan.
I echo the "fuck off" sentiment for our little blue fiend, heartily.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 14, 2006 10:45 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Younger and Healthier?
But also, I'm happy I got to call him a one note flute, because I've been saving that one up for the right time. So even though I would have rather not commented at all, at least I appeased myself a little.
by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2006 9:26 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Sexson would be more fun to watch than the current crop, I just think investing so much into next season is nuts. This team's obvious strength is young pitchers that aren't quite ready to dominate yet. We should be looking at 2008, when Cain, Lincecum, Lowry is going to be a huge rotation. All resources should be focused on this, and even short one year deals do nothing towards this goal. Focus people, focus.
Caveat: Its easy for me to say, cause I got rid of my tickets a couple years back, and am not forced to pony up a couple grand to watch the rebuilding team I endorse.
Re: Son of Title
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:19 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:21 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 9:21 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by dodgerfan on Dec 13, 2006 9:24 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by nick @ McCovey Chronicles on Dec 13, 2006 10:19 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
by E Ticket on Dec 14, 2006 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
If Dodgerfan wants to be a troll, lets not give him what he wants by reacting to his nonsense. I suspect he might he actually provide some good lively discussion if he can just drop the taunting. It's nice to hear the perpective of other team's fans. Besides, I don't want to have to summon my unearthly powers and go all Kenshin on his ass.
Dodgerfan,
If you pick up on what goes on here, you'll see it's generally pretty intelligent baseball discussion, pop culture references and humorous banter. Grat has created a cool little community where people don't stick out their chests and tell each other how much the other sucks. How about seeing if you can participate in the fun and enjoy the civility? Thanks.
Re: Son of Title
by E Ticket on Dec 14, 2006 5:38 PM PST up reply actions
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
Re: Son of Title
It sounds like to me just another vastly over-paid, self-important, should be somebodies who will, yet again, fall woefully far below the mildly indifferent expatiations of the 4-8 inning crowd. Yes, Mr. and Miss socal stick ball fan; Baseball, as we like to call it, is a nine inning game. So to sum up: You will always "suck"(in the bad way)even if you win.
by Ghost11 on Dec 14, 2006 9:06 AM PST reply actions

by 


















