Apologies for the length....
Tim Kawakami has an article up for the Mercury News, and I don't agree with a lick of it. I've always thought it was unfair to dissect a column point by point -- it's unfair at best, arrogant at worst -- but I couldn't help myself. No disrespect toward Mr. Kawakami, but this helps me elaborate on some of my points:
(Randy Winn was the highest regular in that category, at .798. Dan Ortmeier, in limited at-bats, finished at .814. Everybody else was pretty pathetic.)
Rios had 43 doubles, which would've led the Giants. (Winn had 42.)
-They were second-to-last in runs scored (683), behind only Washington.
-Even with Bonds' little final push, the Giants hit the second-fewest HRs (131).
-The Giants' slugging percentage of .387 was last in baseball, which is what happens when you keep playing Vizquel, Aurilia, Roberts and Durham.
Oh man, Durham. Durham and Aurilia probably were the worst two regulars in baseball last year, on the same friggin' team.
The leading run-scoring teams in 2007:
-Yankees 968.
-Phillies 892.
-Tigers 887.
-Red Sox 867.
-Rockies 867.
-Angels 822.
-Rangers 816.
-Indians 811.
Now, I know the Diamondbacks did a lot of things-getting to the playoffs, winning a round-with a lousy offense (712 runs, 26th in baseball).
But Arizona also hit 171 HRs... 40 more than the weakling Giants.
The Giants' offense is a mess. Rios doesn't fix that. With Cain and Lincecum, the Giants have four or five years to build an offense. The Giants would have three years to build an offense around Rios -- a modest upgrade on last year's Randy Winn, remember -- though 2008 is most likely lost.
I just don't get what this trade would accomplish.
0 recs |
203 comments
Comments
Re: Apologies for the length....
He's usually good for a "you are an idiot." Except for when he's good for "you are a moron."
by thehavenot on Dec 5, 2007 10:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by ramirez415 on Dec 6, 2007 8:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
In this case, though, it's not really fair to bash Kawakami. Mark Purdy obviously got first shot at this one, and wrote the "don't trace Lincecum" column, so Kawakami was obliged to write the opposing viewpoint. I'm pretty sure there's some unwritten rule of sports writing that says two columnists for the same paper can't ever agree.
by EliminateMe on Dec 6, 2007 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by jeffc on Dec 10, 2007 2:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sfgfan on Dec 6, 2007 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I love the false statement that pitching staffs can be manufactured. So can runs be manufactured. Ask the `07 DBacks. Besides a manufactured staffs been the Giants way since the 60's tell very recently. That has worked real well now hasn`t it Tim?
by daveinexile on Dec 6, 2007 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by ramirez415 on Dec 6, 2007 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by thehavenot on Dec 6, 2007 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Sigualicious on Dec 6, 2007 12:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by MeSoKrabby on Dec 5, 2007 10:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I couldn't agree more...
I wish Sabean would just say what we all want to hear.."no I am not as stupid as you all think, I will not mortgage the future and trade a future cy young candidate for a 27 yr old corner with moderate power, bring me a real offer or lose my number!" but he probably won't and the torment will continue
by brian on Dec 5, 2007 10:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
If Sabean makes such a stupid trade I will be done with this team until he is fired and Peter McGowan is no longer the owner.
by Bib12 on Dec 5, 2007 10:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by wcovington on Dec 6, 2007 9:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Stuttering John Tamargo on Dec 5, 2007 10:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Another POV
What you need to win is dominance at some facet of the game, or some dominant players. It's possible to put together a team which is above average in all facets, or to be above average at all positions, but it's damn hard. Rios is a good player, the sort of second-tier All-Star who helps good teams win. I do think some people on this board are a little too hard on him.
But.
Tim and Matt have the potential to be great. If you were betting on who would win the most Cy Youngs from 2010-2015, who would you pick? I'd pick Santana first, then probably Linecum. Of course, Timmy's arm might fall off, but when you're in dire organizational straits like the Giants are, those are the risks you take. It's not just about winning this, or even winning in a couple of years. It's about taking appropriate measures to your circumstances. Perversely, it's the tough situation we find oursevles in that should let us take certain risks. Did I want Dukes on our team? Not particularly, but that's the sort of risk we should be taking. It's easy to make fun of those moves when they don't work, but how do you think the Warriors got Davis for nothing and Jackson for very little?
We're in risk mode--the riskiest thing we can do is hold on to our potential flame-out, potential Cy Young award winning pitching. So that's what we should do.
by senorvegas on Dec 5, 2007 10:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Another POV
by wcovington on Dec 6, 2007 9:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I truthfully would be happier with marching Dan Ortmeier and co out on the field in 08 than trading Lincecum for Rios.
If we're going to trade Lincecum, which we shouldn't, it should be overwhelming. This is disgusting
by NeifiChicken on Dec 5, 2007 10:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by achiappanza on Dec 6, 2007 12:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Mr Scruff on Dec 5, 2007 10:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Cookyman on Dec 6, 2007 7:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Let's hang onto the good ones unless we get absolutely blown away. Like Jay Bruce AND Joey Votto blown away, or Rios AND Snider blown away.
by Smoke on the Water on Dec 6, 2007 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My favorite part...
Grant is absolutely right. He kicks Kawakami and every other mediocre baseball fans ass with this point. There is nothing in Tim's delivery that says anything about shoulder strain. If anything, Timmy may have elbow problems because of his whip-like motion... not his shoulder. Shoulder problems come from too much arm in their delivery, and bad release points. Scott Munter's arm-action says shoulder surgery all over it. Not Tiny's. I hate that people think Tim is prone to injury just because he's small and throws gas. He's limber and powerful. Look at Pedro. He's small and threw 95+ heat for a couple years. Now, he has elbow problems because his tendons are being strecthed to the point of ripping.
Tiny im has the kind of delivery that every under-sized kid in high school should have. Maximum amount of torque with the minimum amount of pressure on joints.
Kawakami, go back to being a nine year old kid and learn how to play the game before you comment on the physical aspect of it.
by milesntrane on Dec 5, 2007 10:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: My favorite part...
by Nathan on Dec 6, 2007 9:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: My favorite part...
by marcello on Dec 6, 2007 11:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
nothing like a good ol fashioned Fisking!
- if Tim's mechanics were so worrisome, the Giants never should have drafted him 10th. They've obviously decided the mechanics are fine and shouldn't worry about it.
- This trade screams "SEE, WE'RE DOING SOMETHING!" But they're not really doing very much. Signing Zito last year was for PR purpose - "See, we're doing something!" But the deal actually hurts the franchise financially. Trading Linc for Rios would have the same effect. It might look good in the newspaper to the average fan who doesn't pay attention (or gets all their Giants info by listening to the morons at KNBR), but it will hurt the franchise.
- Rebuilding is a multi-year process. One trade isn't going to make this team a contender. It will take multiple transactions, including drafts, to rebuild this team. Having a young pitching staff coming into its prime in 2010 while the offense gets explosive is going to be amazing. But we ain't there yet.
- in other words, 2008 is a lost cause. Let's hope for no major injuries and some experience gained for the young players. IF they see a real concerted effort to rebuild, they won't get discouraged by the losses.
- Rios as a #4 hitter is a total joke. He's a 5 hitter at best. You don't trade a #1 pitcher for a #5 hitter.
- Lincecum's upside is way more than Rios's. That alone should settle this thing.
- Pedro Martinez for Delino Deshields. I guess the Dodgers needed a 2nd baseman.
by nostocksjustbonds on Dec 5, 2007 10:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: nothing like a good ol fashioned Fisking!
That trade made more sense than this would make, and I'm not even kidding. Deshields was 24 and already established. Martinez was great, but the Dodgers already had four starters with an ERA+ over 100, two of whom were under 25. The Dodgers had young offensive talent all over the diamond...except second base.
by Grant on Dec 5, 2007 10:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: nothing like a good ol fashioned Fisking!
by Aadik on Dec 5, 2007 10:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: nothing like a good ol fashioned Fisking!
Apparently SF has had some of the same internal discussions:
Giants Manager Bruce Bochy said the team nearly made Lincecum into a reliever in March, and they still engage in the occasional debate to turn him into a late-inning presence.
by wilriv21 on Dec 5, 2007 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: nothing like a good ol fashioned Fisking!
by milesntrane on Dec 5, 2007 10:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: nothing like a good ol fashioned Fisking!
by SF Pete on Dec 6, 2007 9:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: nothing like a good ol fashioned Fisking!
by Sigualicious on Dec 6, 2007 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Therefore, it seems to me it would make more sense to make trades NEXT year. I would think virtually all of our pitching will have more value next year.
Lastly, the reports say the brain trust is debating - ie some several very experienced execs are pushing this idea. How can that be? That is scary.
by allfrank on Dec 5, 2007 10:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Adam on Dec 5, 2007 11:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Can't trade for 'em - no vets anyone wants (Marlin model)
Can't sign 'em - they're not free agents
Can't draft 'em - they won't be ready for 5 years.
They Giants receive very little benefits for sucking until the "5 year plan" (rebuild farm system) is finished. All they get is a higher draft spot.
Ironically, BS has created a self perpetuating veteran FA monster.
Or he can cut payroll, suck even more, and still not get any where, because the primary problem is lack of talent.
The only other solution is to find new "talent pools" to exploit: China? Russia? India? Mars? Females?
Here is your 2 year/$36 million analogy. The Giants system is like Iraq, ca. 2007. Staying is bad. Leaving is bad. Phased withdrawl is bad. Abrupt withdrawl is bad.
And in both cases, an idiot put us in this position.
by zenbitz on Dec 6, 2007 3:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I'm speculating, but I believe they underestimate the tolerance the fan base will have for a significant rebuilding. I know the team has had 3 straight losing seasons, but those seasons were portrayed as an effort to remain in the hunt, which was all bullshit and the Brass knew it (but was afraid to admit it publicly.) I'm guess they still don't want to admit that because it would essentially be admitting guilt in letting things deteriorate to this level. That's why Sabean should have been fired instead of extended.
by nostocksjustbonds on Dec 5, 2007 11:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by lmaozedong on Dec 6, 2007 7:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by projectmayhem713 on Dec 5, 2007 11:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by San Francisco Seth on Dec 5, 2007 11:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by z4 landshark on Dec 5, 2007 11:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by z4 landshark on Dec 5, 2007 11:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sfgfan on Dec 6, 2007 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
That Brian Sabean is even giving this possible trade consideration seems horrible to me. All the publicity it has gotten leads me to believe there may be a high probability of the Giants eventually trading Tim for Rios and another piece.
Can you say Orlando Cepeda? Gaylord Perry? George Foster?
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 12:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 5, 2007 11:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by thehavenot on Dec 5, 2007 11:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
You wake up. Lincecum is one of the most promising young pitchers in the game. Rios is a solid corner outfielder who has barely broke .500 slugging once in his career. Not a good trade. What is harder to find? An ace or a solid corner outfielder?
by marcello on Dec 6, 2007 11:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 12:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by marcello on Dec 6, 2007 12:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 12:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Sheesh.
by BawLa on Dec 6, 2007 12:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by jponry on Dec 6, 2007 12:12 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Of course, I agree as well
I would trade Lincecum for Jay Bruce. Straight up, in a heartbeat, hell, I'd throw in a grade B prospect. Because Bruce is a spectacular talent whose ML service time clock hasn't started. Rios is absolutely the wrong guy.
by antinous on Dec 6, 2007 12:51 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
When you have only one chip
A few years ago I heard a radio interview with Ned Colletti on how the Giants approach the offseason. He said that since they pretty much assume that they don't have the money to make dramatic improvements, they look for ways to improve the team incrementally across the board - a slightly better rotation than before, a slightly better infield, etc etc. This kind of fine-tuning approach may work when you have a strong team with a deep farm system, but its a mindset that has really crippled the Giants for some time now. And when you couple this with the team's propensity to lock in on who they want and lose sight of the cost, you end up bringing in mediocre-to-ok players at prohibitive expense.
Many of Sabean's moves in recent years seem to have been of this he's-better-than-what-we-have ilk, at totally disproportionate cost. Sometimes the cost has been in exhorbitant contracts (signing free agents or re-signing our own players at way more than anyone expects, in terms of salary and/or years). Sometimes the cost has been in terms of draft picks lost. Sometimes its been in terms of players given up in trades. Sometimes its been in terms of blocking the development of potentially promising prospects. And sometimes the cost has been in terms of losing possible chips for a really major move.
Lincecum is a unique talent, and the buzz surrounding him throughout baseball is huge. Same for Cain, of course. Teams would kill for a young duo like that in their rotation. You don't trade one of them unless its to get a difference-making hitter (as in Cabrera, Pujols) or, maybe - maybe - if it can bring back a number of good players that together make your team way better. If Toronto were to offer Rios, Accardo, a good major-league 3rd-baseman (they don't have one to offer) and a solid AA/AAA catching or 1st-base prospect, for instance - that might be worth it, provided the Giants made supplementary moves bringing in another 3-4-5 hitter. But Lincecum for Rios straight up? Hell no.
Personally, I don't believe (or want to believe) that trading Lincecum is the only way to significantly improve the team. But if the Giants do, they have to aim much, much higher - and be patient. Otherwise they blow the one opportunity they think they have.
by FavoriteSpring on Dec 6, 2007 12:58 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 6, 2007 1:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Just reread this and now have a renewed, and even greater feeling of huh? He is really reaching for arguments here, to the extent where Im beginning to wonder if hes on the Toronto payroll. My favourite part is where he suggests the possibility of trading for pitching, citing Garland and Haren, my thoughts on this;
Oh yeah? With what exactly? Have you seen what Garland cost/what the As are asking? Maybe give up some hitting? After giving up Lincecum for the sole purpose of improving that area? Or perhaps more young pitching? Whats the point in that? Why not just keep what we have in the 1st place?
Even without stating the obvious that hitting is available through trade and free agency too, its a pointless and nonsensical argument.
by Mr Scruff on Dec 6, 2007 1:53 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
tim barely uses his arm...its like a slingshot
his dad has taught him how to use his entire body with each pitch...its why he doesnt ice down his arm after games, and can go and play long toss the day after a pitched game
could lincecum end up with arm probs??? sure...it happens to the best...but not because of his mechanics
as for rios being a pure power hitter....doesnt the belle spell death for most right handed power hitters?? i dont care what he did in the hr derby...thats bp
and the fact remains....cain and lincecum generated and will continue to generate more excitement than 20 rios'
i fuckin hate sports reporters
by bacci40 on Dec 6, 2007 2:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
My sentiments exactly.
Timmy's stride is about as wide as Randy Johnson. I can see where all his "power" comes from. Notice how he eyes the pitcher the whole time and hides the ball behind his back pocket. The rest of the motion is very fluid.
I'd rather watch this guy pitch every five days than see a guy like Rios, that mind you, is slightly better than Randy Winn, hit everyday.
My $.02
by SoFa King Mike on Dec 6, 2007 8:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 1:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Still not the impact player that can flip a franchise around.
by SoFa King Mike on Dec 6, 2007 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
http://www.projectprospect.com/top-100-under-25-83107/
Players of note
- Lincecum (3rd pitcher on the list behind Hamels at 5, and Felix Hernandez at 9)
- Jay Bruce
- Cain (9th pitcher, just behind Verlander and Kazmir!)
- Pedro Alvarez
- Justin Smoak
- Travis Snider (only TOR on list)
- Matt Garza (D Young is at 18 as a trade comparison, but obviously its just a list and 1 sites opinion so you cant read TOO much into it)
- Villalona (youngest on the list)
- Carlos Gomez (reckon theyd still take Sanchez for him?)
wow, just had a look at that sites march rankings and they had Lind at 71, Encarnaccion at 77 and Marte at 93
by Mr Scruff on Dec 6, 2007 2:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Lets say both players becomes great players & the trade evens out ability wise. And lets be optimistic & say that the Giants can do a good job of rebuilding & be competitive in 2 years. The Giants would then have 1 year of Rios in which to compete. Of course you could extend him, but there's no guarantees & if he becomes the player he would need to be, to make the trade worthwhile he'd become very expensive & divert funds from elsewhere. With Lincecum, you'd have 4 years to compete still before he even reached free agency.
A move like this just stinks of impatience & that's one of the reasons we're in the bad situations we are currently.
by GiantFan on Dec 6, 2007 4:25 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Lincecum (or Cain) for Rios, Lind and Glaus (after a physical).
Never mind that it won't happen. Is that enough for you guys?
Rios isn't a game changer, but he's not bad. I don't think anyone disagrees there. He's he'll be around for a solid while.
Glaus, if healthy, is 31 and is a consistent 30+ home run guy. If healthy. And he could be had on the cheap.
Lind got a bad rap. Most feel he profiles best at first anyway, where he played in college. But I think the Schierholtz comparison is unfair, and the Bowker one I saw in the other thread is awful. He's moved through the minor with authority. He's hit at .300 or above at avery level until this past season. At the age of 22, he had a 26 HR season, including two in the majors. Hell, he's even had a respectable walk-rate for his career. I'm a Nate brown-noser, I'll admit, but Lind is by far the better hitter.
After Lind was sent down mid-season while struggling, he came back in September and hit .273/.298/.473 in 55 at bats. Not a perfect line, but a good finish to a bad year.
A Linc for these three guys gives the Giants a star now and a legitimate long-term prospect at a position of need. More-so, it gives the current team a set of 3-4 hitters which won't look so bad ahead of Molina batting fifth, and a young sixth hitter with potential and a lot of probable good years ahead of him.
I would love to see the Giants continue to pursue Lind. Lowry/Sanchez and a low level pitching prospect? Yes.
by BruteSentiment on Dec 6, 2007 4:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Irrespective of a potential Lincecum/Rios deal, Lind is certainly someone i'd like to see them pursue & i'd make a Lowry/Sanchez deal if we could.
by GiantFan on Dec 6, 2007 6:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Smoke on the Water on Dec 6, 2007 12:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by mxmob33 on Dec 6, 2007 7:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
And yeah, I'd probably do this deal if Glaus' health checks out.
by Goofus on Dec 6, 2007 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
You'd have to do this trade if it were offered.
by EliminateMe on Dec 6, 2007 1:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
As for prefacing his point about Rios over Vernon Wells with "Maybe Toronto is a fairly friendly hitters park,"...Well, Tim, I've been to that ugly stadium, and it's far more hitter friendly than AT & T. Just because the kid looked good smacking cookies into the seats at the All Star Game doesn't guarantee an offensive upside against real pitching in a non-climate controlled structure.
I'm with jponry, send it to Tim.
by Widget on Dec 6, 2007 5:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I know how you feel...except I'm usually apologizing for the girth.
by Goofus on Dec 6, 2007 6:52 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
ugh
- he's trying to prep local sentiment to accept a trade for someone else, or for a larger package including Rios and some spare parts
- he's signalling non-Jays GMs to make better offers than Rios for Lincecum
A trade for Rios (who's a good player, just not a star) plus spare parts is useless. The team is nothing but spare parts. It needs stars.
A signal setting Rios as baseline is an invitation to other good-player-plus-junk offers. It's a mistake. If you're going to play the press, you lie to a few people and say you mooted a Bruce and Hamilton for Lincecum deal with the Reds, but they balked when you asked for Cueto as well.
Now that's setting the bar high.
Sigh. I wish Sabean weren't such an idiot about things like this.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 8:43 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
http://mlbfleecefactor.com/2007/12/06/rule-5-draft-rules-they-should-just-call-it-the-fleece-draft/
by em3 on Dec 6, 2007 8:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by ramirez415 on Dec 6, 2007 8:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Coach Kline on Dec 6, 2007 9:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by hammystyle on Dec 6, 2007 9:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This trade would be the end for me
The Giants are paying the price for years of neglect of their farm system. Rios, as Grant points out, can't fix that.
Lincecum and Cain are the crown jewels. They can stay, and be cheap, through 2011. A rotation of Cain, Lincecum, Zito, and two pitchers from among the available choices, is something to build around.
Rios is not cheap. He'll be $6MM this year and $10MM next. They can have Lincecum and, god forbid, Pedro Feliz for the same price.
The time to think about trading Cain and Lincecum is when Baumgardner is ready to make a contribution, and when the lineup is built to contend.
If I were Sabean I'd listen to all offers for Tim. If somebody is willing to unload the kiddie corps to get him, consider it. But don't take a player who you may not control for the long term. It's crazy.
If he does this it will be the last straw. I will not attend a game this year.
by Katman on Dec 6, 2007 9:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by southcitysteve on Dec 6, 2007 9:53 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Grant on Dec 6, 2007 10:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Thank you Ted Robinson for some sanity.
I love Ralph, but it was bugging the hell out of me that he was defending a Rios trade yesterday.
by SoFa King Mike on Dec 6, 2007 10:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
(I think Ted might be the most under-rated sportcaster of them all...I love him.)
I heard Ralph defending the proposed trade, but in a wishy-washy way. He kept hedging because he said Lincecum's upside is so much higher. I think he finally was going along with the trade because of TINSTAAPP.
by Goofus on Dec 6, 2007 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
My favorite quote of the morning:
"(Rios) is not the impact player that is going to to turn around this franchise."
by SoFa King Mike on Dec 6, 2007 10:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Goofus on Dec 6, 2007 11:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Stuttering John Tamargo on Dec 6, 2007 12:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I did not know that before.
by groug on Dec 6, 2007 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
But, wow, what poetry, complete with the trombone player. Even if Cal hadn't scored on the kick return, the game wouldn't end on a defensive penalty, which the band's being on the field was. Cal would have had one more play to score if necessary.
The saddest thing is that one of the players directly involved in the play, Mariet Ford, is in prison for burning his house with his family in it. Outstanding feature story on Ford in the CC Times written by Raiders' beat writer Steve Corkran about three years ago.
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by UnleashTheGore on Dec 6, 2007 9:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I think he's too stupid for that, personally.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 10:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Yes the Red's have big burning desire for yet another outfielder and Homer Bailey is useless baggage for Reds. NOT!
I wish some Giants PR mouth piece would say, " We don't want to give up Kline for just Wells. But the ball is the Blue Jays court and we will make that sacrifice because of our teams needs."
by daveinexile on Dec 6, 2007 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Links I followed were putting Homer in the supposed Red's offer. But Homer appears to be the best the Reds farm has going and they really need starting pitching. They play in a division ripe for the taking and if they stumble on 3-4 fairly reliable starters the Red's have to be thinking post season with that offense and home yard. It makes no sense for the Red stand point.
by daveinexile on Dec 6, 2007 2:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Natto on Dec 6, 2007 10:39 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I love watching him pitch too, but I am wondering if giants fans aren't a little over zealous regarding his overall talent. I am not suggesting Sabean should take the trade as we currently understand it. I was just looking for an objective viewpoint. Thanks
by ektrod on Dec 6, 2007 10:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
His stats are pretty easy to find, too:
http://firstinning.com/players/Tim-Lincecum-a/
Those K%s are elite. The BB%s are too high, but not dangerously.
Rios is barely (if at all) in the same class right now, and has probably peaked.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 11:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Sigualicious on Dec 6, 2007 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Sigualicious on Dec 6, 2007 2:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
My conclusion is pretty simple. Here are the guy's full stats: http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/R/Alexis-Rios.shtml
age level OPS
18 Rk 646
19 A- 659
20 A 650
21 A+ 752
22 AA 923
23 MLB 721
24 MLB 703
25 MLB 865
26 MLB 852
So, he has a nice little breakout year at 22, makes the majors, and hoists his game up to a mid-800s OPS, with by all accounts great defense and speed. That's a valuable players, and worth trading for -- but that's probably it.
Superstar hitters -- Bonds, say, -- look like this at those ages and levels:
Age Level OPS
20 A+ 930
21 AAA 962
21 MLB 746
22 MLB 821
23 MLB 859
24 MLB 777
25 MLB 971
26 MLB 924
There's a bat that -- in a much lower-production offensive era -- simply laid waste to the minor leagues, adjusted to the majors by age 22, was hitting better than Rios is at age 26 in a high-offense era at age 23, and was one of the best hitters in baseball by age 25.
I'd trade Lincecum for Bonds at age 26 in a heartbeat.
Rios is no Bonds.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by ektrod on Dec 6, 2007 12:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/mechanics/discussion/controlled_fury_tim_lincecum/
by Goofus on Dec 6, 2007 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
He apparently can't read, either, or he'd have seen the pre-draft rankings that consistently pegged TL as a top-pick talent.
I think his problem is that he reads MCC and expects to hear non-Giants fans pipe up.
Dude, it's a fan site. Use Google to read non-fan sites. It's easy and fun.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Although I am extremely positive on Tim, I realize his faults and question marks too.
Regarding Tim's mechanics, I think the primary thing one needs to know is that Will Carroll, who has written the fine book "Saving the Pitcher," wouldn't trade Tim for any other pitcher in the game.
Pedro Gomez, who has posted here, thinks Tim's mechanics are outstanding.
I believe that with Tim it's mostly a matter of control. Tim has greatly improved that control, beginning with the summer of 2005 in the Cape Cod League, a summer league for the top college players. If he can continue to improve his control at anywhere near the same rate he's improved it the past two and a half years, he will almost certainly be outstanding.
Another fun thing to remember -- his first summer in the Giants organization Tim didn't throw a change up, but still was considered a top prospect due to his plus-plus fastball and curve. By the end of 2007, his newly-added change up was arguably Tim's best pitch. With that pitch, he had the highest swing-through rate of any of his three pitches. His swing-through rate was right up there with Cole Hamels, who is considered by some to have the best change up in the game.
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 1:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by jponry on Dec 6, 2007 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 4:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 6, 2007 10:59 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sfgfan on Dec 6, 2007 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Organizational meetings
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Stick To The Plan
As opposed to writing out long dissertations to demonstrate my point each time subjects like this are brought up, I like your permission to use the phrase "Let's Just Stick To The Plan". You didn't copyright that yet did you ? Just checking :-)
Sometimes simple is better. Unless some team comes at the Giants with a totally lopsided "3 for 1" proven IF hitting machines , I'll just keep Lincecum and Cain thank you.
by nvsfg on Dec 6, 2007 7:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
There isn't a single player who will improve this offense. Lincecum should not be traded for a single player.
by Grant on Dec 6, 2007 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Rios replacing Lewis/Davis/Roberts in the lineup (assuming Rios or Winn plays CF) will result in a better offense for 08. However, this is offset by the immediate downgrade of SP from Linc -> Hennesorria or whomever.
This deal is probably break even for 08, and merely horrible for 09-12.
Rios WILL help the offense, but losing Lincecum hurts the pitching. Just because the pitching is the stronger of the two doesn't make this a good deal - just means we will lose more 4-3 games and fewer 3-2 games.
by zenbitz on Dec 6, 2007 11:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Grant on Dec 6, 2007 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by ResDog on Dec 6, 2007 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sfgfan on Dec 6, 2007 12:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by ResDog on Dec 6, 2007 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Just keep thinking of Orlando Cepeda, Gaylord Perry and George Foster when you consider making this trade. Lincecum could turn out to be the best of the four.
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rule 5
by lincysgiants on Dec 6, 2007 11:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Rule 5
by jponry on Dec 6, 2007 11:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Always, always, always need pitching
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 11:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Always, always, always need pitching
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Always, always, always need pitching
by lincysgiants on Dec 6, 2007 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Always, always, always need pitching
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Always, always, always need pitching
by lincysgiants on Dec 6, 2007 7:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Always, always, always need pitching
High risk pick, but given how bad the team will be, absolutely worth a flyer.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Always, always, always need pitching
by lincysgiants on Dec 6, 2007 3:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by nostocksjustbonds on Dec 6, 2007 11:45 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Mark carry on on Dec 6, 2007 11:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by tobias on Dec 6, 2007 12:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Sigualicious on Dec 6, 2007 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by nostocksjustbonds on Dec 6, 2007 1:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by nostocksjustbonds on Dec 6, 2007 6:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I still plan on supporting the team by purchasing my season tickets regardless of the '08 W-L record - recovering from the Bonds era will take a while.
by bigcountry on Dec 6, 2007 1:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
(I'm talking "power threat" of 30-40 HRs since we're in the post-PED era now.)
by Goofus on Dec 6, 2007 1:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by SF Pete on Dec 6, 2007 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I agree that Alex should continue to hit with more and more power. But he doesn't take enough walks. Still, I'd LOVE to have him --have wanted him for five years or so.
But not at the cost of a potential Hall of Famer.
by sharksrog on Dec 6, 2007 5:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Instead of 20 games out of first place, the Giants end the season 35 games out? Just my guess.
by Sayhey on Dec 6, 2007 1:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by ololo3 on Dec 6, 2007 2:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
An Angels fan shouldn't have the right be on a 50,000 watt soap box arguing to trade super super sectacular Giants pitchers for semi-semi-semi spectacular BJ outfielders.
by SoFa King Mike on Dec 6, 2007 3:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by The Nick on Dec 6, 2007 3:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
That level of stupidity from him is, alas, all too believable.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 3:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by lincysgiants on Dec 6, 2007 3:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't imagine Lowry wouldn't have gotten Young
by awesomer on Dec 6, 2007 3:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: PS
Garza Sanchez
age level K/PA BB/PA K/PA BB/PA
23 AAA 24% 8% 29% 13%
MLB 18% 9% 18% 12%
24 AAA 32% 10%
MLB 26% 12%
Sanchez walks a few more, but Ks quite a few more. It's not as if Garza is a strikethrowing sinkerballer, either. He's very promising, no doubt -- but so is Sanchez, and Sanchez is a lefty.
If Sabean wasn't even trying to move Sanchez for the package Garza fetched, then he's as big an idiot as I suspect.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 4:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
There's this other point
by awesomer on Dec 6, 2007 4:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: There's this other point
Garza's main selling points are starting, draft position, one more pitch and having a sponsoring team in the Twins who knows how to promote a trade (just watch what they get for Santana, and don't forget Pierzynski). Sanchez's main selling point is that he punches out major league hitters.
Both strike guys out. Sanchez lots more.
If I had to bet, I'd say Sanchez blows up, and that Garza ends up having a nice little career as a slight disappointment (a #4, not a #2). Still, a real GM would be out there promoting his trade chits, not muttering darkly in local media about trading his potential Cy candidate for a very nice little player.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 6:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: There's this other point
Sanchez + Lowry = D. Young
Molina + Wynn = L. Milledge
A week ago that would have sounded ridiculous to me, but I think those aren't that far fetched today.
by lincysgiants on Dec 6, 2007 7:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: There's this other point
C'mon DYoung is a highly regarded kid with who is free for the next 5 yrs. What would you demand in trade for Big V? And he isn't even in the Top 60 prospects of players.
by wilriv21 on Dec 6, 2007 8:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: There's this other point
by lincysgiants on Dec 6, 2007 10:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I had a weird dream last night that we DID trade Lincecum for Rios. I was numbed by the news, and when I woke up, I still felt numbed. It took a while to shake that horrible feeling.
But to make matters worse, and to show I've been spending WAY too much time on this site, I also dreamt I was golfing with a few other McCovey posters. That was extra weird, since I don't know any of you personally.
by JRPhillips on Dec 6, 2007 4:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by groug on Dec 6, 2007 10:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 6, 2007 4:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by JRPhillips on Dec 6, 2007 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 6, 2007 4:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Another disheartening Sabean quote...
"We're bot looking for prospects who are a year or two away. We want someone who can step in and contribute next year."
There goes the full commitment to rebuilding...
by The Nick on Dec 6, 2007 4:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Another disheartening Sabean quote...
by The Nick on Dec 6, 2007 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Another disheartening Sabean quote...
There's nothing to commit to.
- We gain nothing by cutting payroll (modulo the 5-10M you could sink into scouting)
- We have no position players worth squat (nod to Frandsen and Nate, who might be OK) that would be blocked by FA aquisitions.
- In case you hadn't noticed, it's not like people are giving away great young hitters free with their breakfast cereal.
by zenbitz on Dec 6, 2007 6:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
http://media.knbr.com/knbr/1206russo.mp3
It's worth a listen.
by sfgreg on Dec 6, 2007 4:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
This would be the type of trade we all want for keeping Cain-Lincecum while adding offense.
If Lowry becomes the bait, who would you rather have for two years, Matsui or Rios?
by sb on Dec 6, 2007 7:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
just like that u got 1.winn,2.inge,3. rois,4.matsui,5.rolen,6.molina,7.frandson,8.visquel, and youll still have zito and cain sitting on the top of the rotation. pretty good offense if i do say so myself and its not that crazy. all the guys ive mentioned have been talking to the giants and in best case senerio that would be the offense. the only way ill except them not trading lincicum is if they get smart and see the sucess that k rod and paplon have had as young closer and make him the most dominant closer in giants history
by gornyson on Dec 6, 2007 7:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Seriously, you may make a very valid point (or points), but I don't have the patience to sift through what you just wrote.
by The Nick on Dec 6, 2007 8:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Also, Tim could close on the day he normally throws between starts -- particularly if he would have five days' rest between starts instead of the normal four. He pitched relief in between starts in college.
by sharksrog on Dec 7, 2007 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I feel the quote is appropriate. Points if you can tell me what movie it is from without pasting the quote into a google search.
by Sigualicious on Dec 7, 2007 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
And perfect usage of this quote.
by southcitysteve on Dec 7, 2007 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Goofus on Dec 7, 2007 3:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by EliminateMe on Dec 7, 2007 11:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
But basically you propose:
Lowry for Mastui
Lincecum for Rios
Durham for Rolen
Roberts for PTBNL
??? for Inge
Durham will not get us Rolen. Durham was one of the worst if not worst full-time position player in 2007. He has a good chance to bounce back, but we can't expect much more than a player like Durham, one who also had a bad year in 2007 and a big contract. Next, how do we get Inge? Other teams are also interested and willing to make serious offers. If we trade Sanchez for Inge we are left with a rotation of Cain-Zito-Correia-???-???. That Rotation is horrible, horrible, horrible. Plus Inge is pretty much equal to, if not worse than Pedro Feliz. Plus, Rios is a 5 spot hitter. Thats it. Thinking he'll morph into a clean-up hitter is only wishful thinking. On top of that we only have him for 3 years. Lincecum on the other hand, we have for 6 and is an ace already, and has the chance to be legendary.
Finally,
Winn
Ing
Rios
Matsui
Rolen
Molina
Frandsen
Vizquel
with a rotation of Cain-Zito-Correia and three spots to fill will not contend. Period.
Ugh why did I bother with all of that.
by NinthWithoutNen on Dec 7, 2007 5:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by gornyson on Dec 6, 2007 8:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Don't just assume that because his delivery is unorthodox that he is going to be injury prone. He's not a converted position player. He's been groomed as a pitcher for a while.
by The Nick on Dec 6, 2007 8:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I mentioned to John that I would put Tim at #1, in part because I believed he was less likely to be injured. I also mentioned that I would place only Felix Hernandez with Tim -- liking Felix's even younger age but liking Tim's chances of not being injured.
Perhaps it was merely coincidence, but Hughes, Bailed and Hernandez each missed time last season, while Tim was once again healthy.
by sharksrog on Dec 7, 2007 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
just like that u got 1.winn,2.inge,3. rois,4.matsui,5.rolen,6.molina,7.frandson,8.visquel,
- The Lincecum injury thing has already been addressed.
- Rios isn't young enough to where his upward trend will make him a significant difference maker.
- Lowry for Matsui straight up gets the Giants 2 years and $12mil debt. Not to mention the hit on the pitching staff.
- Roberts and Durham have almost no trade value. And this prospect you speak of? Prospect? Who? Where?
- Trade who for Inge? You're making this team pretty thin again. Not to mention after 2-3 years, we'd be in the same hole.
- Then the rotation becomes Cain, Zito, ???, ???, ???. Likely those "???"s are going to be worse than the Sanchennessorreia trio. So we've got an upcoming ace, a $20mil Kirk Rueter, and a bunch of hacks. All with a lineup that will probably be equal to or a smidgin better than our '07 lineup.
Get the net, brosef. This team is going to suck in 2008. Suck in 2009. And maybe be presentable in 2010 no matter how you slice it.
by The Nick on Dec 6, 2007 8:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
How.
Does.
Tossing.
A.
Season.
Or.
Two.
Away.
Help.
Us.
In.
Five.
Years
?
?
?
by zenbitz on Dec 7, 2007 9:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Signing big time free agents for seasons you will suck at anyway means losing draft picks. Trading Sanchez for Matsui means losing a potentially productive pitcher for someone who won't ever help the Giants go to the playoffs.
That said, I don't have any real big aversion to trying to be at least competitive (mildly so) over the next couple years. Just at as little expense to the future as possible.
by thehavenot on Dec 7, 2007 9:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Trading any of our young players for players who are not guaranteed to be here in 5 years when our emerging prospects are MLB ready is a waste of time, money, and talent.
by Sigualicious on Dec 7, 2007 10:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by The Nick on Dec 7, 2007 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sharksrog on Dec 7, 2007 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Now, who will you give me for...
Roberts?
Durham?
Winn?
Molina?
Zito?
Yeah, I thought so.
Also, just to address some of the other points. The chance of the Giants making the playoffs next year is not ZERO, it's just not very high.
I am really of 2 minds about this. For one, I like to see the Giants try to win games. I definitly don't want them to mortgage the future (if that is even still possible). BUT I shudder to think what Sabean will actually do.
Also, do you really lose draft picks for signing random FAs? I thought that was only if you sign them before the Arb deadline? I know you get picks if you offer Arb, and are declined by player... but those are sandwich picks.
Did the dodgers give up a pick to sign Jones?
by zenbitz on Dec 7, 2007 1:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
http://www.mercurynews.com/sportsheadlines/ci_7654986
QUOTE:
"OK, it's still a gut-wrenching decision. No surprise, my earlier blog post supporting Lincecum-for-Rios has been roasted on at least one very good Giants fan Web site. That's fair, and some of the rips are excellent points."
You know, he almost convinces you with the whole, "it's time for the Giants to try something different" schtick. Then you remember that NOT developing their own talent from within and trading away what good pitching they can develop has been EXACTLY what the Giants have been doing for the last 10 years or so. Granted, Rios is better than any of the other guys the Giants have received for the likes of Nathan and Accardo, but it's still the same damn strategy. Maybe it would be more of a different path for the team to not look for the quick fix for once.
by Smoke on the Water on Dec 6, 2007 9:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
While I think the OF would be my 3rd prefered spot to land a young bat, I would have made the deal for D. Young (if it truly was on the table) due to the number years he can be kept and his similarly high ceiling.
Now if we were to find Rios' equivelant at 3B or 1B, I could see Sabean being more willing and less hesitiant in dealing Lincecum. I think all of our hopes (and Sabean's) are that we can deal pitching other than Lincecum and Cain to pull in a couple of said players.
My main concern is that Sabean isn't assertive enough in proposing trades or making first contact. I think the only reason Rios is the best offer thus far, is that Riccardi is initiating this proposal...and his aggressiveness and work may net him higher value in the end.
by DaStick on Dec 6, 2007 11:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
A corner outfielder is NOT the talent that we're looking for. If Rios was a third baseman, catcher, or first baseman...I think it's possibly worth it.
However, a corner outfielder is in my opinion, akin to a shooting guard in the NBA. You can find one anywhere and they aren't as valuable as other positions.
by Sigualicious on Dec 7, 2007 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Tim Lincecum is special. How many other players have been nicknamed "The Franchise" by their teammates?
by sharksrog on Dec 7, 2007 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by gornyson on Dec 6, 2007 9:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Step two: Please consider using paragraphs and proper grammar, not because I'm being a Grammar nazi, but because your posts are very difficult to read.
Step three: Do you have any sort of proof at all that Lincecum is definitely going to break down? In addition, if you think he's going to break down in his thirties... well, we only control him until he's ~29 anyway. (And I don't agree that he's definitely, 100% going to break down anyway.)
by jponry on Dec 7, 2007 2:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Additional point I'd like to make is, even if Tim's arm were to fall off in his 30s, that would still give the Giants the next seven or eight years of stellar pitching (assuming his career continues to trend upward). What would make more sense than making him a closer or trading him now because we're afraid of his career ending when he's 30, would be to hold onto him and rebuild the offense for the next few years.
by JRPhillips on Dec 7, 2007 11:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so far..
Now, I am by nature suspicious of I've-got-a-secret posts. One of my best early investment decisions was selling a stock I was long based in part on a bunch of positive IGAS posts on internet boards in the mid-'90s (it's underperformed the market since, fwiw). Still, not all such posts are wrong.
I still don't see it, but I'm open to argument by someone who, say, lays out the purported story.
Being young and stupid in the offseason doesn't cut it for me.
by wcw on Dec 6, 2007 9:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: so far..
Classic!
by The Nick on Dec 6, 2007 9:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: so far..
But what Tim Lincecum is, he and his father created. When I saw Tim pitch in San Jose, he was blowing hitters away with just his fastball and curve. When I saw him pitch for the first time last year, he struck out three batters with his curve, two with his fastball -- and three with his new change up.
Dave Righetti didn't teach Tim that change (which is actually an abbreviated split). Tim's dad did. Dave Righetti didn't teach Tim his powerful pushoff motion. Tim's dad did.
One thing the Giants have done right with Tim is that they haven't tried to change him. No doubt there are fine points they are teaching him, but they were smart enough to leave his unusual but highly efficient pitching delivery alone.
by sharksrog on Dec 7, 2007 11:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by montasmob69 on Dec 6, 2007 11:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 7, 2007 1:43 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 7, 2007 1:45 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 7, 2007 1:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
With the caveat that this is obviously the mooted trade of a Giants fanboy, of course. You'd be trading Lincecum and two spare parts for a young, cheap potential star at third and a perfectly adequate outfielder. Lincecum for Zimmerman straight up I'd do (and is not available), and B.Mo.+fungible pitcher for WMP is a small loss, but a very small one that doesn't outweight Zimmerman.
by wcw on Dec 7, 2007 8:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
I also give two thumbs down to his defense as well. He's built like he belongs at 1st base.
Wily Mo was traded for Bronson Arroyo when he went to the Sox intially, I don't know how that can be equated with a trade that includes Timmy.
by SoFa King Mike on Dec 7, 2007 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by Jmerced on Dec 7, 2007 11:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by sam23 on Dec 8, 2007 12:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
by gornyson on Dec 8, 2007 2:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the length....
Jays fans in general are split about 50-50 on it. Rios is a huge price to pay for unproven pitching, they figure. They're kind of right, but I'm with most of you guys that arms like this don't come along very often.
Anyway, I saw a lot of talk about his stats here, and I'd like to put your minds a little at ease if I can. Rios's power numbers keep going up, and if you see him, even though he's 27, he's still looks a bit like the skinny kid who first showed up here who was supposed to be all speed and hitting for average.
He'll keep getting stronger and his power numbers will absolutely keep going up. I know the rule is that guys are starting to plateau by this age, but he's still only listed as 195lbs at 6'5. If I were you I'd be confident that he'll keep bulking up. The comparison we've always kind of heard here is with Magglio Ordonez (that was before Mags went nuts at the plate this year, though). Alex still has a ways to go, power-wise, but is far better in the field.
And don't forget, his RBI numbers are low because he spent a lot of time hitting leadoff or second.
Also, the Jays just don't run, so his SB numbers don't reflect his true speed. He's got excellent range in the field, a great arm, and against NL pitching, he should be at least a 30-30 guy for a long time.
Maybe that's still not enough for Lincecum, but Rios is definitely more valuable than some of the raw numbers might indicate. Far better than just a "modest upgrade on Randy Winn."
by DrunkJaysFan on Dec 9, 2007 11:03 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
by wilriv21 on Dec 9, 2007 12:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















