Is this a crazy brain storm or could it maybe make sense?
I am sure you have heard that the Marlins and Dan Uggla seem to be at an impasse in their contract talks and the Martlins are now looking to see what they can get for Dan Uggla on the trade market. Dan is also entering his last year of arbitration and therefore is scheduled to be a free agent after 2011 unless he signs an contract extention with either the Marlins or the team they trade him to.
My brain storm is for the Giants to trade Pablo Sandoval and Aaron Rowand plus all of his remaining contract to the Marlins for Dan Uggla.
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.
230 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It’s way too early to give up on Pablo. He’s not completely untouchable, but SF would need a lot more than one year of Dan Uggla. As has been pointed out in a lot of these posts, his batting was no worse than league average last year, and he’s got a lot of incentive to get his shit together this winter.
The Rowand salary relief is intriguing, but Uggla’s making 7.8 million this year so it’s not all that much. The Marlins do need a CF at this point, so maybe put them on the list of teams who might be willing to take on part of Rowand’s contract and give the Giants a decent prospect.
It's Johnnie Walker inside.
by Lies and Perfidy on Nov 14, 2010 11:46 AM PST reply actions
I don't think this is giving up on the Panda.
We are getting $18M of saved lost value on Rowand (he is only worth $6M over the next two years) in addition to at least one year of Dan Uggla. We are also getting the opportunity to get 5 years of Dan Uggla for the $60M he wants and unlike Aaron Rowand he is likely to actually be worth this and then some.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:04 PM PST up reply actions
trading Sandoval is giving up on him
Are there players worth saying “Welp, thanks for the memories, Pablo, we’ll send you some hats?” Sure. But not many.
It's Johnnie Walker inside.
by Lies and Perfidy on Nov 14, 2010 12:19 PM PST up reply actions
No. it is not. It is just getting fair value for him and improving the 2011 team.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
What disturbs me most . . .
. . . is that I understood what you meant by “saved lost value.”
He is the World's Most Annoying Rooster.
by gallo del cielo on Nov 14, 2010 9:46 PM PST up reply actions
I do feel like there are a few opportunities to dump Rowand’s contract this year (would love to see a Rowand for Chone Figgins deal happen), but I don’t like the idea of selling low on Sandoval. I feel like Travis Ishikawa and Jeremy Affeldt curretly have equal trade value and are more expendable to the Giants.
I’m also not a huge Uggla fan. Great pitching demands great defense, and I’m frightened to see what an already poor fielder will do when asked to switch positions.
Keep him at 2B. FSanchez has experience with success at 3B.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:12 PM PST up reply actions
I would rather have both players playing where they are comfortable playing.
Which I believe would result in the best overall team defense.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 3:32 PM PST up reply actions
Freddy hasn’t played 3B in a long time, I don’t think you can say he’d be real comfortable there.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Freddy would have a tough time playing 3rd with his arm.
"Don't trust anyone under the age of 30" - Brian Sabean
by Smotheredinhugs on Nov 16, 2010 5:15 AM PST up reply actions
The Marlins are trying to SAVE money by trading Uggla
There is no way they take Rowand. No way.
And giving up on Pablo now is beyond idiotic.
My Son
Dursh nerf darsh narf. Poop.
by GiantPain on Nov 14, 2010 12:12 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
The do save money. Uggla wants 5/60 and Rowand only costs 2/24.
They also get four cheap years of Sandoval.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:14 PM PST up reply actions
But they could probably trade Uggla for some players who don’t cost that much. I doubt they are interested in trading for a player who is not only making $24 million over the next two years but is overpaid in doing so.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
But they will not get a player of Pablos' quality if they do so.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:18 PM PST up reply actions
They’ll get a better player. The acquiring team will have an agreement in place for an extension when they complete the deal, so they’ll get Uggla for several years and probably have to give up a solid prospect or two.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
Not likely - windows to negoiate an extention are very rare.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 5:40 PM PST up reply actions
No, you don't understand
Team X, which acquires Uggla from the Marlins, will have an extension in place for Uggla before they complete the deal, OR the Marlins won’t get as much value as they can. Unless the acquiring team can confirm they’ll retain Uggla past this year, they’re not going to part with a player that is worth giving up Uggla.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
Lots of high quality players are traded with just one year to go before free agency.
Very few of the teams trading for these players get a window to negotiate an extension before the trade is completed. It is impossible to have “an extension in place” without such a window.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 5:47 PM PST up reply actions
I don't know about "lots"
But some certainly are, and if I were the acquiring team I’d make sure I got that window, otherwise I wouldn’t give up someone like Sandoval or any other young, controllable, cheap, high-ceiling player, because one year of Uggla is great, but it’s not worth 4+ years of great potential. So either the acquiring team will get an extension or they’ll refuse to give up a player that is truly worth getting Uggla.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
They don’t have to give Uggla anything besides arbitration money.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
And then they do not get Pablo to relace him with Cauglin moving to his natural 2B position.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:19 PM PST up reply actions
That’s not your original argument. Your original argument is that they do save money. But by picking up Rowand’s entire contract, they do not.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
2/24 is a savings compared to 4/48 or 5/60 which range of the Uggla extention talks.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
But they're not going to extend Uggla
So they’re not going to spend any money on him. So taking on Rowand is a terrible idea for them.
My Son
Dursh nerf darsh narf. Poop.
They (unlike you) will see the money as part of the cost of Sandoval.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
This is a hypothetical trade idea. This is not actually going to happen.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
Making an argument as though you know what the Marlins are thinking is not convincing and never has been.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
By which I mean, making a stretch that goes beyond what their public posturing indicates.
Saying they don’t want to spend $24 million Aaron Rowand? Logical, based on what they’ve done in the past.
Saying they would because they will see it as actually being spent on Sandoval? When have they ever made a trade like that in recent history?
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
I just give them credit for being able to do math.
Trades have to be looked at in their entirety not piece by piece.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:49 PM PST up reply actions
Like Matt Morris and Barry Bonds for Adam Jones and Jeff Clement?
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
2/24 is not a savings compared to NOT PAYING UGGLA AT ALL, which is probably what is going to happen at this point.
If they trade Uggla, it will be for players who are cheap. Not players making $12 million and being wildly overpaid at that price.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
You are still failing to look at the whole picture.
Yes, they can get lessor players then Sandoval without taking on Rowand’s contract but then they will have these lessors players instead of Sandoval. They are not going to get a player of Uggla’s talent long term for just one year of Uggla. They have to add more to the deal to replace Uggla’s talent long term.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:37 PM PST up reply actions
And the Marlins in the past have shown a willingness to trade for those lesser players rather than spend money.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
to be fair
The Marlins did offer Uggla a 4 year extension for more money than Rowand and Sandoval are likely to make over the next 4 years.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
And like I said before
They are willing to spend money on players that deserve it. Not ones who don’t (Rowand.)
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
Yea I’m not agreeing with the original post, just saying that if the Marlins did view Pablo as likely to produce something similar to what they expected Uggla to produce when they offered him that contract they might accept that deal.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
The whole picture is genuinely bad for both teams.
Giants are giving up Sandoval when they aren’t paying him anything.
Marlins are trading away 10 million dollars for a good player to receive 24 million dollars for a bad player.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
You continue to ignore two facts not in support of your argument.
That the Giants will be a better team in 2011 with Uggla then with Sandoval.
The Marlins will likely be a better team in 2012 and beyond with Sandoval then with the draft picks for Uggla or whatever they can get for Uggla without eating $18M of Rowand’s dollars compared to his value.
Both of these goals fit the needs of these two teams perfectly.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:47 PM PST up reply actions
But you said below that you think Sandoval is going to be worthless going forward?
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
No, I just said 2009 will never happen again.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:53 PM PST up reply actions
Then why trade Sandoval for one year of Dan Uggla?
It's Johnnie Walker inside.
by Lies and Perfidy on Nov 14, 2010 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
That is not all you get.
You get the likelihood of being able to sign Uggla long term for 5/60 and you save $18M that would of be wasted on Rowand otherwise.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
You said he will have less value in trade after next year than he does right now. That would seem to indicate that you don’t think he will bounce back at all.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
It just means that 2009 will be even further in the rear view mirror.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
If he bounces back to something like .300/.350/.480 this year, then he will have more trade value than he does right now.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
.280/330/.440 is more likely in my view
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
How do you know the Marlins don’t see that in him?
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
I don't. They could too.
But I think there is a decent chance that the see the .300/.350/450 that you do with an upside on top of that.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 1:02 PM PST up reply actions
Facts are proven
How do you know Sandoval will have a worse year than Uggla? Even if it’s likely?
How do you know Sandoval will be better than the draft picks for Uggla after 2012?
I am not so certain for both cases. Besides, you continue to ignore the financial issues with regards to the Marlins.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
And you need to open your eyes to see the picture.
When a team like Fish think long term talent they are thinking how many years of pre arbitration they are getting make. Secondly what are the odds of flipping a player down teh road for more prearbitration seasons?
So exactly how many prearbitration seasons are the getting from a Rowand & Panda combo? And how likely is some oen willing to trade a prearbition MLB player or prospect for the age 35 and beyond Rowand? The Fish cut players to Aviod that kind of “return”. Ie Cody Ross.
The Giants are 2010 World Series Champs. … And in other news the forecast calls for a rain of toads, heavy at times, with moderate to strong swarms of locust and a high likelihood of a world quake. Details at 11.
Yeah… dumping Rowand’s contract is a fine idea. Thinking that the Marlins are the kind of team that would pick it up isn’t.
Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...
by Smoke on the Water on Nov 14, 2010 3:53 PM PST up reply actions
What?
There is no way the Marlins will do this.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
by jponry on Nov 14, 2010 12:15 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Why not? They are not going to get a player of Pablo's quality for Uggla without eating some money.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:17 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, they do.
They offered Uggla 4/.48 so they have the money.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
They have the money for someone who deserves it. Not Aaron Rowand.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
They would in essence be spending the extra $18M on Panda.
You have to look at both pieces together not separately.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
This to me is an opportunity for Sabean to repeat the success of trading for Matt Williams for Jeff Kent.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:16 PM PST reply actions
Pablo is not Matt Williams.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
Aaron Rowand is not Trent Hubbard
(I don’t even remember who Trent Hubbard is.)
It's Johnnie Walker inside.
by Lies and Perfidy on Nov 14, 2010 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
No, he isn’t.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
Career War through age 30 says he is.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
That doesn’t mean that Uggla is going to have his age 30-34 years like Kent did.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
I’m not saying he won’t (though I strongly doubt he will.)
But the fact that he was better than Jeff Kent through age 30 doesn’t mean he’s going to be better than Jeff Kent after age 30.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
or even equal to, for that matter.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
It does however give him good odds of doing so.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
Good odds of doing so? You really think Dan Uggla has good odds of putting up a cumulative 142 OPS+ over the next five years?
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
Are you serious?
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
Yes, I am. Take off your Giants bias and look at the numbers.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
My Giants’ bias does not affect how I look at their numbers.
Kent’s peak begin as a Giant. His first 6 good years as a Giant was also the first 6 good years of his career. He accumulated 32.8 WAR over those 6 years. Uggla, however, is already peaked and only has 18.8 WAR. Granted, Uggla still has time to catch Kent if you think hasn’t Uggla’s peaked yet. He would still need to maintain over 5.5 WAR for at least the next 5-7 years to even think about reaching Kent’s level. He has yet to do that once.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
by Unitard on Nov 14, 2010 12:36 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
+109
The Giants are 2010 World Series Champs. … And in other news the forecast calls for a rain of toads, heavy at times, with moderate to strong swarms of locust and a high likelihood of a world quake. Details at 11.
Yeah, he is both younger and cheaper and has better career numbers at the time of a trade.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
That doesn’t mean he’s going to end up being better after this point than Kent was.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
This reply of mine you are replying to here was in reference to Sandoval vs Williams.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
Well, that seems irrelevant as well
As, at Pablo’s age, Williams had not even begun to establish himself.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
that’s a pretty good reason not to sell low on him then, isn’t it? ;)
It's Johnnie Walker inside.
by Lies and Perfidy on Nov 14, 2010 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
This is not selling low. It is selling for a fair price to both teams.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
Trading a player who was better at age 22 than Uggla has been in any season as a throw-in to get rid of a bad contract would be selling low on him.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
Only if you believe last year was real which I no longer do.
Wait another year and we will not just get less but much less.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:32 PM PST up reply actions
Is that a Lobster?
"Do you smell that Kenny? That's hard news. Notice the lack of fornicating horses."
Okay.
The Marlins would not be interested in this. They are, as you’ve said, willing to sign Dan Uggla to a 4/48 million deal, but that is for a good player. The Marlins shell out money for good players (see Hanley), but with their payroll ceiling as low as it is, they cannot afford to pay $12 million a year to someone like Aaron Rowand. Does that make sense? They do have some money to give out, but they cannot afford to use it on someone who is overpaid at that price point (and especially not someone as wildly overpaid as Rowand.)
Getting Pablo would be potentially valuable for them, but he is not going to be as cheap as you are arguing in this thread. He makes the league minimum this year, but he starts arbitration in 2012. If he bounces back at all, he will not be particularly cheap (by the Marlins standards.)
From the Giants perspective, getting rid of Rowand would be good, giving up on Pablo at this point would be not as good and acquiring Uggla would be useful but not as much as one would think as he is due to get a big pay-day after this season.
I think the Giants might do it to get rid of Rowand, but I really don’t see why the Marlins would be interested.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
They would in esense be shelling out $18M or Rowand's contract to Sandoval and yes they would do this.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t think they would (seriously, the Marlins are not going to take on payroll in an Uggla trade and what would be the point of trading for Sandoval if you’re actually going to be “paying” him that much money over the next two years?), nor do I think a deal like this is ever going to be discussed.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
I don't know how you can admit that this might be "crazy"
And then subsequently get so defensive about it.
It’s a stupid idea. It makes 0 sense for a cost-conscious team to take on Rowand’s contract. It makes 0 sense for the Giants to give up on a young potential superstar.
My Son
Dursh nerf darsh narf. Poop.
Do you really think he ever thought this idea was “crazy” in the first place? Come on.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
It could be but It could also be just "crazy like a fox" ala the Williams for Kent trade.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 1:06 PM PST up reply actions
That is exactly what most Giants fans were saying after Sabean traded Williams.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 2:42 PM PST up reply actions
That doesn’t mean every seemingly crazy trade proposal will turn out as well as Williams for Kent did. Or that they are not, actually, crazy.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
Don't you realize
That the Williams/Kent trade means that, from now on, we should only make crazy trades?
My Son
Dursh nerf darsh narf. Poop.
You mean the Williams for Tavarez trade?
by BestHyperboleEver on Nov 14, 2010 2:42 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
People have this habit of acting like the Matt Williams trade was some kind of stroke of genius on Sabean’s part. But neither he nor anyone else thought that the Jeff Kent he was getting was going to be the Jeff Kent he actually got. Julian Tavarez was a much more important part of the trade than Kent was. That trade was luck, not “crazy like a fox.”
Well played, Mauer
Welcome to McCovey Chronicles: Calm down
From now on, every day is Thong Thursday!
"Buster's basically a 21-year-old hot-chick that's an old soul" - Barry Zito
I'M A GIRL
by Prussian Creole on Nov 14, 2010 4:07 PM PST up reply actions
They will get a much better deal than that.
Sure the Giants can offer this, but there is no way the Marlins would accept.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
The baseball gods do not always punish the wicked but they will not just allow people to spit in their faces -- Joe Posnanski
I wish I would stop cheating. fuck. this is jctgamer's fault -- jponry
What do you think one year of Uggla is worth?
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 2:03 PM PST up reply actions
This math isn't hard
A year of Uggla, based on past performance, is probably worth around 15 million dollars, perhaps as much as 20. We’ll split the difference and say 17.
Uggla last year of arb will probably net him around 10 million dollars. So he’s likely to provide around 7 million in extra value.
Rowand is probably worth about 8 million a year as a replacement level player if we assume he can manage 2 WAR. He’s owed 24 million. Subtract that from the 16 we think he’ll be worth over two years, and we have the Marlins taking on around 8 million in negative value.
So the Marlins give up 7 million from Uggla and take on 8 million from Rowand, which would mean that they need Sandoval to be worth about 15 million over his payment value over the next 4 years. He’ll make league minimum for one year more, then go through arb, which, if he keeps up a level of production somewhere in line with his career numbers, will probably net him somewhere around 20 million.
So the Marlins end of this deal is entirely dependant on thinking that Pablo Sandoval would be worth MORE than 35 million dollars over the next four years (the 20 million he’ll make and the 15 they’re in the hole).
That’s a very risky proposition for a cash-strapped team. And the Giants would be foolish to give up on Sandoval.
As so many other have said, it makes sense for neither team.
My Son
Dursh nerf darsh narf. Poop.
An actual logic argument.
A counter point. Pablo Sandoval according to Fangraphs has been worth $37.1M in just the last 2 and 1/3 years so the Marlins betting they will get more the $35M in value from him in 4 years should seem like a good bet to them.
If you go with Baseball Reference instead of Fangraphs the Panda was still worth $28.3M instead of $35.1M (6.5 WAR instead of 8.5 WAR) over the last 2 and 1/3 years which should still make betting that they will get more the $35M in value from him in the next four years seem like a good deal to the Marlins.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 3:08 PM PST up reply actions
But you said before that...
You think that Pablo’s true talent level is what he produced in 2010, not 2009. He was worth $7.7 million in 2010. Assuming he produces that for the next four years, he’d be worth 30.8 million, assuming the value of a win doesn’t fluctuate too much. Therefore, the Marlins get the short end of the stick, and wouldn’t take this deal.
No trade
that involves Aaron Rowand going to the Marlins AND them taking on the contract will ever, ever happen.
An early contender for worst rosterbation of the offseason.
Mark DeRosa, still existing.
See discussion with GiantPain above.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 3:09 PM PST up reply actions
I see it.
but it has nothing to do with my point. Sandoval for Uggla is a massive win for the Marlins, but there’s no way that such a cheap team takes on Rowand’s contract. They would probably rather settle for a player of lesser ability and not take on the extra money.
Mark DeRosa, still existing.
It all depends on what the Panda turns out to be.
If he is a good a you and so many others here think then yes the Giants lose and this is exactly why the Marlins would do the deal. Nut, if he is only as good as I think he is then The Giants win and this is exactly why the Giants do the deal.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 3:25 PM PST up reply actions
Gibber is lovely in the summertime.
2010 World Series Champions!
Adopted 'nephew' to the ever avuncular and always awesome Jon Miller
by Johnny Disaster on Nov 14, 2010 9:46 PM PST up reply actions
Isn’t it a gibbous moon tonight?
He is the World's Most Annoying Rooster.
by gallo del cielo on Nov 14, 2010 10:04 PM PST up reply actions
The Fish measure moves In how many prearbition seasons a move my gain them
You deal does not provide them with that.
The Giants are 2010 World Series Champs. … And in other news the forecast calls for a rain of toads, heavy at times, with moderate to strong swarms of locust and a high likelihood of a world quake. Details at 11.
Have you looked at your poll?
You’ll find your answer there.
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
I'm wondering why you bother asking and putting a poll
If you have your mind made up already.
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
To see what the group think is and the rational for it.
I find the rational lacking.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 4:30 PM PST up reply actions
I too find you lacking in rationale.
Glad we could agree.
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
The word you're looking for is "rationale."
The rational find you lacking.
pretty sure it is based on the argument, the responses to each post, and the way the post is written to elicit maximum reaction from the posting general audience here.
Basically it’s the same thing over and over : “group think is wrong, here is one possible alternative, if you don’t agree with me your reason is wrong.”
It really got old after the 78th time.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
The baseball gods do not always punish the wicked but they will not just allow people to spit in their faces -- Joe Posnanski
I wish I would stop cheating. fuck. this is jctgamer's fault -- jponry
Why are you trying to pick a fight and label me as some previous nemesis of yours?
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 5:51 PM PST up reply actions
1. I’m not picking a fight with you, you are picking fights on your own. Read your responses.
2. You were never a nemesis of mine. Not even close. I’ll try to refrain from being rude here but let’s just say I never thought of you as someone I had to try to “take down”. People see you for what you are all the time, a troll.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
The baseball gods do not always punish the wicked but they will not just allow people to spit in their faces -- Joe Posnanski
I wish I would stop cheating. fuck. this is jctgamer's fault -- jponry
Obviously you are or you would not have taken another shot.
I took no shot at anyone in any of my replies above.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 6:20 PM PST up reply actions
Enjoy your little fanpost
I think it’s pretty clear at this point this is a rehash of the old “woe is me, world against GRM” routine.
And yes, you pretty much just confirmed you are GRM despite previously accusing me of labeling you as some “nemesis of mine.”
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
The baseball gods do not always punish the wicked but they will not just allow people to spit in their faces -- Joe Posnanski
I wish I would stop cheating. fuck. this is jctgamer's fault -- jponry
You can carry on this fight without me as I am just not interested.
I see no reason to respond to any more of your posts.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 6:33 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t think he’s trying to take shots at you. I think he, like the rest of us, is confused as to who you’re playing dumb on your identity.
Welcome to McCovey Chronicles: Calm down
From now on, every day is Thong Thursday!
"Buster's basically a 21-year-old hot-chick that's an old soul" - Barry Zito
I'M A GIRL
by Prussian Creole on Nov 14, 2010 6:24 PM PST up reply actions
No pandering over the Panda
He is/will be good once again. He is a world series champion, that has to count for something?
I think you are engaged is wishful thinking.
Wanting him to be good again and have a logical basis to expect it are too different things.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 4:48 PM PST up reply actions
So Marlins are picking up a bad contract and a bad panda.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
They haven't made the trade and if the groupthink is right they will not.
That said I do think they may think they would be getting a good Panda and thus would end up as disappointed as they were with Miller and Maybin if this trade were to actually happen.
P.S. I do actually agree with the groupthink here that this trade is very unlikely to actually happen.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
Another brain storm. Would you trade Pablo Sandoval for Gordon Beckham?
Do you think the White Sox would do this trade?
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 5:28 PM PST reply actions
The White Sox would
I wouldn’t. Pablo and Beckham are both 3B (Beckham does play 2B, but that has the same positional adjustment on FanGraphs, so whatever). Pablo’s already had more major league success, and they’re both coming off down years, so their value is low right now, but Pablo has far, far more upside than Beckham in the batting average and power departments.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
Beckham is a natural SS and was very good defensively as a SS in the minors.
He could very well be out shortstop for both now and the future.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 5:49 PM PST up reply actions
As has been discussed in another thread:
1. Pablo has been, is and likely will be a better player through the end of their arbitration years. Why would you want to trade away the player that is younger, has a better track record and more potential?
2. Beckham is not a major league SS. He’s not even above average at 3B or 2B. What would lead you to believe he could play SS?
by BestHyperboleEver on Nov 14, 2010 6:20 PM PST up reply actions
I must of missed that thread.
Beckham was a fine defensive SS in the minors and doesn’t play SS now only because the White Sox have an even better one available to them.
With regards to Panda it is my judgment that he has experienced a change in his talent level caused by his cataracts and the resulting eye surgery and thus is likely to never be the same. I think his problems at the plate all come from not being able to detect what pitch is coming his way soon enough. I don’t know this to be fact but this is my opinion.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 6:48 PM PST up reply actions
So basically, your entire argument
is based on an unfounded theory which states Pablo Sandoval developed cataracts at the age of 24, can’t see anymore, and therefore is not the hitter he was in 2009 and never will be again?
That’s incredibly sound logic.
The cataracts and eye surgery are facts.
Knowing for sure that this has resulied in a losd of vision is what is just my opinion. Regardless of why I do think his talent level has changed as he just chases way more unhittable pitches then he did before. He chased balls before but most of them where hittable balls. Now he chases way too many unhittable balls.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 7:08 PM PST up reply actions
Wait, I must have missed this. When did Pablo Sandoval have eye surgery and cataracts? I can’t find a single result googling “Pablo Sandoval cataracts”.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
To quote Roger "I misremembered".
A vision problem was detected last offseason and it is questionable if it has truely been fully corrected.
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100226&content_id=8192784&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 7:28 PM PST up reply actions
I remember Pablo saying he was going to wear corrective goggles at bat but that never materialized.
Still, that doesn’t seem nearly as serious as him having cataracts.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
he wore them for most of the middle of the season
then took them off again
Brian Sabean: Sing His Praises To The Heavens!
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game that seems to have resurrected itself in my absence...
can you even get cataracts at 24 y.o.
i thought that was for old folks mostly
by repeat_in_2011 on Nov 16, 2010 11:45 PM PST up reply actions
Well, he has glasses at this point, and according to this article...
http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-02-27/sports/17958888_1_panda-john-bowker-ball
This season, Sandoval will wear prescription lenses to correct the 20-30 vision in his left eye. He started wearing the sunglasses and goggles in November after he complained about some fuzziness and asked the training staff for an eye exam.
Pablo has 20-30 vision in his left eye. Sounds like a minor issue. And much less serious than cataracts
Eyes are a funny things.
To you and me a small change in vision does not matter much but to a baseball player trying to recognize early a fastball or an off speed pitch little differences can mean a lot.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 7:46 PM PST up reply actions
He is also way out in front of offspeed pitches way more then he use to be.
He just does not seem to recognize them fast enough.
by BornRaisedAGiant on Nov 14, 2010 7:14 PM PST up reply actions
This is a more interesting question. It would be kind of a challenge trade for the both of them.
In the end, I think I’d flinch. I don’t think Beckham can be an average defensive SS and even in a down year last year, Pablo was better than him.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
I liked it better when you were still banned
Good to see you’ve learned your lesson and didn’t come back here with the same shitty tone and arguments.
Juan "Doesn't Cheat The Game" Perez, please keep hitting.
this is just wrong on so many levels
First off, effectively the Marlins would be trading 1 year of Uggla & ~15M (the estimated negative value of Rowands’ contract) for 2 years of Rowand and 4 of Sandoval.
It would be more fair to trade Uggla for Sandoval straight up – since Uggla in 2010 is probably the better player even though he is much more expensive.
However, even so this would be kind of a dumb idea for the Giants… why trade a guy who hit .340 last year after a down year? His trade value is at a low. Now, i guess if you thought he was a hopeless case and due to be out of baseball in a year or two, I guess you should try to ship him for something now… but frankly I don’t see why the Giants don’t just see if they can’t turn him around.
Brian Sabean: Greatest GM in the history of history
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game totally stalled and basically dead at this point
Yes. No.
2010 World Series Champions!
Adopted 'nephew' to the ever avuncular and always awesome Jon Miller
by Johnny Disaster on Nov 14, 2010 8:30 PM PST reply actions
Fine, fuck it. This site just can’t handle someone who can’t concede a point. I’ll update the terms and guidelines to include that stipulation. Maybe I’ll remove the part that legally fucking obligates the people who complain the loudest from responding to such a person. Good? Great. Much better site now.
by Grant Brisbee on Nov 14, 2010 8:48 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Easy, big guy.
He is the World's Most Annoying Rooster.
by gallo del cielo on Nov 14, 2010 10:07 PM PST up reply actions
LOL, nobody unites people quite like GRM, I guess.
Welcome to McCovey Chronicles: Calm down
From now on, every day is Thong Thursday!
"Buster's basically a 21-year-old hot-chick that's an old soul" - Barry Zito
I'M A GIRL
by Prussian Creole on Nov 14, 2010 10:46 PM PST up reply actions
So, I don’t think Naked Lunch is for me after all.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2010 11:02 PM PST up reply actions
There’s actually quite a bit of nudity in the book. Jizz gets everywhere.
Don’t get me wrong, though: It is sorely lacking in the lunch department.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2010 11:25 PM PST up reply actions
It is pretty yicky.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 16, 2010 12:32 PM PST up reply actions
but have you seen Naked News?
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
The baseball gods do not always punish the wicked but they will not just allow people to spit in their faces -- Joe Posnanski
I wish I would stop cheating. fuck. this is jctgamer's fault -- jponry
Whoa. Deja Vu.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2010 11:27 PM PST up reply actions
Also, yes. That was a solid couple of hours lost my freshman year.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2010 11:28 PM PST up reply actions
Their Korean affiliates closed shop and didn’t pay wages for some poor girls. That is low.
Obviously any links in the above post are probably NSFW
The baseball gods do not always punish the wicked but they will not just allow people to spit in their faces -- Joe Posnanski
I wish I would stop cheating. fuck. this is jctgamer's fault -- jponry
Sheez.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2010 11:30 PM PST up reply actions
Avatar Book III is great so far
I loved the episode about Roku and Sozin and the episode about bloodbending was legitimately creepy.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
Yeah, I think there’s only one episode in Book III that I’ll probably just never watch again, and that’s just because it’s a mindless filler episode. You’ll see when you get there.
The bloodbending was really cool. I’ll admit that had I written the show, I probably never would have thought about controlling the water inside of things. So, good on them for that.
Have you gotten to the point where Toph becomes extra awesome? I won’t say more, lest I say too much.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2010 11:41 PM PST up reply actions
I swear to God, that is the coolest thing ever. Toph goes Super-Saiyan and the entire series ramps it up as a result. Whenever I’m watching the third season I’m counting the episodes until that one.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
The episode that I'm thinking about that I have no desire to see again
was the one right before the finale.
I LOVE YOU BASEBALL GODS!!!!!
I promise that my adopted Giant, one Zach Wheeler, will not shoot anybody.
Yeah, that’s the one. Frankly, I’m not even sure why I watched the entire episode an entire time to begin with. I think Sokka says something like “That’s exactly the kind of pointless thing we can do that won’t be important at all!” in like the first minute.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 15, 2010 5:26 PM PST up reply actions
Also: Book III had a Dante Basco line reading that made me tear up. That’s how good the book is.
In 2010, teammates Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell perfected the art of brotational hitting.
by howtheyscored on Nov 14, 2010 11:58 PM PST up reply actions
Book III was amazing
Best of the three IMO. Zuko’s “treachery” added a lot of interesting plots, and they really knew what they were doing with wrapping the whole thing up.
That’s what made Avatar so great IMO; it didn’t get Lost. Lost started so well, then they didn’t know how long the show was going to run for (popular show means they had to keep it going as long as it was getting ratings), so they had to pad it out with some bad plotlines that didn’t really tie in to everything else and weren’t explained. But Avatar knew exactly what it was doing, exactly where it was going, and exactly how it was going to get there, so it never lost focus and never became boring. Hell, Season 1 is 20 episodes, Season 2 is 20 episodes, and Season 3 is 21 episodes – 1 filler episode that howie mentioned = 20 “real” episodes. That type of show, with a definite ending that is apparent from early on, really needs a lot of planning and forethought, and can’t be artificially extended (which is what happened with Lost, and why it was semi-ruined), and it’s great to see the creators of Avatar didn’t sway from their intended path.
Can’t wait for the new series, too.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
is there an actual comic or is it just the tv show? I googled but just found the show. legitimately interested here…
The Legend of Korra is going to be a new show, apparently about the next avatar (a female Waterbender.)
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare
So, it’s only the shows – there’s no comic book/graphic novel to download? I was looking for one last night, but couldn’t find one. I like the show, but I’ve only seen them here or there – I guess I’ll start watching them in order. Sounds interesting.
I’m seriously considering going back and doing it all again.
I USED TO NOT BELIEVE YOU
I tweet (more often than I blarg).
I'm watching it from the beginning with my kids
It’s my second time through and their first.
I LOVE YOU BASEBALL GODS!!!!!
I promise that my adopted Giant, one Zach Wheeler, will not shoot anybody.
what about just Uggla for Sandoval straight up?
if he’s ready to sign the 4 for $48 or 5 for $60.
He wouldn't take 4/48 from the Marlins
So presumably he wants more than that, and I don’t want to give him more than that, because that’s very fair. I also don’t want to be paying for his 30-35 seasons (decline phase) at a much higher price than Sandoval for quite possibly similar production. Oh, and Uggla can’t play 3B and Sanchez shouldn’t play 3B, which leaves us with no 3B.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
good points. i just thought it would make more sense to have a known quantity in Uggla over the next 4-5 years while the Giants are likely contending than Pablo, who could be anything from a bench-warmer to an all-star.
by repeat_in_2011 on Nov 15, 2010 9:18 PM PST up reply actions
yeah i wondered about that, too. and 4 for $48 from what should be a playoff contender for the next 5 years or so.
by repeat_in_2011 on Nov 16, 2010 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
I really doubt he'd take $48 million over 4 years...
…to play for us for 5 years or so
The thong is, it happened.
The deal that’s being whispered about right now isn’t really that outrageous though. Uggla to the Braves for Infante and a meh pitching prospect. I’d guess Florida’s in a hurry to get it done since they’ve apparently signed John Buck for 3/$18.
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 fish are not going to want to take on Aaron Rowand's salary period
For the giants, why pay another guy like Uggla big bucks, he is a worse fielder than sandoval. Yes he has proven power, and sandoval is young, with much potential, and under the giants financial control for a long time. If the giants listen to you, they deserve what they get.
That might be overstating the case a bit, but the point is valid.
Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
Curse of the Pandino
31 May 2007, 21:38 EST - the last time Matteh's career W-L wasn't below .500
"You never wake up the baby." - E. Renteria, 01 August 2010
Lowering the Quality of Internet Discourse Since 1985™
by S.F. Giangst on Nov 18, 2010 6:25 AM PST up reply actions
sigh
giantsrainman says:
November 15, 2010 at 7:20 pm
What about the Giants? They could move Sanchez to 3B where he has played before and rather well I might add. The Giants could overpay in talent with Pablo Sandoval with the Marlins balancing this out by taking Rowand and his remaining 2 years and $24M contract.
Apparently the answer was:
Omar Infante + Micheal Dunn for Uggla.
Brian Sabean: Sing His Praises To The Heavens!
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game that seems to have resurrected itself in my absence...
Immediate Reaction
No. God no.
Rooting for Jose Casilla to take his K- and GB-inducing skills to the majors and join his brother.
Trading away major-league players with great upside potential to ease payroll is not what a high-payroll, large-market team that wants to contend does. That’s what the A’s do. That’s what the Marlins do. That’s what the Dodgers do (they’re not small-market, but under Agent Ned, contending is not on the horizon).
You tough it out the next two years, and in the three years after that, reap the value of a cost-controlled player in arbitration years (which is the most important asset that a team can have if it wants to contend).
Rooting for Jose Casilla to take his K- and GB-inducing skills to the majors and join his brother.

by 

























