Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by JakeS on May 16, 2007 3:26 PM PDT
Email
PrintSo, if I didn't make it clearer in the first installment, that section covered the 2004 season (both pre-season and mid-season), thus this installment will cover the preparation for the 2005 season as well as any mid-season transactions.
November 14th, 2004
Signed Omar Vizquel to a three-year contract worth $12.25 million.
Interestingly, I have to harken back to the Pierzynski trade to explain my verdict on this one. Coming into the 2005 season, Vizquel was a 38-year-old shortstop coming off a .291/.353/.388 season - above average performance when coupled with his defense but also the fourth best season of his entire career, a bit of a red flag for somebody of his age. In addition, he had missed half of the previous season due to injuries and failed a mid-season physical for a trade. Now, he's rewarded us with a solid performance (up until this year), but with the knowledge we had at the time this wasn't a good idea. If I'm not docking Sabean for the Liriano deal, I can't in good conscience call this a good one. In addition, we forfeited another draft pick for the signing
Verdict: Even, for the reasons listed above.
November 30th, 2006
Signed Armando Benitez to a three-year contract worth $21 million.
At the time of the signing, Benitez was coming off a monster season for the Marlins where he put up a 1.29 ERA for the Marlins, but there was more to it than that - he pitched just under 70 innings with a merely good 62/21 K/BB ratio and an average home run rate. In the season for that he pitched for three different teams and walked more than 4.5 batters per 9 innings, not a very reliable commodity. He was definitely the best closer on the market, but for a team that started an outfield of Feliz in left, Ellison in center, and Tucker in right, was Armando the piece to bring the team to contention? Yes, I know that those three were not intended to be the starters, but when you have Barry Bonds and Moises Alou manning the corners "unplanned injuries" isn't a card you can play. In addition, we sacrified our first round draft pick in a fairly strong draft.
Verdict: Bad deal because it did not address the team's needs.
December 13th, 2004
Signed Mike Matheny to a three-year contract worth $10.5 million and released A.J. Pierzynski.
The release of Pierzynski technically came after the signing, but these two were basically one move and an absolutely terrible one, top to bottom. First, we'll look at the release of Pierzynski. A.J. was coming off a season where he hit .272/.319/.410, a disappointing season, but a tolerable one in a league where the average backstop hit 258..323.392. He'd also alienated himself to the rest of the team and the fans, so Sabean could have been excused for not getting full value back in a trade, but he didn't even get that, he released him. He released a 27-year-old catcher coming off five consecutive above-average seasons. RELEASED. There is no excuse for that, none at all.
So, maybe he redeemed himself with the replacement? Hardly. Mike Matheny was coming off a season where he posted the lowest EQA of any catcher with 200 PA. His defense was legendary, sure, but he was the worst hitting starting catcher not only on the market, but in the big leagues. WARP, taking into account defense, valued his 2004 performance at 3.4, less than Pierzynski's showing in the season and that took into account Pierzynski's questionable defense. BEYOND THAT, we were the only team interested in Matheny's service - his agent expressed surprise that we offered him such an above-market contract. His old team was kicking him to the curb for YADIER MOLINA, and we payed him over $10 million. In his career with the Giants he hit an atrocious .239/.287/.388 before a concussion ended his career.
Verdict: Bad, bad, bad, and did I mention bad?
December 27th, 2004
Signed Moises Alou to a two-year contract worth $13.35 million
Now, Moises Alou absolutely raked over the course of this contract, enough to make the money worthwhile, but he also fell short of qualifying for the batting title in both seasons due to injuries. In addition, his numbers in San Francisco have been significantly higher than one would have projected given his three years in Chicago. I'll give Sabean some credit, I suppose for seeing some life left in Alou's bat, but his inability to add an adequate insurance policy in the event of Alou's inevitable injuries (Alex Sanchez, anyone?) keeps this from being a plus move.
Verdict: Even.
January 17th, 2005
Re-signed Pedro Feliz to a two-year contract worth $6.1 million
This move is a telling one because it highlights a flaw in Sabean's team-building logic: even if his plan really is to surround Bonds with cheap average players he doesn't know where to find average players. Pedro Feliz hit .276/.305/.485 in 2004, his age 29 season. Now, this was a much higher batting average than his totals in the few seasons prior, so it seemed safe to assume that he wouldn't match it in the next season as he entered the decline phase of his career. At absolute best, Sabean could have expected a repeat of his 2004 performance, so was that worth keeping around? In a word, no. Feliz's 2004 EQA was a career high .263 and was better than only Tony Batista and Edgardo Alfonzo in terms of starting third basemen. Over the two years of that contract he posted EQAs of .246 and .241, the latter making him the worst starting third baseman with the bat in all of baseball.
Verdict: By definition signing the worst player at a position cannot be a good deal.
May 28th, 2005
Traded Jerome Williams and David Aardsma for LaTroy Hawkins
This trade was just retarded. Jerome Williams has certainly fallen from grace but at the time he was still a reasonably interesting pitcher while Aardsma was a former first round draft pick who still looked like a closer in the waiting. We got 30 mediocre innings from LaTroy Hawkins out of the deal and later dealt him for Steve Kline, and while Williams is on the verge of losing a Nationals rotation spot, Aardsma is a late-inning reliever who has struck out 27 in 22 innings this year and occasionally touches 100 mph on the gun. But, yeah, I mean, LaTroy Hawkins, right?
Verdict: Just stupid.
June 30th, 2005
Traded Jesse Foppert and Yorvit Torrealba for Randy Winn
On the surface this trade looks like a good deal - and on the surface it is. We gave up a backup catcher and a prospect who had fallen for grace for an average outfielder who played much better than average for us down the stretch - but it wasn't a trade we should have made. On June 30th the Giants were five and a half games back from a very weak division but there were three teams ahead of them and pretty much nobody outside the Giants front office really thought they had a chance at a serious run of contention without Barry Bonds. As it turns out, those people were right, because even though the trade worked out as well as anybody could ever have hoped the Giants were never within four games of making the playoffs as they limped to a third place finish.
Verdict: Even - the trade itself wasn't bad in terms of the talent we gave up but we were buyers at a trade deadline where we should not have been.
---
So, overall for the 2005 season Sabean clocks in with three even deals and four bad deals, not a good showing, especially given just how bad the bad deals were. Again he refused to sell at the trade deadline - he added Randy Winn (and Winn hit like the second coming of Mickey Mantle) and we weren't even close to making the postseason. Clearly we shouldn't have been buyers at the deadline if even adding a .359/.391/.680 line down the stretch left us seven games under .500, no? With a team as old as the one Sabean was fielding he doesn't get any slack for injuries either - giving a combined 1090 at-bats to Jason Ellison, Michael Tucker, Lance Niekro, and Deivi Cruz is a problem of depth, not of random chance. It was a miserable season to watch and I was amazed at the time that Sabean didn't get the axe following it.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
74 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Lowry and Correia for Dave Weathers
Sanchez and Hennessy for Christian Guzman
Lewis and Schierholtz for Wes Helms
Sav.Vy.
by Punch Rockgroin on May 16, 2007 4:04 PM PDT reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
As for the "cancer" thing, how realible exactly is Brett Tomko on the matter, no one cares what he thinks.
by April3rdLifeBegins on May 16, 2007 4:18 PM PDT reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
For reals though. I really would like to see Teahen wearing an orange and black uni right on or about July 28.
by Dolorous Edd on May 16, 2007 4:22 PM PDT reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
If there is a logical, realistic, fair, balanced way to get Teahen I am all for it. He's local, he's 26 and looks like he could be a 30/100/.300 guy consistently.
by Dolorous Edd on May 17, 2007 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
The Giants COULD get hope from their hockey brethren down Highway 101 in San Jose who did indeed manage to trade three player for the player who went on to win the MVP IN THAT SEASON!
But even when the Giants look there, they are rebuffed. The Sharks traded two players they had themselves drafted in the first round, along with a role player they had acquired in trade for one of their prospects. The Giants, of course, gave up a couple of years of their first round draft picks and aside from Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum -- two pretty much untradeable guys -- have been unable to develop much through their own system.
The Giants need two power hitters. But the problem is that even with their good, young pitching, they have little to trade for even one without weakening their already shaky roster.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Fired
I also agree with your indictment of Sabean not backing up his own trade. He actually showed his own lack of faith early on when he failed to sign AJ to a long term contract from the get go. Instead, he threatened him with release if he went to arbitration. Why would that scare a guy like AJ anyway? That probably had a lot to do with AJ's attitude problems. If you trade 3 good young arms for one player, then you better be ready to get out your checkbook and ask how much they want for a long term deal. If Sabean wasn't willing to do that, he should never have made the trade.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Winn had a good track record of performance and plays a quality CF. The fact that he tore it up after he came here was just gravy. There is no way Sabean could have foreseen Winn's season last year, and now he is right back to career norms.
Now deciding that Winn should play RF instead of CF? That's a different story.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on May 16, 2007 5:18 PM PDT reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
First, the two players they gave up could have potentially been pretty good players if they hadn't been injured after the trade.
Second, if Randy did well after the trade, he almost certainly would command far too much to play for an average center fielder and below-average corner in the second line of defense.
Fortunately the first part didn't come back to bite the Giants. But the second part certainly did.
And then Brian went out and compounded it by signing ANOTHER averagish center fielder, forcing Winn to right field where his glove was nearly golden but his bat was more like a noodle.
While I actually think Brian is a pretty good old-time baseball man, he has made some signings that OUT OF THE BOX weren't very good: Neifi Perez (although perhaps getting his chicken for advertising purposes evened it out), Mike Matheny and Jose Vizcaino. None of the three finished out his contract, although in Matheny's case it was due to very serious injury.
I mean, what was he THINKING with those signings? Those guys were out machines, and I don't think it was outs Brian was trying to create.
Worst part of signing Winn
Why didn't Sabean first wait to see how Winn would perform during his contract year before signing him? He could have signed him midseason or waited until the current contract expired.
Re: Worst part of signing Winn
by English Professor on May 16, 2007 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Say what? Foppert had been injured before the trade too. And Torrealba had had plenty of time to show that he had any skill with the bat. You might say that his major-league numbers were the result of small sample size. Perhaps, but his minor-league numbers weren't any good either. His career minor-league line is .263/.313/.349, and the two years before he was called up to the Giants he had a .724 OPS in AA and a .722 OPS in AAA.
Many players could potentially be good players if they didn't suck.
Second, if Randy did well after the trade, he almost certainly would command far too much to play for an average center fielder and below-average corner in the second line of defense.
Winn was already signed through 2006, because either he would have exercised his $3.75m player option or the club would have exercised the $5m club option. That is cheap for a guy with a .285/.344/.423 (it was close enough to that in 2005) career line who plays a good CF. For this, he gave up completely spare parts. He gave up nothing for a player that was going to be with the Giants through 2006 for a maximum of $5m!
I really don't think you have much problem with the trade itself. It sounds like you dislike the subsequent deal that Sabean gave Winn and the decision to play Winn in RF. Fair enough, I suppose, but 3/$23.25m is pretty reasonable these days. Sabean didn't have to sign Dave Roberts. Winn is a perfectly good CFer who had a bad 2006. Signing Roberts and moving Winn to RF should be judged independently of the trade.
Remember too that before Winn came over in trade, the Giants had Jason Ellison and the rotting carcass of Marquis Grissom to play CF in 2006. He hadn't traded for Finley yet, and Finley was only brought in to be a 4th OFer and to rid the team of the bloated carcass of Eatgardo Alfonzo. It was only Winn's poor play and Finley's 96 triples in the first month that kept Finley in the lineup. Well, that and injuries to Alou.
You may also say that trading Torrealba created a hole that resulted in the signing of Matheny. Is there any doubt that Sabean would have signed Matheny anyway? And if Sabean doesn't trade for Winn, then who plays CF in 2006? It hardly matters how Winn played in 2006, because there is no way that Sabean could reasonably anticipate that Finley, Ellison, or Marquis would be better than Winn. Besides - if you aren't going to sign Matheny, why not play Knoedler? He isn't likely to be worse than Torrealba anyway.
Basically: it was a great idea to trade for Winn. Proven performance, quality track record, solid CF defense, and he was going to be cheap for the team for the next season. Sabean didn't have to sign Roberts. He didn't have to move Winn to RF. He wouldn't have anticipated Winn's poor 2006 - who would? But he didn't need to sign Winn to the extension before the 2006 season anyway. I don't have to like Sabean's other moves to like the trade for Winn. It sounds as if you are either blaming Sabean for the other moves instead of the trade, or claiming that the other moves were inevitable as a result of the trade. I just don't see it. I have plenty of problems with Sabean, but I want him to make the Winn trade every time he can.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on May 17, 2007 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
All three of these were clearly winners by any rational un-biased evaluation. They were not enough to overcome Bonds being out for all of 2005 (except 14 games) but that point does not at all detract from the fact that these were all positive and cost effective moves. If Bonds had given us in 2005 what he gave us in 2006 these moves would have put us in the post season and that is a fact you just can not deny.
Alou?
by DrBGiantsfan on May 16, 2007 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
I'm a serious serious plus on the Vizquel signing, but only because I take the exact opposite philosophical approach from Jake: I think transactions should be judged on how they played out in fact over time, not in how justified or valid they appeared at the time. Alou I agree is even because he raked but couldn't stay healthy. And Winn I agree entirely with Jake's position. It was wrong headed and led to the even more wrongheaded Accardo deal the next year. And signing Roberts and moving Winn to RF exacerbated the problem and will continue to do so for a couple of more years.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
In addition, Alou was healthier and Winn was better in 2005 then either were in 2006.
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 7:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Sure - sometimes the GM is just going to get lucky and do well on a trade even when it wasn't foreseen. I would put the Williams for Kent/Tavarez/Vizcaino trade in this boat. It seemed like a salary dump at the time, but Kent ended up exceeding everyone's expectations and played like a HOFer beginning with his 2nd year with the Giants. Sabean may deserve some credit for identifying Kent as a breakout candidate, but Kent was 29 in his first year with the team - not exactly the time when most players break out. Do we give Sabean credit for getting lucky on a salary dump?
Some trades look like surefire winners but due to unforeseen circumstances just don't turn out well at all. Those trades may end up turning out very poorly, but you wouldn't want your GM not to make them, because those circumstances just aren't going to happen very often. The most recent example of this from Sabean is the Torrealba/Foppert for Winn trade (let's ignore this year's performance from Winn and his crazy post-trade 2005 for this). That one looked like a real loser last year, but to trade a fungible backup catcher and failed arm for a quality CFer? I want Sabean to make that trade whenever he can.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on May 16, 2007 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
If I'm right, that the trade succeeded in spite of Sabean's intentions, that doesn't make it a bad move, of course. It's still an incredibly successful trade. But it does suggest that the philosophy behind the move was fallible and was an indicator that future moves based on the same philosophy would not work out near so well (absent the sort of incredible stroke of fortune that Jeff Kent became). And I would further argue that it was Sabean's failure to learn that lesson that has led directly to some of the problems that Jake is dissecting in these post-Kent years.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
The tricky part about this is that GM may have info we don't have (especially medical, scouting) or otherwise play a hunch.
The fact is - some trades/signings are going to look better or worse after the fact by sheer dumb luck.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Sure, it's not Sabean's fault that Bonds got hurt, but it's his fault for not building a team that could survive that injury (that goes back for years before this off-season obviously) and it's especially his fault for thinking that this team could compete without Bonds at the trade deadline.
I'm sorry that you see this as driven by some kind of bias, but really, what motive would I have for a senseless bias? I'm opposed to Sabean continuing in his role but that's because I've been opposed to his moves and disappointed in his results, not the other way around.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
At the time of the Alou and Vizquel signings Sabean was (and had every reason to be) expecting a fully healthy Bonds for 2005 with simular results to what Bonds gave the Giants in the first 3 years (2002 thru 2004) of his 5 year contract. In this context these were good (nowhere near just breakeven) moves.
The trade for Randy Winn does not have to be viewed as just a traditional postseason run buy. Randy was not just already signed for the remainder of 2005 but for 2006 as well with both years at a very reasonable $5M/yr or less. This was a good rebuilding move for 2006 as well as a good compete now move for 2005.
Now, you may take issue with the selling that did not happen at the trade deadline of the 2005 season but you just do not know what effort Sabean made to sell his sellable parts and what offers he got for these parts. Why is it so hard to believe that the offers he got we just not acceptable and did not offer enough rebuild help for 2006 and beyond?
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
and that scares me
Re: and that scares me
Re: and that scares me
And I am sure none of your really believe the Giants would be stupid enough to trade Matt Cain or Tim Lincecum.
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 8:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: and that scares me
Re: and that scares me
I just don't buy the assumption that velocity is the right way to measure potential. I would much rather trade Sanchez now then trade Lowry now as I think trading Sanchez now is more likely to be selling high then trading Lowry now. But, I would much rather just keep both.
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: and that scares me
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
As a quick aside, those two were the only choices that intrigued me enough to research them -- Matt because he lived near my nephews outside Memphis and Tim because the more I read about him the more I became intrigued.
But when we evaluate Brian, I think we should do so on his entire body of work -- or at least his body of work before the end of the 2002 season (Grade A or A- IMO) and his body of work since (Grade C- or D+ IMO).
Since the end of the 2002 season Brian has made some good moves (Lincecum, Alou, Durham, Vizquel, Ortiz), but IMO the bad outweight the good -- as is indicated by a rather barren farm system and a team that has struggled to finish above .500 the past three seasons.
The Giants are in the top quartile of spenders, but neither their parent squad or their farm system is close to that level.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
The Giants wound up giving little value for Randy, but they also got too little value for what they wound up paying him.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
What an incrediably nieve statement!
The Randy Winn the Giants traded for only cost a prorated portion of $3.75M for a prorate (and best) portion of 2005 and $5M for 2007.
Now, we will have something to discuss when Jake gets to Part Three which will discuss the 2005/6 OffSeason and the 2006 Season and thus will discuss the $23.25M 2007 thru 2009 3 Year Contract Extention the Giants gave Winn then. But, this is just not a part of the evaluation of this trade.
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by giantsrainman on May 16, 2007 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
You argue that the Giants paid Randy $3.75 million and $5 million. Then you finally go on to mention the other $23.25 million as an afterthought. Even considering that the Giants paid only about half of Randy's $3.75 million in 2005, that's pretty close to $30 million total.
You mention that the $23.25 million is part of another evaluation, but it really isn't.
When the Giants made the trade for Randy, you probably looked at it only from the standpoint of what they committed to contractually.
I looked at the trade and said, if Randy doesn't do well, the Giants won't be happy that they committed to $8.75 million (part of it prorated) for two years. If he does well, they will likely overpay for a mediocre player. Instead of a win/win, it's a lose/lose.
Look only at the commitment the Giants made for $8.75 million if you choose to be that short-sighted, but don't call my having the vision to look beyond it, "incredibly naive," which truly is an "incredibly naive" statement to make.
The Giants wound up paying Randy Winn right at $30 million, and I don't think they got value. Do you?
And don't give me a center field bat answer to a right field bat question. It would be naive to do so.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by English Professor on May 17, 2007 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by E Ticket on May 16, 2007 8:10 PM PDT reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
More to the point, he wasn't worth what he was going to get paid. I mean, forget the Matheny fiasco and just compare him to Torrealba, who is a lousy hitter. Over their careers, AJ has created 4.9 runs/27 outs, while Yorvit has created 3.9. That's a difference of a mere 14 runs per season. And I strongly suspect that Yorvit makes up most if not all of those runs on defense.
I suppose if he'd played things better, Sabean could have traded AJ for a low-level pitching prospect or something. But when the list of Sabean's boneheaded moves is drawn up, that's not going to rank in the top 40.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
It was Sabean's hubris
His negotiating position was not nearly as strong as the year before, and he was quietly willing to take a pay cut.
Which he did with the Sox later that offseason.
Re: It was Sabean's hubris
Re: It was Sabean's hubris
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
If we say that the Giants couldn't keep AJ because of chemistry issues, we point the finger at the Giants scouting system for not picking up on the potential chemistry problems.
If we say the Giants should have re-signed AJ, well he did go on to play not well enough to justify the trade, but well enough to win a World Series.
And most of all we can question why even if they had no intention of re-signing AJ, the Giants didn't offer him arbitration so that they would at least get a draft choice and not wind up with NOTHING after a year for three very nice pitching prospects.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Remember, if you go to arbitration, your salary can be cut by at most 20%, which means Pierzynski would have been in line for a salary of at least $2.8 million. But since he went on to become a free agent, we know precisely what his market value was: $2.25 million. So if the Giants had offered him arbitration, they would have been stuck with a player they didn't want, at a salary higher than anyone else was willing to pay him. Sabean did the right thing by letting him walk.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
In AJ and Yorvit Torrealba the Giants had an enviable platoon behind the plate. Not only is AJ a good hitter for a catcher, he's LEFT-HANDED hitter, a rarity among catchers. Few teams have lefty-righty platoons at catcher, although Bengie Molina was in a very good one last season.
With regard to the AJ Pierzynski deal, the Giants missed out both coming and going.
Want a touch of irony? One of the things that most frustrated Giants fans about AJ was the many double plays he grounded into. His 27 was one of the higher numbers in history. It also was an aberration. That was the precise number AJ had grounded into the two previous seasons combined. And just as incredibly, it is just one less than he has grounded into in the two years plus a month and a half of a third later.
Oh, had the Giants offered AJ arbitration, they would have either received compensation at some point or added a tradeable asset, something they have precious little of these days.
Since the end of the 2002 season, Brian Sabean has made a few good decisions (such as Ray Durham, Omar Vizcaino and Moises Alou), but he has made too many poor deals and non-deals.
This past winter he was finally willing and able to spend money to acquire the hitting star he should have acquired in previous year -- only to find himself jilted at the altar by Carlos Lee and ignored by Alfonso Soriano.
Instead he quickly re-signed Barry Bonds for a year and settled for bridesmaid Barry Zito, the most expensive bridesmaid in history.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
What he has done is win a World Series and receive a large raise in a multi-year contract.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
by English Professor on May 17, 2007 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
But my best estimate would be that AJ batted in 108 DP opportunities in 2004 compared to 81 in 2005. AJ's 27 DP's in 108 chances was one double play every 4.0 opportunities. His 13 DP's in 81 opportunities would be only one every 6.2 chances. I can't imagine that Barry's lack of speed and hustle would mean that many more double plays for AJ -- especially since by batting TWO spots behind Barry, there was a better chance that Barry would have advanced beyond first base.
Let's put it this way -- if AJ batted two spots behind Barry and Barry was on first base, there had to be at least ONE out. Which would mean that oftentimes there were two -- especially since Barry was walked more often the more outs there were, as was indicated by 66 of his 111 walks with RISP coming with two outs.
So a disporportionate number of times that AJ likely batted with runners on first base in his year with the Giants came with two outs.
Believe me, it was mostly an aberration. But most Giants fans would rather focus on AJ's 27 GDP's than his impressively small strikeout total of an identical 27 -- less than half his total in any other full season.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
AJ was thought of highly enough by the White Sox that they replaced his expiring one-year contract with one for three years and seven times the money.
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Re: Brian Sabean Review (Part Two)
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
