My San Francisco Giants
by lmaozedong on Apr 21, 2008 9:52 AM PDT
28 comments
The Giants really shouldn't be this bad. Had our organization not essentially trainwrecked itself going after a Ring for Barry, we wouldn't have signed all these old hags. But the past is the past, and Marquis Grissom is gone. What's our excuse now? What reason do we have to continue signing players like Ray Durham and Rich Aurilia, who, while not obviously totally devoid of skill when we signed them, were dangerously approaching that age where baseball players can no longer produce anything of value except that so-called "veteran presence"--and who needs that when all your players are 50, anyway? You say that our club is "headed in a new direction". If we're headed in a new direction, show me! Don't play those old vets who are headed for retirement next year when we already know this year is going to be a bust. Show me Eugenio Velez! Show me Dan Ortmeier (actually, I take that back. Why didn't you sign Dan Johnson?) Fred Lewis! Rajai Davis! NATE SCHIERHOLTZ!!
Understand this, Giants organization--what gets people excited about this team is NOT when Barry Zito starts, but when Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, and occasionally Jonathan Sanchez start! Doesn't it make sense to you then that you should be playing your young players not only to develop them for the future, but to sell tickets NOW? Playing Ray Durham and Rich Aurilia is not only bad baseball, it's BAD BUSINESS!
With that, here is what MY San Francisco Giants would look like:
C: Bengie Molina
1B: John Bowker (I'd like to see him eventually end up in the OF though)
2B: Eugenio Velez
SS: Warm Body
3B: Jose Castillo
LF: Lewis
CF: Aaron Rowand
RF: Nate Schierholtz
With a batting order of
Velez
Schierholtz
Rowand
Bowker
Molina
Lewis
Castillo
Warm Body
This team doesn't have to be the WORST in the Majors offensively, it could be just plain bad. And with our pitching, maybe we don't lose 100 games this year. Please do it?
EDIT: I actually did miss the news about Rajai Davis being DFA'd. Busy weekend.. anyway, yeah, we had like 10 CFs anyway. I'm not too sad about that.
The people who have posted on this blog post have actually brought up a couple of good points. The Giants this year HAVE been playing the youngsters.. probably a lot more than I would have expected. It's nice to see Bowker, though not Bocock so much (though I don't think he's going to suddenly learn to hit..). I just would like to see Durham and Aurilia benched FOR GOOD (seriously, who actually thinks they'll have any value) and Randy Winn traded (I don't think he needs to prove himself--everyone knows what they're getting--basically your average OF in every way). If you're going to commit to something, why not commit to it completely and totally? The WHOLE hog, you know? That's what I figure.
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 |
28 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I’m sure that the poster is creating an ideal Giants lineup from the standpoint of the beginning of the season (with Davis) up until now (with Bowker blowing up). Or it could be he missed the news.
-D
by dw4848 on Apr 21, 2008 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well i wasnt sure, i thought i heard it on the radio over the weekend but i couldnt really believe
they let him go for probably nothing…could have DL’ed some oldster or slide Bowker over to 1B….
just to give Burriss a look when he’s over his head at AAA anyway…
by slojoe on Apr 21, 2008 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would think you would be happy they didn’t sign Dan Johnson, because it means they will give the playing time to John Bowker. As for Durham and Aurilia, I actually believe they’re getting playing time only because the Giants are deciding whether to cut them or not. Do I want to see the kids everyday?? Of course, but I also think they have played the kids alot more than I thought they would when the year started. I expected them to give the vets months before they went to the kids, and they actually started benching the vets after a few days.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on Apr 21, 2008 10:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed for the most part...
Being nitpicky, I’d switch Lewis and Nate in your lineup spots…
I think the Giants management actually is showing a sense of change. They may not be making the best decisions while changing (pulling up the Cock and Burriss, which may stunt their development), but at least give them credit for not signing any mediocre old guys and just calling up the kids to fill in spots. While that’s nothing to send them to the Coaching Hall of Fame for, it’s at least showing that they’re being honest in their statements of going in a new direction. I do believe Aurilia is being played to assess if he needs to be cut or not.
This team (IMHO) is not as horrendous as everyone is making them out to be. They are scoring runs and pitching well. They’re almost at .500 for cripes sake. To top it all off, the Dodgers are in the cellar. This has been a suprisingly good season thus far and I am just happy that I’m not at the point yet where I want to put needles in a Sabean voodoo doll.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on Apr 21, 2008 10:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
SS: Warm Body
I notice you’ve left Randy Winn off this list… Perhaps… Maybe? Randy at Short? He’d be a warm body!
It’s a perfect fit, and there’s no way on earth this doesn’t work!
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on Apr 21, 2008 10:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
why they play the old guys
they’re hoping the old guys show enough to bring back something in a trade. They’re going to let them play for a month or two, hope someone gets hot and they can swing a trade, and then let the kids play the rest of the season.
We all want to see the young guys as much as possible both because at this point they’re better than most of the old guys, and because it allows them to develop and gives us a picture of whether or not they’ll ever pan out, but it makes sense to let the old guys play a little to try to drive up trade value. Sadly, letting them play has only diminished their value… but Durham looks to be heating up.
2002? I'm over it. But I'll never be over Rich Aurilia.
by wjackalope on Apr 21, 2008 10:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s an interesting premise you raise, but at what point does it make more sense to bench the guy and let other teams dream that they could be better than they showed in limited playing time here?
With each passing at bat where Rich Aurilia doesn’t get an extra base hit or score a run, while batting under .200, wouldn’t his trade value increase by making him a bench player and using him in spot starts and late game situations? Then at least other teams might think he just needs regular playing time to show he’s still worth something.
To me, Aurilia isn’t even the problem. It’s more Ray Durham who’s the real issue. At least Rich can play all over the infield, so he does have value as a sub. But Ray only plays second, and badly at that. To me, he’s the real issue. Especially since he seems to be killing his value with each passing terrible at bat.
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on Apr 21, 2008 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Better to not play and let other's think you suck
Than to get on the field and remove all doubt?
Or something… I think aurilia is destined for an early retirement. I think Ray Durham and Randy Winn will be traded.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 21, 2008 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nailed it
That’s it exactly! The better to not play bit…
I don’t see Ray Ray getting traded, I think he’s quickly killing any remaining value he has. It would take an absolute blind act of faith for another GM to take Ray Ray off our hands and hope he’ll put up decent numbers again. And Dave Littlefield isn’t the Pirates’ GM, so who’s left that’s dumb enough to do that?
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on Apr 21, 2008 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As much as he pisses me off
I think Durham is under performing. This weekend he flashed signs of life and for a team in dire need of a 2b (St. Louis, for example) he might be a cheap replacement. (like, you pay half we’ll pay half)
Ironically, I think Aurilia is the one “Vet” who has a place on this team this year. He can play essentially all positions, which makes him useful despite his anemic bat.
IMO Randy Winn has trade value (or at least, pls take his contract and give us Raj Davis II value).
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 21, 2008 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adam Kennedy is not any great shakes
but he’s better than Durham. St Louis need a 2b. They do not need Ray Durham.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Apr 23, 2008 2:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Ray would have a little trade value at some point. Some team will have an injury, or a poor second baseman, and he could be a stopgap kind of fit. I do think he needs to play here and there, and tonight is a good night to play hime. Velez hasn’t hit the ball down in the zone very well, and Brandon Webb is pitching tonight, so it’s logical for Ray to play.
by tyrannoman on Apr 22, 2008 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Against a pitcher like Webb, I’d actually rather see the old guys be the ones who get obliterated. But I would have figured Ray would have had trade value last year more than this year, and we didn’t trade him then. His bat’s still showing zero signs of life. Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see New Cards GM take Durham off our hands, I just don’t see it happening. I hope it does! But I doubt it.
Re: Aurilia’s place on this team, FairWeather, I absolutely agree with you. I don’t think he should be chewing up the majority of at bats on this team, but there’s no reason he couldn’t be a utility infielder.
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on Apr 22, 2008 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do
wanna see Bowker hit tonight. Actually, I wanna see him hit every night, and play first base almost all the time. When he gets a little tired, Ort can spell him against a tough lefty. Other than that, all Bowker all the time.
by tyrannoman on Apr 22, 2008 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A stopgap
who can’t actually play the position and who costs $7.5M next year ontop of this year’s salary?
That’s the problem with Durham. Firstly, any team that sends a scout to watch him is going to see that he plays defense like Ray Charles without a couple of fingers. Secondly, he’s under contract NEXT year too.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Apr 23, 2008 2:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, I had to check this because I know he signed a 2-year deal (he is my adopted son after all), and he is.
from mlb4u.com
Contract:
signed 2-year deal worth $14.5M thru 2008 season on 12/1/06- + he receives salaries of $7M in 2007 and $7.5M in 2008- + he can earn a $25K performance bonus in 2007 if he reaches 450PA- + 2006 salary: $7M, 2005: $6.5M, 2004: $6M, 2003: $4M (+ $3.6M signing bonus)
It’s Dave Roberts who we’re stuck with another year.
by Natto on Apr 23, 2008 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think
I think the team we’re seeing is actually awfully damn close to the team you’re proposing. Lewis, Bowker, Velez, and a couple of warm bodies are all getting regular playing time.
The vets who are playing (Winn, Aurilia, Durham), are either sacrificing time to youngsters (Winn and Durham) or playing over Ortmeier (which some wouldn’t consider a shame, necessarily).
I don’t think the problem is the way the lineup is being made out today. We’re hamstrung with vets under contract. That means they are going to play. But while they’re playing, we’re getting plenty of contribution from the various top level prospects (and some contribution from some low level prospects).
The starting rotation is 4 homegrown arms, and before his injury, the bullpen had Threets to go with Valdez, Wilson, Hennessey, Taschner and former farm product Walker.
Nate Schierholtz is in AAA because he’s STILL at an age where playing in the minors is productive, and he’s far better served getting everyday at bats somewhere than splitting time with hundreds of people on the major league club.
As the season progresses, we’d like to see some more of the trash get taken out, but right now the team isn’t so far from what you want – and is probably a fair compromise between what you want and what could have been based on the roster going into last offseason.
The real problem comes from you first sentence:
Had our organization not essentially trainwrecked itself going after a Ring for Barry<
Which, of course, is only half the story. If the organization had not trainwrecked itself going after a ring for Barry UNDER THE FALSE SUPPOSITION that getting a ring for Barry MEANT mortgaging the future…
Therein lies the rub.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 21, 2008 10:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I know he has injury issues, but I sure wish we had this waiting in the wings in AAA:
Dallas McPherson .295/.446/1.174 6HR and 12BB in 44 at-bats in AAA Albuquerque. However he has K’d 19 times.
I wonder how long before Florida calls him up?
Adopted Giant Brian Wilson: One of the few reasons to watch this year.
by sfgreg on Apr 21, 2008 10:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
thats the signing i wanted
but i think i heard Sabean had “no interest” in MacPherson last winter
by slojoe on Apr 21, 2008 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's not true
the Giants’ went so far as to offer him a contract (according to the rumors) and he didn’t want to come here. I don’ t know if it was money, or playing time, or what.
by tyrannoman on Apr 22, 2008 8:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't Albuquerque
A launching pad? Still, nice stats from McPherson. He’s always had some talent, just trouble staying healthy.
http://www.baycityball.com
by xanthan on Apr 21, 2008 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Warm Body
Can I Adopt “Warm Body” as my Giant?
Todd Jennings: Next up on the Non-prospect Backup Catcher Train. Next Stop: The Pine at AT&T Park
by Speedforthewin on Apr 21, 2008 11:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This guy has a great username
At least…
"While conservatives tell you 'leave things alone and no one will lose,' and liberals tell you 'interfere a lot and no one will lose,' baseball says 'someone will lose.' Not only says it - but insists upon it! ... Democracy is lovely, but baseball's more mature." BVCE supports SF Dugout and Manny Burriss.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Apr 21, 2008 12:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like the way you think...
The last couple of games have given us exactly what you are looking for and I expect it to continue even more so till the end of the year. I would not be suprised if Durham and/or Aurilia and/or Roberts and/or WInn are off the team after the all star break. There are finally some things we can look forward to this season with the emergence of such players like Bowker and Lewis. I know its still early but we need something, anything!! Heres hoping the youth movement continues and we stay ahead the Dodgers the rest of the season. =)
by krazybalr on Apr 21, 2008 2:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My lineup would be different
Lewis
Velez
Bowker
Rowand
Schierholtz
Molina
Castillo
Bocock
However, that is pretty close to what we’re getting. Velez has pretty much taken over at 2B, with Durham playing about 1 game in 3, which is fine. I don’t think it’s a crime ot have him play that often. I do want to see Bowker against tough lefties as well, so we can see what he has.
by tyrannoman on Apr 22, 2008 2:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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.
