The 1B conundrum day 1,432: What do you do?
by NeifiChicken on Sep 15, 2008 12:33 PM PDT
Email
PrintFor years it's been simple. Sabean is a moron that couldn't find a suitable bat to play perhaps the easiest defensive position in baseball. He's a fool and we've suffered, but there was always the chance by sheer randomness Sabean could be tricked by someone in his staff to acquire a good enough bat that could at least have the POTENTIAL. to be league average.
Rich Aurilia, Mark Sweeney, Shea Hillenbrand, and Ryan Klesko (Klesko move I liked though) were all brought in from outside the organization and failed.
Bowker, Niekro, and Ortmeier were all internal "solutions" that failed.
Even JT Snow really wasn't that great for half of his years with us, but since his departure our 1B production has to be in the bottom 5.
This season was shaping up just like any other in that regard, until Travis Ishikawa came along. Ishikawa presents an entirely new problem because unlike Niekro, Ortmeier, and in some ways Bowker; Ishikawa actually has the potential to be different. Ishikawa has always been considered highly talented and has had some very good minor league years in his career. The problem is that those good years were bookends on some Minor League seasons that make Ivan Ochoa look palatable.
Prior to this year, most people (myself included) had probably written Ishikawa off. Yet with the resurgence he has shown this season, he immediately warrants strong consideration for 500 PA's next year as the Giants starting 1B. Yet, because of his inconsistency it is fairly impossible to predict what he will do.
So I pose to you two questions:
1) How well do you think Ishikawa would do next year if he was handed the 1B job and guaranteed 500+ PA's?
2) With that in mind, what would you do for the 1B hole in 2009?
My answers:
1) Impossible to tell. I'd say best case is probably .265/.340/.475 with 20 HR's and good defense. That is nothing spectacular, but how ecstatic would we be if Ishikawa could produce at that line for over 500 PA's? Not quite a league average bat, but with his good glove and the marginal left handed park factor, he'd be close to league average. I think we'd all love that
2) I'd go with Ishi, but I'd still look into insurance. McClain should obviously have a bench role on the 09 team to basically take Aurilia's place, but with less PA's. Nick Johnson always intrigues me, and he's at an all time low price, but the problem is he would probably take at bats away from Ishikawa, which defeats the purpose of handing 1B over to him.
How the fates mock me, when Nick Johnson finally has a chance of being acquired for cheap, Travis Ishikawa has to show up and make Johnson seem unappealing.
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.
159 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ishi
My crystal ball tells me we could expect something to the tone of .250/.300, 15 HRs. And that would be OK with me while the team is in the extended Lets See What the Youth Have While we Don’t Contend period of time (aka 2009). However, 1B will probably have to be upgraded by the time they are likely to contend, either via Angel Villanolla or FA.
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Sep 15, 2008 12:39 PM PDT reply actions
Do NOT trade/but/hijack/kidnap/attract in any wayshapeform Adam Dunn.
"Ain't got a hope in Hell - that's my belief." - Bon Scott
by victor frankenstein on Sep 15, 2008 12:44 PM PDT reply actions
buy
"Ain't got a hope in Hell - that's my belief." - Bon Scott
by victor frankenstein on Sep 15, 2008 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
why not?
I think he could be had for cheap, and would love his OBP and power. If cheap enough.
Did I mention cheap?
Billy Hayes: His job is better than yours.
Agree
He won’t be cheap and AT&T is already in his head.
by Lars The Wanderer on Sep 15, 2008 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions
You're probably right about the AT&T part
But I still think he’d come relatively cheap b/c of the ZOMG LOW BAVG. But I might be naive.
Billy Hayes: His job is better than yours.
He's failing miserably when the Blanks need him most.
Would he be different for us?
"Ain't got a hope in Hell - that's my belief." - Bon Scott
by victor frankenstein on Sep 15, 2008 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions
I think you are indeed naive. The FA market is crap this year. He’s going to get paid big by somebody.
Naive is what I use to cut my microwaved chicken.
Can’t get that image of him whiffing yesterday out of my head.
"Ain't got a hope in Hell - that's my belief." - Bon Scott
by victor frankenstein on Sep 15, 2008 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I know it was just 1 AB,
but when the D’backs were here last week, Dunn absolutely crushed a ball to right center. It was a magestic towering fly ball that went over 400 feet for a routine out. It might have been only one AB, but I saw it as an empirical indicator that Dunn is not the right guy for our ballpark.
Greetings, Marklar! I am Marklar! This is Marklar.
That being said...
…who let the lummox in last night?
OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!
"Ain't got a hope in Hell - that's my belief." - Bon Scott
by victor frankenstein on Sep 16, 2008 2:19 AM PDT up reply actions
after his two LOOOONNNGGGG outs that would’ve been homers somewhere else, i think he is going to pull the carlos lee and not come here.
This applies for
[Insert Power Lefty FA Here]. We should be able to get righty FA’s here though (ala Rowand).
proud father of the newly acquired Brandon Crawford..
Travis Ishikawa
1) He will play very well against RHP and will suffer some growing pains facing LHP. Might start in a semi-platoon but could develop into an everyday starter. Will play solid defense.
2) TI has taken advantage of his opportunity to be given a shot as the everyday 1b in 2009. SF should have a platoon partner, Plan B veteran ready just in case.
John Bowker is an OF.
Why Norwich? He already did well in that league once. What’s wrong with Fresno?
Trent Kline: Decentish. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com. It's not being updated right now. Hope for more at your own risk.
because it's the future
and regression will pick up in the future. everyone knows that.
(i’m just talkin’ smack)
Billy Hayes: His job is better than yours.
Um
Small Sample Size?
Ishikawa has a line of .328/.403/.547.
That is really good.
That is also in 64 AB’s.
For reference, In the same time period, Velez has a line of .354/.358/.554 (65 AB’s).
Lance Niekro had a line of .274/.273/.565 in his first 64 AB’s.
In about the same #, Ortmeier had a line of .254/.284/.493
’tis a little too early to jump on the TI Bandwagon.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
It certainly is, but there are two enormous differences here: Ishi has been a very highly rated prospect at points in his career, and Ishi is walking at a good rate, as he usually does.
He may wash out, he may never be more than a platoon guy… he’s no sure thing. But he merits more optimism than Velez, Niekro, Ortmeier, Bowker or any of the other jokers we’ve had around in the last several years.
indeed, the point is that Ishikawa was once thought capable of producing at high levels. Niekro, Velez, and Ortmeier never really showed the promise of Ishikawa
by NeifiChicken on Sep 15, 2008 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, I understand that POV
TI was supposed to be good, but he wasn’t.
Until this year, he has lived up to what he was supposed to be.
My point is just that his performance thus far is encouraging, but not really telling of much.
I will remain skeptical of him, as I am skeptical of Pablo, Velez, and everyone else who is smacking the crap out of the ball in September.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 15, 2008 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Is that Velez line real? Ha! .354/.358!?
Wow.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Sep 15, 2008 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Is that even a walk or was he HBP? (Too lazy to look up)
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Sep 16, 2008 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m still dreaming of adding Mark Teixeira. If we don’t/can’t do that, I’m perfectly alright with giving Ishikawa a shot at the starting job.
Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...
by Smoke on the Water on Sep 15, 2008 1:20 PM PDT reply actions
Tex is nice, but why invest all that money in a 1B when we have potentially cheap solutions in Ti and Sandoval? Tex is going to require a lot of money to come here and I think it would seriously handicap the team financially.
I’d much rather see if TI or Sandoval can give us some decent (if not better) offensive numbers. Lets say that TI puts up an Adam LaRoche esque line next year. That would give the Giants one nice trading chip to acquire any other help they might need when a player like AnVill comes along (assuming AnVill reaches his potential).
by Squire_Boone on Sep 16, 2008 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I like Ishikawa
For an acceptable comp, I’m thinking he’ll produce like Adam LaRoche.
+1
Adam LaRoche is a great comp for Ishikawa. The only difference I might see is that TI may not have the annual early season struggles that LaRoche consistently seems to have. But, that is just alright with me.
by Squire_Boone on Sep 16, 2008 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions
ooohhh
talk about a guy that never got a fair chance
by NeifiChicken on Sep 15, 2008 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
A man doomed by the very fact of his own last name.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Sep 15, 2008 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Ishi
I’d like the Giants to do for TI what the Red Sox did for Dustin Pedroia. Tell him he is the everyday 1B guy, and to not worry about a slow start. Just let him play, and see if he produces.
Greetings, Marklar! I am Marklar! This is Marklar.
or...
what most normal teams do with their MLB ready prospects (Wait, I guess I can’t really blame the Giants with that qualifier since they rarely have them)
by NeifiChicken on Sep 15, 2008 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
This
would have been helpful plan of action for any number of past Giants rookies – Yorvit, Todd Linden, etc.
One of the worst things about Sabes as a GM, I think, is his impatience : the way rookies better come through in their first 50-300 big leage PAs, or they’re shipped to [ the bench / Frenso / another team / etc ]
But, really
Has anyone Sabean/Giants has “given up on” turned out for anyone else?
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 15, 2008 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Pitchers, yes, a bunch. Position players, obviously, not so much. Yorvit – kinda.
Anyway, I think that baseball d00dz have a finite window of development. And I refuse to believe that someone can have a year like Linden had in 2005 at age 25, and not have it translate into some degree of MLB success (at least more then Linden’s had). But that’s only with the right coaching, advising, and handling by the organization.
As we all know, the Giants in the Sabean era have shown no facility with producing productive major league position players (Yorvit, Happy Pete and Mighty Marvin as [very] partial exceptions). Part of that, obviously, has been the sub-world-beating raw materials that they’ve been working with, but a lot of it, I think, has been a faulty system. And one big part of that faulty system has been bringing guys up, giving them 100 PAs, dropping them once a hot start cools off, bouncing them around minor league levels, having them ride the pine for weeks on end, and basically showing little patience for or trust in rookie players. And, I think that that can’t help but thwart their development.
Trading someone doesn't count as "giving up"
So I am really curious to know who the Giants, in the last 10 years, have called up, given up on – and then gotten rid of only to have that player later attain success with another club.
I can’t really think of a single one. Yorvit was traded for Randy Winn, value was given up for value.
Accardo was traded for Hillenbrand, and while that trade didn’t turn out great for us – I would not look at it as the organization “giving up” on Accardo.
Even Raj Davis, who we all thought hadn’t been given a fair shake this season…
He’s putting up a .260/.289/.375 line for Oakland – not exactly making us regret that decision. Linden, Niekro, etc have all disappeared.
I don’t usually support the Sabean administration, but in this case the evidence suggests that they have been pretty prudent with their decisions.
It doesn’t always take AB’s to figure out that a player has huge flaws. Managers (one would hope) can see these things in practice. If they are reinforced on the field, that might be all it takes.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 15, 2008 6:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly - It Is Call Scouting
Scouting unlike stats does not require a large sample size.
by giantsrainman on Sep 15, 2008 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions
WTF?
Players are humans. They have good days and bad days. A scout watching a player on a good day will likely view the player differently from a player having a bad day.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
devil's advocate
I do think there are certain things a scout can notice in a day regardless of bad or good. If the scout is focusing on results, well obviously that’s no different than looking at a box score for a single game, which can be random, but obviously if a pitcher has RIDICULOUS stuff there is not one day where that will be a fluke. Kirk Rueter doesn’t have fluke days where he throws like the Big Unit. He can have a good day where he pitches a shutout like the Unit, but he won’t have the nasty stuff no matter what.
Same with swings, a small sample size is probably enough for a scout to see the kind of swing a player has as well as his bat speed, which is plenty important and can’t be faked.
I’m obviously not advocating making decisions on players based on short viewings, especially not professional ballplayers, I’m just pointing out there are some things that don’t require a large sample size
by NeifiChicken on Sep 16, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Another weakness of Sabean’s, IMO, is that he develops grudges against players for end-of-season/post-season failures (Jose Cruz Jr, Cody Ransom, Dustan Mohr). And yeah I think that Sabes gave up on Joe Nathan (and his excellent 2003 regular season) partially on a grudge, because of his 81.00 ERA / 15.00 WHIP / one game lost against the Fish in the 03 playoffs. So, there’s one player that yes Sabes gave up on and then yes bloomed elsewhere (to put it mildly).
Many pitchers have of course had some fine seasons after leaving the Giants (Linebrink, Foulke, ROrtiz, Livan, Jason Grilli, etc), but none of them fit the simple narrative of Giants try young player, tossing them aside for nothing, and then other teams finding them useful.
Anyway, my main hypothesis is not that that Sabes got rid of Todd Linden and that Linden then magically did great for the Fish / Elephants / Tribe / whoever. It’s more that the Sabes administration irrevocably fucked up Linden’s development by giving him a few PAs, then having him ride the pine, then then sending him back down, giving him another 75 PAs to try to prove himself again – jerking him around like a yo-yo. Be more patient at the plater, no swing away more, pull more, go the other way. Of course he hasn’t had (much) success in any other organization – I assert that the Giants irrevocably fucked up his development at one of its key junctions.
Of course they gave up on him. Of course he hasn’t established himself elsewhere. They fucked him up and then spit him out.
What should they have done differently? Well first off, I think that the Sabean Giants have had an organizational philosophy of aggressive hitting (aka hacking at slop nightly). For a take-and-rake guy like Linden (81 BB in his first professional season), that’s has to have been the wrong coaching and messed with his rhythms. He still managed to put together a more-than-ready-for-the-major-leagues 1.119 OPS in 2005.
So, my main point is to agree with what marklar said. After Linden’s 2005, the Giants should have “what the Red Sox did for Dustin Pedroia. They should have told him he is the everyday [RF] guy, and to not worry about a slow start. Just let him play, [give him half-a-season-to-a-full-season] and see if he produces”. I feel that the Giants failure to show confidence in and commitment to a young player (and going with the 41-year-old Steve Finley to partner up with Bonds and Winn instead) derailed Linden’s success, clipping his wings at the exact moment that he was ready to take off.
by SnowLeopard on Sep 16, 2008 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions
And this season
I’ve watched them do the same impatient jerking around with Ortimer and Bowker.
You want a young guy to develop? Then give him 300 PAs without the pressure to stay productive the whole time. Let him play through his first slump.
Just like the org had no plan for what to do if dreamy started the season on the DL, they seem like they are desperately casting about with these young 1B/OF types. They seem to throw them against the wall, one after another, to see if they’ll stick. That’s not the way to develop young players, and I figger it’s gotta fuck with their heads sumpin fierce.
by SnowLeopard on Sep 16, 2008 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions
OKay, I'll buy it
I do agree that sending a guy up and down on and off the bench is probably a poor choice.
I would much rather watch a guy get ~ 300 consecutive AB’s and make a decision based on that.
But I guess I do have SOME faith in the management team’s ability to scout the players and make some decisions based on that, too.
If a player has a huge hole in his swing, for instance, and can’t lay off the low-and-away slider – the team doesn’t need 300 AB’s to figure that out. If the guy can’t adjust to that in ~100 Ab’s, then maybe it’s time to move him along.
I think they gave Bowker a fair shot this season. It is my impression that he has tried to adjust his hitting style too much to be able to contact more pitches, and as a result has lost his power.
He is still a 25% LD hitter however, so I still think he has been really unlucky.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Agreed on Bowker
He did get 300+ PAs this year and they stuck with him through an early slump. Ortmeier, on the other hand, was treated badly – essentially named the starter and then never actually given a chance to start.
Like Barry Zito, I'm mildly half-OK.
I can.
Anyone can have a good year in Fresno.
Travis Denker can hit a little. That's why I drive his bus.
Best Case .265/.340/.475?
Really? This is your best case for a $1M bonus baby that clearly found himself this year in the minors? I could see this as you gut shot guess at what he will do. But, to say he has no upside above this is just wrong.
well in my defense
I wasn’t talking about his peak career value, just best case for next year. I think you’d find it hard to justify him doing any better than that next year over 500+ PA’s.
by NeifiChicken on Sep 15, 2008 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions
1) .260/.330/.410 – I have a hard (read: impossible) time picturing any Giants unproven farmhand having an OPS over .800 with full-season AB numbers (actually anything over .700 is difficult to type)
2.) Throw an ass-load of money at Teixeira so Zito doesn’t have to continue slumming with low-pay gamer douches.
My guess would be about 13 HR, .260 AVG and about .320 OBP.
Honestly I think Bowker could put up better power numbers, but not as good of an OBP.. Both can hit for about the same sorry batting average.
by AmorVincitOmnia on Sep 15, 2008 3:36 PM PDT reply actions
No McClain please
Aurilia is a better choice for bench role/1B insurance. McClain is just as old and less versatile (since Aurilia also has middle infield experience). And if the Giants value veteran clubhouse presence (as they obviously do), Aurilia over McClain means one fewer “clubhouse guy” needed elsewhere on the roster.
Like Barry Zito, I'm mildly half-OK.
Aurilia? MI?
I have to disagree. Sure he’s got experience there, but I’ve got experience golfing and I’m no good at that either. There’s a reason why Bocock was up to begin the season, because Aurilia (as well as Velez and Castillo) couldn’t cut it as SS. Aurilia played 3 innings of 2B this year, last year he played 21 games at 2B and SS versus 77 games at the corners. Only 9 of those games were at SS.
He hasn’t been a SS since his days in Seattle in 2004, and a 2B since his first year in Cincinnati.
The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."
How is my adopted son almost twice as old as I am? Nevermind...Go Omar! Warm the Bench!
Hey!
Looked it up and Scott McClain has Ss experience too! A few innings for Sacramento and he played it in his mid 20s too!
Actually, Justin Leone is the answer. He’s played smatterings of SS and 2B throughout his career and was playing in the OF too in Fresno. Look Sabes! I can play CF!
The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."
How is my adopted son almost twice as old as I am? Nevermind...Go Omar! Warm the Bench!
I'm not saying he should be starting at second.
However, versatility is valuable in a bench player, and I would rather send Richie out to man 2B than McClain.
Unlike McClain (or Leone), Aurilia has actually demonstrated that he can hit major league pitching.
Like Barry Zito, I'm mildly half-OK.
"McClain is just as old and less versatile (since Aurilia also has middle infield experience). "
Aurilia didn’t utilize his middle infield experience and likely wouldn’t utilize it if he were on the team next year.
“Aurilia is a better choice for bench role/1B insurance.”
McClain likely has more power and has far more experience at the positions we’d need him at compared to Aurilia.
Plus McClain is worth less than Aurilia (if a few million really matters).
And you can also send him down if he turns out to be completely useless.
by AmorVincitOmnia on Sep 15, 2008 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed, he probably would not be needed at MI (especially since we have eleventy-two second basemen), but as I said above, versatility is always valuable in a bench player.
“You can send him down if he’s useless” is a really bad argument for picking one player over another. If Aurilia is completely useless you can DFA him. Same difference. The money difference isn’t enough to matter.
McClain’s MLE projection from his 2008 Fresno stats, .251/.344/.431, is pretty close to Aurilia’s actual 2008 line of .285/.332/.425. That’s not a significant difference in power.
Like Barry Zito, I'm mildly half-OK.
I'm for McClain
a) Not using this as a plus for McClain, but MLE’s have plenty of flaws and in truth it’s very hard to know what McClain would do with playing time.
b) Aurilia’s defense at MI isn’t worth discussing and as you pointed out we have a plethora of MI options on this team
c) There is a financial difference
d) McClain sends a message to the fans. Sure, at 36, not a youth movement message but a message that we are going to approach the way in which we acquire players differently. Aurilia is a representation of past thinking, where Sabean would go with veteran proof over upside. McClain doesn’t have upside in the traditional sense, but he does at least have the upside of showing power and possibly exceeding RIchie’s production. If Richie even repeated his 2008, I think that would be considered a major victory for him
by NeifiChicken on Sep 15, 2008 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Okay, I'll bite
Why would it be a major victory for Aurilia to repeat 2008 but anything less than that for McClain to do so? Granted MLEs are flawed but we have nothing less flawed that suggests McClain would be better. Both will be 37 next year and can be expected to be about the same place on their career-decline curve. Scott McClain’s power display consists, so far, of 2 (two) major league homers.
As far as messages sent to the fans, here’s how I parse them:
Aurilia: “Sure there are lots of faces you don’t recognize, but we’ve still got that guy you liked back in 2001.”
McClain: “We’re so cheap even our grizzled vets are dudes you never heard of.”
I just don’t see how Scott McClain on the 2009 roster sends any kind of positive message to anyone other than Scott McClain, his immediate family, and other overage ex-prospects toiling in our farm system.
Like Barry Zito, I'm mildly half-OK.
First sentence is meant to ask...
…why it would be anything less than a “major victory” for McClain to achieve Aurilia-2008 level production in 2009. On rereading I thought that might not be clear.
Like Barry Zito, I'm mildly half-OK.
The way I see it
and maybe this is just the message it sends to me:
Scott McClain – He’s representative of the minor league slugger that teams don’t give a chance to (I’m not saying he’s a good example, I have other preferences, but he’s of a similar mold). The Jack Cust’s, Dallas McPherson’s, Mike Hessman’s, etc. Not necessarily going to be good, but has put up killer minor league numbers and has never been given much of a chance in the bigs
Rich Aurilia – Fan friendly, but clearly a player whose best years are behind him and who in 2007 looked like he should be considering retirement. The signing of Aurilia coupled with Dave Roberts (same week or day I believe) was THE example in the 07 offseason that Sabean was NOT going younger and was sticking with the proven veteran tag. Rich Aurilia is the quintessential example of Sabean loving “proven veterans”
McClain and Aurilia might produce at a close level in 09, but they do represent two different ideas. Going with McClain does say “we want to go with the best possible man for the job, regardless of name” even though the role is very small in significance, just as the difference in production might be.
By sticking with Aurilia, who McClain will likely outperform ratewise by season’s end (obviously with a much smaller sample size) you tell the fans “we’re not so focused on production or promise, we like what we know”
In truth, it’s really not that important of a decision, but Aurilia has had his day in the sun and McClain seems to be making a lot out of his opportunity. I’d rather reward the guy trying to show the league he deserves a shot than the 37-year old veteran whose LD% is dropping and would cost 3 to 5 times the price.
It’s really not that important of a decision, but even if you do use MLE’s, McClain is still more productive, even if it’s not by a huge margin
by NeifiChicken on Sep 15, 2008 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions
it's what he represents
The guy that has never been given the fair shake in the bigs. There is a good chance Hessman will become McClain if he sticks with baseball that long. Scott McClain is representative of a lot of these guys, his big difference is that he’s stuck with his dream for so long, whereas most guys would have retired by now and given up.
We’re talking about 1 year in a bench role anyway, with any of those 3, I’d prefer a situation to give them 400+ PA’s
by NeifiChicken on Sep 16, 2008 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Pssst
There is a reason that McClain is 37 and still in AAA.
(Answer: He’s not very good).
If Aurilia had played AAA for 18 years, I am pretty confident he would make McClains career #’s look like a joke.
Aurilia is a much better player than McClain is likely to be, He has much more experience at the major league level (which is different from AAA) – Both on and off the field.
Aurilia is also a franchise player (albeit in a slightly odd way) and should retire with this team.
I like Aurilia off the bench in 2009. McClain maybe fits a ML team in contention in September. Not the Giants.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 15, 2008 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not say we hand him a starting gig
but you cited McClain’s MLE’s (which admittedly, we both take with a grain of salt) to show he doesn’t have much more power than Aurilia (note: the MLE’s were better than Richie’s current production) which might be the case. Nonetheless I think we can agree on a few things:
1) There isn’t a strong difference offensively between these players, no clear cut indication to prove that one would do better than the other in 2009
2) Rich Aurilia would cost at least 5 times as much as McClain
For me, Aurilia is a known quantity, which has value if you are fine tuning a 90 win team, but when you are a losing team, I prefer to take a gamble. There are BETTER gambles than McClain certainly, but he’s in place and I’d say is more likely to get a job than a similar AAAA-type outside the organization. Scott McClain is about taking a very small step into the waters of the relatively unknown.
I think a third thing we could agree on is that it’s pretty hard to predict what McClain would do next year. We both have our opinions on what’s likely, but there is also a percentage that McClain’s AAA numbers could translate better than expected and hit .265/.345/.455 with 10 dingers in a bench role. He could also just as likely crash and burn and hit .220/.275/.390 and be a waste of PA’s. I think like all players at Aurilia’s age (McClain included) there is plenty of chance of the latter, but I don’t think Aurilia has the potential for the former. Maybe he does.
I guess my point is for players that most likely have similar production ahead of them, I don’t see the advantage in paying 5 times as much just because he is more established and has some marginal name value. This is still a losing team with McClain or Aurilia, I’d rather save the money and see what Crash Davis can do with a chance. He’s had a small chance this year and succeeded. It’s an absurdly small sample size, but why not give him a chance?
We need to venture into the unknown a lot more during these losing years, because you cannot afford to take these kind of chances as a winning club. Take advantage of the few perks that comes with being a loser
by NeifiChicken on Sep 16, 2008 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, first off
I never mentioned MLE’s. You’ve got me confused with someone else.
I don’t really care what his MLE’s are, because to me – 18 years of EVERY OTHER TEAM IN THE ML saying “eh, no thanks” speaks volumes.
I don’t know much about McClain as a player, but I can guess that he is a mistake hitter who feasts on crappy MiL pitchers. (see Linden, Todd). That type of approach can lead to some gaudy #‘s in the MiL that translate into absolute crap at the ML level because the pitchers don’t make those mistakes.
The only argument that makes any sense is the cost, but in that case I would rather take a flyer on someone like Dallas McPherson who actually has a chance of MAYBE going Jack Cust on us.
Shit, I’d probably rather have Castillo backing up 3b than McClain.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions
whoops
my bad on the confusion
I too would prefer McPherson. Still, if given the choice between Richie and McClain, I’d take McClain, but it’s not a big deal anyway.
I don’t put much weight into the EVERY OTHER TEAM IN THE ML argument. It’s no secret there are plenty of biases in baseball and plenty of ML teams run things poorly. We have the finest example of that here in SF, with a guy at the helm who will constantly choose ML experience over those without it.
by NeifiChicken on Sep 16, 2008 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions
EVERY OTHER TEAM IN THE ML
past on Barry Bonds this year…
proud father of the newly acquired Brandon Crawford..
Um
Yeah, do we have to even mention how those two situations are non-comparable?
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
OK I Am Going To Do It Here Is Some Rainman Rosterbation
I believe we can produce a near league average offense next year (perhaps even better) with the talent we already have on hand. Therefore I do not want to persue any position players by either trade or free agency.
My projected LineUp and Bench for 2009 would then be ( I am not counting on anything from Frandsen) :
LineUp:
Lewis/Winn LF
Schierholtz/Winn RF
Rowand/Winn CF
Sandoval 3B
Ishikawa 1B
Molina C
Velez 2B
Burriss SS
Bench:
OF Roberts
OF Winn/Lewis/Schierholtz/Rowand
SS Vizquel (Burriss backs up 2B)
CI Aurilia (Sandoval backs up C)
CI McClain (I love me some more “Crash Davis”)
Minors:
Holm C (it is time to say goodbye to Alfonzo and Rodriguez)
Bowker 1B
Denker 2B
Ochoa SS
Boacock SS
Rohlinger 3B
Gillispie 3B
I believe we are one Free Agent Signing (can you say CC) away from an elite Starting Rotation. I belive it is time to cut an run on all of our arbitration eligable relievers (Taschner, Walker, Correia, Hennessey, and Chulk). There is nothing speical about any of the guys that warents keeping and thus paying above the major league minimum. If they want to come back all that should be offered is a minor league deal with an invitation to spring training.
My Projected Rotation and BullPen for 2009 would then be (I am not counting on anything from Lowry or Valdez):
Rotation:
Lincecum
Sabathia
Cain
Sanchez
Zito
Bullpen:
Wilson CL
Romo SU
Sadler MR
Hinshaw MR
Matos MR
Espineli MR
Misch LR
Now this is what I want. But what I expect to to retain a couple of the arbitration eligable relievers, trade something I don’t want to loss (Sanchez?) for Beltre, sign a relatively cheap veteran starter and a couple of relatively expensive relievers thus spreading out the money we could of spent on CC in just about the most wasteful way possible. This is afterall just about exactly want Sabean has been suggesting his offseason goals are.
Aurillia and Vizquel?
It’s already enough to keep WInn and Molina.
Drop them both from the bench, sign one FA and the winner of Denker/Ochoa/Frandsen.
Although it’s probably going to be a 3rd catcher.
The Bench Is Exactly Where These Two Could Have Great Value
The every day youngsters will continue to learn and veterans are far more effective then younsters off the bench. I am not a believer giving youngsters bench roles as this just sets them up to fail. They are better off starting in Fresno then they are taking a bench role in San Francisco. I don’t see the point in signing some other teams free agent bench player instead of just bring back our own. I would of course not be paying Aurilia another $4M or Vizquel another $5M. They both need to agree to come back for $2M or less.
by giantsrainman on Sep 15, 2008 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions
If Pablo is the everyday 3B...
…then I think you really need a dedicated backup catcher. Especially with Molina’s speed, which forces pulling him for a pinch-runner in crucial situations.
Likewise I don’t think it’s feasible to have your only 2B backup be your starting SS. You’re effectively counting on Burriss for 150+ starts and I’m not convinced he’s ready for that.
I’m really not convinced Vizquel has anything left in the tank. Of course people said the same thing about Durham last year, but Durham is six years younger.
Roberts does nothing for the team and never has. I desperately hope they move him in the offseason.
Swap out Roberts, McClain and Vizquel for Holm, Bowker (or Denker), and I guess Ochoa (or a scrapheap utility IF) and I might be with you.
Like Barry Zito, I'm mildly half-OK.
by EliminateMe on Sep 15, 2008 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Don't See How Pablo Starting At 3B Prevents Pinch Running For Molina
I Giants don’t do this before the 7th inning anyway. There is nothing stoping the Giants from going ahead and doing this late in the game and then just moving Sandoval behind the plate from third and putting either Aurilia or McClain at 3B.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I Do Not See You Point On a Backup For 2B
Almost all MLB teams only carry 3 middle infielders and of course 2 are starting every day. Why does it matter if the backup (in my suggestion Vizquel) only plays SS and the starting SS (in my suggestion Burriss) moves to 2B when the starting 2B (in my suggestion Velez) gets a day off? After all Burriss would be playing anyway even if the backup middle infielder played 2B. l see zero effective difference.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I can hang with your rosterbation except Omar. He has no place on the Giants roster in ‘09.
1) Omar gives management a false since of security of being able to be healthy for a long streak of time if Burris flames out a bit, is hurt or just get over whelmed.
2) Omar can only play one spot. He played 2nd 1 game in 1991. In in infield were none of the spots are sure to manned but the same guy for over 120 games that is asking for trouble.
3) WE have no idea he will accept being a back up gracefully. Remember August was presented as "we must see the kids" and he was in a large batting slump. That’s a whole different animal then knowing form day 1 your back up.
4) Boulder Skull. The man just can’t help himself. He will be playing Omar 5 days a week left to his whims.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Obviously Omar Has A Say
If he isn’t willing ot accept a pure bench role and a significant reduction in salary then I don’t want him back either. But, if he is (which I think he might just be) then I think he is the best backup middle infield option.
I have already addressed the concern about SS only elsewhere.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
How many games do you think Burriss can productively play next season?
I ask this because I think the Giants need some one who could soak up 90 games at SS with physically breaking down but will not be so good Bochy benchs Buriss. To me Omar fails both count miserable. I would rather go with a Rule V glove man then Omar.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Why Do You Expect So Few Games (Innings) From Burriss?
I do not see the justification for this.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Expect might be too strong of a word. I just recognized its a very real possibility with a lot probability in it. He has barely played 105 games over "A" ball. Burriss could easily slump and/or have prolonged bad streaks next season needing to go down and work on things. I don’t want it to be so but it’s a very real possibility.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
As much as I love CC
Do we really want to sign him to a really long term deal? While already having Zito tied up in a long term deal. And then having to resign Cain in 2 years. While having to go year to year arbitration on Lincecum soon. How are we going to have money? And spending 15-20 million a year on a few different pitchers is not exactly fundamentally sound strategy IMO.
You're right
MILTON BRADLEY OR BUST!
Don’t hate the playa, hate the game (manufacturer) .
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
I Have Shown Before That We Can Afford This
I can see of no other use of the money that will improve the team more. We are going to spend it anyway so we might as well use it correctly. This fear you have is after all what stopped the Giants from signing Vlad to pair with Bonds when this was clearly the best use of the money available then. Let’s not repeat that mistake again now.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Shenanigans !!!
You have not shown how the team can afford CC/ tex etc.
In fact you get real quiet with cost is around 55MM a year for 3 players in a budget the will range from the mid 70MM- mid 90MM. That leaves 1MM -2MM per roster slot for 22 players. That excludes moneys for Cain, Tim, Wilson and any one else that migth be worth keeping 2+ seasons down the road.
I can see of no other use of the money that will improve the team more. We are going to spend it anyway so we might as well use it correctly
Now here we are close agreement. I would say the 2010 Free Agent market ( Next winter) is the correct place for this team to spend. Besides the fact 2009 is basically crap when lined up to our teams needs it also allows the team to stagger it cash flow in a more beneficial way.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
The Answer Is Simple
The other players are this cheap because they are mostly pre arb with some arbs and none are free agent eligable. We they start to get too expensive you trade them and replace them with new younger cheaper players with the same or better production. Isn’t this how we all think most of the Giants Roster should be managed? Spend the money on a small core (Rotation, Closer, and a couple bats) and stay young and cheap (but still good) everywhere else.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
That is not a functional answer.
Because you can’t even pay arbitration to Cain, Tim and Wilson with that budget. You are forced to trade them which means trading at a loss of talent. It also means a about 6 Ochoa’s and 3 Van Landingham type pitchers.
So tell me how that makes this better then 70 win team in the next 5 years?
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Not True And You Know It
Go back and find where we talked about this before in another tread for the details. I clearly accounted for anyone and everyone in the starting rotation. As for Wilson, he is still two years away from arbitration (he will not qualify for super 2 in 2010) and we can aford his arb raises within the limits we are discussing.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions
GRM
I would encourage you to run the #’s and post them here for evaluation.
You can settle this pretty easily with a little bit ’o fact.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Your Wish Is My Command (this time)
Who Says We Can’t Afford CC, Barry Zito, And The Raises Need To Retain Our Young Starting Pitching?
Let’s look at a five year outlook for our rotation assuming we sign CC for Santana dollars plus 10%.
2009: Sabathia $21.5M, Zito $18.5M, Cain $2.65M, LIncecum $0.5M Sanchez $0.4M Totaling $43.55M.
2010: Sabathia $ $22.5M, Zito $18.5M, Cain $4.25M, Lincecum $5M(super2 arb yr) Sanchez $0.5M Totaling $50.75M. This $7.2M increase is more the covered by the $20.75M coming off the books with the contracts for Winn, Roberts, and Molina expiring.
2011: Sabathia $24M, Zito $18.5M, Cain $8.15M, Lincecum $10M(2nd arb yr) Sanchez $3M(1st arb yr) Totaling $63.65M. This $20.1M increase from 2009 is still covered by the $20.75M that came off the books with the contracts for Winn, Roberts, and Molina expiring after 2009.
2012: Sabathia $25.5M, Zito $19M, Cain $12M(1st yr FA Contract-see Zito’s contract), Lincecum $15M(3rd arb yr), Bumgardner/Alderson $0.4M(trade Sanchez) Totaling $71.9M. This $28.35M increase from 2009 is paid by the $20.75M that came off the books after 2009 and by a small $7.6M increase in the salary budget.
2013: Sabathia $27M, Zito $20M, Cain $16M(2nd yr FA Contract-see Zito’s contract), Bumgardner/Alderson $0.5M(trade Lincecum for a CC/Santana like haul), Alderson/Bumgardner $0.4M Totaling $63.9M. This $20.35M increase from 2009 is still covered.
Bottom line to me is that Sabathia from 2009 thru 2013 and beyond is worth more then saving the money to spend on Lincecum 2013 and beyond. To plan for 5 years from now rather then now is just stupid. We know alot more about what the next five years are going to be like then we do aboout what is coming after that. I would much rather pair CC and Lincecum togeather for 4 years then just have Timmy for these four years and hope for more Timmy beyond these four years.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I Can Agree That This Would Be Preferable
But in the senerio I outlined above Matt will be in the second year of a long term contract while Tim will have just have a year left before free agency. Tim will be in the same situation Santana was last offseason or Sabathia was this season. These types of trades are usually easier to make which is why I suggested this.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions
While I generally agree with your premise
I’m not sure I agree with your #’s.
Your salary’s account for the starting rotation, only.
If your #’s are accurate, and we assume a 90m “cap” then that leaves
2009: 46mm
2010: 39mm
2011: 26mm
2012: 18mm
2013: not gonna fuck with it ’cause it assumes too much
To support the other 20 players on the team. That means an average salary of:
2009: 2.3m per player.
2010: 1.95m per player.
2011: 1.3m per player.
2012: .9m per player.
That is not a very solid operating budget, and you had better hope your ass off that we don’t need any other FA’s to become competitive. I would have to do a little more analysis, but I don’t have much hope for this team being competitive, even with CC, with that little operating budget to spend in the field. Realistically, subtracting Rowand’s contract out of that makes those #’s even lower.
And let’s not even talk about money for Draft signings, international FA’s, etc.
I just don’t think CC is in the budget, dude.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Here Is How The Total Budget Could Work
2009: Rotation $43.55M, Rowand $12M, Winn $8.25M, Roberts $6.5M, Molina $6M, Lowry $4.5M, Aurilia $1.8M, Vizquel $1.8M, 14 PreArb Players $5.6M Totaling $90M.
2010: Rotation $50.75M, Rowand $12M, Wilson $3M(Super2 Arb Yr), 18 PreArb Players $7.25M Totaling $73M. Therefore $17M saved for future years.
2011: Rotation $63.65M, Rowand $12M, Wilson $6M(2nd Arb Yr), Lewis $3M(1st Arb Yr), Burriss $3M(Super2 Arb Yr), 16 PreArb Players $7.35M Totaling $95M. Use $5M of $17M saved in 2010.
2012: Rotation $71.9M, Trade Rowand, Wilson $9M(3rd Arb Yr), Lewis $6M(2nd Arb Yr), Burriss $6M(2nd Arb Yr), 5 1st Yr Arb Players $15M, 11 PreArb Players $4,1M Totaling $112M. Use remaining $12M saved in 2010 and increase salary budget by $10M.
2013: Rotation $63.9M, Trade Wilson, Trade Lewis, Trade Burriss, 5 2nd Yr Arb Players $30M, 15 PreArb Players $6.1M Totaling $100M.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Thank You
And kinda like I expected, Years 2011 and 2012 is where you start to get into problems.
I think that making this team really competitive in those years will also require adding a few Aurilia type FA’s. Very few (none?) teams are able to e competitive with a 100% home grown offense, there will always be a few holes that need to be filled.
I don’t disagree with you that there is money to spend in 2009/2010, but I think that in 2011/2012 any contract like the one you suggest will start putting a significant restriction on the teams ability to plug areas of need with mid priced FA players, which will be important to fielding a competitive team.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions
At some point ( not now) I think we need a differnt talk on Rowand.
I am curious what the conscious would on Rowand in 2-3 seasons.
Myself I think he will be a corner Outfielder and as such trading him might prove very difficult. If he starts out strong next season I almost hope they pawn him off midseason to a team needing O.F. depth or a C.F.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
It is really hard to say what is going on with Rowand
My gut instinct is that he is striking out way too much…
The guy is a good hitter, regardless of what you think of the contract. He has had an abysmal second half – and I’m not sure why.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 17, 2008 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
I am guessing an injury and fatigue are the major reason for his second half numbers. Just a guess though.
If the guess is correct another reason to go for the Goofus 4 man OF rotation ™
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
by daveinexile on Sep 17, 2008 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
I think one thing that Rowand’s career record suggests is that he’s a very streaky hitter. He’s had some poor seasons & some great seasons, and so i think he’s just in a bad streak at the moment, just as he was a great streak early in the year. Why he’s so inconsistant though, i’m not sure, perhaps he tries to hard to force the issue when he gets into slumps, or perhaps it’s mental.
Proud owner of the most boring Username! Alex Hinshaw: Now showing in a bullpen near you!
Just Double Checked And My Recolleciton On Brian Wilson Was Wrong
He will quality for super 2 in 2010. This will make him a little more expensive 2011-2013. That said I still think the payroll with all these core players will remain affordable without any significant budget increases. The key remains to keep the rest of the roster young, cheap, and good.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm scared we finish outside top 10..
and lose a pick if we sign CC.
proud father of the newly acquired Brandon Crawford..
We won't sign CC so don't fret.
If for no other reason than Sabeans Job. He can probably survive this kinda slow crawl of improvement, but if he makes another Zito-esque acquisition and it flops (which CC certainly could) it’s all over…
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions
There’s no way. Sabean isn’t going to spend that much money on another pitcher and risk him being a bust.
I’m not sure that Sabean thinks about such things, but I worry about CC because of the huge number of pitches thrown the last few years.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Sep 16, 2008 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions
CC is in so many ways
Not the right fit for the Giants. We don’t need a pitcher that is going to be awesome next year, and that is what CC is.
He very well may not be very good in 3 years, and we would be paying a lot of backlogged salary to a guy who helped us in 78 games instead of 72 in 2009.
A pitcher in CC’s position is likely to give whoever signs him 1-2 years of awesome followed by 3-4 years of meh with a little injury mixed in. You are underpaying for the awesome in the first two years but overpaying for the meh at the end of the contract.
The awesome does the Giants little good in the next two years, and as a result, it is a poor choice for them. Much better choice for a team like the Dodgers or Red Sox who can use that 1-2 years of awesome to go deep in the post season.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed. He might be awesome for 5+ years, but the Giants can’t afford to take that risk.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Sep 16, 2008 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions
No CC for me
I think that pitching will be okay for us next year with a unit consisting of:
Lincecum
Cain
Sanchez
Zito
Lowry/Hennessey
Wilson
Romo
Hinshaw
Yabu (he has been pretty effective)
Taschner
Valdez/Matos (This is Merkin’s spot to lose if he isn’t healthy)
Correia/Hennessey (The former 1st round picks battle for the final bullpen spot)
I would like to upgrade an infield spot, but don’t like the options unless it is something like Sanchez and Taschner for Fielder or maybe a Cain for Rollins type deal. I understand that those are not likely so I will just fill out my 25 man roster without them. If these moves don’t take place I would like to find a backup SS to allow the hiccups of Burriss at short (Felipe Lopez or Julio Lugo or a rule 5 guy).
RF – Winn/Scheirholtz
SS – Burriss
LF – Lewis/Winn
C – Molina
3B – Sandoval
CF – Rowand/Winn
1B – Ishikawa
2b – Velez
OF – Schierholtz/Winn
CI – McClain
MI – Felipe Lopez / Lugo / rule 5
C – Laser/Holm
OF – Frandsen / Roberts
This roster is harder to fill out than I thought, but mainly I would like to see:
1)a full year of Velez at 2b
2)Winn as a super outfielder allowing Schierholtz to play basically full time
3)Sandoval at 3b and spelling Bengie every now and then behind the plate.
4)Buster Posey taking some balls at 3B in minor league action enabling him and to platoon with Pablo to save each others legs in the future.
5)A healthy Lowry and his change-up
6)Correia in the bullpen
7)McClain as the CI bench player
8)No Tyler Walker in the bullpen or Aurilia on the bench (time to move on)
9)A healthy Frandsen beating out Roberts for the last bench spot
by krukuipandclint on Sep 15, 2008 11:25 PM PDT reply actions
Platoon Player
Travis Ishikawa is a platoon player at best. Too many of the Giants’ young players hit much better against right-handed pitchers.
Didn’t Lewis have terrible platoon splits against lefties in the minors? This seems like the sort of thing that can be fixed.
Trent Kline: Decentish. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com. It's not being updated right now. Hope for more at your own risk.
I'll give it a shot
I don’t see a FA 1B worth signing (sorry, Teixeira fans – way too expensive for the return, plus I don’t think he ever wants to leave the AL again), so I’d say we start the season with Ishikawa at 1B. Especially since it will be, as UnleashtheGore acccurately pointed out above, Lets See What the Youth Have While we Don’t Contend period of time (aka 2009).
Since rainman has expanded the discussion to include roster assignments, here’s my preference:
C – Molina (final year, tutors Pablo as much as possible)
1B – Ishikawa
2B – Frandsen/Velez
SS – Burriss
3B – Sandoval
LF – Lewis
CF – Rowand
RF – Schierholtz
I agree with the rotating outfielders concept, so Winn is on my bench technically.
OF – Winn
C – Holm
MI – Frandsen/Velez
CI – Aurilia or cheap FA signing ?
CI – McClain
And let me say right away that this is not a very good team, nor am I particularly happy with it – but I see it as the best alternative in a rebuilding year. I’d prefer to have Bowker getting ML AB’s, but if he doesn’t start in SF then he needs to be starting in Fresno. Same with Denker, who I really would prefer over Velez (who I think just is not ML ready) in the INF mix. And, of course, I’m optimistically hoping Kevin Frandsen comes all the way back from injury.
I do not want to spend heavily (no pun intended) on CC Sabathia. If Barry Zito and his contract weren’t on the books, I’d consider it, but not at present. Despite his weight, which concerns me about a long contract, Sabathia is more like the kind of pitcher you’d consider giving $126 million to, as opposed to SurferDude Zito. Dave Roberts? I have no idea who you’re talking about.
For 2010, Molina exits via Free Agency and Pablo takes over catching full-time. Either Ishkiwaw or Bowker gets 1B. Frandsen or Denker or heck, even Rohlinger or Gillaspie gets 2B, Burris rocking steady at SS (fingers crossed), 3B now manned by Rohlinger or Gillaspie or (drum roll, please) Buster “Don’t Call Me Gerald” Posey! The Lewis-Rowand-Nate triumvirate in the OF, now supplemented with Ben Copeland (and/or Bowker if Ishikawa has won the 1B competition).
In 2011, we start seeing some of our prospects arrive. In 2012, we contend for the NL championship, and peace breaks out in the Middle East. Cold fusion will power our automobiles, and love will steer the stars.
Or not.
your 2008 SF Giants: this isn’t totally insane, just really stupid
No backup SS
Who’s gonna give Burriss a day off? I shudder at the thought of watching Velez at short.
Also, I’ve decided to confine my anti-McClain ranting to my signature.
Scott McClain: Great story, no place on the 2009 Giants.
I am interested in what the rest of the Brethren think is reasonable expectations for Burriss in ‘09
Kind of with you on this. I want to see Burriss a lot next year. At age 24 do we really think he can handle 120+ MLB games? On this I am not so sure of. In fact I could be really happy with good numbers and glove but he only plays 100 games. .
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
His Youth Should Make It Easier (not harder) To Handle More Games
I just don’t get of see any basis for this concern.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
To expect a 24 year old to not stumble, get into a bad rut it real unrealistic in my view. If Burriss starts and finished 70 games as SS next year he will still have doubled his MLB play time over this year (313 innings) at short. If Burriss he plays 100 full game Burriss is up to 900 innings at SS. Or tripling his work load. He
could
do it. But we don’t know he can do it. Thus the need for some one to be able to step in a absorb innings for possibly weeks at a time.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
That Is Rediculous
To only plan on him starting just half or less of the games is no way to go forward. This kind of thinking is what leads to way to much dependance upon veterans.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, logic can seem rediclous at first blush. It also tends to prove to be very functional.
“Plan for the worse hope for the best” as the old adage goes. Maybe you heard it rewrded as " Be prepared". What you are advocating is " Plan for the best and ignore the rest". That never realy works.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
If you are concerned about my lack of MI backup for Burriss at SS, well, as I said it isn’t an ideal roster. I’d be sorta okay with Frandsen as the backup (yes, I know, he’s not a real shortstop) – but I just don’t see the problem with having Burriss at SS for the whole year. He’s not Joe Castle, and even if he hit like him, my expectations for SS are primarily on the defensive side – and that I think he can handle. His play this year gives me hope that he can be, at least, adequate offensively…and maybe a good deal better.
As rainman said, this fear of younger players has led to the dark side (over-relying on expensive veteran free agents). Let’s actually give the guy a chance.
your 2008 SF Giants: this isn’t totally insane, just really stupid
Interesting and amusing that I am now grouped with the Sabean’s regarding younger players. Very much hot inflatable straw man action you guys have going on there..
I am not saying the need to get a player to take the spot from Burriss. Very much the opposite. I am saying they need plan for the possibility Burriss will not be able to do 120, 130, or 140 games next year at a MLB level of production. Yet this safety net player needs to not tempt Bochy into his evil ways. The need for a viable safety net if Burriss needs to go back down for a bit or get hurt etc. I’ve seen Frandsen at SS. The best I can say is he isn’t Velez at SS.
What I am getting back is basically “There is now way anything can go wrong with Burriss in ’09.” Can you at least see the hole in that stance?
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
by daveinexile on Sep 17, 2008 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions
No hole, just an extra W
I agree with you. There needs to be a safety net for the possibility that Burriss tanks next season. That safety net needs to be a player that will accept being a reserve IF for the majority of the year with the possibility of starting if things do not work out with Burriss (holy run-on sentence, Batman!).
How do you guarantee Bochy’s lineup decisions though?
by Lars The Wanderer on Sep 17, 2008 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions
That safety net needs to be a player that will accept being a reserve IF for the majority of the year with the possibility of starting if things do not work out with Burriss
Nochoa!
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 17, 2008 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
That possibility is certainly not attractive, but it may not be the only possibility.
Perhaps a rule 5 or waiver wire pickup will be grateful to just be employed and accept a reserve IF position.
by Lars The Wanderer on Sep 17, 2008 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, i’m perfectly happy with Ochoa as a backup if Burriss strugles. He’s young enough that he’ll accept being a reserve & that Bochy won’t over-play him. He’s also young & cheap enough that if he ends up doing well he can be an asset.
Proud owner of the most boring Username! Alex Hinshaw: Now showing in a bullpen near you!
retry
To expect a 24 year old to not stumble, get into a bad rut it real unrealistic in my view. If Burriss starts and finished 70 games as SS next year he will still have doubled his MLB play time over this year (313 innings) at short. If Burriss he plays 100 full game Burriss is up to 900 innings at SS. Or tripling his work load. He could do it. But we don’t know he can do it. Thus the need for some one to be able to step in a absorb innings for possibly weeks at a time.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
As much as I get a perverse glee from Ochoa – and I do. I might even be his fan club, such as it is, I hope they can find a better answer. True it’s better then what the team had even 6 months ago but he is showing to a band aid that will have to be changed at some point in the near future.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
No so sure about that...
That is why my plans have Nochoa as the backup SS/2b.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Frankly
I’d be more worried about Ochoa getting 150+ ABs than Frandsen playing 150+ innings of defense.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
Well, that is a question that I am not prepared to answer.
I have not seen Frandsen play SS.
I like Nochoa as a backup SS/2b because he can play both positions very well with the glove.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Perhaps
but so can Burriss.
If there’s a worry about Burriss, it’s his stick, so I think it’s preferable to have a backup who can shore up that weakness. Also, I think the Giants are going to need as much pinch-hitting help off the bench as possible.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
pinch-hitting help off the bench
Where are you going to find that?
It’s not as if our MiL is full of bad glove good bat bench players.
If Burriss is going to be the everyday SS, you need someone on the team who can cover that position. That someone probably shouldn’t be your starting player at another position.
Nochoa is nice off the bench because he back play 2 positions competently.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions
why do we need someone who can play 2B?
They’ve already got Frandsen and Velez.
Really, I’d rather see Burriss backing up someone (likely acquired via trade) and Ochoa gone. I don’t see him as much of a future asset in a starting role.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
Nochoa has no future in a starting role
However, he does potentially have a future backing up the middle infield or as a defensive replacement for Frandsen/Velez.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, the jury is out on Burriss. He has given us some reason to think he can hang around
But we really are just going to have to wait and see.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Just to Pile on here.
Given: I like what I see in Burriss.
I Think he could be a real asset to the Giants going forward.
However:
Burriss is still real young and inexperienced. He has barely played 105 games above "A" ball. Even if next year turns out very poorly for him and he spends a lot of time in Fresno I still think he could be an asset. He is still that young.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Fine, I'll jump in on this
I’m assuming no one gets traded.
Molina/Pablo C
The Goofus Principle™ in the OF + Velez
I want to See Velez and Frandsen split time @ 2b.
I would also like to see Frandsen get some AB’s @ 3b and Velez get some AB’s in the OF.
Burriss @ SS
Pablo/Frandsen @ 3b
TI/Pablo @ 1b
I want a bench of Nochoa, Roberts, Holm. I like bringing Aurilia back if he gives the franchise discount.
Vizquel is gone to play in Japan, as I do not believe he is interested in sitting the bench.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
rosterization
I have been thinking similar for this mostly rebuilding year, with the possibility it turns into a contending year.
around the infield Benjie, Pablo, Manny, Eugenioooo, Travis
backing them up Frandsen or Ochoa; McClain or Aurilia; and one more, maybe Rohlinger or a new face that can play SS. We do need a legit backup SS for Burriss’ sanity.
4 outfielders, that makes 12. If Lewis is late arriving, we may need Roberts for part of the season.
still one spot for Helm, Roberts or somebody else. Personally, I don’t want a 3rd catcher just because Sandoval is playing infield most days. And Bowker needs a full, productive year at Fresno. He’s not old yet.
adopter/sponsor of "Go, Antoan" Richardson
Bowker needs a full, productive year at Fresno. He’s not old yet.
At this point, I agree.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions
This team isn't going to be that good next year either
So give Ishikawa a real shot. I like Bowker and think he can stick in the bigs, but Ishikawa is the only one with the talent and plate discipline really to have a shot at being an above-average or even star player.
If TI can’t fulfill his potential, then at least you know you gave him a shot before going to the FA market, putting Sandoval at 1B, or waiting for Villalona.
by North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan on Sep 16, 2008 3:25 PM PDT reply actions
My rosterbation
OF – Fred Lewis
OF – Aaron Rowand
OF – Nate Schierholtz
OF – Randy Winn
OF – John Bowker
SS – Emmanuel Burriss
SS – Ivan Ochoa
1B/3B – Scott McClain
1B – Travis Ishikawa
1B/3B/C – Pablo Sandoval
2B – Eugenio Velez
2B – Kevin Frandsen
C – Bengie Molina
Note #1: Eat the contract of Dave Roberts.
Note #2: Do not re-sign Omar Vizquel or Rich Aurilia.
Note #3: The re-signing of Randy Winn should be no more than a 2 year deal. Anything more should not be accepted.
Note #4: The lineup is whoever is playing the best out of this bunch. So that means that if Rowand is playing like shit, but Bowker isn’t, Bowker will get the start over Rowand. I’m not making any lineup projections, I’m just projecting (and hoping) that things go this way with the roster.
Starting Pitchers
Tim Lincecum
Jonathan Sanchez
Matt Cain
Barry Zito
Noah Lowry
Note #1: I don’t really care who starts over who out of that 5.
Note #2: Brad Hennessey is the 6th starter and Kevin Correia is the 7th starter.
Bullpen
Brian Wilson
Alex Hinshaw
Jack Taschner
Sergio Romo
Keiichi Yabu
Free Agent Signing – Juan Cruz maybe?
Note #1: When Brad Hennessey and Kevin Correia aren’t starting, they’ll be in the bullpen. To include them on the team, the necessary adjustments should be made (call ups and send downs).
That’s all that I believe should take place going into next season.
by AmorVincitOmnia on Sep 16, 2008 4:13 PM PDT reply actions
Wow
Brad Hennessey is the 6th starter and Kevin Correia is the 7th starter.
What have you done for me lately, I guess?
Signing Randy Winn to a 2 year extension means he would be on this team through the end of the 2011 season. I fail to see the advantage of this.
Only 11 Arms? You’ve got a lot of faith in the starters…
And McClain? Are we having veteran withdrawals already? It’s only been half a season, guys.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Sep 16, 2008 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Me Thinks He Thinks Randy Isn't Already signed for 2009
I dont’t think he is really suggesting we sign him for 2010 and 2011. But If he is I agree that this would be a big mistake.
by giantsrainman on Sep 16, 2008 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions
I am actually warming to the idea let Zito be long relief the first part of next year. Spread out the two questionable right handed arms by a couple day and pencil in Zito as their relief. He can have his customary slow April – June. Get about the same amount of IP and once he heats up is ready to replace any one faltering in the lower end of the rotation.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Zitoization
finally, a useful role for Zito! and solution to the 3 or 4 bad months at start of the season.
Trouble is, Hennessey goes 8 and Z gets no work in; Correia goes 2.1, and Z has to throw several.
adopter/sponsor of "Go, Antoan" Richardson
by foothillsfan on Sep 17, 2008 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
True in theory.
But this is the Giants. How often do thing actually work as planned? Especially with pitchers.
But say things work out that way then the Giants have to bottom of the rotation starters with good numbers to trade at a relatively cheap rate to shop mid season. The Horror and Calamity of it all!
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
“Me Thinks He Thinks Randy Isn’t Already signed for 2009”
You’re right, I didn’t know that.
I don’t think there should be an extension to his contract.
“Only 11 Arms? You’ve got a lot of faith in the starters”
13
I count Correia and Hennessey in the bullpen.
“Signing Randy Winn to a 2 year extension means he would be on this team through the end of the 2011 season. I fail to see the advantage of this.”
You’re right. After 2009, the Giants should not re-sign him.
“And McClain?”
Yes, McClain. I’m interested in what he can do at the ML level.
by AmorVincitOmnia on Sep 16, 2008 4:51 PM PDT reply actions
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
- Giancarlo Stanton busts Marlins Park scoreboard with tape-measure grand slam
- 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)
