Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Full Coverage of 2012 Coke 600

Figuring out the Giants 2012 payroll

Accordign to Sabes, it looks like the 25 man roster is all set except for the decision on who to tender arb between Keppinger and Fontenot, and who will be the backup catcher between Stewart and Hector Sanchez (I'm assuming that they'll DFA Whiteside between now and Monday's deadline). I thought that this would be a good point to try to analyze and predict what the Giants 25-man payroll will be to begin the 2012 season.

Putting the bottom line first, by my calculations the Giants should start out with a payroll of $123.75M - assuming that they don't sign any multi-year extensions with Matt Cain or any of their currently unsigned arb-eligible and non-arb-eligible players. Here's how I break it down.


1. A guaranteed $79.75M is owed to 8 players (including Aaron Rowand who is no longer on the roster):

Zito = $19M, Cain = $15M, Rowand = $12M, Huff = $10M, Wilson = $8.5M, Franchez = $6M, Affledt = $5M, Lopez = $4.25M


2. I'm estimating $40.5M in 1-year contracts going to the 10 arb-eligible players (Whiteside and Keppinger will be DFA'd):

Timmy = $18.5M

Melky = $4.5M

Pagan = $4.5M

Panda = $3.5M

Vogelsong = $3M

Santiago Casilla = $2M

Romo = $1.5M

Fontenot = $1.5M

Schierholtz = $1M

Burriss = $0.5M


3. That leaves $3.5M ($500K each) to the remaining 7 guys whose contracts are still under team control:

MadBum, Buster, MadBum, Belt, Crawdaddy, Pill, Stewart, and Runzler

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.

Comment 62 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

If my assumptions are correct, and the $130M target total that the has been put in print is accurate, then I don’t see why the Giants couldn’t have put in a bid for “that Japanese SS” Hiroyuki Nakajima – or why they don’t have the resources to still go after Rafael Furcal or Carlos Beltran.

If the Giants had put in a bid over the $2M that the Yankees did (let say they went to $2.5M) then offered Nakajima a 2-year deal for $9M (2012 = $3.5M, 2013 = $5.5M) they would still be slightly under the $130M target ($129.75M). I think that Furcal could also be snagged right now for a similar 2-year deal (2012 = $6M, 2013 = $5.5M). Beltran would likely take a more creative approach and a more back-loaded contract, but his market appears thin and he just might listen to a proposal like this:
2012 = $6.5M, 2013 = $13.5M, 2014 = club option for $14M – with $2M buyout clause (option vests if he reaches specific innings played and performance targets in 2013)

I know that some will say that the Giants need to keep the $6M+ cushion under the $130M target right now in case they can reach multi-year deals with current players like Timmy and Cain. However, those contracts can easily be back-loaded to take advantage of Rowand’s $12M and Wilson’s $8.5M coming off the books after the 2012 season, and Zito’s $19M coming off following the 2013 season.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 10:28 AM PST reply actions  

I should add that Huff’s $10M also comes off following the 2012 season, so the Giants do have an “extra” $22M to play with in backloaded contracts and raises for the 2013 season – if you assume that some combo of Belt and Pill will take over at 1B in 2013. If the Giants were to trade Wilson before the 2013 season (and go with Hembree or some other much cheaper relievers), then they’d also have an extra $8.5M to spread around for the 2013 season. That’s over $30M to sop up raises for Timmy and Cain, pay for raises to other arb-eligible players that earn them, and back-load contracts for another impact FA signing this offseason.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 10:41 AM PST up reply actions  

And...

Franchez’s $6M and Affeldt’s $5M 2012 salaries can also be mostly recouped if the Giants bring in cheap, young options to replace them. Panik and/or Culberson could be ready to take over 2B by 2013 and there should be a bevy of cheap, power-armed relievers itching to take Affeldt’s spot by 2013 (Correa, Otero, Harrold, Dunnington, Bochy, Marlowe, Law, Bandilla, Mizenko).

In sum, I count over $40M in payroll coming off the books after the 2012 season. It’s plain to see that the Giants should be able to sign Timmy and Cain to long-term extensions (if they want to stay with the org), keep their other young core player’s intact, and still have around $15M to spend in the free agent market after the 2012 season. Alternatively, some of that $15M could be put to good use this offseason to back-load a contract for Beltran, Willingham, Furcal, or even Jimmy Rollins.

It’s extremely, extremely critical for Sabes & Co. to nail down what is in the minds of Cain and Timmy (to a lesser extent) in terms of their desire to become free agents after 2012 and 2013. If Cain can’t be locked into a long-term contract extension (for at least 2 years) within the next 30 days then Sabes has to assume that he’s going to opt for free agency next Fall. If that’s the case then Sabes also has to assume that Cain will not be a Giant in 2013 (we won’t be able to match the 8-10 year deals that Cain will get). Counter-intuitively, if Sabes comes to that conclusion, then he should go all-out right now to sign Beltran, Rollins, Willingham or Furcal. Because, if Cain is only going to be around for 1 more season then the Giants need to go into an extreme win-now mode.

Similar reasoning holds for Timmy. If Sabes concludes right now that Timmy is very likely to become a FA after the 2013 then Sabes should break the bank for the 2012 season (sign Beltran or Willingham or Rollins) and then trade Timmy after the end of the 2012 season. He’ll get a much better return for Timmy in trade than he could expect with 2 comp picks in the 2014 draft.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 11:14 AM PST up reply actions  

Great analysis. The part that scares me is Sabean’s strong point is definitely not pouring on the charm, and I think that’s what’s needed here. He also doesn’t favor bold moves, he’s an incremental tinker type of guy. Seeing Baggs leak of the Cain negotiations and the leak of Timmy’s camp actually wanting 8 years gives my nerves a big time jolt.

Maybe its some panic on my part, but seeing the G’s offer 4 years to Timmy is a total joke. Leaking negotiation info is really annoying in that sense, who knows what the context of any of this really is. But I see some of Sabey Sabes penny wise pound foolish moves (such as lowballing MadBum on a 100K raise for example) and this pitcher negotiation, far and above the most important thing for the franchise this year and for a 5 year plan, is looking to get rocky. And then all the worst things Sabean has done come straight to mind. He did get Bonds back twice. That’s about all I have to be optimistic with.

by shankbone on Dec 10, 2011 3:40 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't think the offer to Timmy is a joke

He’s got two more years of team control. Verlander signed his 5/80 deal with two years left, Felix Hernandez signed his 5/78 deal with two years left, and Jered Weaver signed his 5/85 deal with one year left. All comparable pitchers, all signed for pretty much the same contract in the same situation. An extension for Timmy will probably be more expensive, but four years is right up there with these other guys. In fact, if I were him I’d rather have four years than five – four years lets him hit FA at 31, five years at 32. If he’s going to do anything other than year-to-year he’d want it to be short enough so that he hits FA at an age where he can still get a huge contract. He obviously would still get a big contract at 32, but that’s pushing it. I’d say to max his earnings he should do what he’s saying: either lock me up for life or I want to hit free agency at 29 when my team control expires.

But if the Giants offered four years that’s certainly not ridiculous.

Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Dec 10, 2011 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed, it’s a very fair offer in terms of length. The 4 years include 2 arb years and he doesn’t have to worry about an injury. If he gets hurt in 2012 while working with a 1-year contract, he’s going to take a 20% pay cut in 2013. I’m not sure what money amount they were discussing, but I assume it would be in the 4 year for $80M range. As you note, after the 4 year contract he’d still only be 32 years old and in line to cash in on a huge multi-year deal.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 4:00 PM PST up reply actions  

I think it’s more about the arb cases than extensions. If they get extensions before the arb date then they’ll know what they have to spend on certain players. But with 10 arb cases, $6M could get eaten quite quickly if they lose half their cases and have to pay just $1.1M more on average than they thought. I think they want the wiggle room (assuming the $130M is a hard cap) so the arb cases definitely don’t put them over budget.

Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Dec 10, 2011 11:33 AM PST up reply actions  

Which is a totally idiotic way to manage a business. but oh well, we’ve talked about that.

by Nivra on Dec 10, 2011 11:41 AM PST up reply actions  

As far as I can remember, the Giants have had only 1 guy actually get an arb hearing in the past 10 years. I’ll bet real money right now that none of these guys end up in a hearing. Serioiusly, the only 2 guys that could end up putting a dent in that $6M cushion if they actually made it to a hearing are Timmy and Panda. All the other guys are just as likely to get less money than I budgeted.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 11:42 AM PST up reply actions  

Sure

But I still think they want the cushion – right now, they do not KNOW what they’re going to get paid, so they have to leave some room to operate. TBH, I don’t think $6M is going to get us a serious free agent – if Beltran is willing to take that backloaded deal (which I guess he has no reason not to) then maybe, but with Pagan and Cabrera I’m not sure how much they actually want him.

Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Dec 10, 2011 11:44 AM PST up reply actions  

Would you rather have Nate or Beltran starting in the OF? For that matter, would you rather have Nate or Willingham? The money is there if Sabes would just get creative and think beyond the next 30 days. He really needs to sign Cain to an extension this month, or he’s got to assume that 2012 is Cain’s last season as a Giant.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 11:49 AM PST up reply actions  

The point is is that it doesn’t cost Sabes anything to make the backloaded contract offer to Beltran/Willingham/Rollins (and we see today that Furcal is only likely to get $11M in a 2-year deal with the Cards). What it does take it extra time and effort and kissing some ass, but things like that are just beneath Sabes. He’s unilaterally taken the Giants out of the chase for any offensive upgrade before the true market value for the player has become known. All Sabes knows right now are the figures that agents are throwing at him and Bobby Evans.

The other thing that I should note is that any player he signs now doesn’t have to begin to be paid until next April. If he should find himself in a cash crunch when the dust settles then he can always trade Affeldt or Lopez in ST (for a minorleague prospect) to free up $3.5-4M in payroll.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 12:08 PM PST up reply actions  

$11MM for Furcal is an insane steal.

The Cards are really savvy at picking up buy-low superstars. Berkman last year and Furcal this year.

Furcal could easily post a 4-5 WAR season. If he doesn’t and wilt’s at a 1 WAR season, it’s practically break-even.

How I wish the Giants could think out of the box like this. Instead Sabes is good at picking up mediocre trash-heap guys with middling upside but horrible downside like Huff, Burks, Tejada, Cabrera, Dunston, Burrell, et. al.

by Nivra on Dec 10, 2011 12:21 PM PST up reply actions  

I really don't think so

He was only worth $2.4M last year in total, including the good run he had with St. Louis at the end. I doubt he’s going to be worth what the Cardinals are paying him (which is reportedly $14M total). He did post a 4 WAR season in 2010, but that was a different player with a .338 BABIP. He’s a big injury risk and not that good when he’s on the field anyway.

Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Dec 10, 2011 12:47 PM PST up reply actions  

His past 4 years injury history is a disaster, he almost retired this year. He’s lost a step of speed, that effects his range and down the line. I know its tempting to look at his upside, but that is a huge risk. He looks like Rento 2.0 to me.

by shankbone on Dec 10, 2011 3:33 PM PST up reply actions  

That Rent deal work out pretty well in the end – if the Giants can sign Furcal for 2 years and he ends up being the World Series MVP in 2013 then I don’t care how many games he plays in the 2012 & 13 regular season. Okay, I’m being purposely dense, I see your point, but we really do need another option at SS should Crawdaddy implode.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 3:41 PM PST up reply actions  

Best contract ever! Hey, Sabean killed it with the clutch savvy vet. But until October 2010 everybody hated that deal.

I’m very surprised they are letting young Brandon operate without a net. It just doesn’t seem like them to do this.

by shankbone on Dec 10, 2011 3:42 PM PST up reply actions  

Too bad they didn’t do this with the other young Brandon. The Giants might have been in the playoffs last year, especially if they had reallocated the $22MM spent on the “net” to a real SS.

by Nivra on Dec 11, 2011 8:46 AM PST up reply actions  

Not going to happen.

He’s stated, and so has Cain’s agent, that they expect that to be done in ST.

by Nivra on Dec 10, 2011 12:17 PM PST up reply actions  

I’ll amend my original point. Sabes has to have the broad outlines of an agreement for an extension in place with Cain by the end of this month. If Cain’s team is refusing to talk now, or making outrageous demands, then Sabes should assume that Cain is gone after next season.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 12:30 PM PST up reply actions  

Totally pains us all I’m sure, but that is exactly the correct analysis. Get to the Yankees and get the 2 remaining Killer B’s, Montero to flip, what not. That will suck, but its the right thing to do.

by shankbone on Dec 10, 2011 3:44 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree.

Something math-wise seems to be off. The only thing I can think of is that Sabes is doing one of three things:

(1) Playing it safe and predicting the extra $6mm will be in arb-raises. This may especially apply if Timmy goes to arb.

(2) Planning on tossing the extra $6mm at Timmy and Cain in the hopeful long-term extensions.

(3) Secretly planning on offering Yuniesky $6mm to play SS for the year.

(4) Saving the $6mm for an in-season deadline acquisition like Beltran was this year.

by Nivra on Dec 10, 2011 11:32 AM PST reply actions  

(4) is also a great point

They probably can’t part with any more real prospects so they’ll have to eat cash in any deal.

Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Dec 10, 2011 11:34 AM PST up reply actions  

I can’t see the owners shooting Sabes down for an extra $6M to spend on a trade in July or August if the Gaints are in contention. They’re already getting bad enough publicity for what they’ve already done.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 11:44 AM PST up reply actions  

They don't have to...

They can just tell Sabean privately to only target the cost-controlled players available on the market, and cover it up with an excuse such as: “We prefer player X because of his grit and hustle. He’s a real veteran gamer.”

by Nivra on Dec 10, 2011 12:22 PM PST up reply actions  

(2) Planning on tossing the extra $6mm at Timmy and Cain in the hopeful long-term extensions.

As I noted, signing either of them to extensions will most likely free up more cash for 2012 as the extension can be easily back-loaded.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 11:45 AM PST up reply actions  

Considering the Zito and Rowand repercussions...

They may be very adverse to backloading contracts. Can’t say I blame em, but in this case, I’d prefer to bend and backload a bit considering our win-now window.

by Nivra on Dec 10, 2011 12:23 PM PST up reply actions  

The problem with Zito’s and Rowand’s deal wasn’t the back-loading it was the length of the deals and the overall money paid. You never should give any pitcher (including Timmy) a 7 year contract – especially Zito in 2007. You should only go more than 4 years on the top echelon position players, and Rowand was never one of those. Above and beyond that mistake, if Sabes had signed Zito for 25% less overall money than he did then it would very likely to have unloaded both guys at some point in their cotracts (with some $$$ also thrown in) for a bag of balls. If you peruse my proposals for Beltran and the other free agents you’ll see that my back-loaded contracts are not for more than 3 years and they don’t involve huge amounts of $$$.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

the main problem with the Zito and Rowand contracts is that those players are horrible.

"There was no torture in the end. Only rapture." - Mike Krukow
Flags Fly Forever

"Orlando before Zod" doesn't have the same nice ring to it.
Official Sponsor of the 1997 San Francisco Giants

by nostocksjustbonds on Dec 10, 2011 4:53 PM PST up reply actions  

Hence the reason not to give them long contracts like Sabes did with Huff, Franchez, Renteria, Tehaha, and Uribe.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 5:15 PM PST up reply actions  

Maybe they’re hoping to sign long-term deals with some of their other players who don’t havet big arbitration awards under their belt, like Panda and Bumgarner, and would appreciate a signing bonus up front.

They’ve also said in previous years that they like to keep some of the payroll free for mid-season acquisitions.

VAE PVTO DEVS FIO

by Bhaakon on Dec 10, 2011 2:58 PM PST up reply actions  

You might be right. The Giants may try to secure MadBum, Panda, and Posey to favorable long-term contracts. I hope they do.

by Squire_Boone on Dec 10, 2011 8:23 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions  

I don’t see how any extension of Cain will use up an resources for 2012. He’s signed for 2012. His extended salary will be paid out from future budgets.

"There was no torture in the end. Only rapture." - Mike Krukow
Flags Fly Forever

"Orlando before Zod" doesn't have the same nice ring to it.
Official Sponsor of the 1997 San Francisco Giants

by nostocksjustbonds on Dec 10, 2011 4:54 PM PST up reply actions  

Let's do 2013 - just for fun

Carrying this forward to 2013, the Giants currently have only 2 players signed to guaranteed contracts for 2013:
Zito = $20M, Javier Lopez = $4.25M
They also have to pay Huff a $2M buyout – making it a total of $26.25M in guaranteed money.

Let’s do a little bit of crystal-ballin’ now. I’m going to assume that Cain signs an extension sometime in the next 3 months for
$100M for 5 years with a 6th year team option for $22M. The contract breaks down as follows:
2013=$18M, 2014=$20M, 2015=$22M, 2016=$22M, 2017=$18M, 2018=$22M (team option with a $2M buyout clause)

I’m also going to predict that Melky Cabrera, Franchez, Affeldt, and Fontenot leave as a free agents, Brian Wilson is traded, and potential free agents Angel Pagan and Ryan Vogelsong sign long-term contracts that pay them a total of $18M (total, not each) for the 2013 season.

That brings the total payroll to $62.25M

I predict that the Giants will pay a total of $22.5M to the following 5 arb-eligible palyers:
Panda=$8M
Casilla=$3.5M
MadBum (Super 2)=$4.5M
Romo=$4M
Nate=$2.5M

They will also have to pay $6.25M to the following 8 team-controlled players:
Buster=$2M
Belt=$.8M
Crawford=$.85M
Pill=$.6M
Surkamp=$.5M
Correa=$.5M
Hector Sanchez=$.5M
Hembree=$.5M

That brings us to a grand total of $91M for 18 players.
That leaves about $39M for Timmy and 6 more players (a starting 2B, a starting OF, a utility IF, 2 backup OF’s, and a reliever).

Let’s budget $25M for Timmy, and $2.5M for the 4 non-starters – leaving us with:
$11.5M to pay for a starting 2B + a starting OF

If these 2 starting spots are filled by Gary Brown (or Frankie Pegs) and Joe Panik (or Culberson) then Sabes ends up at more than $10M below the $130M target figure. If Sabes wants to sign a free agent or trade for a vet at one of those 2 starting spots then he has about $11M to play with.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 10, 2011 5:14 PM PST reply actions  

You kinda made me optimistic

That there is a method to the madness we’re currently mired in

by WeGotWorms on Dec 10, 2011 6:36 PM PST up reply actions  

The difficult thing with all of this fantasy budgeting, is that we don’t know what the long-term vision/plan is (if there is any). The chance exists that Brown and/or Panik may provide an impact in the next couple years. I just hope that the right moves are made when the budget flexibility materializes over the next couple offseasons (e.g. Wilson is allowed to walk). The Giants need allocate the Rowand, Huff, Zito money to good players. I fear they won’t.

by Squire_Boone on Dec 10, 2011 8:30 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions  

Also, we don't know all the little bonuses worked into contracts.

They don’t add up to a lot, but, they’ve got to be budgeted for, and they’re significant when we’re talking about the margins of the payroll.

VAE PVTO DEVS FIO

by Bhaakon on Dec 10, 2011 9:14 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm not convinced there should be a long-term plan

With all the uncertainty involved in baseball, particularly regarding the development of prospects, having even a semi-definite plan in mind may prevent you from moving smartly.

Say, for example, that the Giants currently plan to have Gary Brown and Joe Panik be Opening Day starters by 2014 – earlier if possible, but 2014 at the latest. Then they don’t sign an under-appreciated Michael Bourn in the 2013 offseason despite easily being able to top the three years and $30M he gets(for reference, he’s been worth $19-22M over each of the last three years) because they’re committed to having Brown, who just earned a September callup in 2013 after stagnating somewhat in Richmond and Fresno from 2012-13, be their 2014 CF.

Panik, meanwhile, posts about a 90 wRC+ in the first several months of the 2014 season with slightly above-average defense at 2B, making him a worthwhile but replaceable player. When offered Rickie Weeks straight up for Panik by the Brewers (who are now rebuilding as Greinke and Marcum departed for free agency and Gallardo’s decline into mediocrity has dropped them to 4th place in the Central division), they don’t take it because they are committed to Panik at the second base position despite questionable peripherals and generally mediocre performance.

Point is, the long-term vision should just be to win. You don’t know how that’s going to happen two years from now – you barely know how it’s going to happen next year. If Cain hurts himself in May (please no) and Vogelsong regresses, what we think is our base will not be particularly strong. The best thing for a team is flexibility – you give some of that up because you have to in order to retain top players. But I don’t think the Giants ought to be thinking “Okay, this is what we’re doing now because next year we’ll have this and then we’ll do this and…” An obvious point to be sure, but I’m not convinced they’re thinking along those lines.

Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Dec 10, 2011 11:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed, you need to remain very flexible and very engaged over the long-term as a GM. However, you still need to have a baseline strategy and framework that allows you know when a surprise opportunity is a good risk. I just don’t believe that Sabes has a solid long-term strategy, or that he remains engaged in the process of finding and developing potential good deals in the long-term. He’s always struck me as the type of GM that skates along, makes precipitous decisions based on short-term data and occurences, and usually only puts in his intense work and long hours when the calendar and the situation forces him to. IMO, he’s like the student that is always cramming at the last instant before a big test because he wasn’t smart with his time, his schedule, his strategy, and his effort when the pressure was off and time was plentiful.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 11, 2011 1:02 PM PST up reply actions  

That’s a fun exercise but of course given all the assumptions it’s nothing more than that. As just for instance the dubious assumption of trading Wilson frees up $10 mil or so, which is a nice flick of the pen!

Also, I’m confused why Bumgarner is considered arb-eligible but Posey isn’t when Posey has more ST and I think you’re low on Sandoval. He’s already had two seasons in which he got MVP votes (which is an category arbitrators are supposed to consider against others with his same amount of ST). If he manages that again this year and maybe even hits a top 5 (which he certainly might) he’d be in position to get himself a pretty hefty payday. Of course, the team could get cost certainty on that with some multi-year deal this winter in which case the figure could be quite accurate. We shall see.

MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!

by Roger on Dec 11, 2011 6:31 AM PST up reply actions  

Agreed, there’s a hell of a lot of assumptions that go into forecasting a 2013 payroll, but I trying to replicate a process that Sabes might be going through now, or have gone through recently, in order to figure out what type of leeway he has in this offseason’s budget. If Sabes hasn’t gone through a similar exercise then, IMO, he would be almost criminally negligent.

You’re right in saying that Buster will also be a Super 2 arb guy. I thought that Super 2 also had a performance factor (which would exclude Buster in light of all of the time he sat out this season), but when I looked it up just now I see that Super 2 is only calculated off of service time with respect to the entire pool of major league players that have between 2 and 3 years service time at the end of any given season.

As for Pablo, a huge part of deciding what he will be payed in 2013 is how he performs in 2012 AND what his salary was in 2012. I dindn’t feel comfortable assuming that Pablo will have another year with numbers like 2009 and 2011, not to mention assuming that he’ll stay healthy and on the field all season. I also predict that Panda won’t be paid more than $3.5M in 2012, which would make the jump to $8M quite signifcant for a player in only his 2nd year of arb eligibility.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 11, 2011 12:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Why would they keep Pagan instead of Melky if Brown is waiting in the wings?

Also, Panik would have to have quite a year for them to pencil him in for a starting spot in 2013.

by Nivra on Dec 11, 2011 8:50 AM PST up reply actions  

Both guys can be unrestricted free agents next offseason and I don’t see Melky wanting to stay in SF (bad hitting environment and can likely get more money and be closer to his home base playing in the east) if he has a good season in 2012. If he has a bad season then I think the odds are very high that the Giants just let him walk away. I think it’s much more likely that Pagan will have a decent season, that he’ll want to stick around in SF, and that the Giants will want to keep him around due to his ability to also play RF or LF without an appreciable dropoff in offensive production to what the Giants were getting from their corner OF spots.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 11, 2011 12:48 PM PST up reply actions  

Looking at our 2013 needs, ...

I’d really like to see the team sign Fonty to a 2-3 year deal this winter. Say 2/$5MM, or 3/$10MM. He would provide a year of Panik insurance for 2013 and could easily move into the UT role if Panik pans out.

Similarly, Nate would be a good deal signed to a 3-year deal like that. Low-cost certainty around serviceable starts/capable backups gives a lot of flexibility and prevents black-hole and rent-a-jaja scenarios.

I also see a possible UT role for Gillespie in 2013. If he can play 3B,OF,1B and hit around a 90 wRC+, that would be a valuable backup.

The other thing I wonder about is Hector. If he has a strong year in AAA, the team may look to do a C/1B platoon with him and Buster, allowing them to push Belt into the OF.

They also might let Vogelsong go if Surkamp has a good showing and Zito goes back to being mediocre league avg. Zito.

by Nivra on Dec 11, 2011 9:02 AM PST up reply actions  

About Fonty, ...

He really may be the Brandon insurance that everyone wants Sabean to sign. If he can put up a full year of SS like the partial year he put up in 2011, his value goes up considerably. 3 years. Get-er-done Sabes.

by Nivra on Dec 11, 2011 9:03 AM PST up reply actions  

This surprises me. Since his big half-season in 2008, Fontenot has hit .247/.310/.376; he’s clearly stretched at shortstop; and he’ll be 32 next year. I think he’s a one-win player over a full season if you’re feeling generous, and you shouldn’t ever have to go multiyear with such a player. I’ll be kind of surprised if he’s still in the league in three years.

by Evan on Dec 11, 2011 10:37 AM PST up reply actions  

+1

Fonty is in no way worth more than $1.5M a year and it would be insane to sign him to a multi-year pact. The Giants should be able to get somebody much better than Fonty from the farm system or on the FA/trade market at some point over the next 13 months.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 11, 2011 12:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Who in the farm could produce a .310 wOBA, play a passable SS

as well as a good 2B?

If Bill James is wrong, what about a .300 wOBA?

I just don’t see it. I don’t see either Crawford or Ehire producing that much with the bat in 2013. Burris obviously doesn’t.

by Nivra on Dec 11, 2011 7:27 PM PST up reply actions  

I was thinking of Adrianza, Panik, Culberson, and Tomlinson.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 12, 2011 10:09 AM PST up reply actions  

I think it’s a pretty long stretch that any of those guys could put up a .310 wOBA in the majors next year. Adrianza and Panik are within the spectrum of the possible I suppose, which I don’t really think Culby or Tomlinson would be.

MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!

by Roger on Dec 12, 2011 10:51 AM PST up reply actions  

That’s why i specified 13 months. Next season would be when the FA would apply.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Dec 12, 2011 6:50 PM PST up reply actions  

I don’t know if Roger meant 2012 or 2013, but I think it’s a stretch that any of those guys could put up a .310 wOBA in 2013. Panik hasn’t had a single full-season AB yet. Ehire was projected for like a 70 wRC+ this year by ZiPS, I don’t think he’ll suddenly have a 90-95 wRC+ season with only one year of seasoning.

by Nivra on Dec 13, 2011 10:14 AM PST up reply actions  

Well I said “long stretch.” “Within the spectrum of the possible” shouldn’t mean to expect “probable.”

MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!

by Roger on Dec 13, 2011 10:30 AM PST up reply actions  

1 WAR in 252 PA last year...

That’s great for a UT IF, IMO.
Bill James projects him for a .310 wOBA. That’s also great for a UT IF.

A win is worth $5MM. If we can tie him up for 3 wins over 3 seasons for $6-10MM, he’d be surplus value and very worth it. And he’s much better than having to pay someone like Uribe 3/$21MM or Tejada 1/$6.5MM

by Nivra on Dec 11, 2011 7:25 PM PST up reply actions  

A win is worth $5MM.

Isn’t that typically what teams are willing (currently) to pay for FA signings? At some point you have to get wins cheaper than that out of your cost controlled players, right because otherwise wouldn’t it force your payroll up over $200MM or so just to field a 90 win team? Paying $5mm a win for UT infielders seems a good step in that direction, anyway.

MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!

by Roger on Dec 12, 2011 6:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Seems like that's exactly his point

Fontenot would provide a win or so, presumably at a below-market rate. Paying $3M for bench players isn’t something I love as I’d rather those spots were filled with disposable minor leaguers, but I don’t see many players in Fresno who can come up and play multiple positions. Edgar Gonzalez and Conor Gillaspie are the closest we have on infielders, but I don’t really believe in either of them as much as Fontenot. Perhaps it’s because I haven’t minutely examined all the free agents but I see Fontenot as a good player to have.

I would not, though, give him a multi-year deal.

Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Dec 12, 2011 12:44 PM PST up reply actions  

Pretty sure Edgar Gonzo is gonzo.

by shankbone on Dec 12, 2011 2:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Quincy pretty much nailed it above...

Fonty is in arb-3 next year, I think. That means he’d be expected to make 80% of his FA rate. If he’s worth a win, then he’s worth around $4MM per year next year and would stand to make ~$5MM on the open market. If we can tie him up for 2-3 years at $2-3MM/year, then we’re tying him up below market rate.

Sure, I’d love to have a $500k player to play that role, but Burriss isn’t going to be worth a win, and I don’t see any other farm options that can replace Fonty’s .290-.310 wOBA and play all IF positions. I also know that given the FA market for UT IF we saw this year, it’d cost a lot more if the Giants let him go and had to find a replacement via the market.

by Nivra on Dec 12, 2011 3:51 PM PST up reply actions  

To follow up on Roger’s point: An all-replacement team, it is hypothesized, would win 45-48 games, somewhere in there. A team that’s seriously trying to contend (like, presumably, the Giants) needs to get to 85-88 in most years, maybe a bit more. So your goal is to pick up 40 WAR from your players collectively.

The Giants’ budget is $130 million. Once you subtract the $10+ million for minimum salaries, you’re left with $120 million to buy those 40 wins.

So every you pay more than $3 million per expected win, you’re digging your hole deeper. You’ll need to make up for that with cheap players somewhere else.

by Evan on Dec 12, 2011 10:33 AM PST up reply actions  

Well, I'd certainly hope some of that $10MM for minimum salaries

nets you some value, otherwise you have a poor farm system.

The Giants get wins from Bum, Posey, Belt, Crawford, etc. and will be getting wins from Surkamp, Hembree, Brown, Panik in the near future.

Then you have your arb guys. They will provide anywhere from $1MM/win at super-2 to $4MM/win at the last year of arb. Finally, you pay market rate at $5MM/win to plug any remaining holes.

I’m arguing that Fonty’s in his last year of arb, and that we should tie him up at below market rate around $2-3MM/win for 1 win production for at least 2 years, because I see very little possiblity of acquiring a cheaper option who can fill his shoes, and I’d rather not see the Giants plug that same hole for $5MM/win on the FA market.

by Nivra on Dec 12, 2011 3:55 PM PST up reply actions  

If they really want to go with Burriss as RH compliment to Crawford I fear that Fonty’s going to be the non-tender casualty. Which could be bad, because Crawford has an annoying tendency to miss a month or so of every season thus far in his career.

MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!

by Roger on Dec 11, 2011 5:28 PM PST up reply actions  

This would make me an even sadder panda than I already am.

by Nivra on Dec 11, 2011 10:40 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about San Francisco Giants.
Yahoo_full_count

Manager

174246766_ea2fd78204_small Grant Brisbee

Moderators

Sbzito_small Natto

Fawlty_small WalrusMan

Goofus_small Goofus

Howtheyscoredcat_small howtheyscored

Det_7193_small jponry

Authors

09_small JT Jordan

Small steve S

E6dmccicon_small Every6thDay