Why I am actually fairly pleased with offseason 2012
by mhad on Jan 14, 2012 6:56 AM PST
Email
Print
Disclaimer: This is long winded, sorry about that. Skip to the bottom for TL;DR discussion points.
It is my belief that the San Francisco Giants 2011-2012 offseason was actually pretty good, looking back. Of course, it is not over, and certain things could happen/not happen to change that belief (eg, Giants cannot come to terms with a contract for Tim Lincecum and flip him to the Mariners for Jesus Montero, who (the Mariners) have a bad case of "what the hell was I thinking taking those last two shots of Jameson?"). Most of these scenarios are highly unlikely and so I feel comfortable saying that the roster is pretty much set +/- a few MiL contract and Spring Training invitees that will vie for the last couple spots on the team.
In retrospect, it is easy to resent how things turned out. The Giants, on the surface, did little to improve a league-worst offense. You are aware of this, and have likely discussed it ad nauseum here and elsewhere. The Giants also did not seriously pursue Carlos Beltran, who signed a bowl-wrenchingly reasonable deal with a team that will likely outscore the Giants by orders of magnitude next season. You are also aware of this. The point I want to make is that, after accepting these facts, one sees that the team is actually fairly well constructed, capable of competing for not only the division but for the NL pennant, and are not invested in any risky long-term contracts that could seriously hamper future competition.
It's not the players themselves that I want to discuss, as you have already likely browsed their fangraphs pages (or mlb.com page, if things like BABIP and ISO and Oswing% and SIERA give you indigestion). I would rather draw attention to the contracts themselves (or likely arbitration awards), comparing them with past/projected WAR to get a rough sense of the overall value of certain players whose salaries represent money spent by the Giants in 2012.
The Contracts:
The Giants retained three free agents, all relief pitchers. Affeldt signed a one year deal for 5mil, Lopez signed a 2 year deal for 4.25 each year, and Mota signed for 1 year and 1 mil. Obviously, Affeldt and Lopez' contracts were not well received by a vocal percentage of the community, since they came early and the money given to them basically precluded any serious pursuit of a free agent hitter, specifically one previously-named Beltran.
The Giants have so far come to terms on contracts with two arb-eligible players, Ryan Vogelsong, for 2 years and paying out 3/5mil respectively, and Mike Fontenot, for 1 year/1mil.
These moves, looked at as a whole, reinforce management's stated opinion that pitching is the first priority, and that their vision for this team includes keeping a top-flight pitching staff together. I won't get into the Lopez/Affeldt contracts other than to say they represented a safe if unexciting choice by management to spend the $10mil on a known quantity, rather than wait and hope that a good player could be got for the price they were capable of paying. I do, however, like the Vogelsong and Fontenot deals quite a bit, and so I will attempt to explain my view.
While I could not find an article type analysis on the rough market value of 1 WAR in dollars for the 2011/12 offseason, I believe that, in years past, the figure has ranged from 5-7mil. I will be generous and say that 1 WAR is worth about 5mil on the open market. If this is the case, both Fontenot and Vogelsong being paid as sub 1 WAR players. Looking at Bill James and ZiPS projections for Fontenot, he's likely to produce .650-700 OPS over 200-300 PA, the latter number being more likely given that he will be the primary backup for both Freddy Sanchez and Brandon Crawford. Fontenot was worth exactly 1 WAR last year while having the worst offensive season of his career, so it's a safe bet he will be worth at least 1 WAR again. Vogelsong is an unknown quantity, but if you believe he is capable of replicating at least some of his 2011 success, it's reasonable to assume he can produce upwards of 2 WAR. Both players seem likely to provide surplus value, and their contracts indicate money well spent by the team.
Looking Ahead:
The Giants have a serious tonnage of arbitration cases to work out, including both new acquisitions, Melky and Pagan. Let's assume, for the purposes of discussion, that none of these players work out contracts, and are each given out arbitration rewards according to these projections. Starting with the new acquisitions:
Melky Cabrera projects to receive 4.4mil, or the value of slightly less than one win. Taking the 2012 ZiPS projections, along with Fangraph's FANS, Melky Cabrera seems more or less a league average hitter (106 proj 2012 OPS+, career .320 wOBA) with average/below average defense in right field, worth somewhere in the range of 1.5-2 WAR. While these are not the numbers of an impressive, offense saving player, he is more than likely to be worth the money given to him in 2012. If he does produce something similar to his 2011 (unlikely), the Giants have received impressive surplus value. If he does not perform, there is no long term commitment to an ineffective player.
Angel Pagan, coming off a down year, projects to receive 4.7mil, so basically the same as Cabrera. His numbers are also similar (97 proj 2012 OPS+, career .331 wOBA), but with better defense and speed. The defense and speed bolsters a league average bat and gives him (roughly) a slightly above average profile, worth 3 WAR, according to FANS. This seems reasonable, as it is more or less the midpoint between his last two seasons of 5.5 WAR and .9 WAR, respectively. A 3 WAR player for 4.7mil is almost a sure bet to provide surplus value, and, like Melky, if he does not, the team is not committed to continue paying him.
Both these acquisitions strike me as prudent, low-risk/high-reward decisions in terms of value. Given that Jonathan Sanchez and Torres/Ramirez are projected to receive 11mil between them for 2012, the trades also seem to be an economical cost-cutting decision, moving WAR from the pitcher's mound to the outfield. They appear additionally savvy when you consider that Sanchez' and Ramirez' production are more easily replaced in-house or with minor league contracts than whatever WAR is gained by Pagan/Melky (meaning, back end rotation and RHP bullpen types are often found on the scrap heap, whereas productive outfielders gotten for cheap are 1 Burrell in a thousand, so to speak).
Looking at some other Giants' projected arbitration awards:
Pablo Sandoval: 3.2mil - This is simply beautiful. Pablo is projected to be one of the better hitters in the NL in 2012, agreed upon by just about every projection system. Taken with above average defense (some may say gold-glove caliber, as though gold gloves had anything to do with defense) at third base, Pablo is likely worth about as many war as Prince Fielder (they were both worth 5.5 last year, and FANS has them both worth 5.6 in 2012). When you consider the payday Fielder is in for, Pablo Sandoval looks like a golden god, paid to be worth less than 1 WAR on the open market.
Sergio Romo: 1.3mil - Sergio is projected to be worth about as many wins as jonathan sanchez, in about 60 high leverage innings of work. He may not actually pitch 60 innings, but the kind of production he is likely capable of is worth a hell of a lot more than 1.3mil on the open market.
Nate Schierholtz: 1.2mil - In the highly likely scenario that Melky and Pagan do not both have career years, Nate is a safe bet to get around 300 league average ABs, providing Nate Schierholtz defense in right. Another safe bet for surplus value.
Guys who will make the league minimum in 2012:
Brandon Crawford
Just...marvel over that for a minute.
Quick analysis of expense, using COT'S pretty neat spreadsheet:
The Giants have about 87 million currently committed to the 2012 payroll. Assuming each arb eligible player receives what MLBTR projects them to receive, they will owe 37.8mil in arb salary, bringing total payroll to 124.8million, leaving 5 million or so for doling out league minimum and minor league contracts to various role players/long shot gambles to reach their target payroll of $130mil. The team is currently committed to only $31mil in payroll in 2013, leaving 100mil for long-term contracts to players like Tim, Matt and Pablo and arbitration salary for Posey. The team owes virtually nothing in 2014, when Bumgarner becomes arb-eligible and Gary Brown and Joe Panik are likely ready for MLB. In short, there is tremendous financial flexibility in the coming years, so much so that the team could probably bring in a high-profile free agent on a long-term contract sometime in the next 2-3.
TL;DR Version:
While there were no actions taken to significantly improve the offense over the next 1 or 2 years, the Giants spent money carefully and made wise trades, both improving the team slightly and retaining financial flexibility for the foreseeable future. The team, as currently constructed, is likely to receive surplus value from the majority of the roster, which is an enviable position for franchises interested in long term viability. The team, while perhaps not among the elite of 2012, remains a cost-effective contender for the NL West, and so I submit that it was a rather successful offseason.
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.
221 comments
|
7 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What I'd like to see happen
The Giants are talking contracts with Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum. Here’s my take:
Sign Matt for 6 years, 108mil. The numbers are not super important; my point is that he should be signed long term, and the deal should get done before anything with Tim is set in stone. If you believe that old-fashioned ethics still have a place in baseball, Matt Cain has been a Giant for longer than Tim and has suffered through more years of awful baseball teams than Tim Lincecum. His longer service time should be honored by giving him his big payday first. He is also the more durable and reliable, so a long term contract makes sense from an economical standpoint as well.
Sign Tim for 2/38mil. Tim wants 8 years, which seems excessive. I say, buy out his last two arbitration years, and, at the end of those years, he is still the elite pitcher that he is now, give him the long term contract that he wants so that he remains a Giant for life. If he declines considerably, the Giants are not on the hook for several years and millions.
Sign Buster Posey for 4 years on an Longoria style backloaded contract. From a cold, analytical standpoint, Posey’s value is probably lower than it will ever be, unless he simply falls off a cliff, making now an ideal time to sign him cheaply. 2013 is his first year of arb, and if he has a good 2012, will likely be expensive. A deal made now doesn’t have to pay him more than a couple million in 2012 to be in Posey’s best interest, and he will still have two arbitration years to get the big paydays he most likely will deserve. Signing him now also makes ethical sense, as it would suggest the team has confidence in his recovery and considers him an important part of the future.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Sign Buster Posey for 4 years on an Longoria style backloaded contract.
This is a good example of the main problem with your analysis/recommendations. The Gaints would sign Posey to a Longoria style contract extension in the blink of an eye, but there’s just no way that Posey and his camp would go for it, though. In hindsight, Longoria’s contract was a horrible deal for him, and then add in the fact that Posey will be a Super 2 arb-eligible this offseason. That means he will be arb-eleigible for the next 4 offseasons and then he can be a free agent, so there;s no way he’s going ot sign an extension now when (as you point out) his value is at close to the lowest it will likely to be in the next 15 years.
I hate to break it to every loyal Giant fan, but Buster is a dyed-in-the-wool small town southern boy. The odds of him remaining with the Giants after he reaches his free agency years are very, very low. He’s going to want to play where his friends and family can more easily come watch him and where he wants to rasie his family. Enjoy the next 4 years of Buster, it will likely be the only ones that he spends in a Giant uni. It’s a good thing that we have good catching prospects like Hector, Tommy and Susac in our system.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
It’s an optimistic proposal, I know. I thought that maybe there was something to the idea of paying more that the minimum for his last year of team-cost control in exchange for a slightly cheaper couple years of arbitration. Also, Posey is a Giant for the next 5 years, small-town southern sensibilities or not. Furthermore, I’ve never met Buster so I will not speak for his personal desires and convictions, but I should think that somewhere in that dyed-in-the-wool southerness is a loyalty to the organization that drafted him, developed him, and brought him a World Series title in his rookie year. He is already much beloved by this city, and that’s got to be worth something.
I kind of regret posting the “here’s what I’d do” bit. The main point of my article was that the Giants are in a good position financially to retain their own players, and that if their top players end up leaving, it will not be over financial concerns.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I don’t want to come off totally negative. One thing that I will give you is that this is the type of exercise that I hope Sabes & Co. have been doing for the past 3 months – only they need to look at about 1,000 more permutations than you spell out. The next 13 months are the most consequential ones that this org has faced in the past 6 years – ever since they had to come to terms with the loss of Barry Bonds. Sabes didn’t handle that transition well in the short term, but he did in the long term (putting more effort, money, personnel and resources into scouting, drafting and player development – most especially handing the drafting over to John Barr).
With the distinct possibility of losing Cain, Melky, Pagan, Timmy, Wilson, Franchez, Casilla and Huff to free agency in the next 2 offseasons, not to mention the likely super 2 arb status of MadBum and Buster, Sabes is going to have to be very, very skillful, or get very, very lucky, for the Giants not to end up being a 2nd division team by the time the 2014 season starts. His patience and his willingness to put in a ton of time into re-making the team is going to be put to the test. At this point, I don’t have a great feeling that he will be highly successful at it.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Of the players you mentioned, I would say that only Cain and Tim are crucial for keeping the team viable long term. The value provided by everyone else can be replaced fairly easily, using the same kinds of methods that brought them here in the first place.
I really don’t think Sabean needs to be that skillful to keep the team in the front running. The challenging aspect of franchise management, finding and developing young talent, has, by and large, already been done for this iteration of Giants. All he needs to do is make sure that the elite young talent does not leave the org to pursue better contracts elsewhere. And, with continued careful player targeting that creates teams similar to the 2012 version (minus Zito, Rowand, and Huff), Sabean should have the financial assets to keep everyone around.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
The value provided by everyone else can be replaced fairly easily, using the same kinds of methods that brought them here in the first place.
The challenging aspect of franchise management, finding and developing young talent, has, by and large, already been done for this iteration of Giants.
Two comments on these quotes:
1. Sabes has not shown himself to be especially adept at acquiring/signing (emphasis on the signing FA aspect) the type of position players he’s going to need to populate the team with if they lose 3 of the 4 most important pieces on their dominant pitching staff (Cain, Timmy, Wilson).
2. Your faith in the Giants current farm system is not very comforting to me. I’m probably one of the more overly optimistic persons around here with regards to our farm system, but even I don’t see much quality coming up to the SF roster in the next 2-3 years. If everything turns out perfectly we can likely count on Brown, Panik, and one of the 3 catchers having some positive impact in the majors by then, but that’s a huge IF. Also, as the Wheeler for Beltran trade so ably highlighted, there’s nothing to guarantee that Sabes won’t trade our best prospects away for short-term players in a misguided attempt to “win now” while his pitching staff is still dominant.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Perhaps you need to clarify.
1. If the Giants lose 3 of the 4 pieces of their pitching staff like you said, that’s a blow that the team most likely won’t recover from, and I’m not saying they will by acquiring players like Melky and Pagan. That’s beside the point. My point is predicated around KEEPING those players, which I think they can do. I hardly think that their time as Giants has been so scarring that they will walk, no matter what.
2. You don’t think that Brown, Panik, and Hector Sanchez are likely to produce at the major league level within the next 5 years? I don’t think that’s a stretch. They might not be stars, or even above average, but will still offer something for (virtually) nothing, in a monetary sense. Hulet and Sickels both seem to view them as future major leaguers, so it’s not like I’m on some extreme level of optimism here.
I might be misunderstanding, but I think you missed my point, which is that the team is financially set up well to give the money necessary to retain their core players, bolstered by the young, cost-controlled players coming out of their own system.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
In answer to your 2 ponts:
1. I think that your assumption that Cain and Timmy want to remain under contract is not a good one. Analyzing Cain’s present behavior and Timmy’s past and present behavior should lead a logical observer that the odds the Gaints will be able to retain both of them is very low, while the odds of keeping just 1 onf them is probably no better than 60%. Therefore, my point is that your premise is fatally flawed – and I hope that Sabes & Co. aren’t planning their strategies on the same premise.
2. No, I don’t think that all 3 of Brown, Panik and Hector are likely to be productive major leaguers within the next 5 years. I’d say that the odds are pretty strong that 1 from the group will be, but the odds of getting decent production from 2 of those guys probably drops below 50% It’s very rare that a team hits a trifecta like that with 3 of their current top prospects. Even “can’t miss” prospects have a high degree of failure in pro ball. I think that Hulet and Sickels and just about every other professional talent evaluators would agree with that premise.
In general, I agree with you that the team is set up fairly well in terms of their long-term payroll and finances (although even that comes with a big caveat due to the whole A’s/SJ stadium issue). However. in the short term (specifically, the 2011 and 2012 season) their finances are stretched thin due to the Zito, Rowand and Huff contracts. Unfortunately, those are the 2 years in which the Giants want to sign Cain and Timmy to lucrative long-term contracts. If the Giants can’t sign 1 or both of these guys, then my contention is that they don’t have enough young talent on the team and in the farm system to field a team that will be competitive in the NL West in 2014 and 2015. I don’t agree with Roger’s overly pessimistic view that they’ll be a bottom 8 team, but I do think they’ll likely be in the bottom 9 to 13 range. The good news is that if the Gaints lose both guys they will have a lot of payroll freed up to sign free agents to fill the talent gap and will at least get some comp draft picks when Cain and or Timmy leave the team. The bad news is that Sabes hasn’t shown himself to be a good judge of FA talent when he has a lot of money to throw around, and the new CBA rule changes will make drafting success beyond the first round much more difficult to attain.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
I respect your opinion on the prospects, since you seem to possess a keen awareness of prospects and player development. I am perhaps being overly optimistic, given the lack of high-level competition track record for either Brown or Panik.
Your opinions on baseball-op, though, I’m not as sure about. You say that you hope that “Sabean & Co.” aren’t planning future strategy based on the premise of retaining Lincecum and Cain when they’ve all but proclaimed on high that they intend to keep the pitching staff together. They have the financial resources to give Lincecum AND Cain pretty much whatever they want, within reason. They’d have to be really fed up with playing in SF to want to leave. It’s not like the 2000 era A’s, who couldn’t afford their best players. The Giants can.
Of course, if the Giants struggle mightily and are more or less out of contention by July, I’d expect Tim to get traded.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I'm enjoying this conversation, but
I think there’s a strong likelihood that any pitcher, especially those as talented as Matt & Timmy, expect their consistently high-quality performances to produce results. Here we have two pitchers who could conceivably be on a path to the HOF if they were given even league average offense. Which they are not. I cannot imagine that those two pitchers were satisfied that the Giants were unwilling to spend 2/$26M for Beltran after giving up Wheeler.
Perhaps there was something about Beltran that was so “chemistry-bad” that he would have undermined the team, but I doubt it. The point being that freeing long-term money is a good thing, but it may not be enough if your two best pitchers want to walk because the team was unwilling to fix it’s major flaw.
Don't believe everything you think.
+1
I’ve made this same point in other threads. There’s no way to know if it has any validity, but I think it would be naive not to consider that Cainer and Timmy might be getting very tired of having to keep the opposing team scoreless to have a decent chance to win their games. Especially Cain. I mean, he’s still under .500 for his career despite being one of the best pitchers in the league when viewed over the entire last 6 years.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
I think you’re misunderstanding one of my main points. I agree with you that the Giants most likely have the finances to sign both Cain and Timmy to extensions. My point is that at this time we have no idea if either one of them want to sign an extension even if the Giants go all out to keep them. If either one of them want to leave then (barring injuries) they’re going to get plenty of offers that will be competitive or better than what SF can offer them. I don’t think that Sabes is assuming that Cain and Timmy will both sign extensions (that would be the height of stupidity and operational malfeasance), but I do worry that he doesn’t have a good strategy on what to do if either or both won’t sign. In recent history, it seems to me that Sabes tends to make impulsive and quick decisions when faced with big-picture personnel matters rather than have multiple contingency moves in place. I have a feeling that both the Cain and Timmy situations are going to require a ton of patience and having a lot of contact with agents and other teams.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Yeah, I’ve been saying this same thing for awhile. Also, back to the OP, the Giants started this offseason by saying their number one priority was to keep the pitching together and use their financial resources to lock up Cain and Lincecum. If they finish it without extending either of the two, I don’t see how it can possibly be considered a successful offseason: they will have failed to do the thing they themselves said was their priority, and failed on top of that to shore up the biggest weaknesses on the team (SS, offense).
Does every Southern guy want to play for the Braves? A team that can’t sell out their playoff games? They better save their money, they’ll have Cain, Posey and MadBum to grab, but it’ll be spaced out a bit. THAT’S why they’ve been so quiet this offseason, setting budgets just like our very own Rainy Day Crew.
I think regional biases are a very distant second to money in professional sports. Jimmy Rollins has had a very nice career in Philly. If the Rainy Day guys have their money lined up, Buster will be a Giant. He can go get his peach cobbler in January.
by shankbone on Jan 14, 2012 9:07 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Not just the Braves
You’ve got the Braves, the Marlins, the Rays (assuming they get their stadium issue fixed) and even the Nationals (Virginia is a southern state and would mean the Buster would play twice as many games in Atlanta every year). I think the key thing is the small town aspect of their childhhood, not so much the southern aspect, and where their extended family resides. The SF Bay area is not a place that most small town southern boys want to raise their families in – for a variety of reasons.
I don’t know Buster personally, but I did watch him play his college ball at FSU and I think I have a very good handle on his personality type. The only way that I see him remaining with the Giants after he becomes eligible for free agency is if the Gaints remain a top-tier team that is contending for a World Series title year-in and year-out. And even with that lure it will be hard for them to keep him from wanting to raise his kids kids closer to home. Let’s not forget that his wife is a small town southern girl also.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
I’m from a small town in the NorCal (Grass Valley) but I’ve lived in metro Atlanta for eight years and have traveled all over the state. While most of the “Southern charms” of Georgia are lost on me, I can honestly say that there is little difference in the feeling of community between Leesburg and a small town in California like, say, Tamales. I would assume that if small-town life is what the Poseys want, they can find it anywhere.
LIke all of you, I don’t profess to know Buster or Kristin; I do concede the possibility that they place deeper importance on a southern upbringing for their twins and for the proximity to home than I might fathom. If he does want to leave for the south once he’s become a free agent, he’s earned that right. But I’m optimistic that the between the memories he will have made in SF, the rich contract that he’ll eventually get and the fact that his twins will be almost 5 by the time he’s a free agent will lead him to re-sign in the Bay Area.
I agree with Fla-Giant that it’s supremely unlikely that he’d sign a Longoria-type deal. If his agent is smart, he’ll throw his body in front of an idea like that because he knows how much money Buster would leave on the table. Tampa got lucky with the Longo deal; they tried a similar tack with a young B.J. Upton but Upton and his agent wouldn’t go for it.
Giants long-term strategy needs to center around keeping Sandoval (and keeping him in shape), Posey, Belt, Timmy, Cain, Madbum. If they can keep that core and continue to draft and develop talent like they have in the past few years, they’ll contend as long as those guys are healthy.
I agree that there’s not much difference, besides weather, between a small town in Cali, Georgia, NJ, or Iowa. However, it’s not the generic small town aspect that I was pointing to for Buster, it’s the fact that the specific small town that almost all his family and friends, and all of his wife’s family and friends, still live in and around is in Georgia. There’s just no easy way for his and her families to spend much time around Buster and his future family if he spends 6-7 months out of year working in SF. I also think that it’s a huge issue for a small town southern boy that his family and friends rarely have the opportunity to see him play in person.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
No way that Posey signs a Longoria type deal. Let’s not forget he dropped to 5 based on the bonus demands, the Giants stepped up with 6.2MM, a record at the time, and I fully expect them to step up again when the time comes to sign him as a free agent. Fla-Giant, I’m just not buying the southern small town story at all. It is all about the money, and the second consideration will be about the team having the chance to win, which is a good point you made.
Leftyqb6 – fellow foothills boy here – born in Nevada City, spent a lot of time there while growing up in the East Bay.
I see no way the Giants aren’t focused on keeping their core together. They need to be conservative with money to give themselves the best chance of getting that accomplished. Again, I think its always about the money, and while I doubt there are any hometown discounts to be had, as long as the contracts are fair I see them happening.
Does Posey's injury peraps change his perspective?
There was initially concern that his career may be over. That could serve as a reminder that not much in life is guaranteed and a Longoria-type deal would set him and his family for life.
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
peraps?
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
I doubt it
Posey is quiet about it, but he is supremely confident in his ability to be a superstar. And since he’s going to be a Super 2 guy this coming offseason he really has nothing to lose by waiting to see how this season turns out. I guarantee that he thinks he’s going to have a great year this year.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
How do you know all this stuff about him?
Do you know Buster personally?
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Sign Matt for 6 years, 108mil. The numbers are not super important; my point is that he should be signed long term, and the deal should get done before anything with Tim is set in stone.
At this point, it will be almost impossible to sign Cain to an extension before Tim gets his new contract. Even if nothing else happens in the next 2 weeks between the Giants and Tim, they will have an arb hearing in 2 weeks and Tim will be assigned a 1 year salary by the arbitrator. The second thing is that, once again, you’re assuming that Cain wants to sign a new contract with the Giants. For all we know right now, Cain doesn’t want to be with the Giants next season and he won’t sign a new contract no matter what the Giants offer him. The closer we get to the end of February without a contract agreement, the more this appears to be what is holding up the contract talks between the Giants and Cain.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Actually I don’t think old fashioned ethics have ever had a place in baseball, and the further back into old fashioned baseball history you go, the less old fashioned ethics you see.
Also, I’m not sure what the evidence is hat Cain has been more durable and reliable over their careers. I can see evidence that Lincecum’s been better.
By old fashioned ethics I mean a kind of human-respect type thinking that is not so much baseball based but society based. The same kind of thinking that leads to teams deliberately overpaying old and busted but much beloved veterans so that they can finish out their careers on a certain team.
The evidence being that Cain has pitched more innings and has, if anything, only improved over the years. Lincecum, since 2007, has experienced a noticeable, if somewhat superficial decline.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I’ll assume you meant to type 2009, since after 2007 Lincecum declined his way to back to back Cy Youngs, Cain’s having pitched more innings is entirely due to having been in the majors longer. They’ve brown nearly identical innings since Lincecums first full year (with Tim slightl in the lead). As such it doesn’t tell us much oing forward. One interesting note is that both have undergone dramatic decline in their use of the fastball. Cain’s drop last year was particularly notable.
by Roger on Jan 14, 2012 11:24 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It shows that Cain’s fastball has not declined in effectiveness. If he’s relying on his secondary more because a decline in his fastball then he’d likely get torched. There’s no doubt that both his FB is slower than it was a few years ago but he’s definitely learned to compliment his FB with his other pitches.
I want to ask you though, can using the FB less often cause more wear and tear on Cain? If so, will his FB continue to decline to the point where his secondary is no longer as effective due to an easily hittable FB?
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
Actually by Fangraphs Cain’s fb value showed a substantial drop lat year too. There’s some thought that the less you hrow b the less velocity you have (becaus you’re not building up arm strength), and particularly this goes with pitchers who rely on change ups as Heidi out pitch.
I guess I was referring to fastball velocity re Tim’s decline, said velocity being a pretty prominent bellwether of long-term pitcher health. His results weren’t affected, as you have mentioned, until 2010, when he was noticeably (again, superficially) less effective.
Cain’s having pitched more innings is entirely a result of his having more seasons was the point I was making. He’s got the “longer track record” of pitcher health, which is generally a pretty major selling point when giving pitchers long term contracts.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
mhad
I think your cost/benefit analysis is spot on. As Fla-Giant said above, I hope that this has been Sabean’s thinking over the past several months.
I also agree with Fla-Giant on the crucial nature of the next 2-3 years. Getting rid of the bad contracts of Zito, Rowand, & Huff are no-brainers; but how that now-available money is allocated will determine the team’s fate for the following 5-6 years (or more). The question is: can Sabean identify the players most likely to continue to produce (and reward them appropriately) and let go of the ones least likely to continue to perform? That is not particularly a skill that Sabean has demonstrated in the past, imho. And it’s certainly a difficult task. But it is ultimately his job, and since he is the one in the kitchen he will have to be the one to take the heat.
Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this son of Cabrera.
Good post Mhad.
Wish you had included your first comment in your post as well though because I think a key point to this off-season is whether or not Sabean can extend Cain or Lincecum. Although, if you had included a discussion of Cain or Lincecum, we wouldn’t be able to vote. Fair enough.
There's a First for Everything:
Edgar Renteria, The First World Series MVP in Giants History.
But honestly, if you’re trying to analyze how the offseason has gone, how can you include, much less privilege, things that haven’t happened? You have to restrict yourself to the facts as given, right? Not the facts as desired.
the team as currently constructed seems likely to receive surplus value from nearly very player on the roster
Seems like wish casting to me. As things always tend to go wrong in the long season I’d n er ST that about team’s roster. I certainly wouldn’t say it about this Giants roster which seems to have several pretty obvious players who don’t seem at all likely to do so to me.
Hyperbolic on my part, perhaps.
Things can always go wrong, and very often do. However, my point is that, these kinds of things being largely unpredictable and uncontrollable, the team has put itself in a good position by targeting young, cost-effective players to fill their roster as opposed to talented free agents getting paid way closer to their market value.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I’d say there are only likely to be two or three guys like that on the roster though.
So I’d say players who are likely to provide less value than they’re paid would b Zito, Huff, Sanchez, Wilson, Affeldt, Lopez, Burriss (who’d I’d say the same about if he actually paid the Giants to play). Toss in Mota and you’ve got a third of the roster. Cain and Lincecum are getting to price points that are very close to market value and certainly requires sustained excellence to exceed. I personally have doubts about Crawfords ability to provide above replacement level value, and if Pill ends up with significant PT that’s a question mark as well. And then of course off roster you’ve got Rowand, who certainly won be providing surplus value.
Huff is getting paid 10mil, so say his expected value is 2 WAR. Sanchez 6mil, or a little over 1 WAR. I’d say both of those figures are reasonable expecations , and neither player is owed money next season, so if they are ineffective, it does not hamper the team long term.
Other than Burriss, who isn’t getting paid anything significant, the rest of the guys you have mentioned are relief pitchers, who are traditionally overpaid. However, Wilson’s getting paid 8.5mil, so roughly 1.5-2 WAR, which is a reasonable expectation for a high workload closer type. Mota’s getting paid 1mil, which is like .2 WAR, which is basically zero expectation anyway.
So yeah, maybe not every player, but certainly more than 2 or 3 can be expected to exceed the value of their salaries.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Last year Sanchez provided $4.4milvalue, Wilson, $2.8, and Huff (2.5). Plus obviously Zito, who gave us ($1.9) last year and would barely provide surplus vale for his 2012 salary if you combined his productivity from 2008-2011. And actually, now that I look at it you could say the same thing for Affeldt,amazingly enough.
Yes certainly more than2-3 players will give surplus value, but a lot of those can be expected to be negligee value: ie Fontenot, Stewart, Casilla. The only cost effective impact players are Sandoval, posey, Romo, and then hopefully Pagan and Cabrera. And in both the latter cases it’s somewhat questionable whether their surplus exceeds the sunk value of Rowand. Hopefully it does.
I would also add Bumgarner to your latter list. And the word you were looking for is negligible. I am not interested in the negligee value of Aubrey Huff, post-2010.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
How does autocorrect decide to change “part” to “ort”?
"Your curses do not compare to those of Houston fans or Detroit fans, and especially not to those of fans from the northside of Chicago. You are not Hamlet. You are Valerie Bertinelli. Your victim act is schlocky, and totally unconvincing. You fancy yourself tormented. You are merely insecure."
-- Scott Burton to Red Sox fans, 6/12/02
http://espn.go.com/magazine/burton_20020612.html
Dan Prtmeier
2010 World Series Champions!
Adopted 'nephew' to the ever avuncular and always awesome Jon Miller
by Johnny Disaster on Jan 17, 2012 8:21 AM PST up reply actions
I would also add Brandon Belt, but many people are not as confident as I that he will get 400+ PA this season.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Yeah, I forgot to say "good post"
A level-headed look at the roster
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
Interesting vote results so far
It fits with my theory that the people with extreme opinions are so loud that they leave the impression that it’s how everyone thinks.
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
I expected the somewhat unsuccessful option to be more popular, given the recent tone of the posters around here. I admire whoever voted for resounding success, either for their optimism or somewhat dark sense of humor.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I know there's people who suspect it was me, but I voted "Somewhat successful"
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
I resisted the urge to get the poll going by voting “resounding failure.”
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I missed the poll entirely. But I guess I won’t vote since it’s missing the choice I think is the most likely outcome: compete in 2012 and struggle in the following years.
You’d have to expect some pretty serious decline from some pretty young players for that to happen.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
and have the money reserved to keep them go to unproductive players. If they aren’t kept around that would be $40mm in payroll to find replacements/upgrades elsewhere.
by VizquelQuest on Jan 15, 2012 1:24 PM PST up reply actions
Well there’s the rub. Spending money wisely on the FA market isn’t one of our FO’s greatest strengths.
I certainly agree that Sabean’s track record is spotty at best but I thought it was worth pointing out that you have to assume both Cain and/or Lincecum leaving AND that the money saved is not used on a similarly productive player to project an overall decline in talent.
At the point in time we are talking about both Cain and Lincecum would no longer be coming at a discounted rate though, so finding a player on the open market should have the same likelihood of success. Ignoring Sabean’s poor track record of finding talent on the open market is probably unwise but then so would ignoring his track record on extensions. I’m not sure why the re-signing of his own player should be expected to have any higher degree of success.
I guess it all just goes to underscore Sabean’s short comings as a GM. If only he could focus on the draft and let someone else handle the rest.
by VizquelQuest on Jan 15, 2012 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
so finding a player on the open market should have the same likelihood of success
I wouldn’t agree with that because there aren’t necessarily going to be player’s of Cain and Lincecum’s level coming on the market in the next couple of years.
But yes, it’s true, that if pressed to it I’d say it’s likely for at least one if not both of the two to leave (though I hope like crazy i’m wrong on that), and that then I do assume they will not be successful at replacing that productivity on the open market.
Wow. I just checked out the FA class for 2013. Other than Hamilton there is no one of Cain’s talent available unless someone’s option is declined. I didn’t realize how bad the FA class of 2013 was.
Replacing Cain would be next to impossible for even a great GM so relying on Sabean is not very encouraging.
by VizquelQuest on Jan 15, 2012 6:08 PM PST up reply actions
Greinke's in the 2013 FA list
As is Cole Hamels. You could make an argument for Colby Lewis, but it wouldn’t be a good one.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
I can’t believe I overlooked both of them. Victorino and Ethier are also on the list but I would puke if I saw one of them in a Giants uni.
Greinke would actually be an extremely interesting pickup. If Rag’s magic HR reducing powers worked on him he could get back to Cy Young candidacy.
by VizquelQuest on Jan 15, 2012 7:51 PM PST up reply actions
And there it is
Colby Lewis: 2013 Giant. Ugh.
In the end, America will be remembered for three things: the Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
Proud parent of Javier Lopez: southpaw, poltergeist, haunter of dreams.
Calling relief pitchers a “know quantity” is a bit presumptive imo.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
I call him gerald. he’s a pristine white handkerchief, though? nediB eoJ Joe Biden ‽ Joe Biden.
Relief pitchers are volatile, of course, but I was more referring to the fact that, with the money given, they were more likely to stay with the team, as opposed to not signing them and saving the money to go for a free agent who might not take the Giants offer, thus losing Affeldt/Lopez in the process.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
And that, I think, is absolutely valid.
It is one of the reasons I was not all bunched up about the Affeldt and Lopez signing. They are NOT the reason we stood aside for Beltran.
Don't believe everything you think.
Great post. I’m not real happy with the Giants’ off-season, but I do think the financial flexibility they’ve maintained is a good thing.
They haven’t locked themselves into any additional long-term contracts.
Generally I’d say that’s a good thing, but in the present circumstances —
1. a core of five young, cheap stars
2. a mediocre rest of the team
3. a very winnable division
4. not much help on the way from the farm system
— this seems like the best possible time to splurge on a long-term contract or two.
a very winnable division
Have you looked at the snakes’ roster recently, or the guys they have in their farm system? Not to mention that the Fodgers will have a new, and likley very depp-pocketed, owner group in the next 6 months. No to mention that the Padres have a deep and talented farm system. The NL West is likely to be one of the toughest divisions in baseball very soon.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
The NL West is likely to be one of the toughest divisions in baseball very soon.
Precisely why we should have bolstered the offense with Beltran this offseason, thus taking on the division while we can and showing Matt & Tim that we don’t expect them to do all the heavy lifting.
Don't believe everything you think.
That's applicable to about 2 years ago, actually.
Had the Giants not ignored a rebuild strategy and not signed Zito and Rowand, they could have splurged 2 years ago, when Cain and Lincecum were actually cheap.
They’re aren’t cheap anymore, really.
Lincecum and Cain are still providing plenty of surplus value, and collectively, Lincecum/Cain/Bumgarner/Posey/Sandoval are very cheap.
There’s still plenty of money to splurge if they want to, of course.
Plenty? I would be surprised if they provide more than $10 MM of surplus value combined. Lincecum is about to get really expensive, and Cain is no longer very cheap.
Adopted father of Chris Lincecum, without whom (quite literally) Timmy would not exist.
$10M of surplus value from our own FA is a lot better bet than a 60% chance of getting undervalued superstars on the market. Especially if you look at the crop of pitchers available over the next two years and our lack of SP in the minors. Timmy and Cain create more revenue in merchandising, too, I think.
Ideally, we’d trade one or both and get a huge haul of prospects that would create $20-$50M of surplus value, but that would screw with “the window,” and fans would hate it. Honestly, though trading Cain to the Yankees for that deal rumored earlier, then using the cost savings on Beltran, Barnes, and holding onto JoSa instead of Melky would’ve been a fantastic move. Beltran+Barnes over Melky+Crawford have a good chance to outWAR CAIN-JoSa over the next 2 years, or at least break even, and the haul of Montero, Betances, other prospects and keeping Verdugo would’ve had tons of potential future surplus value. Montero would probably be ready to produce 2-3 WAR this season over Huff, even.
Sabean doesn't like to splurge
Mrs. Sabean makes him clean it up
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
poll choices are based on a false premise
namely, that the Giants’ offseason should not be judged by what they have done but simply by what they have. Obviously, the Giants are well stocked with talent and “will contend for the NL west in 2012 and beyond.” But just as obviously their offseason, in which every move was lateral at best and indifferent subtraction at worst, was a “resounding failure.” Those two facts are not in conflict but your poll implies that they are. We shouldn’t have to choose between “the Giants are good” and “Giants management fucked the dog all offseason” when both are completely 100% true.
by Royce Clayton as Miguel Tejada on Jan 14, 2012 7:00 PM PST reply actions
Good teams shouldn't be looking to get too much better
You want as many wins as are necessary to sneak into the playoffs every year. The Yankees could trade Banuelos and Betances and Romine and Nunez and…for more pitching, but they’re favorites to win the East now as it is. No reason to win 120 games just because you can, when more wins now cost you wins in the future. If the Giants think they’re contenders (and they should), there’s no reason to sacrifice the future for now.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
Sports is about the pursuit of greatness. Especially going into the long season, the goal should be to assemble the best possible roster.
There are implicit qualifications on that though
Couldn’t we improve our roster by packaging Brown and a couple other prospects for someone like Alexei Ramirez? Almost certainly. That’s a guy who’s a significant upgrade on a team that appears to be rebuilding, and would fit into our budget. But it would cost so much of our already thin system that it doesn’t make a lot of sense. Same goes for organizations that have good systems and are close to contending – the Rays could certainly put together a package for Ramirez, or some other strong SS. They could acquire nearly anyone they wanted with their system. There’s no chance their current roster is the “best possible roster” they could assemble.
But they think, as we do, that what they have will allow them to compete this year and what they would have to give up costs too much of their future. In MLB, unlike the NFL, NBA, or NHL, you make long-term investments because you can’t turn a team around in a season (and what I mean by this is that you can’t take, say, the Astros and make them contenders in a year). Teams do that, and rightfully so, because it’s good business sense to build a team that’s perennially in the hunt and never the favorite than a team that’s the favorite for three years out of ten.
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 Jan 14, 2012 10:32 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
You’re just talking about cost-benefit analysis of particular deals though. I don’t see how that changes anything. Certainly making deals that, as a matter of course, gve away more production gang they bring in is not a very logical way to try to put together consistently grat teams. On the other hand it I important to always remember hat most prospects will fail to become productive major leaguers and that often are more productive as trad chps than as players.
Personally I think you overrate the Rays system, which suffers a huge drop off after Moore (probably the biggest drop from #1 to #2 in baseball), but yes they do always keep an eye on he future. But we’re I them I would definitely be looking to improve SS and C, as the AL wild card could quite conceivably take 94-95 wins this year and you really have to be a very great team to get tat in the AL.
The Yankees could easily have sat on their hands and said we can probably sneak in, but what they did instead was stunning and impressive and should hav put a beam of joy on their fans faces because they really have put themselves in a position to be great. And with the pitching depth they look to have now I wouldn’t be shocked if thy do look to deal one of the Bs (I’d use Banelos) if Arods situation makes them want to get a RH bat at some point.
I think quincy was saying...
…that your statement:
Especially going into the long season, the goal should be to assemble the best possible roster.
…is overly absolute and not practical.
A team has to balance the objectives of both short-term and long-term success. That’s why each time a team trades prospects or even young players for one year of a guy or a end-of-season rental, it’s open to debate.
If my take on his comments are correct with him.
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
I always assume “given pragmatic restraints” in my thought process and thus omitted it from the sentence. A Freshman mistake.
Of course you have to balance long and short term objectives. My objection to Quincy is his notion that your objective should be to try to sneak into he playoffs, which given that things are always likely to go wrong with the plan, seems a recipe for failure to me, and worse falls in line with what he most cynical fans often accuse the team of: try to be just good enough to sell tickets, but don’t bother with anything more than that.
I thought that might be the case
So then it goes back to the premise of the OP; that they’re fielding a team that should be better than last year while leaving flexibility for subsequent years.
It’s open for debate as evidenced by all this discussion, but I more or less agree. I also agree with you that Cain and Lincecum are an integral part of those subsequent years.
What will be fascinating is if their demands become so high (in years and/or dollars) that the Giants have to decide whether they’re worth it or the money could be spent more effectively elsewhere.
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
Trying to sneak into the playoffs
For a smart team, is not trying to build an 85-90 win team if everything goes right. It’s assuming things will go wrong, so you build a team that will win 95 games if everything goes right and sneak into the playoffs most years when you win 85-90 games depending on your division and luck.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
Comparing what the Rays do and what the Yankees do
Is more than a little odd. The Yankees made a great trade, but they did so because they already have a fantastic offense and can replace Montero’s bat via free agency. The Rays could make a move like that I suppose, but there aren’t too many strong SS/C bats available.
Perhaps the best current example of a “best possible roster” philosophy would be if the Yankees signed Fielder. They now have a “hole” at DH, they certainly have the money, and it would make their team better. But it’s unnecessary – they already project to win the East, it would cost them a lot more than just his high salary given the luxury tax, and they’d have to surrender a pick. That doesn’t seem like a good move to me, even if it would given them the best possible roster. Which is why that philosophy is just generally problematic – it makes it seem like it’s a good idea to do anything that helps you today no matter what it does to tomorrow (or today, for that matter).
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
I would also say that if we were offered a Brown for Ramirez deal I him we’d be crazy not to take it. A guy who’s been worth 9 wins in the last two years at a position of desperate need, who’s also signed to a very reasonable 4/5 year deal for a 23 year old at a position of organizational strength who’s never played above the Cal league? Honestly that seems like a no-brainier to me.
Sadly Alexei $5ml contract for 2012 would no doubt break our budget, and our FO would politely hang up the phone.
OK, but would you throw in Panik and Belt?
On paper, it would make the team better in 2012, but wouldn’t it throw away too much of the future?
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
Again, I don’t think anything I said should be construed as: make a habit of brain dead deals that appear to give away vastly more value than you receive. I also don’t think they should throw in Lincecum and Cain to the deal, and the last time I bought a car, I didn’t offer to pay twice the sticker price, just for e fun of it.
So to clarify, keeping your inventory stocked with depth and potential impact is a vital component of trying to be the best you can be. As is assembling strengths and addressing weaknesses of the major league roster. Successfully making the relevant evaluations of who to keep and who to exchange is a huge part of the front offices role, and it is a very difficult one. You can’t overstate he importance of the future (especially as prospects very very frequently don’t turn out and someday never comes) nor should out understate it (if for no other reason than you’ll need valuable trade chips in the future as well).
The other thing of course, is that the future hasn’t come yet and you can still impact it at a later date. I know Rangers FA who loathed the Clff Lee/Justin Smoak deal because it was mortgaging too much of the future. A year and a half later that attitude looks silly for a variety of reasons. On the other hand you can make a reasonable argument that the Red Sox could have made he playoffs in 2011 if only they hadn’t made the Victor Martinez deal in 2009, but that deal did play a significant role in getting them to a postseason and needn’t be regretted I think.
Anyway I never meant to suggest profligacy and wantoness as successful approaches to roster building; but I do believe that wih all the resources, innovative thinking, an good old fashioned player evaluation skills you can muster, a FO goals should as ambitious as possible; not a faint-hearted “well I think e have a chance” but a roaring “come and get us.”
Actually I suppose the best litmus case on the balancing long and short term right now would be the Colby Rasmus deal. With flag in pocket (and a flag I suspect will grow in stature thru the years thanks to Gm 6 and the end of the Pujols, Larussa era, it would be fascinating to see a poll asking should the Cards have made hat deal. There’s certainly an argument to be made either way.
I was assuming we'd have to trade more than just Brown
Hence the inclusion of “a couple other prospects”. And that type of deal wouldn’t give away vastly more value than received, just trade a lot of future value for substantially less present value, the difference being mitigated by the inherent risk in future value. A simple win-now move that teams make all the time. But no team constantly makes win-now moves; every organization, at one point or another, doesn’t acquire a player that would help them compete because it would cost too much of their future. Adding Lincecum or Cain to that move would take it from a win-now move to a stupid move.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
I rec’d your post above. Well said.
Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this son of Cabrera.
I always say, "A rec from Lyle, will make you smile"
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
First of all, I'd like to thank my family
They’ve been with me through everything, from when I started writing that comment to when I hit the “Post” button. I know I couldn’t have made it without their support.
Um, who else, who else…oh, of course Intel, Asus, Logitech, HIS, the various companies that manufacture the parts that went into my computer…um…Earthlink, my internet service provider, they give so much and want so little! Uh…evolution, for creating a conscious mind…man, I am so unprepared for this! Roger, he gave the reply I needed to post that comment…I can’t think of anyone else, but if you had a part in helping me win this rec, you know who you are! Good night!
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
/runs back to the microphone
Oh, and Lyle for the rec! Ohmygodicantbelieveialmostforgothim!
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
Nice
And just in time for Golden Globe/Academy Awards season.
And yes, I know I was being made sport of. All in good fun.
Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this son of Cabrera.
Oh, good
I was afraid that would come off as nasty and sarcastic.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
One thing that I do believe was misinterpreted in my original statement is the inference that “the pursuit of greatness” is a short-term mindset. Quite the opposite, as sustained excellence is usually considered a higher form of greatness than one offs.
And I think I should amend construction of the best roster possible to construction of the best organization possible, considering minor league depth a necessary extension of the 25 and 40 man.
Makes sense
You through me off with this:
Especially going into the long season, the goal should be to assemble the best possible roster.
I interpreted it as speaking only about the upcoming season
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
What I was trying to say was that the baseball season creates a lot of attrition (injuries, slumps, off years, etc) and that trying to create just enough talent on the roster to sneak into the playoffs is more likely to fall short than fall safe, and therefore you need to stockpile depth and get as much impact as possible.
That’s not a short-term only view, though. I think you also need to be replenishing your well of upcoming talent at the same time. But I do believe that in trying to find the balance between maximizing short-term success without selling out sustained success two things are important to keep in mind: you have more opportunity to fix long-term problems than you do short-term problems (ie there are lots of different ways to reinvigorate your system’s talent level); and, 2) the short-term plans are more predictable than long-term plans because so much will change between now and three years from now, and consequently they should get more priority in the scheme.
In the end it all comes down to good scouting and good player evaluation. That’s always the bedrock of success in either term.
Your reservations are noted.
I was not aware that the Giants management had been fucking the dog whilst we discussed the various merits of Ryan Vogelsong’s second year. If it as true as you claim (i.e, 100%), then perhaps calls for a change in management are warranted.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
That's not how you win an argument
But just as obviously their offseason, in which every move was lateral at best and indifferent subtraction at worst, was a "resounding failure." Those two facts are not in conflict but your poll implies that they are. We shouldn’t have to choose between "the Giants are good" and "Giants management fucked the dog all offseason" when both are completely 100% true.
People treating their opinions as truths (i.e. leaving out “IMO”) is common, but it’s particularly egregious when you state your opinion and them explicitly describe said opinion as “fact” or “100% true”. You did it twice here.
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
LOL
It’s like ending an argument with, “Period. End of story.” and thinking that means you won.
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
"This conversation is over" is the one that gets me
Goddamn parents can’t prove me wrong so they end the discussion.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
It was a do nothing offseason
It was a total do nothing offseason because the Giants have boxed themself in with the Zito contract among other bad moves. Giants will finish 3rd at best.
by Giants-Just-Win on Jan 14, 2012 9:41 PM PST reply actions
its not only the Zito and Rowand, and Huff contracts that box this management group in.
They overpay for mediocre guys, and then refuse to pay more for serious talent. You would think a team that would spend 6 million on Sanchez, 6 million a year on an injured over 35 derosa, 11 million a year on Huff, 5 million for Affeldt, would have no problem spending 13 million a year for Beltran, or 11 million a year for Rollins. Are 60 innings a year of nerve racking relief from Affeldt worth five elevenths of a Jimmy Rollins?
by bradleybear on Jan 14, 2012 11:38 PM PST up reply actions
I'd respectfully ask you again
to consider the Huff contract at the end of the 2012 season. We got him for, what, $1.5M in 2010 and he lead us to the WS. Last year at $11M he stunk up the place. So, if he comes back and posts .275/23HRs/85rbi in 2012 won’t you feel pretty good about the 3 years and the $23.5M?
Don't believe everything you think.
by wcovington on Jan 15, 2012 3:01 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
How firmly do you believe this?
Giants will finish 3rd at best.
Despite a historic number of injuries and a pythag that suggests a better record with just normalized RISP hitting, they finished in 2nd place last season.
I respect an opinion of “I don’t think they did enough”, but which to teams in the division have done so much that a a 3rd finish at best is so assured?
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
According to Baseball Prospectus, they should’ve had a worse record — expected to win 83 rather than 86. The hitters’ bad luck was outweighed by the pitchers’ good luck.
Perhaps with the way things happened
But the RISP situation was historically awful and shouldn’t be expected to happen again. That should give them more than a three-game boost.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
No, actually Evan's 83-win value is BP's 2rd-order wins.
This normalizes for bad RISP luck.
BP’s 1st-order wins, which only normalizes for Pythag, had the Giants at 81 wins.
The only boost you can give them past that is the injury boost, and I do think injury boost puts the Giants at a talent level around 86-88.
I certainly do not buy the concept that Jonathan Sanchez, and Ramon Ramirez will be easily replaced within.
Maybe if Hembree turns out to be ok, perhaps, but to easily replace Ramirez from within at this time is unlikely. Jonathan Sanchez will not be easily replaced from within or otherwise. You would need to attach a bionic arm to either Zito or Surkamp to have a chance.
Hembree isn’t RR’s replacement, it’s Mota or Runzler. Not to mention that the odds of RR repeating his recent excellence in the 2012 season were very low. Relief pitchers tend to swing between extremes from year to year – especially ones with RR’s unimpressive past record.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Iron Curtain??
At the end of the pre-season, does an iron curtain fall so that all baseball dealings terminate, and what you see is all there is? Or is it possible that once the Giants have more of their financial uncertainties resolved—and here I mean not only arb cases and Cain’s contract, but also more of the A’s-to-San-Jose situation—they may revisit the question of how much they can afford to spend? No doubt there will be fewer oft-injured, costly, well-past-their-prime, spavined, long-term-contract vets kicking around by then, and in the meantime we shall have to put up with a team that has only a very small number of starters ripened into their ’30s, OMG. Many posters on this site seem to believe in the thud of the iron curtain come April, but until I hear it, I will not fall into deep despair; and perhaps not even then.
Historically speaking, very few in-season contract extensions have ever been reached with any players that were set to become FAs at the end of the season – especially true for players that were due to get a big multi-year contract in free agency. If both sides truly want to reach a deal then they’re going to at least have an agreed upon framework before the regular season starts, because neither side wants negotiations to affect the player’s on-field performance. In addition, once the regular season starts it will usually be in the team’s, or the player’s, best interest to hold off negotiations due to the poor or great results of the player on the field. Finally, due to the new CBA rules, the trade value of players will be severely degraded once the season starts, becasue no team gets comp picks for their free agents unless said player wasn’t traded during the regular season.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
In terms of the Giants’ future, why do you focus on prospective free agents? As to the degradation of trade value, that would apply, wouldn’t it, to players who played less than one season for the team they were traded to? and hence the comment focuses again on (prospective) free agents.
I don’t fully understand your first question. Do you mean why do I focus on Cain and Timmy, who can’t be FAs until the end of this season and next season, respectively? If so, then I would answer that I’m focusing on those 2 because that was one of the main points of the OP. As for your 2nd question, trying to trade Cain this regular season, or Timmy next regular season, assuming both don’t sign an extension before that time, will impact that Giants adversely. Opposing teams are not likley to give back as much in an in-season trade, because they know that they will receive no compensation for either pitcher if they can’t be sign them after the trade is completed.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
No, I didn’t mean why you focus on Cain and Lincecum; I meant, why do you focus on the Giants’ during-the-season chances in the FA and prospective-FA market (“Historically speaking, very few in-season contract extensions have ever been reached with any players that were set to become FAs at the end of the season – especially true for players that were due to get a big multi-year contract in free agency.”)? There are lots of players who can be moved who aren’t in that category. The Giants can address needs very handily after the season begins, without having the burden of two years of a 35-year-old semi-mobile outfielder or three years of a mid-30s shortstop at $12.67M a year.
Not sure what you mean re Iron Curtain
Are you saying that the baseball season is some kind of Soviet-era suppression?
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I actually had in mind what Churchill presumably had in mind—I think his Iron Curtain was an Englishing of the French rideau de fer, the iron curtain that falls in front of the entrance way to a store when it closes. My ironic suggestion was that bloggers treat the off-season as the only time when trades and signings happen, with the store door fast shut thereafter, so that the Giants’ fate in 2012 and thereafter depends on what has already happened. But what I had in mind does benefit from the further totalitarian twist put on the “iron curtain” phrase by Goofus’s gloss on it.
I see
Although I think what Churchill was referring to was more the inability to understand what was happening on the eastern front of Europe, not necessarily that things were shut down. So I thought you meant maybe that the fans are kept intentionally in the dark about the thinking of management, which I’m not sure is true. It seems like if Sabean even sniffs the various tires of a certain player, we tend to find out about it.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Wait. Your poll choices don't accurately reflect the possible spectrum of results.
For example, I think that the offseason was very unsuccessful, but the Giants will contend in the NL West from 2012 to beyond.
You are not the only one with this quibble, apparently.
It seems strange to me that people think that the Giants are in good shape to contend for the next few years, but still decry management’s ineffectiveness. Perhaps expectations of Sabean are inordinately high.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I cut my other reply short down there to address this.
You’ll see, in it, that almost all of the value/production that you cite for this offseason was not a result of actions taken this offseason.
The team started off good, so I think it’ll be good. And management has been quite effective in player development for the last 3-4 years, but that, too, has nothing to do with the 2012 offseason.
And I think this is the main fallacy of the post.
The team, while perhaps not among the elite of 2012, remains a cost-effective contender for the NL West, and so I submit that it was a rather successful offseason.
Had the Giants literally done nothing the entire offseason, they would have remained a cost-effective contender for the NL West. Schierholtz, Torres, and Belt are a surplus-value outfield just as much as Cabrera, Pagan, and Schierholtz, and the surplus value is comparable.
Romo, Schierholtz, and Sandoval would still be cost-effective players making the Giants a contender.
The payroll would still be flexible going forward.
But the problem with calling this theoretical no-move offseason successful is that, given the Giants’ 83-88-win talent level, their marginal value for wins is really goddamn high. See image.
You’re looking at a situation where the Giants stand to gain so very much from improving the team by a few wins, because those wins are much more valuable than wins are in the abstract. (The wins are more valuable because making the playoffs is very valuable, making the playoffs being the most important and most impactful step to Winning the World Series)
So, that in mind, the hope is that the Giants take any and all resources available and use them to increase the talent level.
by dregarx on Jan 15, 2012 1:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Can you explain the "marginal revenue of wins" figure?
It seems to me that their revenue is close to be fixed since the team will almost assuredly draw something close to maximum capacity.
Not sure how much they benefit from additional revenue from TV ad sales and their partial ownership of CSNBA, but extra Panda hat sales can’t mean that much.
Bold Prediction: Pablo Sandoval finishes 1st or 2nd in 2012 NL MVP voting. I'm Twittering now (well maybe not literally now): @GoofusMcP
Yes, sir!
The additional revenue is playoff revenue. Since teams on the cusp increase their playoff chances much more with a single win than teams in the dust or teams at the pinnacle, those wins have more value.
Now, if you look at what the Giants had as free resources (which I won’t consider Torres to be because he appeared to be essentially a value-for-value flip in my book), they had:
-whichever amount of money they decided was free to spend on players
-Jonathan Sanchez, I suppose, since Surkamp and Zito are, while both worse, viable starters
For Jonathan Sanchez, they moved surplus value and depth from the rotation to surplus value and depth in the outfield. I’ll submit that while they didn’t really increase surplus value, they made a shallow are deeper and a deep are less deep, but still good, so this is quite nice in my book.
The only other moves (IIRC) were to sign a 0 WAR player for $5 million, and a 1-WAR player for $4 million.
So where were the Giants? In a position where wins are a premium, and much to be desired. What did the Giants do with their cash? They bought 1 WAR with $9 million.
That’s not a great offseason.
This is good criticism.
I rec’d your original post, as it adds some good analysis to the discussion.
It is true that the Giants did not actually do much. My point in posting this article was that, when you take the roster as a whole, the strategy appears fairly sound. Sometimes standing pat is a valid strategy, although not popular after a disappointing season. Had the Giants significantly hiked up payroll to bring in a FA hitter, the choices would have been either a short-term fix (Beltran) or a long term mammoth contract (Fielder, Pujols) that would have seriously stressed the team’s ability to re-sign Tim and Matt.
There is an important distinction between wishing they did more and realizing the team is in a strong position as constructed, which is what I wanted to bring to light.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Thanks for the compliment! :)
I was hoping for small, short-term fixes without hiking payroll, such as Jamey Carroll, and had hoped for Beltran, but payroll does indeed probably have to increase to get Beltran.
As for your post.
I was OK with the Melky deal, so I’m cool with your analysis of it.
Mentioning all the league-minimum players, as well as Romo, Schierholtz, and Sandoval… I don’t know why you did it. Sure, they’ll get their payoffs this offseason, but the fact that they are Giants in 2012 and at a low cost has absolutely zilch to do with the 2012 offseason.
Moving on to Pagan. Pagan represents the flipping of value for value. Lose Torres, gain Pagan. Now, I still like Pagan, but Torres was just as much a “sure bet to provide surplus value” as Pagan, and in the process, they lost a bullpen arm. I can’t say I like it, but it’s not something I would whine over, conversely. Still, the trade is nothing to brag about; the Melky Cabrera trade is better in that sense.
Concerning Fontenot: I totally agree. Great decision. Great price.
I just realized that Fontenot was arb-eligible.
Meaning he was cost-controlled not because the Giants made a great signing, but as a function of his status as an arb-eligible player, which was still true before this offseason.
Meaning that that signing is more a result of the previous trade than a boon in itself.
The only other moves (IIRC) were to sign a 0 WAR player for $5 million, and a 1-WAR player for $4 million.
I’ll assume that the Giants consider Affeldt a potential closer if (a) The Beard goes down or (b) they can (and should) trade The Beard at the deadline.
Don't believe everything you think.
The maximum that I'd expect Pagan+Melky to be worth more than Torres+Sanchez in terms of WAR is probably 1 or 2.
And they lost more than that letting Beltran walk.
The most delightful ecumenical contradiction in nomenclature.
Dursh nerf darsh narf. Poop.
Last year Cabrera had a Baseball Ref oWAR that was virtually identical to Beltran’s. Nothing says that MC will repeat his great year, or that Beltran will at age 35 have what has become for him the unusual success he had last year. Since Pagan, Torres, and Sanchez were all injured for a good part of last year, what to expect of them in 2012 isn’t clear; nor is the advantage of Beltran over whom he would replace in the Giants’ OF, unless it would be Cabrera. But I have no idea what would support your unqualified confidence as to lost WAR.
I don’t think Beltran’s success at age 35 is “unusual”. In fact, his career suggests that it was the age 34 season (and the age 33 season, to some degree) that was “unusual”.
Beltran’s generally been a HOF-caliber player all career.
He's dealt with some pretty serious injuries, though.
It’s a lot harder for a guy in his mid 30s to come back from an injury than a guy in his early 20s. One (mostly) healthy season does not ensure he will stay productive next year, or the year after.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
That teams this off-season were so hesitant to bid for his services supports mhad’s comment—he is a considerable risk. Since he rebounded in 2012 from two not-HOF years, as you say, 2012 might have become the exception rather than the rule, hence my “what has become for him . . . unusual.” That 2011 is an unlikely predictor is more likely since he’s at an age that historically has been on a steeper downward slope of performance, as I recall the relevant graphs; and since he can no longer adequately play RF, let alone CF, acquiring him would have led to more rearrangements in the outfield, thus further raising the bet on the value of his bat.
typos
should be: “rebounded in 2011 from two not-HOF years, as you say, 2011 might well have become the exception”
Beltran’s bat has to be weighed against his baserunning, his fielding and his injury risk. Its not a slam dunk by any means, even if he would improve the offense. While Melky and Pagan won’t give the Giants 900 OPS they will field better than him and run the bases much better. I just think about his first game where it looked like he caught his cleat, and the wrist injury. Tough call though. The Cards deal signed may not have been accepted coming from the Giants. We have no idea about what Beltran was asking for in those early negotiations.
In support of what shankbone writes: According to Baseball Ref, Pagan when he was fully healthy in 2010 put up a WAR of 5.1, and last year Cabrera put up a WAR of 4.8. These are numbers equivalent to the WAR Beltran put up last year, and better than the two years previous. They are pretty much equivalent to any WAR Beltran ever put up in his NL career except for 2006 and 2008. No one has an idea of whether one or both of them will repeat that kind of performance in 2012, but each has shown himself capable of it in very recent years.
I actually like both Pagan and Cabrera, but you’re beating facts into the shape you want them to fit your argument. For one thing, why use rWAR for Pagan but fWAR for Cabrera (who’s 2011 by BRef accounts for only 2.9 WAR)? It gives the appearance of trying to shine up a argument that’s a bit scuffed, it seems to me.
It’s also worth noting that Pagan’s 2010 rWAR accounts for half his career total over 6 seasons, so suggesting that as a baseline or a true ability should at the very least be modified, especially given the 0.2 he put up last year (is there any reason to believe his nagging injuries from 2011 won’t continue to be a problem in 2012, for instance?).
Cabrera’s 2011 is only 37% of his career total by BRef, but by Fangraphs it’s a full 67% of his career worth and 2.5 Wins better than any other of his 6 full seasons. While you can construct an argument that there’s reason to hope he’s reaching a new performance plateau, the possibility that last year was an extreme outlier must at least be considered.
And finally, even if you constrict Beltran’s value to only his NL career (and I don’t know why you’d do that), the notion that
They are pretty much equivalent to any WAR Beltran ever put up in his NL career except for 2006 and 200
seems a stretch to me. His 2004 half season in Houston was phenomenol (3.5 rWAR in 399 PA), his 2007 was 5.3, his 2009 4.2 and last year 4.4. So in the last 8 years he’s had two seasons under 4 rWAR, as compared to Pagan who has only two seasons in his career as high as 1 rWAR, and Cabrera who’s never been above 3 rWAR.
Again, I like both Pagan and Cabrera and like both deals. But you’re argument is cherrypicking data like nobody’s business.
And now they’re both signed. Cabrera gets 6MM, I think that is a bit above expectations, I thought he was more in line with 4.5MM or so. Career year wins out I guess.
If you look at Beltran’s OPS+ down the line you see a remarkably consistent very good bat. As long as he stays healthy I bet he’ll continue that the next two years. He won’t steal bases or take extra bases though. His fielding is declining. Those are the areas that the younger players should be a better bet. I’m just saying that the ice packs on the knees in the dugout could give one pause, and obviously the sweet deal the Cards scored is a reflection of that as well, teams shied away.
BR clocked Cabrera as a -1.9 dWar last year. Ouch. That’s in CF, he will most likely be manning LF for us. We’ll see how that changes things. He did have positive dWar numbers for the Yankees. Want some more good news? BR clocked Pagan at -1.7 dWar last year as well! Did Sabean screw the pooch on this?
Personally I don’t think so. Pagan has been a white whale of mine. I think while he doesn’t have Torres range he is a good CF. His oblique injury should be completely healed. Melky will play much better defensively as a corner OF, and then the argument really becomes “Is he a tweener”. I think he most likely is, but I’ll take him over the Crisps and Dejesus of the world. He had a 330 BABIP, 10% over his career 299 average. That’s not completely unsustainable.
Sabean got younger and more athletic in the OF. As good as Beltran’s bat is, the injury risk and the downgrade in defense and baserunning should be considered. Belt is the wildcard, that will have to play out. In that regard, Sabean has his precious positional flexibility all lined up. Pagan gets hurt, Melky can shift to CF. 2 guys who switch hit and play the entire OF are pretty useful. But they won’t put up 900 OPS. There’s the rub.
Roger: You’re right that I used different WAR figures for Cabrera and Pagan, but I did so in error. The number for Pagan, 5.1 in his best year, is accurate, but that for Cabrera should be, as you say, 2.9. He lost 1.9 WAR defensively from an oWAR of 4.8. In this regard, however, one might note that in his other seasons, he was overall slightly on the plus side in dWAR. My clearly stated point was not that these guys will repeat their peak performances, but that such performances lie within capabilities that they have demonstrated recently. I will stand by that. As to Beltran, I have kept to his NL career because it is more recent, hence more relevant to his current capabilities. I’m not assessing his creds for the HOF, but his desirability in 2012, or 2012-13. I thought it was clear in my post that i am using his career as a standard of excellence—my praise for Cabrera and Pagan is that they are capable of doing as well as his usual level—but that his age and injuries might lead one to think that he will be less capable of doing what he has done. Pagan and Cabrera, close to their primes, have shown, once each in the last couple of years, that they can contribute on the Beltran level, so that one ought to be happy but not amazed if they do so. I will stand by this argument too.
I respect an opinion of "I don’t think they did enough", but which to teams in the division have done so much that a a 3rd finish at best is so assured?
No one in our division did much this offseason which I guess is good. But Arizona, and Col are better then the Giants at this point. Both score more runs, both have better lineups, Arizona had good but not great starting pitching. I give the nod again to Arizona for the West, follow with Col, SF, LA, SD.
I just don’t think the Giants have any kind of liineup at ALL. They have too many big question marks and are stuck with Zito as a 5th starter.
by Giants-Just-Win on Jan 16, 2012 2:43 AM PST reply actions
Your quote boxes are empty for me. Not sure if that’s a problem on my end or if you didn’t quote correctly. I’m assuming you meant for the first paragraph to be in quotes. FYI, put the quotation between the two phrases beginning and ending with these symbols: < >
But Arizona, and Col are better then the Giants at this point.
There are arguments that can be made that both teams are better than the Giants (although it’s quite a stretch to call Colorado better, in my opinion), but you are going to have to make them, because there are also perfectly legitimate arguments that the Giants are favorites to win the West.
I just don’t think the Giants have any kind of liineup at AL
You are entitled to think that, but that doesn’t mean that it is true.
Also, as has been said so many times on this website, being stuck with Zito as your 5th starter is not the worst position to be in. Many contending teams make do with worse.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Colorado scores runs (how could they not), but their lineup is no monster of offensive productivity, especially when Tulo gets hurt. FWIW they difference between Colorado and SF’s Runs allowed was about 30 runs more to the Giants favor than the difference between their Runs scored. I’m actually more worried about the Dodgers than the Rocks, but I still think the Giants and AZ should be the class of the division.
Lots of good analysis in this post and all of the replies
IMO, I think the Giants punted this offseason, but I can see why some are optimistic. I just don’t happen to agree. They had the opportunity to upgrade a corner outfield spot and at SS and decided to pass. (In before Calbear’s TOO RISKY – TOO MUCH MONEY!). The Giants will hang around most of the season. That appears to be enough for some folks.
Still, there is some heavy lifting to be done before spring training starts. The really telling thing will be their decisions on Lincecum and Cain. I wish there was a “too early to tell” option on your poll.
Dearest, Susan - The Patron Saint of Patience
by Lars The Wanderer on Jan 16, 2012 10:40 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
I suppose I should have waited until after all the arb dust settles.
I didn’t realize there was so little confidence in the Giants’ ability to retain both Tim and Matt until the end of 2013 (barring a disastrous start to 2012, whereupon Tim might very well be traded). I figured that the contract discussions with both of them were pretty much a formality at this point.
For what it is worth, I think the Giants did upgrade their corner outfield options. Just not with the player that we wanted. Same goes with SS. The nice thing about below replacement level production at a position: It’s easy to replace.
Finally: Are you allowed to “in before” your own posts?
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I didn’t realize there was so little confidence in the Giants’ ability to retain both Tim and Matt until the end of 2013 … I figured that the contract discussions with both of them were pretty much a formality at this point.
As for that, I’d say whatever confidence I did or didn’t have would be relatively meaningless since I have virtually no insight into the facts of the matter. Failing information, my “confidence level” seems like it would be little more than a litmus test on the relative optimism/pessimism of my nature (spoiler: it’s pessimistic).
My default position on such things is that if it hasn’t happened yet, it can’t be assumed.
To me the question is not in the ability but the conviction of the owner ship. Tha Sandoval contract was nice (and if is more like ’09 & ’11 going forward they get leverage to tear it up and go longer and the get the 1st year of 2 of free agency I would have preferred) but the reality is we have not seen them lock up any of the young core. I believe Rowand was the last contract over 4 years this franchise has signed. That worries me in a lot of ways. I have chosen a less favorable grade with an incomplete. They get something done with Cain and I view this a pretty good off season.
If they don’t I don’t want to think of Cain hitting the free agent market with teams in in few markets that are larger looking for starting pitching.
Just trying to gruntle my Giants baseball Jones in the least destructive way available.
2010 was just a dream.can I have another please?
by daveinexile on Jan 19, 2012 11:18 AM PST up reply actions
I think it's all about expectations and maybe I need to readjust mine
I thought a World Series win plus a full season of sellouts would get ownership to be on the Tier 1 spending tier (Yankees, Phillies, Red Sox, Angels, Cubs, White Sox) instead it’s pretty clear we’re firmly in Tier 2 (Mets, Giants, Twins, Tigers, Cardinals, Dodgers).
Once the Dodgers are sold theyll almost certainly jump up to Tier 1 and the Rangers will probably be up with us this year.
Additionally, with a tight budget I think creativity is necessary. A trait that Sabean and this FO have never really shown. And didn’t show this offseason. It’s frustrating.
If one or both of Cain and Lincecum this “strategy” blows up. And if we lose both we’ll almost certainly have a new GM. Although, the way this organization operates theyd probably just promote Bobby Evans.
Quote from my adopted son Mike Krukow: "We're the Giants. We're San Francisco. And we're World Series Champions!"
Spending
The budget has never been a real problem with Giants. The problem has been Sabean, and his utter lack of creativity. They have tied everything up in pitching, and bad contracts such as ZIto, and older injured vets. Yeah it’s great to have good starting pitching, but if you can’t afford any decent bats, what’s the point..
The Giants simply don’t score enough runs and that is why I have them behind ARI, and COL. I don’t even have the Giants hanging around this year. I see Posey having a tough year comming back from injury. I see enither Cain or Lincecum getting hurt at one point or another during the year. We didn’t upgrade much of anything in the offseason, so I don’t see much improvement in the lineup at all.
I am of the opinion that the Giants will not get Cain and Lincecum signed long term. One or both will be gone.
by Giants-Just-Win on Jan 16, 2012 3:22 PM PST reply actions
“Utter lack of creativity. They have tied everything us in pitching, and . . . older injured vets.” Many of your fellow posters think that the way to deal with this situation is to exercise a lack of creativity in signing up older injured vets, or at least older vets with a good likelihood of injury such as Rollins and Beltran. This seems to me exactly what people criticize Sabean for doing.
As for your clairvoyance about Posey, Cain’s or Lincecum’s getting injured, and one of those two pitchers’ being gone (with the tacit ancillary that the Giants will get little or nothing in return), I don’t have the magical powers to contradict you. You offer no evidence for any of these seeings. How did you come to have your crystal ball?
I think getting Pagan and Cabrera was actually pretty creative. It wasn’t signing up Coco Crisp or David Dejesus to a 3 year deal. 27 years old, 30 years old, 1 year deals where they have to play for their next contract versus a 35 year old better hitter worse fielder who would cost more than both of them combined. Leaving the old injured vets alone is a pretty nice call I think.
Huff and Sanchez are the only over 30 guys in the lineup. Cabrera if re-signed would have the honor as oldest bat in the lineup. It would appear the old vet story is almost re-written, if Panik and Belt do take over for Huff/Sanchez, there won’t be a single one left.
I’m of the opinion the Giants have a 90% chance to sign one and 60% chance to sign both. The Rainy Day Crew aren’t stupid, they know who the movie stars with muscle are. Insanely good insanely popular players who are homegrown will be retained at all costs. And on Sabean, why would he not want to retain the guys who won the ring, proved him right and essentially saved his job? Cain and Timmy have a legit shot at being absolute legends of the game. They know how good the fan support is here. That counts for just as much as any of the naysayer reasons for them bolting.
How is ptiching a problem here? no seriously. Most teams have over 50% of the 25 man spots in pitchers but this squad doesn’t have to do that. And if the farm is producing 2 or so replacement level players a season and manger uses them instead of trainge for another teams replacement level players mid season ( lossing they players that vcould be better then replacemtn level in coming years) this stratagey works well.
The real nut crusher is the time of the bad contracts and that current front office talks about saveing money more then buildign things.And they yet to have done little in the way of action to would dispute the penny pinching talk.
Just trying to gruntle my Giants baseball Jones in the least destructive way available.
2010 was just a dream.can I have another please?
by daveinexile on Jan 19, 2012 11:26 AM PST up reply actions
Spending
I am just making an observation on Cain and Lincecum, both have pitched a lot of innings over the last few years. I think due to the lake of run support each will try and pitch for more strikeouts, which could mean more injuries. Mind you I don’t wish ill will on either, I just think one or the other is due for some kind of breakdown.
As for one or both of Cain and Lincecum being gone. I look at it like this.
1. The Giants still have that F*&&&*& Zito contract for another two years, not counting the buyout.
2. In order to get Cain they are going to have to go something in the range of 4-5 years at 20 MILL + per. If anyone thinks Cain gets less then 20 MILL a year, I think your crazy. In order to get Cain and Lincecum your talking about 40MILL + per year for both.
3. I think they do have a decent chance to sign one, But I don’t see them commiting that much money long term to two starting pitchers. IF either gets to free agency without us doing something long term, I would count the Giants chances as zip. Too many teams will be in on Cain, LLA, NNY, SOX, TEX, the list goes on. The Giants will not get into a bidding war with the east cost power teams.
If we didn’t have that darn Zito contract still, I might be more of the opinion that we could get both. But even then, it has not been in the Giants nature to have two large contracts on the books. And when I am talking about large contracts I am talking about the mega deals that both Cain and Lincecum are going to get or require to keep.
Now manybe I am wrong, but I have not really seen any changes in the way the Giants manage the payroll to think they are going to sign both.
by Giants-Just-Win on Jan 16, 2012 8:37 PM PST reply actions
Zito doesn’t really prevent keeping either Cain or Lincecum. He has 2 years and then a buyout remaining.
Lincecum and Cain are already making pretty big money now so the per year increase is really only going to be about $6-7M for each of them. Rowand and Huff’s contracts come off the books in Cain’s FA year and Zito in Lincecum’s. There should be plenty of money to keep them both. I think the big question is that are they going to be happy with the situation in SF because there are going to be other teams offering similar money.
by VizquelQuest on Jan 16, 2012 9:10 PM PST up reply actions
On the Zito Bandito front, I think the Gints missed out on a golden opportunity to sign up a cheap LH 5th starter in Paul Maholm. The Cubs got a nice bargain there. 4-5MM to secure the back end of the rotation would have been a great little move. Instead, the Gints are being very headstrong about Zito being able to repeat his 1/2 seasons of league average in 2009 and 2010, and that doesn’t look like a good bet. They’re on the hook for a lot of money, its a sunk cost, they should cut it and move on.
There is still time to grab another scrapheap reclamation project, but Maholm stood out to me. Left handed ground ball guy, throw him in our park with Raggs & Co, and profit. Instead its Zito and the 83 MPH fastball. If he can’t get that lost velocity back, he is done.
Giants Score Zero Runs
Just another point on the bad lineup, and Lincecum..
The Giants scored no runs while he was in the game in seven of 33 starts, had one run six times and two runs five times, according to STATS LLC.
So 18 out of 33 starts we score two runs or less for him. I mean good grief, if were going to spend 40MILL + on both Cain and Lincecum how about some bats to go along with the pitching.
by Giants-Just-Win on Jan 16, 2012 9:06 PM PST reply actions
Contracts
I think plenlty of money is a relative term. Yes they may be able to fit both in the payroll, but if they do that means were going to be spending close to 60MILL on Cain, Lincecum and Zito in 2013. Another 9 Mill + for Wilson and that’s almost half the payroll on 4 pitchers, one Zito we get almost zip production out of. The Giants will not be able to do anything significant with the lineup, with that much money already commited.
I know the rest of the lineup is cheap, that doesn’t mean it’s any good.
I just think there are other ways to improve the overall team rather then having both Cain and Lincecum signed to long term mega deals. On top of that Lincecum has been danging around looking for an 8 year deal. IMO 8 years is just crazy for a starting pitcher. Some team will give him that, but I don’t think it should be the Giants.
Bottom line I feel is that the Giants lineup flat stinks, and were going to be sinking everything into pitching with just about no bats.
by Giants-Just-Win on Jan 17, 2012 3:40 AM PST reply actions
60mil on three players, with 20 of that coming off the books after 2013. That’s 40mil locked up, and 90-100mil remaining for the rest of the payroll. Say 30mil goes to arb raises for Bum and Posey, which is a generous figure, and you still have 60-70mil for the rest of the roster. That’s enough to seriously pursue a top flight free agent, whether a pitcher or hitter, depending on the team’s greater need at the time, without gutting any chance at filling the rest of the lineup with talented players.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
But they have historically been unwilling to pursue top flight free agents (particularly hitters who they insist won’t sign here and just use SF to drive up bids). Since Zito, they’ve not only studiously avoided every major FA on the market, Sabean gets angry when he’s asked about pursuing them. I think assuming that surplus payroll money will lead to top flight FA signings is a dubious assumption.
I’d also point out there just aren’t that many major FA’s available anymore. If Pittsburgh screws up, maybe McCutchen. Teams identify and lock up talent much earlier now. I agree about Sabean’s reaction and hitters unwillingness to roll to PacBell.
I’ve actually been looking at 2013/2014 free agents that could be possible good fits for the Giants. Here’s a very (read: very) preliminary list:
Michael Bourn, Josh Hamilton, B.J. Upton, Hunter Pence, Ian Kinsler, Stephen Drew, Ryan Zimmerman, and one Joey Votto.
Of course not all of these players will still be available when they would actually hit the open market, and many of them will probably be entertaining contracts for amounts way higher than than the Giants are willing to pay, but they represent potential free agent targets that could improve this team, and a few of them qualify as pretty effing major FAs that will probably test the open market.
As far as hitters not wanting to play in PacBell, when was the last time a major free agent hitter spurned the Giants’ offer to take less money to play elsewhere?
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
by mhad on Jan 18, 2012 12:36 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Quick aside, Rec’d your post.
I’d add Brandon Phillips next year if the Reds don’t get something done but he’ll be 32. Looking at the ages from MLBTR 2013 list BJ Upton stands out as young enough to be a good risk. Pence and Kinsler have a pretty good chance of getting cut loose in 2014. Votto could be quite the prize. There are some good players there.
Not sure if Roger was referring to this, but the Sabean chase of Carlos Lee, Soriano, Gary Matthews Jr. stands out big time for me as the prime example of players not really wanting to come to the Bay and using the Giants to keep the bid action heavy. Sabean threw down his “stalking horse” quote after that and refused to get in the bidding for Matt Holiday or Jason Bay a couple years later.
Personally I think the pitchers park rep is overblown and a good RH bat would thrive at PacBell, but it does seem to be a big factor for hitters.
I think the importance of the “big time hitters don’t want to come here” meme is that the FO itself seems to propagate it. They believe it (and maybe rightly, I don’t know) and it affects the way they approach the market. Thus the “we don’t want to be anybody’s hobby horse” meme.
I think its stalking not hobby (horse).
From Kawakami’s interview in 2009:
“We’re not going to be involved with people that are going to use us on the way to somewhere else. If there’s legitimate mutual interest, we’ll have meaningful talks. If it’s just going to be a stalking horse situation, we’re not going to spend the time.”
The next sentence makes me cringe. Sabean sucks at the middle market FA signings:
“Quite frankly, there are a lot of nice opportunities with that second tier. There are some people that are going to help, maybe in some cases just as well as the higher-priced free agent, including the numbers of years you’d have to give somebody.”
Honestly, that quote seems pretty down to earth to me. Sabean’s made a lot of great budget signings in the past couple years. At least enough to cancel out the duds. He might not be a genius, but he also does not suck.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
Oh I agree on his moves the past couple of years for sure. This Melky and Pagan trading is awesome, it avoids the middle market guys such as Crisp, DeJesus or Willingham, Cuddyer types.
The moves that weren’t so hot were Alfonso, Dave Roberts, Rowand obviously, if you want to get a bit nitpicky Randy Winn although he was pretty good, and the only guy recently I have a beef with is Tejada, but it was mitigated by only one year. Got value out of Uribe, Huff, Torres. Further back the Neifi signing sticks out. Rumors are the Bernard extension was at Dusty’s insistence.
I think Sabean learns from his mistakes, and is trying something new. Didn’t mean to sound so down on him, I’m actually quite pleased he’s not following a predictable path this offseason.
I wish he would try the whole trading for prospects thing.
I still salivate at getting Montero, Betances, and change.
You can salivate at it, but that deal never had any corporal reality of any kind. It was entirely the creation of a NY columnist who believed the Yanks should make such a deal. The smart baseball people actually running the team instead got much more for much less. It was always an absurd notion, being signicantly more than the Yankees had offered for Cliff Lee.
Let's play alternate reality, then...
Would Montero, Betances, and change be enough for 2 years of Timmy?
I know, sacrilege… but 2 years!
Honestly I wouldn’t. I think it sends a terrible message to everyone:the players, the fans, the industry. And it’s likely to be a bust in the long run. If he’s going to walk I’d do what the Cards did with Pujols last year: play him to be last day, get all the value out of him he has to give on the field, put a team around him hat has a chance to win, keep trying to negotiate a path forward, and if he goes another direction thank him for all he great years and let him know that he’ll always be a Giant. Then to work putting together another winner.
That path ends up looking good for St. Louis because they won a World Series
If they hadn’t, I think a lot of people would’ve said they should have traded Pujols for a fat haul of prospects. I wouldn’t have done that, but mostly due to my belief that Pujols wasn’t going anywhere, not because I thought the Cardinals were going to do anything. If you had told me before the season that the Cardinals weren’t going to re-sign Pujols I would have traded him ASAP (of course, the WS win makes that totally worth it).
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
I disagree. It looks good either way. But if it helps I’ll make the example Milwaukee and Pronce Fielder. They did the right thing this year and people who think should have traded him for prospects do two things in my opinion. They massively underrate the damage you can do to a fan base by folding up your hands and shipping off a star (and the consequent long term financial ramifications of that damage). And secondly they cling to the notion of the windfall prospect haul that has always been more myth than reality and becomes more and more so all the time.
That’s easy to say now when it’s all promise. But Tampas “huge haul” is already looking like a relief pitcher and possibly a UT infielder. The Adrian Gonzalez trade haul is already looking very sketchy (and in fact they’ve already tossed out the bigget chip with the trash) and the Mets “huge haul” is a single pitcher who has yet to make it to AA (you might be familiar with the letters TINSTAAP). You shoud probably have said Houston as well, since they did great work at the deadline as well.
They’re always huge hauls when they’re made, but reality will have its way more often than not.
In retrospect it’s the little deals that often provide the great return. Tampas pick up of Ben Zobrist for Aubrey Huff has got to be on the short list for greatest trade of the last decade. The Matt Joyce deal is nice value. San Diego I think will end up with more alue from trading Mike Adams than Adrian Gonzalez (though I do really like he Latos deal).
Instead of looking a the deals from this year which you think will provide huge hauls go back five ten years an find he ones that actually dd.
And then note that getting a huge haul does not necessarily = profit. Is hard to find a better return in recent memory than the Orioles got from Erik Bedard, especially if you factor in that they to o flp the one veteran piece for another valued prospect. And yet..
Also, I don’t want to obscure my first point which to me is more important. Look at he Cleveland Indians for a perfect example of how rebuilding can cause you long term financial problems. From the early, mid 90s thru about 2001 thy drew an average if about 3.4 mil and were consistently first or second in attendance in the AL.
Then they announced the intention to rebuild on a 3-5 year plan and a significant piece of at fan base disappeared and never came back. When they won 93 games in 2005 they were 12th ine league in attendance. When ey came within a game of e World Series in 2007 they were 9th (which is where they mostly sit now). At the nadir attendance was half of what it was in the 90s and the best it’s gotten since is about 2.3 million.
From a business perspective selling off stars for prospects is even more of a Rssian Roulette than from a baseball perspective. Hck even the A’s were managing to draw over 2mil every year in the Big Three hey day. Since he winter Ty traded Hudson and Mulder they’ve never managed 1.5 again.
They should have had to pay more than Lee
They only would’ve had Lee for a few months and he was 32 after that season to Cain’s 28. Not sure he’s worth Montero+Banuelos, but Montero+Betances isn’t crazy IMO, particularly if they work out an extension beforehand (which would almost have to be required for the Yankees to do that).
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
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
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
