I think he makes some sense it the deal is right and he’s healthy. Giants’ SS had the worst OPS in the National League in 2008. Together, all the shortstops the Giants ran out to play, OPS’ed less than .600 on the year. Only Baltimore was worse.

And, as you pointed out, our depth at short is pretty bad. Furcal could be a bridge between now and prospects down the road.

I think if he’s healthy — the team doctors give him the OK — then he’s a pretty good option. He won’t turn this team around but SS is a major weakness on the Giants right now and I think he addresses it pretty well.

4yrs/$50M incentive-laden deal

Sure, he might flop. It’s not my money and he sure as hell won’t be blocking anyone.

But let’s be reasonable… more than 3/33 would probably not be good. It makes way more sense if we also go after Burrell/Dunn/Texiera as well. Just getting Furcal is like saying “TRAVIS ISHIKAWA – LEAD US TO THE PLAYOFFS”. And I saw that movie. It doesn’t end well.

I’d rather see the Giants trade a Winn or Molina or Rowand for a useful minor league shortstop in the high minors.

He makes sense but I’m too worried about his health for a significant long term deal.

I’m relatively pro Furcal. He’s the best shortstop on the market who won’t cost us prospects, and the Giants were absolutely abysmal at short last year. I think it’s asking too much for both Burriss and Frandsen to pan out, and neither is likely to be the kind of player who pushes the team to a pennant.

Yes, I’m worried about Furcal’s injury history and his terrible 2007. But you only have to hit a little bit to be a worthwhile shortstop, especially with Furcal’s strong arm. I suspect he’d remain tradeable a year or two down the road, as well. Plus he can be moved to second if need be.

I’m also a little worried that if we don’t start filling some of our holes, we’re going to end up like the Pirates or somesuch, where we look at just about every player and say, “Well, he won’t make us a contender …”

On this topic though, it really comes down to the price and his health. I know that those two things are incredibly obvious and all that does is basically restate what you said. 3 years at 36 million would be a good investment if he stays healthy. If he’s hurt, though, that contract will really suck.

Eat-all-the-cookies me always like signings. Signings are exciting and get me all crazy into the present. Yes We Can! Eat-all-the-cookies me doesn’t care if Furcal might get hurt; Eat-all-the-cookies me wants gratification now.

My more sensible half thinks that the Zito and Rowand deals make this a bad idea… we can’t afford to have another $12 million/year tied up in a player who carries such large risks.

For everyone that is saying 3/36, didn’t Furcal’s agent recently say the bidding starts a 4/40? You could call it hot air on his agent’s part, but I think Furcal will be able to get 4-years.

Career .286/.352/.412. Over $10 mil a season, really? Can’t we just sign Durham to a 1 year deal & let him battle for time with Frandsen & Burriss?

May I suggest we have a run-off for this poll? Maybe we could merge it with the prospect poll!

I could see something like 3/37 + 1 year 13 mil/3 mil buyout being good for both Furcal and whatever team signs him.