For Crying Out Loud, Wait a Minute!!
by VTown on Jul 30, 2009 12:14 AM PDT
Email
PrintI am a die hard Giants fan for the past 30 years. I remember going with my Dad and braving those cold nights at the Stick, watching the teams of the late 80's and early 90's having some success and even had the good fortune of being able to bat boy a few times. I love the Giants with all my heart. I come to this website because I enjoy reading other people's opinion about my beloved team. Even if I disagree, I am not naive enough to always think I am right. Today though, I am actually disgusted with a lot of what I read. People, please calm down. Some of these post I read actually makes me scared for Sabean. Of course there is a lot of sarcasm, but the criticism for making the trade for Sanchez is unreal. A TRADE CANNOT BE JUDGED IMMEDIATELY. Reserve judgement for this trade in a few years. Right now the simple fact is Sabean acquired an All-Star, a previous batting champion, and filled a HUGE hole in the line-up. Had Sabean not made this move, there would of been criticism for just standing pat. The Giants are a better team today, no matter how Tim Alderson turns up in the future. Who knows what he'll do. Let's be excited for what we have now. Be proud of the fact our franchise doesn't sit on our ass and do don't do anything. At the very least the Giants are proactive and are trying to make the playoffs. I am sure I will receive a lot of criticism from all the Sabean haters out there, but I for one am thrilled that the Giants are in the playoff hunt, and added an All-Star second basemen today.
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.
55 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
meh
meh
#1 threat to America: Pandas
Also, Tim Lincecum
Adopted Father: Tyler Graham
by GrahamCrakalaka on Jul 30, 2009 12:28 AM PDT reply actions
I might reserve judgment on this trade, but I have already made up my mind about the merits of the use of paragraphs
by FluLikeSymptoms on Jul 30, 2009 12:41 AM PDT reply actions
All-Star second basemen today
This has no meaning at all
Chris Dominguez: Bringing dingerz back to The Bay (In a while)
You’re correct that it doesn’t have much meaning but it’s not like he wasn’t a deserving All-Star. Aside from Utley who’s obviously way better there’s a reasonable argument to be made that he’s the 2nd best 2B in the NL, he’s 0.1 win away from being the 2nd best this year by WAR.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
No he wasn’t, i’m guessing (given his recent slump) that he was the 2nd best performing 2B in the NL at the time and so was a very deserving all star.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
You're both wrong
Sanchez was in the ASG because he was voted in by the players. Manuel did not pick him, and he was one of the main reasons why Panda was blocked from getting in.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Pwnd!
Rafael Rodriguez: #8 on our list, tearing up Scottsdale, and has been alive long enough to see the Warriors make the playoffs once.
by BrianBokake on Jul 30, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
If signing an ALL-STAR! is the kind of thing you really care about, we could’ve probably traded for Felipe Lopez. He’s 2 years younger, has an OPS 7 points better than Sanchez this year (25 points less for his career), and was recently traded for a lesser prospects.
Sanchez is a fine player, and an upgrade, and as a Giants fan I’m happy about this. I want them to at least try to make the playoffs considering I think they have the best 1-2 rotation punch in either league. They are a better team today (or at least when Sanchez can actually play) than they were yesterday. That’s great. Also, because of some things I’ve heard about him, I’m not all that worried about Alderson being a star, though he may be someday. It’s just that I think…
a) Sanchez doesn’t address either of our top two weaknesses — getting on base, and hitting for power.
b) We could’ve gotten a better player for a prospect of his stature in this trading environment (judging by ecomony, recent trades, etc.)
c) We could’ve gotten Sanchez for less. The Pirates were clearly dumping his salary. There wasn’t one other public bidder. There was still 48 hours until the deadline for Pittsburgh to lower their demands. I honestly got the impression the deal went down when it did because he was in town, and they didn’t want him flying off despite the fact he can’t play right away.
As someone else said in one of these 1,000 comment threads, I wasn’t against trading Alderson or acquiring Sanchez, i just didn’t think they be in exchange for each other. Had it been Alderson for Willingham and/or Sanchez for Frandsen/Bowker/Guzman, I would’ve dealt with it a lot better.
"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 Jul 30, 2009 1:05 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
As i mentioned in the other thread i don’t understand the sentiment that it’d have been better if we’d given him up for Willingham. Sanchez is the better player (3-4 wins a year as opposed to 2-3 wins a year) and plays a position where we’re much weaker. Willingham is a little younger and has a bit better contract but i don’t understand the logic that you’d be willing to give up Alderson for Willingham but not for Sanchez.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
Besides the reasons you already gave (Willingham is younger and cheaper)…
1) Someone like Sanchez can be acquired more easily (see Lopez example above).
2) Willingham would address both of our two biggest weaknesses.
3) Willingham is healthy and hot. Sanchez is injured and mired in a slump.
4) With Willingham… (wait for it)… Bengie would not hit cleanup!
"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 Jul 30, 2009 1:22 AM PDT up reply actions
so you think Willingham and Uribe are better than Scheirholtz and Sanchez?
by FluLikeSymptoms on Jul 30, 2009 1:28 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, but he’s also not as good a player and we’ve got a better replacement for his position. Sanchez is probably a 1 win better player & you could argue that Schierholtz/Bowker are 1 win better than Downs/Uribe/Frandsen (they have been so far this year) so we’re possibly 2 wins better (over a season) for having Sanchez over Willingham.
1) You’re trading for future production not past production. Lopez would be cheaper but he’s been barely over replacement the last few years so he’s unlikely to be good going forward.
2) Sanchez addresses our biggest weakness, terrible production from 2B. You can say that “Willingham addresses our biggest weeknesses” but acquiring him makes us a worse team than acquiring Sanchez does so i’m not sure how that matters. He also addresses our biggest weakness more than Halladay would but i’d still rather Halladay!
3) Makes little to no difference. Sanchez could go on a hot streak tomorrow (or when he returns from his day to day injury) and Willingham could go into a slump. You can’t predict hot streaks, just how you’d expect them to perform.
4) He probably still would knowing Bochy. And anyway, it makes no difference, as depressing as Molina is in the cleanup spot the aim is to improve the team more as opposed to removing Molina from the cleanup spot & trading for Sanchez does that.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
I’m basically with you on Willingham, but saying “Sanchez is the better player (3-4 wins a year as opposed to 2-3 wins a year)” may no longer be true. Willingham has been better this year and was much better this year. And he’s not injured.
You’re right he has been better this year but i’m not sure you can have much confidence in him being this good in future years & i certainly wouldn’t want to make a trade expecting that. You’re right in that Sanchez had a bad year last year & you can’t ignore that. I guess it take the statistically large sample and say that Sanchez has been a 3+ win player 4 out of 5 seasons where as Willingham has been one 1 out of 4 seasons. A more complicated projection going forward would be more accurate though.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
It’s Sanchez’s slump and injury that make the trade such an atrocity for me, not a desire for Willingham. It sounds like dealing with the Nationals is just impossible at this point, and I’d rather just give Bowker the job anyway.
I’m not particularly bothered by his recent slump as it’s SSS and i’m presuming his injury isn’t an issue going forward otherwise they wouldn’t have made the trade. I’m not of fan of the trade either, but i don’t think that Willingham would have been a preferable option.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
It’s not SSS if it’s tied to the injuries, though. Will he get on the field regularly is certainly a concern at this point.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
with Sanchez he shouldn’t bat cleanup either. No reason that Sanchez shouldn’t be hitting third with Sandoval moved to the fourth slot. The sad thing is even if they get Willingham, Bochy would keep Bengie in the fourth slot
Proud new dad of Edgardo errr Edgar Renteria!!!
by rxmeister on Jul 30, 2009 7:42 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Everyone should read that quote in Rosenthal’s column that FluLikeSymptoms had in his fan post. This is from another GM. He said that Alderson is “overrated,” and more importantly, “Sabean had a long list of untouchables, and Alderson wasn’t on it.” The fact that Sabean had a long list of players he wouldn’t deal tells me he’s not willing to just give up anyone to take a run at it. It’s easy for a fan to say it’s a terrible trade and Sabean is an idiot, but it’s also not fair. Talk to me when Alderson proves you right. Until then I’ll assume that Sabean knew what he was doing.
Proud new dad of Edgardo errr Edgar Renteria!!!
who's on this long list of untouchables?
Other than the obvious MadBum, Posey, Villalona, Neal, who is on there? He probably has Noonan and Gillespie on there…
And what would you base this assumption on?
by AndOnTheDrums... on Jul 30, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I can’t say I agree with everything you say, especially your lack of paragraphs, but it does seem like the vitriol expressed over this trade is a little overdone.
I get that everyone’s high on Alderson, probably for good reason, and yeah Sanchez is another no-power guy on a team of no-power guys, but we’ve got almost 3,000 posts in three “this trade stinks” threads on the main page, and the guy hasn’t even played a game in a Giants uni yet. I get that a lot of those posts are just funnin’ McCovey style, but it still seems like an overreaction at this point. Yeah, it could all pan out to be justified, but we don’t know yet.
THIS, THIS, 1000 TIMES THIS
Fred Lewis can stand under my umbrella.
31 May 2007, 21:38 EST - the last time Matteh's career W-L wasn't below .500
We are at war with Los Angeles. We have always been at war with Los Angeles.
Lowering the Quality of Internet Discourse Since 1985™
by S.F. Giangst on Jul 30, 2009 7:32 AM PDT up reply actions
It’s not that Sanchez doesn’t make us better. He does. And, yes, now we have a better chance at the playoffs. What I (and I think many other posters) are pissed about is that the move is an indication that the management has scrapped the trend of the past few years to piece together long-term plans that will keep us in contention not just this year, but well into the future. The short-term, go-for-it-now thinking was what dug us into a four year downward spiral where the Giants were among the worst teams in all of baseball. Shrewd management and some luck (like Lincecum dropping to #10 in the 06 draft and becoming the best pitcher on the planet 2 years later) have helped us climb out ahead of schedule. But I’m afraid that Sabean is going for it all because we’re in contention and mortgaging our future to do so. With our resources, we should always be contenders. If we keep selling off key pieces from our farm, I don’t think we can do so – especially in light of some of the huge, bad contracts we are burdened with for the next 3-4 years (Zito, Rowand).
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
I’m not sure trading Alderson for 1.5 years of Sanchez means we’re in mortgage future/go-for-broke-now mode. They got something, they gave up something, and guess what their farm system is not all of a sudden in shambles because Alderson is gone. We weren’t going to get anything of value by trading the guys that got the official “Ok it’s cool to trade these guys” stamp from everyone.
by sakbaum on Jul 30, 2009 5:55 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, it’s been a long tough slog since the last good Giants team. Sabean’s long-standing fondness for “proven” players eventually bore fruit in several years of bad, boring baseball. Things are better now, but only because of the heroic labors of three outstanding young home-grown players; the rest of the team is bloody awful.
The thing that sustained us through the down years was the sense that the Giants were building something special through the farm system. But together these two trades have diminished the farm system quite a bit in exchange for exactly the sort of mediocre players who got us into this mess. And the team still isn’t particularly good.
I just don’t see how these two trades have demonstrated that they are all of a sudden back to only trading for proven players or have “diminished the farm system quite a bit,” or how we need to all of a sudden lose faith that the Giants are no longer building something. I know I still think they are. Think of all the excellent prospects the Giants still have. They just no longer have Barnes and Alderson.
Believe me, I understand the value of young players, prospects, etc., in the grand scheme of things. And yes, those two guys could be something special. They also might not be. But if our entire strategy around team-building is to wait and see how prospects develop without trades, we might also be missing out on some good opportunities.
I don’t know if I’m willing to call Garko or Sanchez mediocre or to completely pan the trades. Are they exactly what the team needed? Probably not. Do they improve the offense? Yes. Are they worth what was given up (prospects that haven’t reached the majors yet and — remember — actually might never either)? We just don’t know yet.
Barnes and Alderson were both among the top-10 prospects in our system, one was top-3. Both had a reasonable chance to contribute to the big league team in the next couple of years. It doesn’t decimate our system, but, as Evan mentions above, it’s a trend toward the mediocrity of 2005 – 2008, which is concerning. It also puts incredible pressure on Bumgarner to produce in the next one or two years. If something happens to him, we’re in big trouble pitching-wise.
If you were building a team, you might take Sanchez as a 2B (because he plays great defense), but you wouldn’t really have Garko on the team. They’re only on our team because our offense is historically inept, and thus, they represent a huge upgrade.
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
Maybe I’m overreacting, but suddenly our farm system doesn’t look all that impressive. Alderson and Barnes are gone. Bumgarner has lost velocity and made little progress on his breaking pitches. Villalona and Noonan have been humbled by high-A; they’re young enough that it’s not a major setback, but their stock has dropped. Gillaspie has been a disappointment. Henry Sosa’s not right. Fairley’s still a flop.
On the flip side, Neal has vaulted into the top 5; Kieschnick and Crawford have been okay; and apparently we had a pretty good draft. But overall things look a lot gloomier than they did six months ago.
We're still a top-10 system
Bumgarner is still an elite prospect (we’ll see if the one-time lower velocity is anything serious or concerning). Posey is a stud. The other prospects you mentioned are a concern (although I’m not going to give up on Fairley until he’s 23).
But the 2008 draft is turning out very well. Lots of our latin signings are turning into very interesting prospects (Rodriguez, Adrianza, Jose Casilla, Jorge Buccardo, Julio Izturas, Hector Sanchez, Francisco Perguero) and they’ve continued to find major league caliber arms between the couch cushins of the draft (Runzler, Patterson). And the early returns on the 09 draft are already strong (Dominguez, Stoffel, Toole, Gloor).
So we still have a lot of prospects. But we’re pretty thin on starting pitching prospects after Bumgarner and Wheeler (when he signs).
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
Yeah, we’ve got to rely on the farm system because Timmeh and Matteh are dead and we can’t ever make any more trades or sign any more free agents…
Sorry the sarcasm, really, but we’ve got two of the best five pitchers in the league having fairly ordinary years by the standard of what they are capable of. They’re young, they’re resignable and there’s never a shortage of free agent 3 and 4 starters at reasonable prices.
Fred Lewis can stand under my umbrella.
31 May 2007, 21:38 EST - the last time Matteh's career W-L wasn't below .500
We are at war with Los Angeles. We have always been at war with Los Angeles.
Lowering the Quality of Internet Discourse Since 1985™
by S.F. Giangst on Jul 30, 2009 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions
we’ve got two of the best five pitchers in the league having fairly ordinary years by the standard of what they are capable of. They’re young, they’re resignable and there’s never a shortage of free agent 3 and 4 starters at reasonable prices.
Don’t disagree with your first sentence. But seriously disagree with your second. First, #3/4 starters do NOT sign for reasonable prices. League average is around 2 WAR, and the going rate is $5 million per. So you’re talking around $10 mil for a league average starter. Could we get a bargain? Yeah, but PLANNING on getting a good deal isn’t smart if you are setting yourself up to dip into the free agent market. Second, Cain and Lincecum may be willing to sign with the Giants, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to be signed. Zito eats us $20 million in payroll through 2013. Starting next year, Lincecum is going to be earning $6 million plus and escalating through the end of his arbitration years in 2013. Cain gets $4 mil next year and has an option for $6 mil in 2011. After that he’ll get expensive – like $15 mil per expensive. So do you really think that we’ll have Cain and Lincecum forever when we’ll be investing around $50 million into 3 pitchers in 2011+?
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
I’ll quarrel with the first sentence too.
having fairly ordinary years by the standard of what they are capable of
They have a collective ERA around 2.20. You expect them to get better?
Ignore ERA. Look at the other stats. Ordinary is not a number, it’s a range, and the point in that range which a pitcher occupies at any given time largely depends on random occurrences. Add more randomness to get ERA… And yes, on the basis of ERA, both of these guys do have the makings of a 2.00 to 3.00 ERA season, 8 or 9 seasons out of 10.
Fred Lewis can stand under my umbrella.
31 May 2007, 21:38 EST - the last time Matteh's career W-L wasn't below .500
We are at war with Los Angeles. We have always been at war with Los Angeles.
Lowering the Quality of Internet Discourse Since 1985™
by S.F. Giangst on Jul 30, 2009 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions
“A TRADE CANNOT BE JUDGED IMMEDIATELY. Reserve judgement for this trade in a few years.”
You obviously feel strongly about this given the caps. I have to say, I STRONGLY, STRONGLY disagree. You have to evaluate the trade in the context of what we know at the time of the trade. The process is what counts, because over time, the process is what is important in producing winning teams. Evaluating a trade based on one or two players production is as much a demonstration of being lucky/unlucky as anything else, and that will often times lead you to wrong conclusions.
The process for this trade was most likely incredibly poor. 2 weeks ago BA essentially put Alderson in their Top 50 prospects, though Keith Law’s article makes him sound lower than that. Where he ranks as a prospect is the important point here. As a Top 50 guy, the trade has to give us 5 wins of value to be worthwhile (a bit more actually since the probability of under producing is greater than the probability of over producing). Under those conditions, this trade is terrible. Sanchez is 31, put up .4 WAR last year, is on pace to be about a 3 WAR player this year, and essentially would need to be a 4 WAR a year guy to give us that value. That’s the information Sabean has to go by, and IF Alderson is a Top 50 guy, he clearly screwed up (even if he gets lucky and Alderson flames out).
However…there is an argument Alderson is not a Top 50 guy. Here are prospects trade values. It may be that Alderson has fallen to a Grade B prospect, and in that case Sanchez only has to give us ~3.5 wins or so, which is certainly more plausible. That would make the process behind the trade not so bad.
Essentially, what it comes down to, is we don’t know the future, so you have to judge a GM’s actions by what they know in the present. This methodology takes into account the probability of pitchers failing and succeeding and their value if they succeed to give an expected value for the prospect. Good teams will use a process like this well, and even if they get unlucky (like when the Red Sox traded Hanley, for instance), it’s still a good trade. More times than not, they will look good, and that’s how to build a winner.
Well, yeah, we have to evaluate the trade given what we know at the time of the trade. Which to me means that we haven’t seen Alderson pitch in the majors yet, so yeah, he could be really awesome and we could have totally gotten screwed. Then again, maybe he doesn’t and maybe the trade isn’t so bad.
I’m not saying I’m a scout, I’m not saying I’m an expert on pitcher development, and I’m not saying I’m hoping Alderson fails now that the trade’s happened. But it seems like player development, particularly pitchers, is a pretty unpredictable thing, so how can we talk about this being the worst trade ever when Alderon hasn’t actually hit the majors yet?
Question: does one, or is one even supposed to, account for how terrible 2b has been this year? That has to count for something in the decision making process, does it not?
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
Well, it’s a factor worth considering of course. On the one hand, the value we get from Sanchez is “wins over how terrible 2b has been this year” instead of “wins above replacement”. On the other hand, this doesn’t affect the market value for a player, so we should still make sure to get fair market value. If you go into a store to buy something you value at $10, but the market values it at $5 (its selling price)…you don’t just pay $10 for it, you know? But yes, in terms of the value we get from Sanchez, that should be included (but it’s a lot more effort so I just assumed we’d get replacement level value there). Though the concept of “replacement value” is it’s freely available…I guess maybe that assumption doesn’t always hold true.
by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions
On the other hand, this doesn’t affect the market value for a player, so we should still make sure to get fair market value.
Yeah, but Los Piratas (presumably) know our situation, no? I really think there is some sort of “compensation” involved for Schmidt & Co. We’ve used the Pirates as our own personal farm system quite a bit.
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
Well the idea is the market dictates the price, a team might think they have negotiating power so we just move on to the next team until we find someone willing to give us market price. Of course that assumes a perfectly competetive market, maybe with only 29 teams out there (and many less selling) that’s not the case and you could be right.
A couple more points. Someone I was discussing this with at Fangraphs brought up the point of risk premiums – prospects might have a risk premium attached to them in trades because they fail so often, so the expected value might overstate the trade value some. Second, I got Keith Law to answer my question in his chat, basically he said Alderson was a backend Top 100 guy at best, so his expected value might only be around $8M or so.
“We’ve used the Pirates as our own personal farm system quite a bit.”
I’m holding out hope that continues and this works out great for us. :)
by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions
indeed. thanks for droppin the knowledge mb. now let’s go get matching devean george jerseys!
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
I think I might rather have a Todd Fuller jersey.
Anyways, this has been an interesting discussion, I’ve learned a lot by bringing these concepts up. Obviously the concept of trade value (at least the information that’s available to the public) has a long way to go to really nail down the market. I will say, what I’ve learned through this process has made me feel better about the trade – I was extremely upset yesterday, and I’m still against it, but not nearly as angry about it. If we make the playoffs, that’s an another bonus I’d add on to the trade.
by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions
it's not about sanchez himself, necessarily
a lot of us WANTED sanchez, we KNEW we needed a 2nd baseman, but we also knew that he’s NOT worth tim alderson
yep
I think Sanchez will do okay. I’ve calmed down about his knee; I hadn’t read that an MRI had revealed no major damage. It’s just the idea of losing two top 10 prospects in two days that had me going off the deep end.
Supporting San Francisco Dugout since 2005 and Manny Burriss since 2006, and bringing you all your California League needs since 2009.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Jul 30, 2009 12:34 PM PDT up 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
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
