What would you rather see happen?

by positiveuphemism on May 17, 2008 9:11 PM PDT

I am finding myself enjoying this season quite a bit. I want to see us win, but in 80% of the games, if they don't win, I don't care. In fact, in a way it makes me happy.

The San Francisco Giants have never had a #1 pick. To me, this is the best result we can honestly hope for this season. Apparently it has the highest chance of producing a good player of any spot in the draft.

Also, at this point, it's still possible the #1 next year will be an Arod type talent. We can't say for sure what HS baseball will produce.

Assuming the Giants don't contend, we can expect of these five: Aurilia, Durham, Vizquel, Winn, Molina, at least a few to be gone by opening day next year. IIRC, Aurilia and Vizquel are gone after the year and the other three have one year left. I think it is very possible that if we continue to stink that at least one of the other three will get traded. We all know this won't happen if we "contend."

I know there are 4 teams ahead of us in this race. Rockies, Mariners, Tigers, Padres. The Rocks and Tigers really should be playing much better and I expect them to finish well ahead of us. The Padres aren't really this bad, are they? I have no clue about the M's.

In any case, I think we have an outstanding chance at a #1.

McCoven, what would you rather see?

Poll

Would you rather finish with the #1 pick or "contend" throughout the year and end up out of the playoffs while holding on to all our veterans?

0 recs | Comment 61 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

they're on pace for 64 wins

id just as soon they get the #1 pick

by slojoe on May 17, 2008 9:40 PM PDT 0 recs

oh the possibilities....

http://www.projectprospect.com/article/2008/05/02/top-10-college-sophomores

waiting for 2011....

by Osama91w9 on May 17, 2008 9:44 PM PDT 0 recs

I wouldn't mind that Strasburg guy.

by positiveuphemism on May 17, 2008 9:53 PM PDT up 0 recs

+1

Proud adoptive parent of Tim Alderson.

by Anticon23 on May 17, 2008 10:12 PM PDT up 0 recs

Strasburg FTW!

Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est?

by shikantaza on May 18, 2008 10:15 AM PDT up 0 recs

Play to lose

Two man rotation from here on out. Zito & Misch.

That boy Giggsy
He's won it ten times

by ChrisHero on May 17, 2008 10:26 PM PDT 0 recs

shouldn't that be Zito & Cain?

I kid!

by positiveuphemism on May 17, 2008 10:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

Zito and Hennessey.

Aaron "Swag" Rowand

by victor frankenstein on May 19, 2008 12:05 AM PDT up 0 recs

What?

Zito and Lowry if you really want the #1 pick. “Forget that injury nonsense, Noah, just get out there and pitch! You ARE a gamer, aren’t you? Take one for the team. Or a hundred.”

Your 2011 SF Giants: the 2008 Augusta Greenjackets!

by Lyle on May 19, 2008 5:51 AM PDT up 0 recs

why can't he

pitch with his right hand? he bats righty doesn’t he?

Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis

by wjackalope on May 19, 2008 9:13 AM PDT up 0 recs

Dont throw in the towel

I dont hope the Giants get the 1st pick. I want them to be as competitive as possible. If we play all the young kids and we lose I have no problem with that, I just dont want us to lose just to get better drafting position. There is still plenty of season left

by ACgiant97 on May 18, 2008 12:46 AM PDT 0 recs

That's not the question, though

Simply #1 pick, or fail to make the playoffs and get rid of overpriced veterans.

I am not advocating tanking it by any means.

So…you would rather us finish with the #2 or #3 pick than #1? Is the honus of having the worst record worse than what a #1 pick could bring?

by positiveuphemism on May 18, 2008 12:51 AM PDT up 0 recs

If I thought having the worst record came with a Honus, I’d definitely go with that choice.

"I been waitin' a long time for this! I been waitin' since the f**kin' amateurs!" --WILL "THE THRILL" CLARK

by Josh from Hollywood on May 18, 2008 3:18 AM PDT up 0 recs

What, Josh?

There wasn’t a Sabean pic you could use here?

Your 2011 SF Giants: the 2008 Augusta Greenjackets!

by Lyle on May 19, 2008 5:51 AM PDT up 0 recs

I'll bet

I’ll bet I know which 20% of the games you want the Giants to win. It’s the same 20% I care about.

by sharksrog on May 18, 2008 1:11 AM PDT 0 recs

I see you speak of Matt Cain’s starts.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on May 18, 2008 1:32 AM PDT up 0 recs

The thing about those 20%

is if for some reason the guy who starts for the Giants is out of the game and doesn’t have a chance at a decision, I don’t care about those, either.

Funny that…

by positiveuphemism on May 18, 2008 2:24 AM PDT up 0 recs

yeah

all i cared about today was that cain didnt get the loss

by Azmanz on May 18, 2008 4:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

Which 20% is that?

I am on the edge of my seat waiting to find out the answer to this question.

If you like things that are funny, perhaps you will enjoy ChatterBalks Dot Com?

by groug on May 18, 2008 7:08 PM PDT up 0 recs

I reject this premise

I do not see why we couldn’t contend while jettisoning the veterans.

by Lars The Wanderer on May 18, 2008 8:08 AM PDT 0 recs

Exactly

I think we’d be doing better without some of our veterans.

by giants9107 on May 18, 2008 8:12 AM PDT up 0 recs

Ummmm

Talent? Ability? Roster?

My boy ain't fat, he's just big boned. Big bat, too.

by Roger on May 18, 2008 8:37 AM PDT up 0 recs

The vets are playing so well..

that we will contend? Their performance has not been better (and in some cases worse) than the kids the Giants are being forced to use. It isn’t like the presence of Rich Aurilia is going to propel the team to .500

by Lars The Wanderer on May 18, 2008 8:43 AM PDT up 0 recs

Just because a lot of our vets suck it doesn’t mean we’ll be a good team without them. We don’t have anyone better than Molina, Winn or Vizquel. And I’m not sure Velez is really better than Durham.

Don’t get me wrong though, I’d love for us to trade away the vets (Winn we should only trade for a real hitting prospect, even if it means eating his entire salary. Same for Molina, but I don’t see the Giants trading him), even if it means fielding a lineup around replacement level.

..so allow me to present Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain as two sweet, sweet bottles of warming hooch.

by Cookyman on May 18, 2008 9:26 AM PDT up 0 recs

Just because a lot of our vets suck it doesn’t mean we’ll be a good team without them.

Which is exactly my point. Why would keeping the veterans prevent the team from picking up a #1 pick? The answer? It wouldn’t. That fact makes the black-and-white presumptive question of “keep the vets or #1 pick” completely incorrect.

To summarize: the two are not mutually exclusive.

by Lars The Wanderer on May 18, 2008 9:30 AM PDT up 0 recs

Why would keeping the veterans prevent the team from picking up a #1 pick?

It’s not that he vets are so good they’ll keep us from losing. I think positiveuphemism is saying that it’s impossible to keep the vets and get the #1 pick because if the Giants are that bad around the trading deadline, then Sabean will probably trade most of the vets away for anything. If the Giants are close to contenting, he’ll keep them because he thinks they help the team.

..so allow me to present Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain as two sweet, sweet bottles of warming hooch.

by Cookyman on May 18, 2008 10:01 AM PDT up 0 recs

Third or fourth place is close to contending, according to Sabean. =(

Proud adoptive parent of Tim Alderson.

by Anticon23 on May 18, 2008 10:16 AM PDT up 0 recs

I guess I just don't understand

It’s not that he vets are so good they’ll keep us from losing.
>If the Giants are close to contenting, he’ll keep them because he thinks they help the team.

So which is it? Are the vets lousy or will they keep the team in contention thus requiring Sabean to pile even more vet goodness on top of this crap mountain? It certainly appears to all that the team is nowhere close to contention. If he trades vets for prospects, those prospects are not going to be worth anything. Winn, Molina, Roberts, Aurilia, Durham for anything usefull enough to make a difference in the standings is a pipe dream.

by Lars The Wanderer on May 18, 2008 10:18 AM PDT up 0 recs

I must have gotten totally lost somewhere

because it looked to me like you said we could “contend” while jettisoning vets. To me “contend” means for the post-season. My comment didn’t mean to imply that I thought keeping the vets was our only chance for contending, but rather that no such chance exists either way.

My boy ain't fat, he's just big boned. Big bat, too.

by Roger on May 18, 2008 11:52 AM PDT up 0 recs

Winn is our best RF. Molina is our best catcher. Vizquel is our best SS. Therefore, trading them will hurt the team this year. That’s all I’m saying.

..so allow me to present Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain as two sweet, sweet bottles of warming hooch.

by Cookyman on May 19, 2008 7:38 AM PDT up 0 recs

Again..who is the GM?

If we are utterly failing the chances of trading vets is much much higher than if we are “contending.”

With Sabean, the two are mutually exclusive.

by positiveuphemism on May 18, 2008 12:55 PM PDT up 0 recs

I don’t think that possibility is even remotely denied by this premise, I just think that this premise is not interested in that possibility because it assumes that contend with youngsters has ALREADY won the poll.

Essentially, we’re voting on whether we like option B or option C better because option A is so overwhelmingly obvious, not “which of these two choices A and B, which cover every single possibility, would you want to see because it absolutely HAS to be one of the two.”

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on May 18, 2008 10:56 AM PDT up 0 recs

I want to believe the above...

But the poll is worded as “Would you rather finish with the #1 pick or “contend” throughout the year and end up out of the playoffs while holding on to all our veterans?”

To me, this question explicitly rules out having a good year while playing the kids. I think it very plainly suggests that keeping the vets assures them of not being the worst team in the league while still not making the playoffs. It seems unnecessarily black and white to me. There are an unlimited number of possible scenarios using any combination of kids-lose/kids-win/vets-lose/vets-win. The question makes no reference to an assumed winner outside of what was asked.

by Lars The Wanderer on May 18, 2008 11:23 AM PDT up 0 recs

Who is the GM?

oh yeah…right.

by positiveuphemism on May 18, 2008 12:54 PM PDT up 0 recs

How many kids has he traded for vets this year?

Oh yeah…none. And there is no reason to get snarky. We are all having an adult discussion about a topic you started. Perhaps you should participate?

by Lars The Wanderer on May 18, 2008 1:00 PM PDT up 0 recs

My point is your comments are not based in Sabean reality

I understand exactly what you are saying, and it would be nice if that was how Sabes worked, but he has proven that it is not.

by positiveuphemism on May 18, 2008 1:12 PM PDT up 0 recs

If this poll were posted last year or 2-3 years ago...

I would agree with you. Based on the Baggarly article (link posted in today’s game thread), it appears that Neukom thinks differently. Somehow I doubt we’ll see more of the same from Sabean. It definitely appears that Neukom will force a different approach than Magowan.

by Lars The Wanderer on May 18, 2008 1:30 PM PDT up 0 recs

Losing enough games to get the #1 pick would probably mean we’d have had to lose a ton of games to division rivals, which kills me, especially losing to the Dodgers.

I’d rather see the team move forward each year with signs of hope (which I think is happening) than be a laughingstock just to get some uberprospect in the draft that isn’t going to be on the big team for another 2 or 3 years, if at all.

2008 Giants: A steaming pile of scrap!

by Goofus on May 18, 2008 9:18 AM PDT 0 recs

+1

Ryan Paul: Two four-letter words are better than one.

by The Enchanter on May 18, 2008 10:06 AM PDT up 0 recs

+2

You have to play to win. I’m sorry, but anything else is pretty fucking shady.

I would much rather see this team build and improve across 2-3 years than totally fucking tank this year in the hopes of drafting well.

Eugeniooooooo!!!!

by FairweatherFan on May 18, 2008 6:11 PM PDT up 0 recs

Speaking for Myself

I don’t want the Giants to lose. I want them to win. It’s just that this year everyone knows that the Giants are not going to make the playoffs. Therefore the best outcome for the Giants is to have the worst record in the majors. Since we (I) do not want the Giants to lose, I do not root for them to lose. I root for them to win. When they lose, however, I comfort myself by looking at the loss as one step closer to the number one pick. When they lose five in a row, I go alright we’re really gaining ground now.

In a strange way, it’s kind of a no-lose scenario. If they win, great. If they lose, okay.

All of that said, I think the best thing to look forward to is the continued development of our prospects and semi-prospects. And that should happen whether the team wins or loses.

So, with that in mind, the only losses that I hate are losses like today where promising pieces (Cain, Walker, Wilson, etc.) stink up the joint.

Only 927 games until the end of Zito's contract

by thehavenot on May 18, 2008 7:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

I'm not running for political office,

but I approve thehavenot’s message.

Your 2011 SF Giants: the 2008 Augusta Greenjackets!

by Lyle on May 19, 2008 6:41 AM PDT up 0 recs

I am enjoying this season...

but as strange as it sounds, I’m enjoying the development of the players more than the wins. Watching Timmy, Cain, and Dirty pitch has been tons of funs… as has checking out Merkin (although he’s on the shelf). I’d like this team to win so that these guys don’t pick up loses at a high rate… other than that, I’m looking for Bowker, Lewis, Burriss, and the other kids to do well, but that doesn’t require wins, although if they do well, we’re more likely to win.

So, to end this confusing post, I’d like to see a great balance between a high draft pick and good development.

Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est?

by shikantaza on May 18, 2008 10:07 AM PDT 0 recs

I totally agree.

Proud adoptive parent of Tim Alderson.

by Anticon23 on May 18, 2008 10:17 AM PDT up 0 recs

I’d like a high pick with good years from bowker, sanchez, cain, lincecum, wilson, lewis, rowand, and schierholtz (if/when he gets called up). That’s not asking for too much, is it? IS IT?

Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...

by Smoke on the Water on May 18, 2008 12:44 PM PDT 0 recs

oh and burriss and merkin too… didn’t mean to leave anybody out. except eugenio. i’ve given up hope there.

Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...

by Smoke on the Water on May 18, 2008 12:49 PM PDT up 0 recs

Some clarification

There seems to be some confusion about this poll because I only listed the two extremes and skipped over the two other possible middle possibilities.

In reality, there are four possible outcomes this season. I am rejecting anything that has to do with making the playoffs because that just isn’t going to happen.

1 – we “contend” but fail to make the playoffs. In this one we do well enough that Sabean does not drop any of the dead, over 30, weight. This has been modus operandi the last few years.

2 – we play about as well as we were a few weeks ago, when every game was fairly exciting, the bullpen was lights out, but we still lose a few more than we win. This is another situation where we might not drop the vets.

3 – we suck, and finish with a draft pick lower than #1, but higher than #7. A good draft pick, but a grey area draft pick that isn’t exciting. Vets may get traded. When the draft comes up we wish we had the #1 pick because the previous season is over and now that we are drafting it becomes clear that those extra five or so losses might be the difference between gold and bronze.

4 – we get the #1 draft pick and have maximized our future potential growth possibliity from this year.

I chose to only go with options 1 and 4 because the other two are so wishy-washy that they would, IMO, skew the poll. There would be some people who hated the idea of having the worst record so much they would choose to finish second worst. There would be other who wanted to compete, but not enough to keep the vets and would choose the other option. So essentially I merged the options.

I suppose I could have been more verbose, but I trust the intelligence of most of the people on this site and felt they would be able to read between the lines. Essentially it boils down to: same old, same old, or a #1 pick. What would you like more?

Also, I see all the disappointment in the gameday threads when they fail. It makes me a little sad because if the goal is a #1 pick, the failures become much much less disappointing and much more positive. I do root for them to win every game, but I find myself laughing a lot at the failures (Castillo DP’s for instance) and more genuinely thrilled with the successes. If a team that is expected to lose loses and a person is upset by this, they are taking things way too seriously.

by positiveuphemism on May 18, 2008 1:23 PM PDT 0 recs

The two options you give aren’t the only two possibilities. I mean, I’m not saying I expect them to win the division, but you’re basically asking for people to give you the answer you want to hear by limiting the alternatives, and making the alternative…well…shitty.

Billy Ripken is not a fuck face

by Karlifornia on May 18, 2008 3:53 PM PDT 0 recs

The problem with this poll is that it’s one sided. You are told that at the end the team accomplishes nothing, so it’s pretty obvious that everyone will choose the number one pick. A more interesting question might be would you prefer the number one pick to winning 95 games and perhaps losing in the second round of the playoffs. Of course that’s irrelevant because that ain’t happening!!

Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment

by rxmeister on May 18, 2008 4:18 PM PDT 0 recs

which is why the poll is one sided.

the best we can hope for this season is a #1 pick.

by positiveuphemism on May 18, 2008 7:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

So you believe that the Giants have a reasonable chance

at winning 95 games?

ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524

by rfloh on May 18, 2008 10:49 PM PDT up 0 recs

"Contend"?!

11.5 back in the division. 8.5 back from the wildcard with 11 teams to pass. And still nearly 2 weeks to Memorial Day.

Sorry fanbois and fangurls but this season is over.

Fred Lewis can stand under my umbrella.

by S.F. Giangst on May 18, 2008 9:01 PM PDT 0 recs

Preaching the the choir, buddy.

SAVE_US.RAY
Nattowear: now featuring new crap!

by Natto on May 18, 2008 9:07 PM PDT up 0 recs

85% of the choir (who are doing it for school extra credit or something)

The other 15% believe in god

by positiveuphemism on May 19, 2008 1:11 AM PDT up 0 recs

God is dead

or at least coughing up blood as fast as the Giants bullpen coughs up runs.

Fred Lewis can stand under my umbrella.

by S.F. Giangst on May 19, 2008 5:02 AM PDT up 0 recs

God is doing just fine

The Giants, however, are not.

Your 2011 SF Giants: the 2008 Augusta Greenjackets!

by Lyle on May 19, 2008 6:44 AM PDT 0 recs

The Giants were in the Series 6 years ago

God ain’t done much in 19 centuries. If he was a younger deity you might send Him down to work on a few things, but right now He’s barely hanging onto a roster spot. He’d might bring a couple of demiurges in a trade but nothing more. Of course the whole Pantheon farm system has decayed and hasn’t produced an everyday player since Allah.

Fred Lewis can stand under my umbrella.

by S.F. Giangst on May 19, 2008 8:35 AM PDT up 0 recs

#1 pick, of course.

Why pseudo-contend if you can’t win it all when you’re just as ready to lose everything and get the #1 pick?

by withclubsauce on May 19, 2008 10:43 AM PDT 0 recs

Hellooooooo

YOU PLAY. TO WIN. THE GAME!

If I wasn’t so lazy I’d You Tube that baby right up here.

My boy ain't fat, he's just big boned. Big bat, too.

by Roger on May 19, 2008 10:57 AM PDT 0 recs

I don’t care so much about the pick # – but – given that we have zero (well, 1%) chance of the post season this year – I would really like it if we fail miserably (except: Lincecanium) so that ownership can see what a wretched job Sabes as done and… FIRE HIM

FIRE BRIAN SABEAN

by zenbitz on May 19, 2008 11:41 AM PDT 0 recs

Winning by losing

As a lifelong Giants fan, it hurts to see them lose, but somehow their losing now is not as excruciating as it was back in the Dark Ages at Candlestick. I can’t quite pinpoint why and I don’t think it is because I have a wife and kiddies now to think about. It could be because they are not a moribund team with no hope playing in an empty wind tunnel of a stadium with seemingly very little fanbase and no community interest. Their farm system offers hope, although it could be a few years away. They play in the best stadium in the history of baseball… ok, one of the best. And based on this blog, there does seem to be a good amount of community interest… unless it just seems that way because a few McCovenites spend all their days posting, giving the impression of a lot of community interest…

But anyways, it certainly seems that the Giants have a very good chance to finish with the worst record in baseball. But if the young players can learn from their mistakes, draw together as a team rather than point fingers of blame, and resolve to get better, the losing would be turned into a positive. Likewise, if losing serves as a rude awakening to management, and if they can dedicate their efforts to improving the team, things will turn around. Let’s not forget the Tigers of a few years ago finished with one of the worst records in baseball history. Through player development and some smart trades and signings they were contenders within a short time.

A lot can change before the 2009 draft. Prospects’ stock can rise or fall rapidly. But as it stands now, it looks like we’ll be players in the Stephen Strasburg Sweepstakes. If we finish with the second worst record, Dustin Ackley sounds like someone we could use too.

by baseballjunkie on May 19, 2008 12:55 PM PDT 0 recs