An Open Letter to Barry Zito
by edinburgh on Apr 23, 2008 9:20 AM PDT
Email
PrintSent to zitobarry@gmail.com
Barry,
As a born and raised Giants fan I need to let you know that you are bringing untold shame to this organization. Your $126M contract is proving to be the worst signing in all of professional sports. Basically, you are stealing from the Giants right now: they paid you to pitch well and win and instead you pitch poorly and lose. Essentially, you take their money and give nothing in return.
I think the most important thing for you to do right now is void your contract. It is clear you can pitch only at a mediocre level in the majors, and to continue with the richest contract ever given to a pitcher, is morally wrong. You're smart enough to know that I'm sure. Please do the right thing for the organization and especially the fans.
Thank you,
Steve C.
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.
93 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You’re too kind. I was going to write a letter strongly urging him to commit seppuku.
"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 23, 2008 9:30 AM PDT reply actions
I keep thinking
The Giants’ record in games NOT started by Zito is an even .500 (8-8)
¿Julio is tourist in San Francisco? Harper's Bizarre!
Dear Steve C.,
Direct your anger to the owner’s/GM box where it belongs. It isn’t Zito’s fault he found someone dumb enough to hand out that contract. You would have taken it, too, and there’s no way you would ever – ever – give $100MM+ back to someone who had willingly agreed to give it to you in the first place.
Sincerely,
KCE
Exactly
In fact, in 1977 Lyman Bostock offered to do just that. He was slumping so he offered to give back his salary. Gene Autry (Angels owner at the time) refused, saying ‘What if you hit .600 next month? You’re sure as hell not getting any more money out of me!’
fancy underpants?
"If I can change and you can change, then everybody can change!" Rocky Balboa, Rocky IV
by WithTechron on Apr 23, 2008 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Diamond encrusted ones? Zito can spring for them.
Adopted father of the AnVil / GIANTSPACE™ returns!
by SoFa King Mike on Apr 23, 2008 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Diamond encrusted ones? Zito can spring for them.
Adopted father of the AnVil / GIANTSPACE™ returns!
by SoFa King Mike on Apr 23, 2008 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Why are people mad at zito for taking the money?
Would you have refused the money?
Sabeans the dummy that gave him the money. Be mad at him.
I don't blame Zito for taking the money
I blame him for keeping it.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Why?
He takes a risk signing the contract the same as the team does. He risk’s losing out on money that he could have made IF he continued to perform at a high level and had signed a shorter contract, coming up for FA again in a few years.
Fundamentally, Both sides take some risk in any contract. In this case, Zito’s risk (leaving future money on the table) seems to have paid off. Magowan’s risk (That Zito under performs for his pay grade) seems to have been unwise.
It happens, that’s the nature of any contractual agreement.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions
NO risk
The Albatross left NO money on the table. He took the highest offer, with all the perks and is strumming away.
but he may have shorted himself tuture earnings. If he was a lights out stud in years 1-3, don’t you then he could’ve signed a deal for a higher annual average than $17 mil? That’s the risk the player takes with signing a long term deal. They may be leaving future dollars on the table.
Example: Arod
Except he just bailed out of his long-term deal and then renegotiated.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Right, but you understand what I mean.
Had he not, he certainly would have left “future earnings” on the table.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions
yes. I personally hate the opt out clauses, and that is what irritates me most about Zito’s contract. All that does is handcuff the team. If Zito pitches lights out, he can run away for more $. If Zito pitches lilke he is, the club is stuck with him.
he hasn't earned it.
both sides may have taken risks by signning, but they aren’t the same and don’t have the same value. Zito signed the maximum contract he could. Heck the Rangers reportedly offered him 6/$84 with a 7th year option and the Giants way outbid that.
You’re right in theory, though. He hypothetically could have been lights out in the first couple of years and then got an even bigger payday in FA. However, the likelihood of that happening was not great. His pitching was regressing and he was getting older. Whatever risks he took by signing suck a long deal were alleviated by the Giants paying him way more than he was worth. On the other hand, if he was as awful as he’s been, the Giants would have no recourse (especially with a no-trade clause) and would be stuck with a historically bad contract, which is what’s actually happening.
I suppose he also risked that in a year or two there might be an even stupider GM willing to pay him significantly more than he’d be worth for longer than he’d be worth it, but that risk is relatively small.
The Giants on the other hand are paying $14.5M this season (and $18.5M from 2009-2011, $19M in 2012, $20M in 2013 and possibly w/ the option vesting, another $18 in 2014) for an awful pitcher. Over the life of the contract, they risk not being able to sign free agents or re-sign Cain & Lincecum or other young players to long term deals. Plus, they look like fools, which I suppose you can’t put a pricetag on.
Ultimately the blame for this contract is not Zito’s, but Sabean and the ownership. However, the bottom line is that he hasn’t earned the money he’s being paid as he has sucked balls so far (especially this year.) and should give some of it back. I know that won’t happen, but it is still my opinion.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Whatever risks he took by signing suck a long deal
Remarkably appropriate typo.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
uh, yeah
that should say “such” not suck
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
The Zito Contract Was An Ownership Decision
Sabean was a lame duck (contract expiring) and thus too weak to resist. There is alot to blame Sabean for (loss of Nathan, Bonser, Lirano, and Accardo, retention of Durham and Vizquel, and the signing of Roberts and Aurilia) but this (THE BIGGEST MISTAKE) ain’t his fault.
There is no evidence for this. I mean, what are you going to argue? It’s not like Sabean to pay too much for a starting pitcher with bad peripherals?
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
Didn't You Pay Attention The Last Two Winters?
Ownership wanted to make a big non Barry Bonds splash and the failed on Soriano and Lee and thus got desporate and stupid on Zito. This was completely marketing and ownership driven. “The New Face Of the Franchise”. To think it was Sabes idea is just plain foolish. Sabes was too weak to resist because he was fighting to stay in the good graces of his bosses to keep his damm job.
by giantsrainman on Apr 23, 2008 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions
what makes you think that Sabean wasn’t an enthusiastic supporter of this signing or that it wasn’t his idea in the first place? he may have advised the Giants against this signing, or against this much money, but there’s no evidence of that, regardless of how determined the ownership was to sign a “Face of the franchise” (which they probably were.)
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Nice theory. Maybe even true. You need to look up the word “evidence” though.
Sabean ever say “Zito was not my idea”
Magowan ever say “I told Brian to get Zito no matter what the cost”
It the move somehow uncharacteristic (Matt Morris) of Sabean?
Here are some quotes from an article end of 2006:
Sources said the baseball staff, including general manager Brian Sabean, believes Zito is worth the seven-year commitment because he is similar in style to Greg Maddux, who pitched exceptionally at age 35.
Before Christmas, Sabean, managing general partner Peter Magowan and manager Bruce Bochy met with Zito in Los Angeles. A source close to Zito said the pitcher was impressed not only by the financial commitment Magowan promised to turn the Giants into a winner again, but also by Magowan’s honesty in detailing the shortfalls of the organization and how Zito would become the cornerstone of the new Giants.
I have never found anything other than us blogospherians stating “I cannot believe MacGowan was not responsible… it just smells like his meddling”.
It’s Sabeans JOB to find players and write contracts. If the Owner has a bad idea, Sabean should QUIT rather than tarnish his “sterling reputation” with a bad deal. At the very least – Sabean negotiated the contract – including the 7 year monstrous length – even if it was originally someone elses idea to “go after Zito”. It’s his job to not over pay.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
Smells like Al Davis.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Vicks and Ben-Gay?
Adopted father of the AnVil / GIANTSPACE™ returns!
by SoFa King Mike on Apr 23, 2008 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with zenbitz
I think the whole “meddling owner” angle that’s been taken with Zito, while it could be true, nobody has any evidence of it and it just feels made up.
http://www.baycityball.com
+1 on agreeing with zenbitz
Reports I’ve read seem to indicate that Magowan’s influence on the deal was present, but (wait for it), at the end of the day, Sabean is still the GM.
Zenbitz’ last paragraph says it all. Big-time +1 on that.
That's all I can stands, I can't stands no more!
Come On, Get Real.
How the hell could Sabean throw his boss under the buss “Say Zito was not my idea” when he was fighting for his professional life to get a contract extention. Finally, the idea that Sabean (or for that matter anyone) should quit because the disagree with their boss is so flat assed unrealistic that it makes me wonder if you ever had a real job.
by giantsrainman on Apr 23, 2008 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Yep
I think this is especially true in Zito’s case. People around here sometimes act like he isn’t busting his ass trying to get back whatever it is he has lost – almost as if he is trying to suck. He wouldn’t waste his time with all the mechanical changes and reinventions if he didn’t care. By all accounts, the dude is doing every thing he can to right the ship. Even if it’s a fruitless endeavor, I can respect that. This guy’s work ethic and attitude is a long way from Armando II and we’ll all be better off if we give him the benefit of the doubt.
Now, giving Magowan & Co. the benefit of the doubt on this one? No chance. Not now. Not ever.
I completely agree
It’s not Zito’s fault he sucks, and it’s not his fault that Magowan & Company chose to pay him to suck. It’s also not our money (sorta) so why do we give a shit how much they are paying him to suck?
What we should care about is if he plays or not. Players who suck should not play in anything but the lowest of leverage situations. That is our right to demand as money-paying fans. That’s not Zito’s fault either. Bochy tells him to pitch. I assume that @ some level, Bochy doesn’t have much choice in the matter, either.
So, ultimately, the person to direct your angst against here is whomever is dictating that Barry Zito is the ace of this organization, and as such must continue to start games.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions
I also fully beleive
That Zito is doing everything that HE can to get his shit right. I don’t blame him at all.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Great point. I am flat-out pissed that Zito is pitching as bad as he is, but there’s nothing morally wrong with him. The contract is sure to be a bust, but at least he’s trying. If he’s stays healthy he’ll probly at least have a couple decent years for us, and if somewhere down the line he wins a big playoff or pennant race game then maybe he can salvage some goodwill.
Armando being paid 8 million and he can’t even sprint 35 feet to cover first base withou blowing his hamstring is professionally unethical. What a loser.
Armando's hammy
did lead to the greatest line of Stan Conte’s life, however. When asked what kind of rehab Armando was going to go through, Stan’s response was “Push aways. The kind where you push away from the table.”
I can’t really be that mad at Barry Zito. I’m sure this is a million times more frustrating for him than it is for us.
Now, I’d be happy to write an open letter to Brian Sabean asking him to please resign, but w/e.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
You mean 126 million times more frustrating?
I’d love to be that frustrated.
¿Julio is tourist in San Francisco? Harper's Bizarre!
yeah, the money helps ease the frustration, I'm sure.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Adopted father of the AnVil / GIANTSPACE™ returns!
by SoFa King Mike on Apr 23, 2008 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I have found that expecting that Zito
will cough up the lead is a great way to watching his starts. After the Giants went up 3-0 it was then like watching a good action flick where you know that the hero will save the day, you just want to know how. In this case it is that I know Zito will hand the game to the opponent, I just don’t know how. And this time Bochy hooked him with some hope of a come-back cause we were only down by two runs. And hell, our bull-pen IS worth watching these days.
Bases loaded, one out and ${VETERAN_GIANT} hits a $#^&*@# grounder to 2nd!!!!
I begrudgingly support this.
Tentatively adopting Dan Ortmeier. And Boom Goes the Dynamite.
by Andy from DC on Apr 23, 2008 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
I've been doing the same thing
It is almost gratifying.
¿Julio is tourist in San Francisco? Harper's Bizarre!
Funny, I was thinking of your screen name when I was writing
“cough up”.
Bases loaded, one out and ${VETERAN_GIANT} hits a $#^&*@# grounder to 2nd!!!!
And that's why guaranteed contracts are a bad thing.
Guaranteed money = necessary. Guaranteed contracts = bad.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
This applies mostly just to sports.
Guaranteed contracts for many of the working classes can be a very good thing.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Why? If you can't perform, you're out. Doesnt matter if your a 126m Pitcher or a 30k plumber...
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I persaonally know somebody who is very, very good at their job, but because of the industry they work in (Title) only still have it because of a guaranteed contract (which they were given for being very, very good at their job).
Guaranteed contracts can keep good workers working. It all depends on context. At the level of $126 million professional athlete, that context falls apart. But among the working classes I imagine its more common than we realize.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, let's not let this get political
But just because you are good at something doesn’t mean it’s useful. I’m pretty good at a lot of things that may or may not be useful in a given economic situation. Right now, I would assume Title is a field that has been hit pretty hard. As a result, being a good title agent or whatever isn’t a very useful thing right now, and hence not worth much $$.
Just being good at something isnt enough. Being good enough @ something that is needed is what matters.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Your're, of course, not wrong
There are two sides, and their split is rather ambiguous. There is business side and the working side. I’m particularly sympathetic to the working side as the lower and middle classes are concerned. People need to work, and if there is a case where a decision might be better for workers than for business, I’m often going to side with the workers. On that same note, I do understand that if the business side isn’t correctly moderating the working side, then the business side will fail and there will be no room for workers anymore. I mean, if there is no business, there is no work.
You obviously have a lot of education on these subjects, and I would guess plenty of first-hand knowledge based strictly on how well you’re talking about them. Comparatively, my education and first-hand experience with these subjects is much smaller, so I won’t pretend that the things I say are airtight or without fallacy. I just hope I’m making some sort of sense in favor of the position that I’ve been taking.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I think always siding with the worker might be a tad naive.
Most employers are small busines owners, who typically are struggling to stay ahead each month. They typically have much more “skin in the game” when it comes to the employer/employee relationship. While it might seem to cold and heartless when an employer lets someone go, my “real world experiance” has been that employees are far more likely to “unfairly” severe a relationship (leaving without notice), leaving the employer holding the bag.
Besides, it’s far easier for an employee to quit, than it is for an employer to fire someone without facing possible legal consequqnces.
2008 Giants: A steaming pile of scrap!
Well I didn’t mean ALWAYS always. Context is everything, blah blah blah. Employers are workers, too. It’s a fine balance. I’m perhaps just overcompensating for what has, heretofore, been a fairly profit-only-sided argument.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh
I didn’t mean to sound like it was always a done deal for me. As with anything, context is everything. If a decision hurts business with the short term aim of helping employees but the long term ramifications of hurting employess, it should never be made. If a decision booms business but unnecessarily hurts the employees, I’ll be against that. The list goes on. It’s also not lost on me that business owners are workers, too, and they often struggle to get by as much as the next guy. I’m also on their side.
The side that I’m trying to argue for here is the side that decisions that can be bad for business can be the GOOD decision if it properly benefits the workers. So, for instance, this person I know having a guaranteed contract is keeping that person in work. In the current title market that guaranteed contract is detrimental to the company in the short term because they have to honor that contract, but the damage is minor in terms of the long term health of the company. A skilled worker gets to keep working, and business – though temporarily hurt – does not fail. If the contract was such that it’s impact hurt the company enough to force other layoffs or somehow crippled the companies ability to compete over the next x number of years, it wouldn’t be a good thing.
The struggle is always between the business side and the human side. I am in favor of the business side because it benefits the human side through profit, not because it is inherently profitable. If the balance tips too far either way, the whole thing falls apart. A company that is too employee minded may always come in at a loss, and then there will be no company and no employees. A company that is too profit minded may make unnecessary cuts on the employee side in the name of making that extra buck.
And while making profits is not inherently wrong, making profitable decisions at the long term expense of the worker doesn’t seem right to me, no matter how sound the “business” side of the decision may be. This is countered when the profitable decision at the long term expense of the employees is an alternative to a decision that will be more harmful (like, not firing people and then going out of business and losing everybody).
I’m not sure I sound less naive, but I hope I sound a little more rounded. I understand that the right decision can negatively impact employees (and/or employers!) in the short and sometimes long term. I just don’t want the wrong decisions to be excusable strictly on the basis that they are temporarily bad for business.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t disagree with any of your points, but there is one more point I’ll make: It’s very easy to criticize a business when they make employee-related moves in the name of “business” or “profits”, but to me it’s no different than if an employee quits for another job that pays more.
Pretty early on in my working career, I came to a conclusion that has helped me keep perspective, whether it’s as a manager or an emplyeee: The employer/employee relationship is like any business relationship. As long as it contniues to benefit both parties, it’ll continue. If one or both parties feel their not benefitting, the relationship will need to be re-addressed or severed.
2008 Giants: A steaming pile of scrap!
You obviously have a lot of education on these subjects, and I would guess plenty of first-hand knowledge based strictly on how well you’re talking about themLol, I’m 26. Thanks tho.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
n/p
You’ve been speaking eloquently about business/economics. More so than I’m capable of. Props were in order.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m pretty good at a lot of things that may or may not be useful in a given economic situation.
Me too, I’m still disappointed at the scarcity of “professional masturbator” jobs out there.
2008 Giants: A steaming pile of scrap!
I wasn't gonna go there...
But thats the #1 thing that came to mind… lol
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
A valid contract
Not that it wouldn’t be highly ethical of Barry Zito to void his contract, but he certainly has no obligation to do so. What SHOULD be done is to fire the guy who gave it to him—but can Peter Magowan really be fired? :)
There is no reason for Zito to void his contract
Assuming he followed it to the best of his abilities. He and Magowan both agreed to terms, and that’s where we are. Now if Zito snuck off and injured himself doing somethign he wasnt supposed to, or was slacking any not trying his hardest – then yeah, he would be morally obliged (or if he falsely represented himself, which you may be able to make a case for… lol) to void the contract.
Just because he sucks isn’t reason to oblige him to do anything other than to try to not suck.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Just an aside
there ain’t no way in HELL the players union would allow the contract to be voided anyway. Unless the Giants’ can find Zito speeding while loaded with a hooker (a la Denny Nagel), this contract isn’t going away.
to add on to your point
the union wouldn’t let Zito void the contract, let alone the Giants
"If I can change and you can change, then everybody can change!" Rocky Balboa, Rocky IV
by WithTechron on Apr 23, 2008 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
it would take more than that
a dead hooker, maybe.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
You can bet your Ass
That if Zito turned around and posted a 1.00 ERA and won 30 games for the 2007 and 2008 season, there is no way Magowan would void the contract and let Zito re-negotiate for a higher amount.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, sure
But that’s besides the point.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Apr 23, 2008 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions
they should just buy him out
give him $30M to go away.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Silver Lining?
When Zito was first signed a bunch of us, in that initial thread after the announcement, theorized there was no way Zito would still be playing for the Giants at the end of his contract. I’m racking my brain, thinking about all the pro athletes who signed 6-to-10-year contracts and almost NONE of them end the contract on the same team they started with.
In fact, the only one who comes to mind is Manny Ramirez, who’s finishing up an 8-year deal this season. Weird that Manny, one of the ultimate oddballs, would be that rare guy who survived so long in Boston of all places. Guess he’s a pretty good hitter.
Eagerly awaiting Crazy Crab Bobblehead Night on 7/18.
Manny doesn’t give a shit, really. That’s why he’s lasted so long in Boston. He’s that type of guy he is because he knows how talented he is. I was at Yankee Stadium when he bashed two bombs off Mussina last week. He’s the real deal and has a lot of gas in the tank. Damn I miss the good old days with BLB.
Maybe if we boo the shit out of Zito enough, he will crack and bail on his no-trade clause.
Adopted father of the AnVil / GIANTSPACE™ returns!
by SoFa King Mike on Apr 23, 2008 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions
but who would trade for him?
no one, unless the Giants pick up the tab. The contract itself is a no-trade clause.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
and even the Red Sox and Manny have had problems, as great as that contract has been for the both of them. Manny has asked for a trade a couple of times, and the Red Sox even put him on waivers a couple of years ago and nobody claimed him.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
those guys are hard to trade
a case in point is Todd Helton. The Rockies have been trying trade him, but his contract is simply not moveable.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
The only way Zito gets moved is
that we eat most of the contract. Until A-Rod extended last year Texas was still paying a great deal of his salary. So really, there is no silver lining.
Bases loaded, one out and ${VETERAN_GIANT} hits a $#^&*@# grounder to 2nd!!!!
Zito should go on the DL so that they can figure out what is wrong with his delivery
"If I can change and you can change, then everybody can change!" Rocky Balboa, Rocky IV
I’m not sure how going on the down low would help us figure out about his delivery, but I’m willing to give it a shot.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Giants upcoming schedule
Possibly Rags can reshuffle the starting pitching in the next few weeks. Looking at the schedule the Giants have off days on Thursday May 1 and on Monday May 5. Here is a suggestion to the Giants:
April 23: Cain At SD
April 24: Lincecum at SD
April 25: Sanchez vs Cincy
April 26: Correia vs Cincy
April 27: Zito vs Cincy
April 28: Cain vs Colorado
April 29: Lincecum vs Colorado
April 30: Sanchez vs Colorado
May 1: Off day
May 2: Correia at Philly
May 3: Cain at Philly
May 4: Lincecum at Philly
May 5: Off day
May 6: Sanchez at Pittsburgh
May 7: Correia at Pittsburgh
May 8: Zito at Pittsburgh
I imagine if he has another poor outing on the 27th, skipping his start after the May 1st off day is a fairly distinct possibility.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 23, 2008 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
stick him in the pen temporarily
let him work out some of the kinks without the pressure of starting. of course, then we’ll have the most expensive LOOGY in history.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 23, 2008 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
i WISH he were doing nothing
the problem is he isn’t.
now we have a durable pitcher who consistently shits all over the mound every fifth day. AWESOME!
I’d rather have a mike hampton or kevin brown who end up on the DL. At least it allows for a better alternative in the meantime.
Zito’s contract will only be an albatross if the Giants allow it to be. It’s way too early to just dump him, but the Giants are going to have to face the fact that the contract was a mistake and they are going to have to have the guts to react accordingly. When Noah Lowry returns they will have five starters better than Zito, and in a couple of years when guys like Alderson and Bumgarner get here, he won’t even be good enough to make the team. If the Giants write off the contract as a mistake they can survive this. If they continue to stubbornly send him out there every fifth day hoping he turns into Tom Glavine or Jamie Moyer, the bad effects of this contract will continue to haunt the franchise.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Baltimore’s tradition of fans shouting ‘O!’ during national anthem sparks interleague feud
- Chris Perez follows rant against Cleveland fans with even better rant against Cleveland fans
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
