I'd like to buy an offense for 10M please
by jctGamer on Sep 24, 2009 1:42 PM PDT
Email
PrintGiants Contract Obligations for 2010
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p4ew-fwu2XT1HXvmS0G6qaA
51.1 tied up in Rowand, Zito, Renteria, Cain, and Affeldt
Lincecum = 10M
Wilson (using Bobby Jenks model) ~5M
J. Sanchez ~1.5M
Ryan Garko ~1.5M
Pablo Sandoval ~.5M
69.6M in 10 players, 15 holes to fill.
Giants Opening day payroll information over the last years :
- 2009: $ 82,616,450
- 2008: $ 76,594,500
- 2007: $ 90,219,056
- 2006: $ 90,056,419
- 2005: $ 90,199,500
- 2004: $ 82,019,166
- 2003: $ 82,852,167
- 2002: $ 78,299,835
- 2001: $ 63,280,167
It is safe to assume that the Giants will open 2010 with a ~90 Million dollars payroll. Let's call that 91.6M.
91.6-69.6 = 22M. We have 22M and we need to fill the following gaps:
5th starter
LF
RF
2B
C
5 Bullpen spots
5 backup position players
Assuming we go all in house solution for 5 bullpen spots, 5 * (.4) = 2M. We're down to 20M
If we resign Freddy Sanchez,he is going to make at a minimum 5M (and that is assuming he takes the maximum arbitration pay cut).
This solves your 2B. We're now down to 15M for LF, RF, C, and backup position players. Let's say RF and 4 backup position players are in house options at minimum. 5 * (.4) = 2M. we're down to 13M
Resigning Juan Uribe. What is the price tag here? 2.5M? 3M? Let's go with 3M just for argument's sake. The 500K is noise anyway.
For 10M, we'd need LF, Catcher, and a 5th starter.
This exercise is a chilling reality check. This tells me that
1) There is no way we are going to resign Bengie Molina next year. That Catcher spot has to go to Posey for 400K. It just wouldn't work otherwise.
2) We are probably going to look at Madison Bumgarner as the 5th starter. I didn't arrive at this conclusion before, now that I looked at the financials, I'm calling it right now. Bumgarner starts next year.
3) The Only way we can sign Holliday or Bay is if we do not resign Sanchez and Uribe. I'm not even sure how big of an upgrade that may be, but as it, we cannot simply add that contract to this team.
4) Holy shit Aaron Rowand Contract.
Looking ahead to 2011, Edgar Renteria contract comes off the books, offset by Lincecum, Wilson, and Cain's raise.
For all of those looking at the "38M contract coming off the books, yeah guys let's go sign Holliday and Bay! WROLD SERIES WOOHOO" scenario, I hope this has been a helpful punch in the stomach.
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.
163 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Uribe...
I could see SF giving him 2 years, 8-10 million. I would not be pleased if they do that, but it’s reasonable that he could seek/get it given how good a year he had, especially down the stretch
I hope not...
but
a) he’s 2nd on the team in OPS, batting avg, HR per AB
b) he’s been clutch down the stretch “when it counts”
c) defensive flexibiltiy
I can see Sabean falling love with the guy. If he actually kept playing like his, he’d be worth that type of deal too, but I’m not sure if Sabean would recognize what an abberation this is
by NeifiChicken on Sep 24, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree. At this point Uribe might be getting a contract pretty similar to what Sanchez will get.
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
in a strange a twisted way
Chone Figgings might set the market for Juan Uribe. When Somebody overpays Chone for 3 years 30 Mil, Uribe is going to point to that contract and say I want 60% of that.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
no way uribe gets those dollars in todays market
he’ll be happy to get a 2yr 4.5-5 mil offer.
in fairness...
we don’t know what “today’s market” is since “today” is not until November/December.
I do think prices will be down, but not as extreme as last year. And let’s not forget who you’re looking at in reading markets, the guy who spent 18 million on Renteria in a depressed market
by NeifiChicken on Sep 24, 2009 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions
I think his value really hinges on whether people think he can play SS
Because the market for 2B’s is pretty strong.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
I agree with this.
Uribe, if he is shrewd, realizes he is the heir to Craig Counsel. No the guy you want starting in one position 5 days a week but will have many weeks when he start 5 days a week between multiple positions. Those kind of players are extremely valuable in the NL.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
I wonder if Uribe’s good Aug. and Sept. were partly because he rested so much in mid Summer. Compared to the years he started all year.
Or maybe the AL to NL switchwas the big reason he improved.
cheering for Adam Witter, who will hit bigleague dingers some day.
Still yelling "Go, Antoan"
by foothillsfan on Sep 25, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions
To me that is logical deduction. But I may very well be too baised to offer an accurate opinion.
I certainly would have liked some on in CF for the 3-4 weeks after the All Star game besides Zombie Rowand. One way to have done that would have been to space out his playing time a bit more in the first half.
Don’t even get me going on how they have handled Renteria’s playing. Especially given he has been injured and they have known about it but they basically viewed saying “rub some dirt on it” as addressing the issue ( from June forward) rather than go out and do something to help and the team contend. For Example I have real hard time thinking the Brewers would not of been tempted by Alderson & Barnes for Hardy in July.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
Assuming your numbers are correct...
I think Frandsen at 2B would be the best option for that position. Sign Uribe for a couple million at most, and he can take the SS job. Play Bowker in RF, and sign either Bay or Holliday for the $13 million or so…maybe backload the contract if possible?
Of course, they could always just increase payroll.
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
Bowker in RF?
What about Bowker/Velez/Nate OF?
Curse you, Scott, for foiling my scheme with your untradably corpulent contract!
They need to sign SOMEONE to make the offense better
Otherwise we’ll just see a repeat of this year, with probably a regression in the pitching.
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Sep 24, 2009 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I’d think that replacing Randy Winn with a peanut butter sandwich would be an offensive upgrade next year.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
This!!!
Along with a side of moving one the league’s lowest OBP guys out of the #4 hole might make this team’s offense merely dreadful.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
Velez will be at 2nd if Sanchez walks and the Giants look internally.
You want to see a walk? Then go watch the mailman.
Contemplating the Internal
Bowker/Rowand/Nate
Sandoval/Renteria/Velez/Ishirko
Posey
I see doubles, and triples, not much improvement in quadruples.
I would, if the difference between him and Sanchez means signing a good hitter.
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Sep 24, 2009 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes!
If Frandsen/Velez fails and “WE’RE IN THIS THING!” then pick up a decent option for a fraction of the cost in July.
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
Also, "Sabean is an idiot" 2010 contracts:
Renteria: $10 million
Rowand: $13 million
Zito: $18.5 million
Sigh. Nearly half of next year’s payroll tied up in these three.
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
this is the case for a lot of the teams actually. Notable exceptions are teams spending North of 100M like the Red Sox and the Yankees.
I remember a year when Ben Grieve was 50% of the Rays Payroll?
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
I forget what I read over at the Cubs site, but they have something like 110 million wrapped up in 10 players next year.
Yup...
Zambrano = 18.875 mill
Soriano = 19 mill
Aramis = 16.75 mill
Lee = 13 mill
Lilly = 13 mill
Fukodome = 14 mill
Dempster = 13.5 mill
Bradley = 10.33 mill
And Harden is a FA this off-season.
That's worse than I remembered
only 17 other roster spots to pay for. I read a post over there calling for the new owner to get a quality SS and a true ace. I think they could be called the Yankees of the midwest.
They spent $82 million last year, $76 million the year before, and you’re anticipating $90 million this year?
My guess is the payroll is more likely to go down than up.
I believe that $82 million isn’t counting Dave Roberts $6.5m and Benitez got a $1.6m check from us too. They were committed to around $90 million to start the season (not counting Barry’s deferred $5 million).
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
I think something in the $87-92M range is a good guess
Wisconsin: Famous for dairy, Ryan Rohlinger and not much else.
some smart team will pick him up for Randy Messenger’s cousin
by NeifiChicken on Sep 24, 2009 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions
but what will Randy Messenger’s cousin do to him?
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Sep 24, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Velez at 2b. Covered.
Lewis in LF. Covered.
Nate in RF. Covered.
I’d be happy if we sign no one this offseason. We have players. We don’t have a manager or a GM. Spend the $$ on those two spots.
by positiveuphemism on Sep 24, 2009 2:40 PM PDT reply actions
I don’t know about handing the RF job to Nate. He’s looked pretty bad at the plate lately, hasn’t he?
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Sep 24, 2009 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Umm
Schierholtz has kind of sucked this season, particualrly if you look at his splits and notice that his season totals are propped up by one hot month back in June. Unless serious upgrades are made elsewhere, I wouldn’t be comfortable with simply handing him a starting spot in an outfield corner.
He has a great arm, though. Maybe he has a future as Kieshnick-esque 5th OF/middle reliever.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
He also has been jerked around a lot. The best thing for a young player is to play every day. He hasn’t been given that chance. As far as I am concerned, the verdict is still out and this was a wasted year for him.
by positiveuphemism on Sep 24, 2009 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Why is handing over a long term starting assignment necessarily the best thing to do for a young player? Why isn’t spot duty and letting them learn from the bench just as valuable for position players as other sports jobs (ie breaking in pitchers in the bullpen, breaking in QBs with a clipboard, etc etc etc)? I’d be willing to be that the majority of young players break in that way, so it can’t exactly be a absolute deal breaker. More to the point, Nate’s season has been almost exactly what one might expect out of him based on his minor league career (in fact it’s very close to exactly what his MLEs were last year). He has a huge hole in his swing, no patience of any kind, not as much game power as raw power, and his value mostly rises and falls on BA. Just the player he was in the minors.
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.
I would say it’s a much different situation from the examples. The theory is reps are good. For a young QB, though, taking the hits he’s gonna take might not be worth the reps, he might need to learn the game a bit to get it to slow down so he sets his feet and delivers properly. With a pitcher I think bullpen is for 2 reasons – 1 to be careful on their arm and not overwork them early, possibly before they have the stamina to start for a whole year and 2 because the team is trying to win and a bullpen job lets them go through their growing pains without doing too much damange to the team. I think it’s reasonable to assume that reps = good in both those cases, too, just that there are other downsides that factor in.
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
But in the real world, very few players get to break in with steady regular play. There just aren’t many rookies who get starting jobs immediately. Aside from emergency injury replacements (like for instance Pujols and Howard) and hotshot prospects on hopeless teams, most young players break in with part time duty. I guarantee if you look at the starting roster of every major league club you’ll find that the vast majority started with rookie years that included equal or less PT than Nate has gotten this year. It’s SOP.
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.
The idea of Velez at 2B terrifies me. Can we come up with something that doesn’t involve him in the infield?
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t want to pay Sanchez either, I just think there has to be something out there that’s a better option. I think I’d rather see Frandsen get a legitimate shot at 2B than Velez. Velez is just so bad defensively in the infield, and not even good enough offensively to make it ok…
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
There's a deep crop of competent FA 2B's this offseason.
I’d be shocked to see Frandsen starting, even if Sanchez doesn’t return.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
Yeah I hadn’t looked into it at all, I just think there’s some better option out there than Velez.
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Matt Downs.
Just sayin’.
"The part of the roster where most of the money is spent, though, is on free agents and guys acquired through trade — guys Sabean did play a big role in acquiring. And they are not good. When you get 2/5 of a pitching rotation for free, you would think you could do better with $76 million than to field the league’s worst offense."
-Taliesin September, 2009
Personally, I've stopped doubting Velez
I can’t ever remember seeing a player transform for dramatically or thoroughly in the course of one season as Velez has this year. I’ve gone from dreading him to being a fan. He’s been an 800 OPS guy in the second half and still looks like he has a lot of upside. Sanchez has only been an 800 OPS guy one season in his career.
By letting Sanchez walk and playing Velez at 2B, it frees up cash to fill bigger holes.
"We're in this thing!" My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman, "Sweet Jesus" Guzman and Jesus H. Guzman.
My knowledge of what small sample sizes do refuses to let me believe in Velez’s hitting ability much. :(
The truth is even if Velez hits decently I’m too worried about his glove at 2B to think he’s worth giving a shot there. Even though the offensive threshhold at corner OF is higher than 2B, I think he has a better chance of being a decent player there than at 2B because his speed makes him a much, much better fielder out there than he is in the infield…
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 4:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Also, he’s also only hitting .288/.338/.468 in the 2nd half this season…that’s not that good, especially considering his OPS will overvalue him over that time period because of his higher SLG relative to OBP…
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions
If he could play an average 2B, it’d be pretty nice but, well, I’m pretty sure he can’t do that…
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"AT LAST I AM A PARENTS." - Buster
Exactly, I’m much, much more confident he can play an average to even somewhat above average OF (speed like his goes a long way in making someone a good corner OF’er).
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions
I think his problems before were all in his head. He looks more confident in both the infield and outfield. While I agree he might be better suited to the outfield, his bat serves the team better at 2B.
"We're in this thing!" My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman, "Sweet Jesus" Guzman and Jesus H. Guzman.
his bat serves the team better at 2B.
It is true, my thoughts are just the difference between his OF and IF defense is greater than the difference between how his bat plays at 2B and corner OF.
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Also, he’s also only hitting .288/.338/.468 in the 2nd half this season…that’s not that good,
News flash: On this team it is that good.
especially considering his OPS will overvalue him over that time period because of his higher SLG relative to OBP…
I think this sentence is just nitpicking. If his OPS is .806, it’s .806. II thoughts that purpose of OPS; to weight the two against each other. Frankly, if it’s weighted more toward SLG, I have no problem with that. Maybe it doesn’t make him a prototypical leadoff hitter, but I’ll take.
"We're in this thing!" My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman, "Sweet Jesus" Guzman and Jesus H. Guzman.
Well the second sentence isn’t nitpicking as much as pointing out the flaw in OPS. For a balanced player, like a 110 OPS+ guy who’s 10% better than average in OBP and 10% better than average in SLG (I think that’s how OPS+ is added, maybe it’s 5% in both for 10% overall…?), it’s not an issue, but for a guy who’s not as balanced in the two it could still use some improvement. OBP and SLG aren’t scaled the same, which leads to a natural overweighting of SLG because it’s scaled higher (OPS+ fixes this problem), and they don’t have the same importance in determining how many runs a team scores – OBP is much more important than SLG (this is still a problem with OPS+). In addition there’s the problem that BA gets double counted in OPS – by both OBP and SLG so high BA guys relative to their OBP are overvalued.
I use wOBA, unfortunately Fangraphs doesn’t do splits so that’s why I didn’t use it in this case. I think Velez does fit into the category of being overvalued by OPS, which is why I said that. It’s not like he’s at the extreme or anything, though, so I’m not trying to knock his accomplishments in a huge way…
(Velez’s OPS+ over that same time period was 114, by the way)
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions
OPS+ does not correct the weighting of OBP and SLG
It just adjusts for park and reformats the number to make it more intuitive.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
I noted it doesn’t fix the weighting problem, but if you break the problem down to two separate problems – the first being different scales for OBP and SLG and the second being different amounts of importance, it does correct the different scales because it scales them to an equal level, but it does not correct the second problem.
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions
If Velez is now a 114 OPS+ hitter, I’ll take it. Sanchez hasn’t approached that since 2006 and would be a lot more expensive, even if he signs for something like 2/$10M
"We're in this thing!" My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman, "Sweet Jesus" Guzman and Jesus H. Guzman.
If he's a 95 OPS+ hitter (his season total) I'd still take him and the 8M
Sanchez is only a 97 OPS+ hitter for his career, and 97 for this season.
My problem is that I don’t really believe that Velez (or Uribe, for that matter) are really this good.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
And I’m in full agreement there. The question is, how confident are you that Velez is a 114 OPS+ hitter (or for that matter, even a 100-105)…?
And just to be clear I haven’t advocated bringing Sanchez back at all. I’m not a fan of that idea. My thoughts are if we go with Velez long term it should be in the OF, and I figure there has to be some better alternative out there to 2B than either Velez or Sanchez…
by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 7:08 AM PDT up reply actions
Because our current GM doesn’t appear to know how to develop hitters.
by positiveuphemism on Sep 24, 2009 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions
My personal recommendation
Brian Wilson for Carl Crawford (with various sweeteners from either side to work out the differences)
Rays get their closer with 3 years of team control, payroll relief for Crawford’s 10M salary.
Giants get their Left Fielder for 5M more than their original budget, and 2 picks for Crawford after next year. Runzler setup, affeldt close in 2010.
Sign Adrian Beltre if he is willing to take a 1 year deal, play Juan Uribe all over the place.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
Problem is you know if Brian Sabean entered a trading agreement with the Rays, we’d get screwed. I definitely think we should trade Wilson, he’s good, I like him, I just think his trade value won’t get much higher and we have relievers we can replace him with (Romo, Affeldt), and we desperately need bats.
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Who's got the baby wipes?
2B Velez
C Posey
3B Sandoval
LF Holliday
1B N.Johnson
CF Rowand
RF Bowker
SS Renteria
Bench: Whiteside, Garko, Frandsen, Schierholtz, Torres/Lewis
SP Lincecum
SP Cain
SP Zito
SP Sanchez
SP Bumgarner
CL Wilson
SU Affeldt
RP Romo
RP Medders
RP Miller
RP Joey!
RP Catfight!
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
Bumgarner should be in Fresno next year, I will hear no arguments to the contrary. Other than that, I like your roster. Well, not like like, but it’s better than this year
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Sep 24, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Well I’d like to see them leave it open for him and go with Joey/Sadowski until he’s ready. Don’t block the 5th spot.
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
How do you block the #5 starter spot without a pair of #3 ( or higher) starters? And if the President should prove ready by July and the outsider brought in for #5 has not work his way out of a spot that is a nice little trading chip to have.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
If 5.8 K/9 in AA isn’t evidence he should be in the Majors next season, I don’t know what is!
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions
He played in 129 games this year and should be a relatively cheap option & an upgrade over Ishi. Garko is still on my roster too.
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
129 is less than 5/6 of the Season
At 1B I want a guy who can make 140 starts without breakage. 140 starts even leaves time for 1 trip to the 15-DDL.
Uh, you know the season's not over, right?
Marlins still have 9 games left, which would give Johnson 138. You really going to quibble if he’s two games short of your arbitrary standard?
"We're in this thing!" My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman, "Sweet Jesus" Guzman and Jesus H. Guzman.
140 is 140 and 138 is less.
If you finish 1 game back and lost by 1 run 24 times, his absence from your lineup will loom very large.
Res, what would that roster cost?
If its realistic ($90 millionish), done. It’s an anti-Sabean Lunatic Fringe type roster (too much $ for prime bats, not enough for the Winns, Molinas, Sanchezs of the world), however, so Sabes would have to be gone for it to happen.
by San Francisco Slim on Sep 25, 2009 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions
My numbers were somewhat similar to JCT’s but I think he had higher salaries for arb players. It definitely is Fringe-ish. But I think it would give some of our younger players at bats while not having to carry the offense. I cringed a little myself when putting Velez at 2nd and at leadoff. You could just as easily sign Freddy Sanchez (or another free agent 2b) for Nick Johnson’s money and let Garkakawa platoon at first. I just like Johnson’s ability to offer some protection to Holliday in my lineup.
C Buster Posey 0.40
1B Nick Johnson 5.00
2B Eugenio Velez 0.40
3B Pablo Sandoval 0.40
SS Edgar Renteria 9.00
LF Matt Holliday 17.00
CF Aaron Rowand 12.00
RF John Bowker 0.40
C Eli Whiteside 0.40
IF Ryan Garko 2.00
IF Kevin Frandsen 0.40
OF Nate Schierholtz 0.40
OF Lewis/Torres 0.40
48.20
SP Tim Lincecum 8.00
SP Matt Cain 4.25
SP Barry Zito 18.50
SP Jonathan Sanchez 1.50
SP Madison Bumgarner 0.40
CL Brian Wilson 4.00
SU Jeremy Affeldt 4.00
RP Sergio Romo 0.40
RP Brandon Medders 0.40
RP Justin Miller 0.40
RP Joey Martinez 0.40
RP Catfight! 0.40
42.65
Total 90.85
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
reality check
giants are not going to get into a bidding war for holliday/bay. the red sox will end up with one of them, and stl, nym, nyy ,among others will be fighting for the other. we need more than 1 bat anyway. i feel cain or sanchez will be dealt.
“we need more than 1 bat anyway”
I’m going to shiv the next person who says this. We’ve been saying this for how many years now? It’s really hard to get two hitters if you never get the first one.
El Presidente Larry Baer's epitaph
"Nothing important ever happened without me."
I couldn't agree more
Did Scott Boras start holding 2-for-1 sales on middle of the order hitters while I wasn’t looking? Because that’s the only way this argument isn’t completely asinine.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
Oh, and, in case you weren't paying attention
The Giants actually HAVE a big bat now.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
why shiv the person trying to point out the obvious ?
save your shiv for someone in the front office who refuses to do anything about it.
because you’re advocating that we not do anything about it. You’re basically saying “well we can’t fix the whole problem now, so we shouldn’t even work on it.”
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
not at all what i'm saying....
i’m saying it’s not realistic for the giants to buy holliday/bay, or to stretch the budget to $110 mil. best wat to get the impact bat is through a trade of pitching.
by giantdonkey on Sep 25, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions
I think it would be fair for him to shiv you
because your argument is very false. Do you really think our team wouldn’t be any better with an elite hitter added to the lineup? 2 elite hitters would be very nice, but they don’t grow on trees. You either have to develop them yourself, ala Sandoval (who we were freakishly lucky to end up with in the first place), trade all of your prospects for one, or….sign one in free agency. Simply saying we should never sign one because we need more than one makes absolutely no sense.
The very bad man traded my son...So now I'd like you all to meet my new son, Ryan "Aaron" Garko...Dammit it's just not the same!
and also
we don’t really need more than one.
The very bad man traded my son...So now I'd like you all to meet my new son, Ryan "Aaron" Garko...Dammit it's just not the same!
Sandoval is a pretty damn good hitter (you could possibly call him elite), and we definitely need more than just him…
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions
(as in we don't desperately need to add more than one)
Wording fail on my part
The very bad man traded my son...So now I'd like you all to meet my new son, Ryan "Aaron" Garko...Dammit it's just not the same!
no again
i’m not saying NEVER sign one…. i’d do cartwheels if the giants signed holliday. but THEY WON’T….. let’s be real, people. the giants will NOT get into the bidding for holliday/bay. any IMPACT/ middle of the order hitter will have to be gotten in a trade.
by giantdonkey on Sep 25, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree with you on Bay (braces for assault from The Get Bay Now faction) but Holiday might be a little different. Especially if the Front Office does the right think with Fred Sanchez and don’t continue to over pay for him. Holiday is not likely to give back with his glove what his better stick brings in and the Giants Front Office does seem to value that.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
I thought Holliday’s D was actually pretty good?
The very bad man traded my son...So now I'd like you all to meet my new son, Ryan "Aaron" Garko...Dammit it's just not the same!
It is. And I would think (without looking it up) it rates better than Bay. So where the Front Office might drag their feet on Bay I really have a hard time seeing why the Front office would drag its feet on Holiday; unless the budget was totally tapped out.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
I don’t think he’s all that good. He’s competent. He’s not particularly fast either and doesn’t have a very good arm.
UZR has him as marginally above average this season
But his past UZR’s have been substantially better. Also, Bay’s UZR has been terrible the last few seasons, really awful, Some of it might be park effect (I’ve read that Fenway damages left fielders’ UZR) but it was bad his last season in Pittsburg.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
Some really weird stuff happens to people that play LF in Fenway in UZR. I don’t even think it’s worthwhile to look at UZR for a Red Sox LF…
by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 7:10 AM PDT up reply actions
/ shrugs
Bay’s glove work was going downhill before he left Pitt.I did not consider him complete butcher while he was in Pitt but he was definitely declining. I’ve seen nothing in his time in Boston to reverse that impression.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
Totally OT
Sorry for a minor hijack, but you guys are the people to ask…
Can Chad Billingsley still be sent down to the minors? Hypothetically speaking.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
I have a Facebook friend who keeps complaining about Billingsley. During and after each of his last two starts, my friend’s status updates all center around, “SEND BILLSINGLEY BACK TO TEH MINERZ!!!” I wanted to make fun of his limited baseball knowledge, beginning with Billinglsey not being able to get sent down, but then realized I didn’t know for sure whether or not he still had options.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
Chad Billingsley rhp
1 year/$0.475M (2009)
* 1 year/$0.475M (2009)
o re-signed by LA Dodgers 3/6/09
* 1 year/$0.415M (2008)
o re-signed by LA Dodgers 2/28/08
* 1 year/$0.3845M (2007), re-signed 2/07
* contract purchased 6/06
* drafted 2003 (1-24)
* $1.375M signing bonus
* agent: Tommy Tanzer
* ML service: 2.110
Options
If a player is on the 40-man roster but not on the active major league roster, he is said to be on optional assignment—his organization may freely move him between the major league club and the minor league club. If a player is on the 40-man roster and not the active 25 man roster for any part of more than three seasons (in which he spent 20 or more total days of service in the minors), he is out of options and may not be assigned to the minors without first clearing waivers. However, if a player has less than 5 years of professional experience, he may be optioned to the minors in a fourth season without being subject to waivers. If a major league player is ineligible for free agency and “has options” remaining, his team may option him to a minor league team without consequence. This is usually what is meant when players are “sent down” to the minors. Likewise, when a player on the 40-man roster is added to the active major league roster, he is “called up” to the majors.
Looks like he was drafted in 2003, and used one option year in 2006. Assuming he was only put on 40 man roster at that time, yes, he can be optioned to AAA.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
I’m all for either signing Beltre or Nick Johnson to a 1 or 2 year deal, and maybe trying to find a cheap option for a 5th starter
Also known to haunt as theghostoftravisdenker and theaccidentalghostofsergioromo.
by theghostofjasonellison on Sep 24, 2009 3:44 PM PDT reply actions
though, in that case, I guess non-tender Garko, which i guess wouldn’t really make sense
Also known to haunt as theghostoftravisdenker and theaccidentalghostofsergioromo.
by theghostofjasonellison on Sep 24, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions
plz no beltre
just keep Pablo at 3rd. I’m OK w/ GarkoKawa at 1st if we get an OF bat.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Another chilling reality check
Committing 60% of your payroll to 5 players is bad business.
Committing 50% of your payroll to 3 players might be even worse business.
Zito will make his 18M. He has a no trade clause
Lincecum will make his 15M in 2012 and 2013. Maybe more. That is, if we don’t sign him to a long term deal.
So Matt Cain, after his 2011 option of 6.75, is going to get paid.
18+15+12 = 45M.
Committing 45M in 3 pitchers for 2012 and 2013?
Matt Cain is going to get traded. I don’t know when, I don’t know for what, but he is going to get traded.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
solution: Increase the payroll
Neal before Zod!
Official Sponsor of the 1997 San Francisco Giants
by nostocksjustbonds on Sep 24, 2009 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Trade him for a fat first baseman! The fatter the better!
Merkin Valdez? Manuel Mateo? A rose by any other name...
The contracts are stupid, yes, but I think you’d be surprised by how the economics of baseball naturally causes situations like this to happen. Beyondtheboxscore is doing a series where they graph teams payrolls based on how much each player is making, it’s interesting stuff, they’ve only gone through a few clubs but it seems to always be dominated by 5 players or so with everyone else making crap compared to them. Our bigger problem is the fact that our 5 players making that much money include Zito, Rowand and Renteria, who should be giving us much more value considering how much we’re paying them.
by Missing Barry on Sep 24, 2009 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Backtrack on Linceum/Wilson contracts?
Could I get a quick primer on the options to signing Linceum and Wilson, since they are arb eligable? How realistic are long term contracts?
by San Francisco Slim on Sep 25, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions
How realistic are long term contracts?
It really just depends on how interested each of them is in a long term contract. Not sure anyone really knows that…
by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Wilson would be smart to take along term contract. 3 years at 4 million. Tim could go to arb, win and then sign a contract next year for more money
I R 5
by say hey nation on Sep 25, 2009 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions
Thanks
Who chooses arbitration? Giants or player? If Giants prefer signing Lincecum to a long term contract, presumably because they could save money over the next couple of years, can Lincecum still insist on going arbitration if he chooses?
Agreed, I think Wilson would prefer signing a long term contract, given the history of young power relievers.
by San Francisco Slim on Sep 25, 2009 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Thanks again
Was just educated in this morning’s Lincecum thread. It appears that a long term contract would not save money over arbitration, so it’s a moot point. It does look like Lincecum’s going to cost something like $8 million next season.
Hmmnn.. I think Cain will be traded at some point.
by San Francisco Slim on Sep 25, 2009 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Was just educated in this morning’s Lincecum thread. It appears that a long term contract would not save money over arbitration, so it’s a moot point. It does look like Lincecum’s going to cost something like $8 million next season
You won’t really know money saved/nurned until arb, it really is a gamble and depends on how well Tims agent does arguing his case
Hmmnn.. I think Cain will be traded at some point.
Because Tim is gonna make some money? No, if he is traded it would be to fill a need not salary relief. Zito has abuy out after the ‘13 season. Which conveniently coincides with Ti’s 1st FA year. So the Giants can make a contract swing that way also.
I R 5
by say hey nation on Sep 25, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, a long term contract may not save money for 2010, in that the Giants would presumably try to offer something around arbitration, whatever that is, $6 – $10 million, in a the first year of a long term contract to Timmy. My original question had to do with whether a long term contract would be garner signficant savings over arbitration for 2010. It doens’t appear that it would.
Agreed that Cain would be traded to fetch value, but Timmy’s immediate salary raise, makes that more possible. I think its just human nature to spread the salaries around the roster and not be so concentrated in starting pitching. No that its rational. I wouldn’t be shocked to to see Cain traded this off season.
by San Francisco Slim on Sep 25, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Meant, NOT that its rational. Just predicting human nature.
by San Francisco Slim on Sep 25, 2009 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions
not really
Is it really out of the question to think they could up the payroll a few million to sign Holliday/Bay/Crawford? They’re in a position to make a shitload of money with a successful team next year. If need be, they could also offset some of the money to later years in the contract. And even with the scenario you suggested, Crawford is still a possibility. He won’t be commanding Bay/Holliday money. I’m sure management knows that our team is a mediocre offense away from being very good. They would be stupid to waste the talent they’ve assembled because they’re a few million short on the payroll to make their team a legitimate contender. On top of that, 90 mil isn’t even that huge of a payroll for a high market team like the Giants. Look at the Tigers, whose payroll is well over 100 mil. Detroit isn’t as big of a market, nor is their fan base as wealthy.
And for those of you who say we’re more than just one good hitter from being a contender, no we’re not. If we added Holliday, we would be much, much, much better off. Take into account that Sanchez’s knees should be functional next year. Garko shouldn’t be riding the bench next year, and might be poised for a rebound. A 2-5 lineup of Sanchez/Sandoval/Holliday/Garko isn’t all that horrible. In fact, it’s pretty decent. And if Posey breaks out, it all the sudden becomes pretty good.
The very bad man traded my son...So now I'd like you all to meet my new son, Ryan "Aaron" Garko...Dammit it's just not the same!
Get rid of Rowand.
He is so unclutch, that his numbers are deceiving. He is a little better than a 4A player. Yes his numbers look decent, but he sux against good pitching. He hit mediocre pitching ok, and hits the bottomfeeders in the majors really well. Problem is, when you need him, you only have to put in a guy who can toss a decent slider, and Rowand looks like a little leaguer.
by bradleybear on Sep 24, 2009 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Clutch hitting is mostly made up. Yes, Rowand does struggle mightily against RHP’s with good sliders. Overall Rowand has had a lot of problems with sliders and curveballs this season (and he was bad with sliders last season, too). You’re taking this unclutch thing a little far, though, since that’s only your perception and I doubt you can find good evidence it’s true…
by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 7:14 AM PDT up reply actions
This were the cluth thing gets fuzzy. Can someone be clutch? No, you are not going to be better than your skill set. Done. But can some one be “un-clutch”? I think yes, pressure of the situation makes you change your approach, physically or mentally, and that causes you to fuck up more often than not. In regards to Rowand, I have no idea about his clutchablility,
I R 5
by say hey nation on Sep 25, 2009 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions
It may be true, the problem is the evidence is never going to be clear enough to really determine someone is unclutch with any amount of confidence. You’re best off assuming everyone follows the norm when it comes to clutch performances.
With Rowand, he’s OPS’ing .705 with RISP this year, so that’s certainly bad, worse than his .748 OPS this season. For his career, though, he’s OPS’ing .797 with RISP compared to .789 career OPS. What does that mean? Also, he’s OPS’ing .804 overall with runners on base anywhere this season compared to his .748 mark. For his career it’s .813 with runners on compared to his .789 career mark. Has he hit poorly with RISP this season? Yes. Will it continue into the future – probably not. Can we call him unclutch? Definitely not.
by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I agree with you. Baseball is a statisticians nightmare. Another question is what is “clutch” is it RISP? or RISP w/ 2outs? And/or do you have to be behind or a one run lead? Is clutch all September if your team is in a playoff race? or is it mostly in October when you are in the playoffs?
Basically, we will never really know but I think my theory of a player being able to be un clutch but not clutch is a plausible one.
I R 5
by say hey nation on Sep 25, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions
I’m with BradleyBear. Rowand, like a lot of hitters, does way worse against pitchers with good hard breaking stuff. He is totally guessing and flailing. Whereas Sandoval and Molina, just for starters, hit them sometimes at least.
cheering for Adam Witter, who will hit bigleague dingers some day.
Still yelling "Go, Antoan"
by foothillsfan on Sep 25, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions
It is true that he struggles with sliders especially. I don’t see the point of that statement, though – what matters is his total performance against everyone, right?
by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
This was incredibly depressing...
and I hate your face for telling the truth and not letting me dream.
Brian Sabean is akin to a treatable form of cancer... just get rid of it before it kills you
Possibly mentioned already...
but the payroll may be even tighter than you’re suggesting here. In Sabean’s retention press conference, Sabean said payroll should stay somewhere around 85 mil.
Sabean said that the payroll, which hovered around $85 million, won’t change much next year. But don’t expect the Giants to outbid all rivals for the sparse number of available free-agent sluggers, such as St. Louis’ Matt Holliday and Boston’s Jason Bay.
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20091005&content_id=7340802&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf
"Snow woulda had it!!!"
Has decided to put all his "In this thing" energy to being in the Shark Tank and the Big House.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on McCovey Chronicles
Related FanShots on McCovey Chronicles
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
