Type A Personalities
by Grant on Nov 14, 2008 12:37 PM PST
88 comments
Brian Sabean, 2003: "I have to get my house sprayed because I have draft picks. Wait, did I just say ‘draft picks’? Oh, man. I meant ‘termites.’ I always get those two confused. Probably because I have a similar amount of respect and affinity for both. Did you know that Michael Tucker was a first-round pick? Exactly. He also weakened the foundation of my house, but that’s a long story. Tuck Tuck knows how to liven up a party, and let’s just leave it at that. What was the question?"
Brian Sabean, 2008: Draft-pick compensation will influence which free agent players the Giants target.
This revision of organizational priorities is most welcome. A point to consider, though, is that the Giants’ first-round pick is high enough that it can’t be taken away. If the Giants sign a Type A free agent, the team will lose a pick closer to 50th overall. If the Giants sign a Type B free agent, they don’t lose a pick, though the free agent’s former team would get a supplemental pick.
You can find a list of Type A free agents here. We can talk about abstract, it’s-not-my-money reasons why Free Agent X would make us happy, but how many of these players would we actually trade a prospect for? My groupings, using only the players the Giants could conceivably be interested in (and I’m stretching that definition to include a couple of unlikely names):
C.C. Sabathia
Mark Teixeira
A.J. Burnett
The pick would make me think twice, but I’d go ahead and sign the player
Orlando Hudson
Oliver Perez
Adam Dunn
Pat Burrell
Derek Lowe
Jamie Moyer
Ben Sheets
Ryan Dempster
The pick would make me think twice, and I don’t think I would sign the player
Juan Cruz
Edgar Renteria
Damaso Marte
Forget about it
Doug Brocail
Orlando Cabrera
Brian Fuentes
Raul Ibanez
Jason Isringhausen
Darren Oliver
Russ Springer
Bobby Howry
Note that I’m not advocating any of these signings. Ryan Dempster’s contract is going to look silly in three years. This is more of an exercise to see if, for example, Ben Sheets wanted to sign an incentive-laden contract that would be very favorable to the Giants, how would the draft pick affect the decision? It really, really makes a difference with respect to the availability of free agent relievers. The difference between, say, Brian Shouse and Russ Springer isn’t worth one of the top 50 amateur players in the draft.
A long aside: One of the problems with moaning about lost draft picks is that we have no idea whom the Giants would actually select with the lost pick. The Royals used the pick that the Giants intentionally gave up for Michael Tucker on Matthew Campbell, which was the equivalent to a $1M donation to the Matthew Campbell Retirement Fund. Maybe the Giants would have spent the pick on someone different – Dustin Pedroia, Yovani Gallardo, Hunter Pence, or Huston Street – but you can’t just assume something like that. Of course, I’d still put money that the pick lost for the Armando Benitez signing would have been used on Matt Garza, but I don’t think I’ll ever be able to ask Dick Tidrow about it. Did the Aaron Rowand signing save the Giants $1M in draft bonuses, or did it cost the team a chance at a pre-arbitration star? Without knowing exactly how the Giants would pick, we’ll never know. And, dang, that’s irritating when trying to evaluate things like this.
Long aside over. The comment starter: Which free agents should be off limits because of the draft-pick cost?
0 recs |
88 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
yet
another reason to make a run at Furcal… only type B.
I would not sign Dunn or Burrell unless one of them is going to play 1B. I would probably pass on Sheets, Moyer, Dempster. Olivier Perez and Derek Lowe would have to come with very favorable terms. The bottom two sections on your list are a clear ‘pass’.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
by zenbitz on Nov 14, 2008 12:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
i'm a fan of 1B Dunn '09
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Nov 14, 2008 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Where else?
Where else would Dunn or Burrell play aside from first base? It is a weaker position than the outfield, particularly unless the Giants acquire a third baseman and Pablo Sandoval plays there.
by sharksrog on Nov 16, 2008 8:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
a) I am not sure they can play 1B (although Dunn has played a 1000 inn there or so, and Burrell played 60ish games there as a 23 y.o rookie.
b) I am not sure they will come to SF as FAs if they have to play 1B.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
by zenbitz on Nov 17, 2008 9:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't want Dunn
even if he plays 1B. I like his power and his OBP, but I think he is totally wrong for AT&T.
Greetings, Marklar! I am Marklar! This is Marklar.
by marklar on Nov 17, 2008 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Long aside over. The comment starter: Which free agents should be off limits because of the draft-pick cost?
In my opinion, any of the relievers. I think punting a pick for Juan Cruz — who is a pretty good reliever — is a bunch of malarkey.
Marte is off the market, by the way. He just re-upped with the Yankes for $3/12.
#1 JUDY STEFFES FAN
My favorite pie is (name of pie flavor)
Bay City Ball
by xanthan on Nov 14, 2008 12:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He signed for 25-cents? I’m sure that’s below the veteran’s minimum.
by cornball on Nov 14, 2008 3:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
man that’s a steal
Pac Bell, SBC, AT&T, 2010=???
by jt_7241 on Nov 14, 2008 5:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm actually confused
3.5 mil? 3 mil over 12 years? 3 years at 12 m/ yr? 3 yr, 12 m?
by bondslegend on Nov 14, 2008 9:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
3 years, 12 million.
#1 JUDY STEFFES FAN
My favorite pie is (name of pie flavor)
Bay City Ball
by xanthan on Nov 15, 2008 6:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
3 years, 12 million yen
Sergio Romo will gladly hand you a bench to sit on / GIANTSPACE™ / Adopted brother of the AnVil
by SoFa King Mike on Nov 15, 2008 2:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think if you’re signing a “big name player” then i don’t think losing the draft pick is really an issue. For example, your first couple of lists, shouldn’t really be impacted by the draft pick, but whether signing them is the right move.
If it’s a utility player, or buy low candidate, then it should really make you look elsewhere. As mentioned, i think it really impacts on the relief market, as i’m hard pushed to see any of the relievers being worth it to be honest, especially given the number of other options that don’t require picks. I guess it’s more of a question if it’s a big name closer, but hopefully we’d steer clear of them anyway.
Ultimately i think draft pick compensation can be overplayed, especially in the case of the bigger name players, but it should make you steer clear unless you think you’re signing a really good player.
Proud owner of the most boring Username! Alex Hinshaw: Now showing in a bullpen near you!
by GiantFan on Nov 14, 2008 12:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I pretty much like Grant’s list, but I think I’d move Burnett down a notch (once he’s got his fat contract I have ZERO faith that he’ll be that valuable).
Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...
by Smoke on the Water on Nov 14, 2008 1:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
+1 on Burnett
I wouldn’t put him above Dunn. Even Burrell, Perez, Sheets, and Dempster could be put at a similar level as Burnett, I think anyway.
Less arm, more talk. Raisingcain is a GAMER.
Adopted Giant: Henry Sosa
by raisingcain on Nov 14, 2008 6:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i’d also question jamie moyer…he is what 48yrs old how much longer can he really go for
by cazzuno on Nov 14, 2008 1:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I’d say another 48… or so.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2008 1:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So much of this depends on whether the Giants FO really and truly thinks it can contend in 2009, doesn’t it? If they think a Holliday-less Rockies and Peavy-less Padres will bring up the rear of the NL West, and that they’re only one FA signing away from competing with the DBacks and Evils, then a Top 50 draft pick seems like a sacrifice worth making. Having said that, I’m very skeptical we’re just one player away, even if that FA fills a big need (e.g., power hitter who can play the corners). Then the question becomes is this FA going to be a valuable, productive player in 2010-2013 or would a much cheaper (albeit unproven) draft pick be a better option for those years.
Another problem is whether Sabean will feel pressure from the owners to make a big FA signing this year no matter what to sell tickets for ‘09, even if it limits the team’s options in future years, and even if (when? ohplease ohplease) Sabean isn’t around after next season.
Which is a super-long way of saying that, from that list, only Mark Teixeira and maybe CC seem worth a pick.
No, my Crazy Crab bobblehead is not for sale.
by Kitspool on Nov 14, 2008 1:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
'Contending'
It really worries me that Sabean is going to try and contend for the NL West next year, and end up sacrificing out shot to contend for the whole enchilada a little further down the road.
I think FA moves should only be made to contend if it’s for a WS title. Yes, the G’s might contend for the weak NL west next year…but who cares? We’d probably get blown out of the water in the first round of the playoffs. I really think that any moves this team makes should be based around the idea that we can be WS contenders in 2010 (a bit early?)-2012, when our glut of really good prospects should make it to the majors.
Unfortunately, Sabean is probably thinking that winning the NL West next year would save his job. That would be one of the worst things that could happen to this franchise.
by Gregjitsu on Nov 14, 2008 1:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
false dichotomy
Trying to contend for the NL West in 2009 does not imply sacrificing 2010 (or 11 or 12 or whatever).
You are also overestimating the star power of those prospects. Not that I would trade any of them, but a nice prospect – even a can’t miss prospect – even a few of them – doesn’t == world series victory.
All they give up now is money. The Giants are in an OK position, because they have 2 top starters, 2 decent starters, and “adequacy” all around the diamond. They just need to find a couple guys who can hit, without trading away any blue-chippers.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
by zenbitz on Nov 14, 2008 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
my kingdom for an EDIT function!
Also – FAs that we sign this year may cost draft picks … but those picks (especially a 2nd round or below) are not going to be in the majors in 2 years anyway.
What is the average time in the minors for a 2nd round pick? 1st round pick?
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
by zenbitz on Nov 14, 2008 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Reread my post.
I didn’t say that contending for the NL West in 2009 necessitates sacrificing 2010 and beyond. I just think that under Sabean it probably does. Not because it’s impossible in principle, just under this particular GM. His pattern in almost every off season is to overpay a free agent for a contract that is too long. How many Zito signings can the club take? How many Rowands?
If we can find a FA who will take a shorter contract, and fills a gap for us, great.
“All we give up now is money.” Not true. By tying up money in contracts, a big free agent signing now and we give up the flexibility to sign a big FA later. It all depends on the contract. Contending next year and not hurting our long term chances is entirely possible. But do you trust Sabean to make the right moves to find a way to do both? I don’t.
On another note, I don’t think we’re a couple of hitters away from contention-we also need to fix the bullpen.
by Gregjitsu on Nov 14, 2008 2:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the Giants’ manage to sneak into the playoffs, I don’t think they would be automatically elimanted (unless they had to play the Marlins). With Timmy and Matty fronting the rotation, I would be excited about a short series.
by tyrannoman on Nov 17, 2008 11:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Glad to hear Casey Blake won’t cost us a pick.
Don't think, it could only hurt the ballclub.
by ResDog on Nov 14, 2008 1:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Maybes: CC, Big Tex, Furcal
Everyone else: resounding no
Adopted Giant: Aaron King
Wearing the crown by 2011. Or at least the LOOGY hat
by baetown415 on Nov 14, 2008 1:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Skip Furcal, please.
Just coming off back surgery. His last contract was 3 year, 39 mil.
Worst of all, his career stats are only a marginal improvement on what Manny Burriss produced last year. I really, really don’t think the addition of .040 or so of SLG that Furcal provides are going to be worth the 10 or so million dollars extra he would cost, EVERY YEAR. We can similar numbers from Manny Burris for $450k or so. Why on earth would we want Furcal? He’s not a bad player, but I think it would be an incredibly poor way to spend 12 million or so every year.
by Gregjitsu on Nov 14, 2008 1:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Furcal is a perfect example of what this team DOESN"T need anymore of: Speedy leadoff types.
We need a bopper and we need him now.
If we can’t get Tex (and I doubt we can), my hope is they see if either Burrell or Dunn is willing to play 1B. If not, pass on both and put the money into developing the minor leagues, or save it for next year.
If Sabean signs Furcal (or Hudson for that matter), I may blow a gasket.
by The Double Deuce on Nov 14, 2008 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Missing?
What we might be missing is that for a shortstop, Rafael Furcal has some pop.
I am not in favor of signing EITHER Furcal or Hudson — unless Rafael is fully healthy and doesn’t cost an arm or a leg. Hudson has been a pretty ordinary hitter outside Arizona.
by sharksrog on Nov 16, 2008 8:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
FURCAL 2009 ZIPS Projection
Name P Age AVG OBP SLG G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS RNG EXCELLENT Rafael Furcal# ss 31 .286 .358 .411 105 433 72 124 22 4 8 52 48 57 22 5 Av
Is that worth 3/33? Shee…. I dunno. That’s basically 100 games of Ray Durham at SS. .358 OBP is about as good as anyone on the team last year (except Durham). I guess if you reallly, really believed that Burriss can put up a .350 OBP for a full season…
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
by zenbitz on Nov 17, 2008 9:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
HUDSON 2009 Zips Projection
I probably should have combined these comments, but suffer!
Name P Age AVG OBP SLG G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS RNG VERY GOOD Orlando Hudson# 2b 31 .290 .363 .431 127 473 65 137 29 4 10 60 54 74 6 3 Av
Looks like a much better deal than Furcal… but is Hudson/Burriss better than Furcal/Fransden?
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
by zenbitz on Nov 17, 2008 9:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
GRAIN OF SALT
Those projections are NOT park adjusted, so the first one is dodger stadium, and the second is the BOB!
That probably lowers the offensive gap between them considerably…
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
by zenbitz on Nov 17, 2008 9:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m curious how you feel that Manny Burriss is an equal substitute for Furcal. Furcal is by every stat you can think of, a better alternative to Manny Burriss, not saying we should sign Furcal, but give credit where it is due Furcal is right now a better SS that Burriss. Oh and a proven major leaguer.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s less that anyone is saying Furcal wouldn’t be an upgrade, but more that he isn’t the type of player we need right now. Plus he has been injured A LOT lately. I wouldn’t want to risk a multiyear contract on him.
And who can say that Burriss couldn’t be better than him next year? Burriss should only improve and Furcal may be on the downslide. If we sign Furcal, we will NEVER find out if Burriss can be a solid SS in the majors (unless Furcal gets injured again).
by The Double Deuce on Nov 14, 2008 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Burriss: 240 ABs, 37 runs, 68 hits, 1 HR, 18 rbi, 23:24 bb to k ratio, .283 avg.
Furcal: 143 ABs, 34 runs, 51 hits, 5 HR, 16 rbi, 20:17 bb to k ratio, .357 avg.
I dont know about you, but I think I would place my bets on Fucal being better next year, and I emphasized the home runs to show you why your power argument is moot here, if Furcal had a full season he probably would have been one of the top sluggers on this Giants team.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 2:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And SB nation formatting sucks.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 2:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
2 reasons
1-furcal is a proven #1 hitter while burris is a proven #7 hitter
2 – what if frandsen/velez suck at 2b who are we going to play there Bocock…Jose Castillo. Having Burriss compete with the aforementioned gives giants better shot day in day out
by cazzuno on Nov 14, 2008 2:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Look at Furcal's career numbers.
Furcal’s career splits: .286/.352/.412/.764
Burriss’s major league #‘s: .283/.357/.329/.686
**The ONLY significant difference between Furcal’s career #’s and Burris last season is SLG.**
The numbers that Furcal put up this year are CLEAR outliers, and it was a shortened year (for him). He may have come back to earth, like Rowand did, had he played a full year. Even if he had put those numbers up over a full year, it would be silly to think he could produce them consistently again, because he never has in his career. His best year was 2006 at .300/.369/.445/.814. If we could be reasonably certain he would do that again, maybe he’d be worth a look. But why would you judge a player on his single best year? Furcal has over 4600 AB’s in his career. Until he puts together a run of several great seasons in a row, he is a .285/.350/400 guy, and he has never hit more than 15 hr’s in a season. That’s not bad, but it’s not worth spending 10 mil on when we can get .283/.357/.329/.686 from Burris for half a mil. Granted, Burriss SLG is an eyesore. But his avg and OBP are very strong for a ROOKIE ss.
Yes, Furcal will almost certainly be better than Burris next year. But so much better that he is worth 20 times what we will pay Burriss next year? I think not. In fact, I’ll say it-HELL NO HE WON’T!!! He’s an unremarkable hitter, aside from the fact that he’s a SS. If you want to talk leadoff men, I think Flew or Winn are better, cheaper options.
by Gregjitsu on Nov 14, 2008 3:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow partner unclench, as for your fears of over paying for Furcal, it wont happen. Im pretty sure that Sabean is not stupid enough to pay Furcal more than 7 mill a year on an incentive laiden contract after a serious injury year, I was simply refuting your claim of Burriss being an adaquit sub for having Furcal. Burriss was not last year and will not ever be on the same level as Furcal and to say that he is as good as having Furcal is silly.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 3:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And sorry I shouldnt say that Burriss will never be on the same level as Furcal but I dont see how having Burriss is grounds for saying “dont sign Furcal” when they are on two different levels of productivity. And like I said above I dont think we should sign Furcal unless he comes at an extremely cheap price. I would rather have Burriss at 450 k than Furcal at 10 mil + like you said.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Burriss IS a good sub for Furcal
I’m unclenched, I just sound really serious sometimes. :)
But look at the numbers. The only stat Furcal put up that’s considerably better than Burriss is SLG. In terms of avg and OBP, Burris looks capable of putting up very comparable numbers. Also, the two players have very similar fielding stats.
I don’t think we can get Furcal cheap enough, honestly. I’d rather have Burriss at SS all year long so that Velez and Frandsen can split time at second. If we push Burriss to 2nd, it’s going to be difficult to find enough playing time for Burriss to stay sharp, as well as auditioning Velez and Franny. Velez, might i add, showed a MUCH improved bat over the latter part of the season, and I’d love to see what he can do in 09. Frandsen has looked solid in AZ, so I’d like to see what he brings, too.
by Gregjitsu on Nov 14, 2008 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have doubts....
that Burris could legitimately put up the OBP Furcal can put up in a year
Those walks are going to go down as teams realize that Burris is the lowest power threat in the big leagues.
The guy is not even proven in the minors yet, so I’m pretty skeptical in thinking that a guy who could not really succeed in the minor leagues really turned the corner into a productive MLB hitter. Maybe one day, but I don’t think he’s there yet, and might never be.
by NeifiChicken on Nov 14, 2008 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
plus his fielding is inferior to Fucals
by NeifiChicken on Nov 14, 2008 4:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He is unproven
But he will only prove himself by playing. His AFL line is very solid looking, btw. I’m not saying he’s going to turn out to be as good as Furcal. Just that he’s done enough to warrant a start. If he doesn’t work out next year, fine. But given what he’s shown, there’s no reason to go out looking for a leadoff hitting SS this offseason when we desperately need power, already have two competent leadoff hitters, and have a SS who at least merits at chance at losing the starting position on his own.
by Gregjitsu on Nov 14, 2008 6:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Your assuming that Flew is a great leadoff guy, which hes good but his power plays him more like a 2 spot kind of guy. Why do you want to put Fred in the leadoff spot and waste his potential to produce runs in a lower spot in the lineup? Same for Winn, he hits too good to be considered a lead off guy and even though he can steal quite well I would still take an actuall leadoff type over him.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 6:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And see fairweather’s comment below dude, Furcal would be great at the right price.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 6:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly
I think that as much uncertainty as there is in Buriss’ bat, there is more in Furcal’s health.
With Furcal, the reward does not justify the risk. Not unless he is willing to sign for <8=9m.
by FairweatherFan on Nov 14, 2008 5:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re assuming that Burriss can repeat his showing last year. The problem is that his minor-league track record doesn’t support a .357 OBP in the bigs, and players with such low slugging ability tend to have their walk rates clipped as pitchers challenge them.
I’m rooting for Burriss, but he hasn’t proven he’s in Furcal’s league yet.
by Dan from NM on Nov 14, 2008 9:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Deuce I do dig your avatar, Full Throttle was a friggin awesome computer game back in the day!
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 2:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hell yeah. Still one of my favorite PC games ever.
by The Double Deuce on Nov 14, 2008 5:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I loved the cave fish and having to kick their asses on the open road, does anyone know of free way I could play FT again?
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 6:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
do a google search for
“scummvm”. Freagin awesome. You can play FT, and pretty much all of those sweet old lucasarts games.
by bondslegend on Nov 14, 2008 9:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ScummVM lets you play any of the old LucasArts SCUMM games, but you still need a copy of the game. How you procure that is none of my business.
by Natto on Nov 14, 2008 10:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
YOU KNOW HE’S EVIL BECAUSE HE HAS SHIFTY EYES!
My current Interwebs obsession is pretty awesome. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com. It's not being updated right now. Hope for more at your own risk.
by groug on Nov 14, 2008 10:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Only CC and Teixeira if the contracts are right. As gregitsu stated, tying up significant amounts of money will have repercussions in the future when the team is ready to contend. CC and Tex are not signing a three-year deal.
The Giants certainly do not have any MLB ready player that can hit at the level of Teixeira. That would be an expensive investment, but one that should pay off.
CC should certainly pay with increased ticket sales, although the Giants do not seem to have much a problem in that area. This is not the Rays. My worry with CC is body type, health and longevity. He has not shown any signs, but the man has pitched significant innings. He may be the exception and not the rule, but it seems as if it would be a risky investment.
No to Furcal. He would be a good fit for the Giants right now, but the injury history leads me to believe there would be problems there. That….and he was a Brave and a Dodger. He must be evil :-)
My adopted son Matt Downs. Lost in the wilderness of mediocrity.
by nvsfg on Nov 14, 2008 2:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Affeldt?
Makes some sense from Sabean’s perspective. One of the best relievers on the market and won’t cost a pick
As for major FA’s, I’d probably stay away from the whole bunch. Teixeira has the most interest to me, but that’s obviously a huge commitment
by NeifiChicken on Nov 14, 2008 4:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Just who i was thinkig.
I like Orlando hudson too, although that would prevent us from seeing the young guys. I wouldn’t object to a guy like brandon looper on a year or two contract, especially if we deal sanchez
by Okiegiant on Nov 14, 2008 11:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Barry Bonds wouldn't cost us a draft pick
I’m just sayin’…
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Nov 14, 2008 4:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Where's "Outside the Box Thinking"?
Thats thinking outside the box, i like that
I see the future, and it is Pablo
by CB30 on Nov 14, 2008 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Out hunting.
Conveniently with Bonds.
The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."
by WalrusMan on Nov 14, 2008 7:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Isn’t BLB in a box with a rifle pointing out?
Sergio Romo will gladly hand you a bench to sit on / GIANTSPACE™ / Adopted brother of the AnVil
by SoFa King Mike on Nov 15, 2008 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldnt mind losing a pick for CC or Tex
Otherwise, I would be hesitant, and some would be definite no’s
I see the future, and it is Pablo
by CB30 on Nov 14, 2008 4:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Sign all of them
C- Molina
1B- Tex
2B- Hudson
SS- Furcal
3B- Sandoval
LF- Burrell
CF- Winn
RF- Dunn
SP- CC
SP- Timmy
SP- Burnett
SP- Sheets
SP- Cain
2009 WS Champs!
Giants! Giants! HELP US GOD!
by j14 on Nov 14, 2008 4:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I dont know that is a pretty weak rotation.
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 14, 2008 6:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, one stiff breeze could put half of them on the disabled list.
by Natto on Nov 14, 2008 10:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Any rotation with Matt Cain in it is one I wouldn’t be happy with
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Nov 14, 2008 10:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Every rotation needs a third starter though.
My current Interwebs obsession is pretty awesome. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com. It's not being updated right now. Hope for more at your own risk.
by groug on Nov 14, 2008 11:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
MATT CAIN SUCKS
Sergio Romo will gladly hand you a bench to sit on / GIANTSPACE™ / Adopted brother of the AnVil
by SoFa King Mike on Nov 15, 2008 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Man, I’d pay good money to watch Burrell and Dunn play in the same outfield … in any uniform but a Giants uniform.
by StickRat on Nov 14, 2008 8:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dump winn
and sign Barry? Slowest outfield ever!
by bondslegend on Nov 14, 2008 9:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I see
nothing wrong with this theory
by bondslegend on Nov 14, 2008 9:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sign: Jeremy Affeldt, Koji Uehara, Alex Cintron. Trade for: Jeff Baker. Drop some money on signing: Jon Garland. Done.
by StickRat on Nov 14, 2008 7:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
i like were your going with this.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Here comes Captain Obvious wearing his Atomic Wedgie!
by daveinexile on Nov 15, 2008 8:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just so I am on record and can be appropriately mocked.
Types 1: CC, Tex.
Type 2: Reasonable terms Ollie Perez. Maybe Dunn at 1b, Burrell at 1b.
The rest I pass on.
This gets more interesting ( to us Giants fans) once the deadlines for arbitration is passed.
Some of these names ( from both class of free agents) might not be compensated then. Iam loking at you Big Unit.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Here comes Captain Obvious wearing his Atomic Wedgie!
by daveinexile on Nov 15, 2008 8:14 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I certainly hope you’re not looking directly at him. That’s like looking into the sun.
by Natto on Nov 15, 2008 11:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think its more like looking at a train wreck, how do you look away?
I'm young but i didn't fall off the truck yesterday!
by jbowl on Nov 15, 2008 12:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah right you are Ken!
Save your not named ken. Well you get the idea.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Here comes Captain Obvious wearing his Atomic Wedgie!
by daveinexile on Nov 16, 2008 5:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on McCovey Chronicles
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
