McCovey Chronicles: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Cowboy Altitude for Wyoming Fans!

In Defense Of Sabean

As we all know at McCovey Chronicles, Brian Sabean's contract has been extended through 2010. This decision has left most Giants fans spinning in their graves, couches, barstools, or whatever the hell they're sitting on.

Star-divide

As we all know at McCovey Chronicles, Brian Sabean's contract has been extended through 2010. This decision has left most Giants fans spinning in their graves, couches, barstools, or whatever the hell they're sitting on.

I, on the other hand, feel that this is a step in the right direction for the Giants organization. Through most of his tenure, Sabean has kept the Giants competitive. From 97 until now, the Giants have won 3 division titles, and had 4 playoff berths, while remaining in contention up until the last games in 3 seasons. He even brought a NL west title to San Francisco.

The Giants are lousy now, but wont be lousy for long. All the SBC/AT&T/PacBell park bandwagon hoppers can eat shit. The Giants have a promising pitching staff, and are a free agent signing or two away from serious contention.

A lot of you kids don't understand that it isn't easy to get players to sign with any team. Between contract negotiations, relocating their families, and other issues, it is no small task. Considering all of the free agents in the past few years that have signed elsewhere it may seem as though Sabean has been scared to pull the trigger. At any rate, playing in AT&T park does not appeal to most right handed sluggers that are to be and have been on the market. If you know anything about playing baseball, you know that the ball doesn't carry well to left field at night, and you will never hit an opposite field home run unless you really get more than all of it. Furthermore, the Giants have been very sneaky in stating a "win now" mentality, while quietly rebuilding via the last three drafts behind our backs. They know they must appease fairweather fans and idiots alike, so they say they're pursuing a championship now, when they're really not.

After reviewing Sabean's trade portfolio, I've found that with the exception of the Joe Nathan, Boof Bonser, Francisco Liriano for Pierzynski debacle, he has a very solid track record. He brought in Jason Schmidt and was credited for masterminding the Kirk Reuter from Montreal deal. With the exception of the previously mentioned trade there is only one player currently playing in the Major Leagues. That player is Carlos Villanueva of the Milwaukee Brewers. Recently he shipped Armando Blownitez for Randy Messenger, who at one point last season, was being groomed to be a future closer by the Marlins.

True baseball people know that change is a process that takes time. So let's give this man a chance. This last off-season was pretty bad, but following this season Sabean will have some decent scratch to play around with. Alex Rodriguez will most likely opt-out of his contract and the Giants are in position to be big suitors in the A-Rod sweepstakes. As reported recently in a Sacramento Bee article, Rodriguez has said that he really liked the bay area and the fans, so maybe it's a slight hint that he has a shared interest in San Francisco. Also, Eric Byrnes and Jermaine Dye, two Bay Area natives will be on the market and would probably love to don the Giants black and orange.

Now I know there's a lot of people out there who hated the Giants last off-season as much as I did. But we all make mistakes. Sit tight kids. This mess will be over soon.

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.

0 recs  |  Comment 130 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Correction on my blog. Yorvit Torrealba is alos active in the MLB.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 4:48 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
I guess Jason Grilli finally outlasted his welcome in Detroit.

But Brian Burres was pitching for the Orioles earlier this season, as well as Coutlangus for the Reds.  I thought I saw at least Coutlangus recently.  Aardsma has been up and down for the ChiSox.  Jerome Williams was up a while for Nats.

But part of the flaw of this argument, as far as Sabean naysayers goes, is they would argue that this lack of ex-Giants is because Sabean has done a poor job of stocking the farm system with good prospects.

To which I again say, it is not that easy to stock the farm when you are winning, you get bad draft picks, and indeed his record was very poor until probably last year when Cain, Hennessey, and Correia joined Lowry in the pitching staff.

"I'm a Giant now" - Wendell Fairley "I'm really proud to be on this team." - Nate Schierholtz

by obsessivegiantscompulsive on Jul 16, 2007 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Give me 1 example...
of a move post 2001 that you thought was solid
Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 5:42 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: Give me 1 example...
Getting Lofton was a great move.  In 03 herges was an awsome set up man.

by SabeanSupporter on Jul 15, 2007 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Give me 1 example...
Herges cost us Clay Hensley, who despite his terrible 07 has a bright future in San Diego.  We got two good months and one year of a closer (almost) worse than Mando.
"Sportswriters: a rude and brainless sub-culture of fascist drunks" - hunter s thompson, former sportswriter

by nick on Jul 15, 2007 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Give me 1 example...
WEll, isn't a little bit of "so what?"  If the theory is to draft pitchers to trade for what you need, then that is what happened.  And the traditional evaluation of 'how did the prospect turn out' is kind of irrelevant, because the prospect was traded to fill a need, and, theoretically, the prospect can be rather easily replaced.  Not necessarily from that year, or that year's draft class, but RPs, except for the very elite, are more or less interchangeable.  And Herges was pretty important while he was here - and contributed to the success we had in those years.  This is why team performance tends to be cyclical - the longer you are in contention the longer you are overpaying to leverage your chances.  Pretty soon you start running low on pieces.  See, Giants, SF; Yankees, NY; Braves, Atl.  (and look at the recent histories of the teams in our own division).

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Acquiring Randy Winn was a good move in my book. He's been a solid defender and in his time here he's put up solid numbers. Re-signing Barry Bonds over and over was also good. Drafting Cain, Lincecum, Sanchez. Signing Angel Villalona. Getting rid of Jerome Williams and Yorvit Torrealba. Signing Matt Morris. Extending Noah Lowry's contract. I could go on.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 5:48 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
the "solid" Winn has posted an OPS of 715 and 753 the last 2 years. He clearly represents a below average right fielder.

Morris posted an ERA of 4.96 last year and 3.86 this year.

Quite frank, neither you nor I has any idea how involved Sabean is in the drafting process.

Villanova has less than 100 AB's in rookie ball! You are prepared to call him a success at this point?

Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 6:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Well, that's kind of an interesting argument about Winn.  Technically, you have an argument that his 753 puts him below average.  The difficulty is determining what "average" is.  One benefit to Randy Winn is he can take his 753 OPS onto the field every day.  There aren't enough of those guys to go around.  So, lots of teams have to platoon, and their OFs get the benefit of 'inflated' stats because they only play against the opposite handedness pitchers and/or pitchers they historically do well against.  If we had the luxury of playing Winn against just LH his OPS would be an impressive 879.  Even against RH pitchers, his OPS is still 702, good enough for about 60th in the leagues OFs (as it is he is #50 out of the total of about 100+ OFs).  So, vs RHs he is about average, against LH he is way above avg.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
A starting player should have an OPS that is ABOVE average, since the average includes part-time players and reserves, as well as starters.

Randy's hitting is pretty much acceptable for center field, but not for either corner.  As it turns out, the Giants now have THREE guys whose bats are perhaps acceptable in center but insufficient for the corners.

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 11:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Yea, Randy is not really good enough to start every day.  He'd be an above-average platoon player in my book.  Most of the Giants roster is that way.  None of them are really good enough to start except Bonds, Klesko, Molina, and Durham.  Lewis is developing, Feliz and Vizquel have top-notch D... but the guys making up our line-up just are not everyday players for good teams.
If Brad Hennesy had Steve Kline's attitude you'd get Rob Nen... without the triple digit heat.

by milesntrane on Jul 16, 2007 8:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
>Acquiring Randy Winn was a good move in my book.

Acquiring Randy Winn was a good move; signing him to a big expensive contract extension with limited no-trade language is turning out to be not such a good move.

Jesse Foppert: Welcome home, my son. And meet your adopted brother, Kelvin Pichardo. He's from the Dominican Republic.

by leftymalo on Jul 16, 2007 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Getting rid of Williams?  You know the Giants got the setup version of Armando Benitez, Latroy Hawkins in return, right?  Sabean also threw in Aardsma for the hell of it.  Hardly a brilliant move.

by BenboC on Jul 15, 2007 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Yeah, so where are Aardsma in Williams now. Neither are in the pros. I doubt Williams will resurface anywhere either. He couldn't even cut it on the Nationals.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Hawkins salary for his time here eclipses the money Williams and Aardsma combined would have made if there were still with the organization.  When you throw in his pathetic performance, the Giants still got on the short end of the deal.  Also as a point of definition - AAA is still professional baseball.  I'm not trying to make a juvenile retort, but I'm just pointing out proper use of terms.

by BenboC on Jul 15, 2007 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Yeah, but Hawkins was misplaced as a closer when he had always been a set-up man.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
The Giants didn't use him (outside of a couple games) as a closer.  His numbers don't look too terrible with the Giants, but he gave a lot of inherited runners and imploded in pressure situations - hence the Armando Benitez of setup men.  He single-handedly blew leads and gave the Cubs 4-5 wins because he couldn't stand the pressure of facing his former team.

by BenboC on Jul 15, 2007 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Salary is pretty irrelevant.  It is kind of grasping for straws.  If you trade prospects for a guy who can play right now, which is the general idea, of course his salary is much higher than that of the prospects.  The point is, the prospects couldn't give you what you hoped to get from the MLB player you traded for.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
At the time Williams and Aardsma were traded, they were still very valuable prospects.  Williams posted two solid seasons to begin his career.  It was perceived that Aardsma just needed some work on his control and he'll take off. It doesn't matter what Aardsma and Williams are worth now.  What is important is what they were worth then.  The Cubs fans completely turned against Hawkins and he was worth virtually nothing on the market. The point is that Sabean overpaid yet again for what was essentially the Cub's version of what Armando Benitez was to us.

by BenboC on Jul 16, 2007 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
You also do realize that by not showing faith in Torrealba, Sabean made the infamous Pierzyksi deal.  A completely unnecessary upgrade at catcher when you have Hammonds, Tucker and Mohr patrolling RF. This move also indirectly led to the acquisition of Armando Benitez.  When Pierzynski didn't work out, Sabean also signed Matheney (who lasted just 1.5 years for 10.5 million) - a downgrade both offensively and defensively over Torrealba.  The Torrealba (with Foppert) deal for Winn was good.  The unnecessary extension that amounted to 3 years and $23.25M for what is essentially a 4th OF - not so good.

by BenboC on Jul 15, 2007 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Sorry, I don't understand this argument at all.  What does the choice for C have to do with who is in RF?  And, since I'm asking questions, how is Matheny a down grade from Torrealba?

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Catcher has NOTHING to do with right field -- except that salary dollars that are allocated to one position aren't available for another.

One could argue either way on Torrealba versus Matheny, but while both players have had serious injury players, Yorvit was likely at LEAST the equal of Mike at the plate and behind it defensively.

Mike was known for his great handling of pitchers, but one couldn't demonstrate it from his catchers' ERA.  I'm not saying it didn't exist -- merely that it can't be demonstrated with results.

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
The point is that if you're going to trade a valuable player like Nathan, as well two talented prospects, do it to fill a hole the Giants sorely had.  Hammonds, Mohr and Tucker were 4th outfielders at best.  Look at Matheny's career stats versus Torrealba's.  Torrealba is clearly the better hitter, and I think he's top tier defensively.

by BenboC on Jul 16, 2007 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Acquiring Winn wasn't a bad move.  Re-signing him to the contract they did was.

by tobias on Jul 15, 2007 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
When discussing your trades, you conveniently left out Accardo for Hillenbrand.

Here's my problem with Sabean...when dealing away young talent, try to get something back in return greater than a borderline-decent hitter with an attitude problem, k?

Sabean defenders continue to declare that our fearless GM's hands have been tied trying to win won with Barry on the squad. Isn't that the goal of any franchise though? You build your squad around a truly pre-eminent player? It's almost like Bonds has been a liability all these years.

So you've got things completely turned around...the Giants weren't good for all those years because Sabean built around Bonds. The Giants were good because Bonds' otherwordly performance the last ten years covered for Sabean's innefectuality.

Sabean gets credit for one thing in my book - drafting pitching talent. Otherwise, he's shown me nothing that inspires confidence that he can build a consistent winner from the ground up.

by otis29 on Jul 15, 2007 7:02 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Who is the young talent we've giving away? Minus the Twins deal and Accardo as I left myself wiggle room in the blog and in my previous comments.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Minus the Twins deal and Accardo

This is akin to saying "minus the HR's and OBP, Barry Bonds doesn't give you much" or "minus the double homicide, OJ's a pretty good role model".

Those deals had a huge impact on the team you currently see on the field, no?

by otis29 on Jul 15, 2007 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
The Accardo deal does. But we still have Chulk. He's not bad. Or good.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
I prefer "Besides World Wars I and II, the Germans have been very good at foreign relations over the years." See the wiggle room I left myself there?

I love this guy. "I researched Sabean's trade portfolio and nobody's still in the majors but Carlos Villanueva... Oh, and Torrealba... Oh yeah, and Accardo... And Linebrink... And Bobby Howry... " Man, that must have been some exhaustive research you did.

</sarcasm>

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Clay Hensley and Scott Linebrink come to mind as young pitchers given away in trades.

by APGiantsFan on Jul 15, 2007 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Linebrink yes. We'll see what happens with Hensley. He's currently getting slapped around in Triple A.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
He may have been able to get rid of Benitez -- but he also SIGNED HIM. For $5 million.

And nice citing of "intangibles" there -- the Giants clearly value veteran savvy and  intangibles over demonstrable results. You'd fit in perfectly in the Giants front office.

Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.

by delorean on Jul 15, 2007 7:04 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
I believe Armando was signed for about $21 million over three years.

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
It wasn't omitted on purpose. Accardo is doing well in Toronto and I apologize that I forgot to mention that. But you're right, Jeff Kent never did anything for the Giants. He had nothing to do with our success from 97-2002. The pitching staff that the Giants had didn't have much to do with it either. And I don't think we've been trying to win with Bonds. As I stated in the blog, the Giants have said that that's what they're doing, but they have clearly and quietly been rebuilding.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:06 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
the Giants have said that that's what they're doing, but they have clearly and quietly been rebuilding.

I don't understand how you can say that. Rebuilding is the exact opposite of what they've been doing. Since Kent left, Sabean and Co. have been trying to assemble a team around Barry on the cheap -- ostensibly to "win now,"  but it hasn't worked. In Sabean's defense, the ownership group didn't give him the money he needed to assemble a real team around Barry.

Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.

by delorean on Jul 15, 2007 7:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
And in response to the other comment, you make a valid point, but it's not like Winn or Morris were supposed to be the centerpiece to the offense and rotation respectively. I feel the Giants are on the right track though and the 2007 is a loss at best. We'll see what happens this offseason.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:08 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
P.S. I was actually pretty disappointed that the Giants let go of Accardo for Hillenbrand, although at the time I wanted Hillenbrand, we all knew that Accardo was not the right guy to give up for him.

P.S.S. Armando Benitez was a waste, and I can't defend that, but he did get injured often and didn't throw for a very long time. We'll see how Messenger turns out.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:10 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in Messenger for the long haul. Take a look at his minor league stats (8 years, so it's not exactly a small sample size):  4.50 ERA, 1.50 WHIP.

Big leagues?:  4.50 ERA, 1.60 WHIP.

So I think we've got a known quantity here.

Full disclosure: My dislike for Messenger may be slightly colored by the manner in which he wears his cap.

by otis29 on Jul 15, 2007 7:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Hahahahahahah. Otis. That killed me. But that's how the kids like to wear their hats. I used to wear my hat like that when I was playing high school ball two years ago. Messenger has a good fastball and a good hook. Control has plagued him, but Rags and Gardner were both control pitchers. They could help this kid, and maybe he'll be a nice little surprise in exchange for Benitez.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Control has plagued him, but Rags and Gardner were both control pitchers.

Yeah, I'm sure they can help him, just like they've helped mold all of our other noted control specialists like... Okay, I'm drawing a blank here.

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
He could wear a pickelhaube and goosestep to the goddamn mound as long as he saves games.

(I didn't realize his numbers were as bad as all that. His stuff certainly looks better than that. Sigh.)

Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.

by delorean on Jul 15, 2007 7:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Of course this could be entirely accurate and informative.  But, on the other hand, these guys are in the minors for a purpose.  Maybe he had to develop a pitch or control.  Maybe that has happened.  Just looking at the numbers tells us absolutely nothing.  You have to look at them at least in conjunction with a scouting report.  And, BTW, looking at the (small sample size) numbers, it appears his control has markedly improved

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Also, I'm not trying to attack anyone on here. I'm open to here all points and am solely defending my arguments. No hard feelings to anyone. We all want to see a winner.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:12 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Also, I'm not trying to attack anyone on here...

"All the SBC/AT&T/PacBell park bandwagon hoppers can eat shit..."

"A lot of you kids don't understand..."

"If you know anything about playing baseball..."

"They know they must appease fairweather fans and idiots alike..."

"True baseball people know..."

And yet, strangely enough, I actually felt attacked. Like, if I don't share your point of view that Sabean is doing a bang-up job, I must be an idiot.

by tobias on Jul 15, 2007 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Actually, if you don't share his view that Brian Sabean is doing a bang-up job since the end of the 2002 season, it shows you have a brain.  :)

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 11:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Billy, if you look at the last three drafts and the signing of Villalona it is clear the Giants have been trying. You are a former pro yourself and know that rebuilding takes time. In the last three seasons the Giants have had a losing record, but have had very good drafts.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:19 AM PDT reply actions  

A Couple Of Thoughts
  1.  Let's see, Russ Ortiz for Damein Moss and Manuel Mateo(aka Merkin Valdez)....oh that's right, Merkin is going to make this trade look like a steal!  Sidney Ponson.  The aformentioned trade with Minnesota.  Williams and Aardsma for LaTroy Hawkins who turned into Steve Kline.  Accardo for Hilly and Chulk.  Martis for Stanton.  Yep, that is a great, great track record there since 2002.  How long ago was than now?  That's right, 5 years!
  2.  Other than Tim Lincecum, who can you point to as evidence that the last 3 drafts have been alll that?  The current draft may pay off down the road, but I, for one, think we could have done better this year.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 7:44 AM PDT reply actions  

BTW
I'm not a kid. I go all the way back to the teams of the late 60's.  Unfortunately, our future looks a lot more like the 70's to me.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 7:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: BTW
And sadly, even Bad Sabean's record isn't worse than Jerry Donovan, Spec Richardson, and Tom Haller.  

Well I guess Spec's trade for Vida could make that a close race.

by achiappanza on Jul 16, 2007 12:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: A Couple Of Thoughts
Well what are Damien Moss, Jerome Williams, David Aardsma and Merkin Valdez up to? Certainly not pitching professionally. That's right. All the other pros are still in the pros. How about Matt Cain and Fred Lewis? For the last three drafts and if you looked at their Single A, double A and Rookie ball teams, they're developing good young players. So yeah. Nice argument.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 7:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: A Couple Of Thoughts
You can throw Jesse Foppert and Kurt Ainsworth in there too. We'll see how Liriano pans out when he comes back from Tommy John surgery. But damn did he look good.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 8:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

Faint Praise
Sounds like the best you can say about Sabean's trades since 2002 are that he didn't give up much...... except Joe Nathan, of course.  Everybody forgets that Russ Ortiz had a couple of pretty good years after he was traded before he went in the tank.  Think we could have used him in the 2003 playoffs or in the 2004 season?

Sabes has also failed to even come close to acquiring an impact bat to replace Jeff Kent, and we needed another bat when Kent was still here!!  So, the strategy was to build a veteran team around Bonds?  He did a terrible job of that.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think part of the problem
lies in his "let's build through free agency" strategy.  Not only is it difficult to acquire impact players on the open market but also a reliance on FA puts the GM in the mindset to acquire the best player available no matter the cost regardless of his actual talent level (see last year: Lee, Carlos or Zito, Barry)
Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Faint Praise
"Terrible" is an overstatement, Dr.B.  During those years we put together won of the absolute best records for winning in the major leagues, and won several division titles and got to the series.  That is not terrible.  Could we have used another big bat?  Of course, who couldn't.  But, realistically, the strategy worked just fine until Bond's surgery went to hell, keeping him out of the lineup, effectively, for a year and a half.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly
Sabean didn't acquire Bonds.  He's the guy who made all this work.  Take him out of the eguation and we have truly terrible teams.  I would say that there there have always been at least 20 GM's who could have done as well or better than Sabean did with this team during his tenure.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Exactly
In all fairness, you can't just take Bonds out of the equation.  For one, his salary would get to go to someone else.  For another, the choice of "complementary players" had to be largely based on complementing Bonds.

by achiappanza on Jul 16, 2007 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Exactly
Exactly, ditto.  Bonds needed protection around him in the lineup.  He had that briefly in 2000 and to some extent through 2002. Sabean never replaced Ellis Burks, never replaced Jeff Kent after that and held onto JT way too long.  The lineup withered around Barry until opposing teams could walk him with impunity.  Sure, we scored some runs that way, but we should have been hitting 3 run dingers by the bushel.  Those teams could have been some of the highest run scoring teams in history with a decent supporting cast.  Instead, Sabean went off on some cockamamie theory that power isn't important anymore.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 16, 2007 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: A Couple Of Thoughts
Wait, you want to proclaim the last 3 drafts successes because those players are doing well IN THE LOW MINORS? What does that really mean? How many players do well in the low minors only to bomb in AA or AAA?

Are you already taking Manny Burriss as a success story because he's hitting .300+ at Augusta? If so, you're ignoring the fact he bombed in high-A earlier this season and was demoted.

Are you counting this year's first round as a positive development? If so, you're ignoring the fact that none of those players have signed, and are therefore praising talent not actually in the Giants system.

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: A Couple Of Thoughts
He's also apparently counting thoroughly worthless 2005 draft (at least I can't count to three without going back that far) in which they didn't have a pick in the first three rounds, and in which the only people remotely like prospects (Ben Copeland, Dan Griffin) probably can't be considered in the Top 15 or 20 even in a thin system like the Giants. Saying the Giants 2005 Draft (rated a flat F by BA last year) is a good sign for the organization's future, is IMO a sign that the person doing the talking doesn't know his subject matter very well.

by Roger on Jul 15, 2007 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: A Couple Of Thoughts
We definitely could have done better. There's no doubt about that. I mean, we didn't get a Major League first baseman for starters. Dave Roberts was a pathetic signing. And I think he might have disclosed his early season elbow injury in order to make more money. Finally, Mark Loretta was available. I could've done without Durham, Aurilia, or Feliz.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: A Couple Of Thoughts
"Let's see, Russ Ortiz for Damein Moss and Manuel Mateo(aka Merkin Valdez)....oh that's right, Merkin is going to make this trade look like a steal!"

How is trading for a guy who became our best prospect the next year(ahead of Cain) a bad thing?

"Sidney Ponson"
This has been run into the ground.  Ponson pitched well for us in the regular season and none of the players we gave up did anything.  Where's the problem?

"The aformentioned trade with Minnesota"
Given

"Williams and Aardsma for LaTroy Hawkins who turned into Steve Kline"

Traded two rapidly declining prospects before they had no value and got what little we could.  Where's the problem?

"Accardo for Hilly and Chulk"
Traded an underperforming reliever for a bat and an underperforming reliever.  This argument could go on forever so I'll give you this one.  But I will add that we have lights out relievers at every level as you know and we can't be expected to keep everyone.

"Martis for Stanton"
?  We trade someone with the maximum upside of a no.3 starter who is pitching alright in low-A and get a reliever who we parlay into the 51st pick in the draft.  Even without the pick, why can't we trade Martis?  What are the odds he will make the majors or get us something better in a trade later down the line?

"Other than Tim Lincecum, who can you point to as evidence that the last 3 drafts have been alll that?"

How can that be determined?  Two years is not long enough to gauge a draft.  Jesse English was drafted in 2002, and he's only 22 in S-K(pretty much age-appropriate) and the book is not closed on him yet.  It's way too early to gauge the success of those drafts with some of the high school and JC players still kicking.

by Derelict on Jul 15, 2007 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: A Couple Of Thoughts
Well, actually, Doc, Stanton, Chulk, and Kline have been useful pieces.  It's not fair to just evaluate these trades for their impact on the future, that wasn't the motivation for the trades.  Stanton, in particular, gave us what we were looking for, as did Kline.  Chulk is still here, doing better than many expected he could/would do.
  To answer #2, but without going into names, there are a number of 'prospects' that came in '05 and, especially, '06.  Look at the pitching staffs in Augusta, the middle IFs and middle OFs.  Augusta, in particular, has a lot of talent, a lot of guys at the top of the league.  And this year's draft is the first one where we really benefit from the losing of '05/'06.  Most analysts, other than yourself, give us excellent grades for the '07 draft.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
We never know exactly what goes on vis-a-vis trades and FA signings, who's available and who isn't, but I think Sabean should get credti for NOT trading away anymore young pitching while trying to assemble this year's team.  
  Last Winter, Magellan was our projected 4th OF, so signing a proven (defensive) commodity for CF, especially for the incredibly modest dollars Roberts was signed for, is, all things considered, a pretty good move, one that doesn't really cost us in terms of young talent.  I'm sure Sabean was well aware of the risk of going into this season withoutAlou, a bona fide
#5 hitter, and he should be commended for Not paying a huge ransom to replace him and, instead, being ready to go with our own prospects (Linden, Lewis, Schierholtz, Ortmeier).  Why isn't this, partially, a stealth rebuild?  

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 8:43 AM PDT reply actions  

Sabean
offered Carlos Lee a 100 million dollar contract, Matthews Jr a 50 million dollar contract and, I believe, Soriano a 90 million dollar contract.  Only through dumb luck (or bad luck depending on your perspective) did we not wind up with "bona fide number 5 hitter"
Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Sabean
What I meant was, since he wasn't able to get a FA, Sabean didn't trade away young talent to get the # 5 hitter.
  And, BTW, tho I am not a Matthews fan (and am glad he didn't sign here), both of those players are having very nice years.  Wouldn't either one of them, in our lineup swing our W-L record something close to 10 games?

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

ahhhh...
I see what you are saying.

Re: Matthews Jr.  He IS having a decent season, especially taking into account his position; however, he has not been significantly better than Winn or (WARNING: NERDY MATH FOLLOWS) that much better than Roberts. If you assume Roberts is a replacement level player, he earns roughly -2 wins relative to league average in a season.  Sarge's season will come in at somewhere in the range of 1-2  wins above average, leading to an overall swing of 3-4 games.

Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

one last point...
I don't think one can safely make the assumption that Roberts represents a replacement level talent (essentially a AAA veteran).  I believe he is better than that and will experience some rebound over the life of his contract.
Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Since when can 6 million dollars a season for a guy with a .700 career OPS (lower than Feliz) be called "incredibly modest"?

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Well, when he was signed I think his OPS was 712, which is about middle of the pack for OFs.  And the $5/6Mil is modest compared to the going price for players with this profile (Pierre, Matthews).
  So the comparison to Feliz is inapt - Feliz plays a position that expects more power, Roberts doesn't.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
A .712 OPS is likley below the middle of the pack for outfielders, and let's not forget that the pack includes nearly as many reserves as starters.

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 11:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
He really should be evaluated on OBP, that's what he was signed for, and has career 342 would put him in the top 25 of regularly playing OFs

by allfrank on Jul 16, 2007 12:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Don't foget to include Brian Burres and Jon Coutlangus.  Both are pitching in the majors and are players Sabean lost because of ridiculous signings and poor roster management.

by slcgiant on Jul 15, 2007 9:05 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
You beat me to this. Both were lost due to roster snafus, where Sabean placed them on the 40 man roster before they needed to be, then had to remove them to add worthless vets and needlessly exposed them to waivers.

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

JPO
Did you post this to respond to yourself?  

Stack our current line-up vs. any other NL West or NL or MLB team.  Explain to me how it's an acceptable group of MLB players?  Now, stack most of our line-ups over the last ten years w/o Bonds vs. any other NL West or NL or MLB team.  Also, not really acceptable.  As someone mentioned above and as many of us have contended for quite some time now, Bonds has been so good that he's really covered for organizational mistakes AND choices (e.g. "veteran" hitters).

Sabean has developed decent pitching talent, some of which he's undervalued and some of which he's traded with poor foresight.  Sabean has traded for Schmidt and THEN he completely failed to trade Schmidt for two years until he left.  Other than that, over his tenure, he has made decent short term deals, which to be fair, probably even surprised him (e.g. Burks).  I give him (and detract from him) these things.  

However, to say that he's put the Giants or directed the Giants to a position or scouted for the Giants or "found" for the Giants players to solidify the standing of the club is not really true and certainly not recently.  I think that a change was needed (and has been needed) with the Front Office...irrespective of ownership's meddling.  

While it's not easy and it is often a gamble, there is young talent out there that could have been drafted or found--hell, even a Dan Uggla for Florida...why did THEY see in him?  Just looking around MLB right now, one can see example of teams reliant on FAs (Yankees), aging glory (White Sox), youth (D-Backs), stupid FAs and great youth (Dodgers w/ Colletti), stupid ownership (Orioles, Giants) etc...and the fantastic mixes that so impress me as a baseball fan, the Braves, the Red Sox, and the Brewers (and D-Backs) of the world.  And, while these are just generalities, I'd much rather see the Giants run like the Braves than like the White Sox.  

I fear that we're in real trouble for the next X number of years, especially as the youth at Arizona and LA mature and, likely, improve.

by Kent on Jul 15, 2007 9:13 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: JPO
I must say that people seem to forget how cyclical baseball is. Fortunately and unfortunately in my lifetime (which is only 19 years), I've been spoiled with good Giants teams. Minus the Glenallen Hill era. But I hate it when people say, "Oh, without Bonds." Because he was there and he played. You can't take him out of the picture or delete him from you memory. Yeah, without Bonds they'd probably be worse, but Bonds was there. So enough of that without Bonds crap. But back to cycles. Take the 2003 Detroit Tigers for example. 119 losses. Then three years later they're in the World Series. They did it with good young pitching and solid veteran inning eaters. A good signing here and there as well and then they found themselves at the top of the division again. Please guys and gals, this is going to take time. Give Sabean a chance to really, really do something on his own with some money. If he messes up. Then I'll be more than willing to send him to the wolves.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
Since Bonds was not a Sabean signing and has clearly had the biggest impact offensively (not just on this team, but in the entire league), it is a natural question whether Sabean has any eye at all for offensive talent. So it's fair game to play the "take Bonds out of the equation" game, IMO.

And sorry, using the argument of cyclicality is in effect tossing out any impact a GM may or may not have on a franchise. For every Tigers example, there is the alternate example of an Oakland, Atlanta, and Minnesota. And on the other side similar examples in Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and the Cubs.

by otis29 on Jul 15, 2007 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
The A's sucked for a long time in the mid to late 90's. The Braves sucked in the early 80's. The Royals were great in the 80's early 90's. As I said, we'll see what Sabean can do now. Instead of maintaining a team, he has to create one.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
Sorry, I just don't subscribe to any theory of cyclicality. It conjurs up some magic of the cosmos that brings all franchises back to respectability at some point.

What you are really talking about is accountability. GMs that field poor products get replaced. Replacement GMs that field poor products get replaced. GMs that field quality products normally stick around. And they do that by putting run producers in the lineup and run suppresors on the mound.

Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule, which explains Sabean's shiny new two year deal.

Sabean's job is to put quality players on the field by whatever means. Looking at the Giants roster and farm system, you'd have to say he's failed on everything but starting pitching.

by otis29 on Jul 15, 2007 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
I'm 37 and I've seen the ups-and-downs.  So yes, I'm well aware of baseball as cyclical.

You've placed an argument on this site and you're now defending it.  That's fine, perfectly fine.  But, as an argument many (me included) are placing Sabean in a greater context with or without Bonds and criticizing you're statements.  I think that you're failing to see our argument back at you.  What's more, to argue that he needs "a chance to really, really do something" is just absurd to me.  The mere fact that this franchise has to rebuild itself so profoundly is further evidence of the ridiculous path that he and our ownership have chosen to take.  And that's just it, these CHOICES are not random, they were intentional...and the lack of foresight with guys from Accardo to Linebrink to Nathan is a PROBLEM.  And, while every MLB team has ups-and-downs and gives up on guys who prove themselves, you gotta minimize these things to be successful and to save money on the free agent marketplace.

In my opinion, it's a testiment to the fraternity-like nature of professional baseball that a guy like Sabean has not lost his job by now.  I also think that you are failing to account for the agency of others.  Because, the rise and fall of the Giants has not occurred independent of other factors.  And, in this vein, the Giants have a hell of a lot of "rebuilding" to pass the current Padres, Dodgers, and DiamondBacks...hell, even the Rockies aren't that bad.

by Kent on Jul 15, 2007 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

Good Points
I would like to add something about The Trade here.  It's easy to say it was one bad trade and every GM, no matter how good, has made a bad trade.  The biggest problem I have with The Trade is that Sabean himself didn't believe in it.  If you are going to give up 3 good young arms for a player, it needs to be for a player you are willing to pay almost any price for.  If Brian Sabean really  believed in AJ Pierzynski, all he had to do was offer him a 3-4 year contract at an average of about $5 M and presto, we have the catcher position nailed down for a price that is still less than what a good catcher will make on the open market.  But, Sabean obviously had is doubts about AJ and didn't want to commit to a long term deal.  He even went so far as to try to intimidate him into accepting a low ball offer and was surprised that AJ won his arbitration case.  It was a trade and aftermath that a competent GM just doesn't get messed up in.

Just to be clear, this isn't an argument in favor of signing AJ long term, it's an argument against making a trade you don't believe in.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
Ah, I see what you're saying. I still don't feel Sabean is completely at fault for the current state of the team. I mean you also have to credit it to players getting hurt and other players underperforming. Secondly, it is not Sabean alone who lacks foresight. He has advisors and scouts, they deserve some of the blame too.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
 "I mean you also have to credit it to players getting hurt and other players underperforming."

What do you think the risk is when signing players who are 35+ years old? That they'll burst into flames? Convert his teammates to Scientology? No. The risk is that they will GET HURT AND UNDERPERFORM? Hello?

I know you're only 19, and don't have the first-hand experience of your body breaking down after the age of 35. But I'm 38, and you can take it from me, it does. Saying Sabean shouldn't be blamed for the older players he signed getting hurt and underperforming is like saying drunk drivers shouldn't be blamed for any accidents they cause. After all, how did they know that car would be right in front of them and they wouldn't be able to swerve in time?

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
I agree.  It's not entirely Brian's fault.  His responsibility ends with the players on the Giants roster and in the minors.  The other problems the Giants have (not enough security for Barry Bonds, etc.) aren't hit fault.

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
Sorry guy, this is my first time writing a blog on a site that the public can respond to. I didn't know the proper etiquette. But I had to at least admit my errors and omissions.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
I really think the "take out bonds and our lineup sucks" is the worst argument.  If you took the best player away from any lineup(excluding the Yankees and Redsox) that team would most certainly be a lot worse.

by SabeanSupporter on Jul 15, 2007 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
The problem with the Giants offense is that it sucks even WITH its best player.  :)

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: JPO
No, it really isn't a stupid argument.  Do we really have to get into VORP and marginal run values with you to see both Bonds' significance (e.g. how much better he's been that the best players on just about every team) and the total lack of any real talent (aside from Kent) around him?

by Kent on Jul 15, 2007 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Interesting note from BP today:

The whispers going around baseball last week were that the San Francisco Giants would fire General Manager Brian Sabean right after the All-Star break. The story went that owner Peter Magowan, disappointed that his team is in last place and the only club not in contention in the National League West, would wait until after the break to pull the trigger, so as to not take away from the All-Star Game festivities. Once all the pomp and circumstance died down around AT&T Park, Magowan did make a move with Sabean--he gave his GM a two-year contract extension that takes him through the 2009 season.

The Giants finished either first or second in the NL West in each of Sabean's first eight seasons from 1997-2004, but were third in both of the last two years. The continued downward trend this season led to the speculation about a possible dismissal. "Frankly, this is an emotional time," Sabean said. "When you're in a position where you don't want to leave an organization that has been so good to you, in a city and place you love so much, especially with your family concerned, I'm deeply flattered. This is a great first step for ourselves and the staff to get busy as we need to turn our fortunes."

If that wasn't enough of a surprise, there's another--the Giants, after years of loading up on veteran players under Sabean in an effort to win a World Series with Barry Bonds in the lineup, plan to start a youth movement, and they wanted to give their GM enough security to execute that plan. "The hope is we can surprise ourselves with what I think the team could be, led by our young pitching staff," Magowan said. "But if we need to develop patience so that we're in a better chance to win and sustain winning in a couple of years or so, we're prepared to do that.I don't want you to think we have no interest in winning in '08--we do. But it's a different philosophy, a different emphasis, where every year we have felt, possibly incorrectly, that we have a chance to get into the playoffs. I think the emphasis is changing."

The building blocks are to found among the starting pitching, notably left-handers Barry Zito and Noah Lowry and right-handers Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum. Zito is 29 and Lowry is 26, but Lincecum is 23, Cain 22. Despite his 3-10 record, Cain leads the rotation this season with a 3.3 SNLVAR, while Lowry trails him at 2.6, followed by Zito (1.6) and Lincecum (1.4, but in barely two months' work).

Look for the Giants to start selling off most of their older parts between now and the end of the month. Among those who could be moved are right-hander Matt Morris, catcher Bengie Molina, first baseman Ryan Klesko, second baseman Ray Durham, third baseman Pedro Feliz, shortstop Omar Vizquel, center fielder Dave Roberts, right fielder Randy Winn, infielder Rich Aurilia, and left-handed reliever Steve Kline.

Don't expect a third big surprise, though--the Giants won't trade Bonds in a season in which their icon left fielder is primed to become baseball's all-time home run leader. However, the franchise's new direction makes it clear he won't be re-signed as a free agent, ending a 15-year run with his hometown team.

by marcello on Jul 15, 2007 9:20 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
McGowan: "The hope is we can surprise ourselves with what I think the team could be."

wtf

Billy Hayes: Nine more big-league plate appearances than you.

by delorean on Jul 15, 2007 9:31 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
To be honest, you kind of lost me at "The Giants are lousy, but they won't be lousy for long."  Please provide me with the tiniest thread of evidence that this is true.

Yes, the starting pitching looks good and it is primarily young.  But have you noticed that the Giants are third-worst in the majors in runs scored?  With Barry Bonds?  Without Barry, the Giants could well be LAST in runs scored.

So the Giants rid themselves of Bonds, trade off the other older pieces they have with any value, and suddenly they are going to go from the lowest-scoring team in the majors to a team that is going to get enough runs for a pitching staff whose best starter (Tim Lincecum) presently has a (albeit deceptive) 4.63 ERA?

I believe you are dreaming -- and I'm guessing you thought the Giants had a good chance to be competitive this season.

Allow me to use the 1982, 1985 and 1986 Cardinals as an example of how important it is to score runs even with good pitching.  Both the 1982 and 1985 teams crafted a wonderful 3.37 ERA that the Giants -- even with all their good young pitching -- would LOVE to create.  

The 1982 team scored 685 runs and won 92 games, which was enough to get them into the playoffs, where they were able to win the World Series.  That team would be a MINIMUM requirement for the Giants, since 92 wins may or may not be enough to make the playoffs.  But we all would settle for the final result!

The 1986 team scored 84 fewer runs, though, and actually finished below .500 at 79-82, naturally not making the playoffs.  Get an idea what even half a run per game can mean to an offense?

The 1985 team was easily the best Cardinals team that decade, despite losing the Series to Kansas City in part because of the Don Denkinger missed call.  That Red Birds team won 101 games in the regular season.  How did they do it?

Well, they dropped their ERA down to 3.10, meaning they cut more than a quarter of a run off their 1982 and later their 1986 ERA's.  But perhaps even more importantly, they scored 747 runs -- or nearly a full run per game MORE than they would score in 1986 when they won 22 fewer games.

So my question to you is, let's say the Giants are able to drop their team ERA down to 3.50.  That figure would rank second in baseball right now.  It would mean with unearned runs, the Giants would be yielding about 625 runs in a full season.  Without Barry Bonds, how are they going to be able to score something approaching 725 runs in order to give themselves a decent chance at the post-season?

Personally, I see tough times for the Giants until (and assuming) Angel Villalona becomes an impact hitter at the major league level.  No team has ever won a non-forfeited game without scoring.

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 10:21 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Well, they are on pace to score 680 in a year in which at least 6 players are significantly underperforming.  For us it is only guesssing, but I think management has a good idea who will bounce back and who won't.  If 2-3 players bounce back and 2-3 are replaced with 270 type hitters we could eadily score 725-750 runs.
  Finally, your assesment (re: Villalona) looks only at what you can see now, and completely ignores both trades and FA.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
The Giants will likely break 700 runs this year.  But without Barry Bonds, they would likely not break 650.

How are they likely to score 725 runs next year WITHOUT Barry?  It's not impossible, by any means.  Nor does it appear to be likely.

Incidentally, what the heck does a .270 hitter mean?  If a .270 hitter has a .300 OBP and a .350 SLG, he's a bum.  If he has a .350 OBP and a .450 SLG, he's a valuable commodity, especially if he plays in the middle of the diamond.

by sharksrog on Jul 16, 2007 12:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Next year without Barry is a big if, if you ask me.

As it stands right now, I see no good reason that he's not a Giant in 2008. Ask me again in October, and we'll see if the tune has changed, but right now in terms of baseball decisions (which do not include the popular "I'm tired of this shit") I get the feeling it would be a pretty sound one to bring him back for one last year.

Coming to you by proxy (I adopted: Dave Righetti!)

by howtheyscored on Jul 16, 2007 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
We're one or two free agent signings away from contention? I assume you mean assuming we keep Bonds, because there's no one player and very few pairs of players we can sign that can even come close to replacing his production. If we don't bring Bonds back we'll threaten to have the worst offense in the league next year - even with A-Rod (who will get crazy money).

Our pitching is also pretty overrated as well - Morris and Lowry don't seem likely to sustain their early performances (Lowry in particular is getting by on a ton of stranded base runners and a tiny home run rate), Zito is merely average or a little better, and Cain seems to have taken a step back this year. Lincecum is awesome, true, but we don't have the best pitching in our division, much less all of baseball.

If we make a couple of free agent signings in this off-season with the intention to contend it's only going to extend the losing period even further and saddle us with more lousy contracts. Not that I disagree with you though - that's exactly what I expect Sabean to do.

Barry Zito: Mike Hampton with a guitar

by JakeS on Jul 15, 2007 11:21 AM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
True, we have only the 3d best pitching in our own division, but LA has serious problems with their starting pitching and SD has several pitchers who are OLD.  And we know what that means.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Yes. It means that the Giants could equal or pass the Padres and/or Dodgers in pitching in the future.  It is the Giants hitting that worries me far more.

by sharksrog on Jul 16, 2007 12:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Yeah, I replied to a lot of things. Sorry guys, this is my first blog. I'm just trying to develop my chops as a writer. This will be my last comment before my next blog. I believe that the Giants pitching is very strong. Cain and Lincecum have been shaky, but one is a rookie and the other is in his second season. Furthermore, Morris and Lowry both struggled with injuries last year. Morris had broken ribs, Lowry had back and oblique problems. The Giants will be big players in the FA market this offseason and I'm looking forward to seeing what Sabean does. As I noted in the blog itself, it's hard to get right-handed hitters to play in a ballpark where the ball doesn't travel to the pull field. I appreciate all of the feedback I've gotten, good or bad, and look forward to writing more as well as hearing from all of you more. Thanks for reading.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:33 AM PDT reply actions  

do you...
have any evidence that its hard to get right-handed players to play in ATT park?  You should try and provide some support for these types of statements.
Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: do you...
Well we couldn't sign Vlad, we couldn't sign Soriano, we couldn't re-sign Kent, we couldn't sign Carlos Lee, we couldn't sign Gary Matthews. I know the last two are switch hitters, but still. AT&T is not a hitters park. Hitters prefer to hit in hitters parks no? Okay, that's my last.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

correlation...
does not equal causation.  Lee, Soriano et al might not have wanted to sign with the Giants because they don't like fog.  
Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: do you...
only Matthews is a switch hitter and he wanted to go to LA to be with his family. True, the team should have offered Kent whatever he needed to stay, but they didn't and perhaps he just got tired of being here. Lee wanted to be close to home in Houston and it costs 57% less to live there than here (meaning a $10M salary in SF is about $4.3M in Houston).

As for Vlad, we didn't make a serious effort to get him and the only reason I've heard that he may not have wanted to come here was because of Flippy, and that's just speculation.

As for Soriano, I don't know why he didn't come here, maybe we didn't offer as much money, and maybe it's the park, I don't know.

Anyway, if it's true that FA power hitters won't come here, then that fact makes it MORE IMPERATIVE for the team to draft and develop power hitters. Sabes had a chance to get some this year and he took a couple of high school pitchers instead, which will force the team to try to lure free agents to fill those spots in the future, which will cost more money than its probably worth.

The Fringe was right.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jul 15, 2007 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: do you...
From everything I've read, no way was Kent coming back to be on a team with Bonds.
  And I was always under the impression, having just moved in to the new ball park with the payment schedule and it being unknown just how we would draw at ATT, they weren't willing to take the very high dollar risk on Vlad, given what at the time appeared to be a very serious medical risk (his back).  More recently, and on this site, I have read that Vlad would not come here, no way, no how, in large part because of Felipe.

by allfrank on Jul 15, 2007 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Felipe
Well, now that we've lived through the Felipe era, I guess it's no surprise that Vlad wouldn't want to play on a team managed by him.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: do you...
Who was it who hired Felipe, anyway?  :)

by sharksrog on Jul 16, 2007 12:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: do you...
  1. Carlos Lee = NOT a switch-hitter.
  2. AT&T is MUCH tougher on left-handed hitters statisitically, and actually pretty fair to righties. That doesn't prove it would be easier to sign righties (but then you didn't show any real evidence to the contrary either), but it does suggest that.

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Righthanded?
Boy, I'd like to see if someone can come up with some park factor splits for AT&T.  I could swear it's much easier for RH hitters to hit HR's than for LH hitters, except for ONE LH hitter that is.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah...
I have heard that too... As far as I know, the only info of the type you want is in the Bill James Handbook.
Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Righthanded?
The sporting news/stats inc "scouting notebook" book has this for all stadiums (at my 2004 copy)

It has park factors for
G (I guess just as a baseline)
BA
AB
R
H
2B
3B
HR
BB
SO
E
LHB-BA
LHB-HR
RHB-BA
RHB-HR

1 year and last 3 years.

The 2001-2003 LH HR factor for "pac bell" was .61!
By far the lowest in MLB.  RH was .68!  I don't think it's been that low since.  But it's hard to hit HRs here.  

by zenbitz on Jul 15, 2007 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Righthanded?
I believe they move the RF wall in a tad after the 2002 or 2003 season.  Of course, there isn't much they can do about RF.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jul 15, 2007 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: Righthanded?
This is by Dayn Perry, so perhaps take it with a grain of salt (he doesn't quote his source), but he says AT&T Park cuts down HRs by 17% for righties and 16% for lefties (scroll down towards the bottom).

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7003088?print=true

And in this article, Albert Pujols is quoted as saying AT&T Park is the toughest park in the league for right-handed hitters, and Justin Morneau says "For righties, lefties, it's a big park either way." (again, towards the bottom)

http://www.startribune.com/503/story/1293245.html

Adopting Dave Roberts since 2007

by hometownboy on Jul 16, 2007 2:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: do you...
They were saying on TV that AT&T is bad for lefty power hitters, not for righties.

by sharksrog on Jul 15, 2007 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
I don't think anybody minds you commenting in your own diary, that guy was just teasing you for replying to your own comment (something I'm sure most people here have done at least once). You should feel free to reply to anyone in this diary's comment section. In fact, I think you're expected to: when someone thinks you're dead wrong (as I do now), and post a comment to point out the errors in your argument, they are hoping you will respond with either a counter-argument, or better yet, reply with something like: "You are completely right, English Professor. I was mistaken in my beliefs, but then you came along and showed me the light. Hopefully, someday I'll have your immense level of baseball expertise. You are a god among baseball nerds."

by English Professor on Jul 15, 2007 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Errors are a terrible defensive metric
and infinitely moreso to measure catchers by.

by awesomer on Jul 15, 2007 4:19 PM PDT reply actions  

If you disagree....
please try and refrain from school yard taunts.  

Now, challenging each other to duels, I completely stand behind.

Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 15, 2007 4:22 PM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
You're trying to defend the indefensible here and I'm not buying one bit of it.  
Omar Vizquel to Big Sam, "Barton, Viduka, Rozenhal, Geremi, Deco even?...way to go Gaffer, keep up the great work!"

by PacBellBoozer on Jul 15, 2007 6:30 PM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Well I appreciate all the feedback, and while I thought playing devil's advocate to Brian Sabean would be easier, but it was no small task at all. Now before anyone calls me a flip-flopper or anything like that I just wanted to say that I just tried to take a stance and back it up as best I can. Too bad Sabean has dug himself too much of a hole, as did I. Thanks for all the interest in my blog. I'll write a new one when I return from Japan on Monday.
J-Po: a kid with a computer and brass balls.

by jpo on Jul 15, 2007 6:31 PM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Tip:  Stop calling it a blog.  It's not one.
Omar Vizquel to Big Sam, "Barton, Viduka, Rozenhal, Geremi, Deco even?...way to go Gaffer, keep up the great work!"

by PacBellBoozer on Jul 15, 2007 6:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

What?
I'm no McCoveyChronicles watchdog or anything, but the nature of the debate in this forum really isn't to throw out something ridiculous and then try to defend it as an intellectual exercise.  Look, we all post stuff that's right and wrong, but you don't see a lot of, say, "I don't think that gravity exists...discuss" diaries.

Pass on greetings to Shinjo for me.

by Kent on Jul 15, 2007 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: What?
That's because everybody KNOWS gravity doesn't exist.  :)

Anyone who thinks it does, doesn't understand the gravity of the situation.

by sharksrog on Jul 16, 2007 12:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

Re: What?
I'm calling BS, sharks! Gravity does so exist, but only on the surface of the sun where it's hot enough for the necessary superconductive ionotropic sub-molecular fissive attractive forces to exist.

For the same perfectly reasonable explanation, there is also gravity in some volcanoes, which I think explains a lot about the supposed theoretical impossibilities of so-called MagnoLava, the completely not made up Lava that attracts things as well as it vaporizes them!

Coming to you by proxy (I adopted: Dave Righetti!)

by howtheyscored on Jul 16, 2007 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sabean is a Giant for two more years
It is something I must accept. I do not have to accept losing seasons. Sabean must right this organization. He should begin right here in July by removing some vets, some salary and checking out some of the younger players.

by wilriv21 on Jul 15, 2007 6:57 PM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Is this guy like, training to be Skip Bayless or something?  
Sabean Trek: The Search for 100 Losses

by ToddLindenHasAPosse on Jul 15, 2007 8:59 PM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
The biggest worry about replacing Sabean is that we'll get someone worse in his place.

Sabean is far from perfect, but I don't think he's worse than about a B- general manager.

There is room for improvement, but there are plenty of GMs in the league that are much worse.

by sfmaynard on Jul 16, 2007 6:15 PM PDT reply actions  

Re: In Defense Of Sabean
Then th eobvious answer is to look outside the league!

FREE MIKE NOLAN!

Coming to you by proxy (I adopted: Dave Righetti!)

by howtheyscored on Jul 16, 2007 7:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

No defense for Sabean
Sabean has presided over -- hell, he has engineered the teams -- that have lost 11 straight HOME games to the archrival Dodgers.

This is unprecedented failure, where it hurts the most.

Our GM shoulda been shipped out for that one statistic alone.

by Moggeee on Jul 16, 2007 9:03 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about San Francisco Giants.
Start posting about the Giants »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Ejirvb_small
Home Runs and Western Suns : The Video
_gamer-avatar_small
Matt Downs: Man of Honor
Hidey-fern_small
BEAT LA: Image repository
Goofus_small
Recent bannings and warnings
Hidey-fern_small
Claim your Meme - or FAQIII

Recent FanPosts

Small
A request to the moderator
Squarelogo_small
minor lines 9/3-9/4
Small
I made Juan Uribe
Small
Comparing the 2010 and 1997 Giants
Small
Giants Gear?
Chsunday_comics_small
OT: Sabermetrics class
Goofus_small
Save the date: Friday 9/24 Meet-up at Public House

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Chicago White Sox's Mark Teahan is congratulated by Gordon Beckham (15) after scoring on a single by A.J. Pierzynski in the second inning of a baseball game against the Detroit Tigers Monday, Sept. 6, 2010 in Detroit. (AP Photo/Duane Burleson)

White Sox Win Seventh In A Row On A.J. Pierzynski's 10th-Inning Single

NEW YORK - JULY 18:  Andy Pettitte #46 of the New York Yankees bends over prior to leaving the game in the third inning against the Tampa Bay Rays during the first inning on July 18 2010 at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx borough of New York City.  (Photo by Jim McIsaac/Getty Images) +6 updates

Andy Pettitte Reporting To Minors For Rehab Start Following Incident-Free Bullpen

New York Yankees' Brett Gardner, left, Nick Swisher, and Curtis Granderson, right, celebrate after the Yankees beat the Oakland Athletics 4-3 in a baseball game Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2010, at Yankee Stadium in New York. (AP Photo/Bill Kostroun) link

Beyond The Box Score's Week 22 Power Rankings

More from SBNation.com >


Overlord

174246766_ea2fd78204_small Grant

Minions

Fawlty_small WalrusMan

Dog2_small kenshin1

Minime_small Natto

Howtheyscoredcat_small howtheyscored

Goofus_small Goofus

Det_7193_small jponry

Minor League Guru

Small steve S