|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 1, 2013 18:33:22 GMT -5
Came across MLB Trade Rumors' ratings of potential 2014 free agents. The Giants have two of the top 10.
The top-rated potential free agent is Robinson Cano. Cano is one of the best players in the game.
Hunter Pence is ranked #5, and Tim Lincecum -- while criticized here -- is #7 and the top-ranked pitcher.
Matt Garza is the 2nd-ranked pitcher, coming in at #8. Garza's ERA has ranged from 3.32 through 3.95 the past seven years, including his 3.38 ERA in 16 innings this year.
Garza made only 18 starts in 2012 and has just returned to make three starts this season.
A.J. Burnett is the 3rd-ranked pitcher and #10 overall. Burnett is 37, but he does have a 3.38 ERA since the beginning of the 2012 season. Burnett has a lot of stuff, and I have been (overly) high on him for a long time.
Josh Johnson was ranked as high as #3 overall, but he is on the DL for over a month and has dropped out of the top 10.
It is anticipated that three pitchers Allen mentioned -- Paul Maholm, Ervin Santana and Hiroki Kuroda -- will vie for the top 10 at some point this season.
All those guys will likely be pretty expensive though -- even Santana, whose ERA has exceeded 5.00 in three of the past six full seasons.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 1, 2013 21:21:20 GMT -5
Maholm is making $4.75 this season, and rumor has it he may be dealt when Brandon Beachy is ready to come back. Who's going to sign for more next season, Maholm or Lincecum? Who do you think will pitch better?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 2, 2013 12:31:44 GMT -5
Allen -- Maholm is making $4.75 this season, and rumor has it he may be dealt when Brandon Beachy is ready to come back. Who's going to sign for more next season, Maholm or Lincecum? Who do you think will pitch better? Rog -- Maholm is actually being paid $6.5 million this season, according to Baseball-Reference. He will be paid considerably more beginning next season. Paul had a 5.10 ERA in 2010, but he's been very good since. What would you estimate Paul's new contract to be when he signs it this winter? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#11331#ixzz2V52QJbFt
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 2, 2013 15:28:14 GMT -5
You're right, I read it on Cot's under his name. I have no idea why they would post his 2012 salary. But the question still stands, who do you think will sign for more in 2014, and who will pitch better? Paul went six strong today giving up two earnies and (to contrast with Timmy) walking none. As I type this, he is on line for his seventh win. (Braves lead 6-3, bottom of 8). For comparison purposes, those seven wins would lead the Giants staff by three. Paul's salary next season would depend on alot of things. How he does the rest of the year, how stupid the other GMs want to be in signing other pitchers, etc. If I had to hazard a guess, I would imagine $9-11. Or less than half of what Timmy will probably sign for. Paul doesn't have overpowering stuff or a glowing history.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 3, 2013 10:12:36 GMT -5
Allen -- Paul's salary next season would depend on alot of things. How he does the rest of the year, how stupid the other GMs want to be in signing other pitchers, etc. If I had to hazard a guess, I would imagine $9-11. Rog -- Have I mentioned that I think you greatly underestimate the market, Allen? If the season ended today, I would expect something like 4/$60 for Maholm. I think your guess would indeed be quite hazardous. Paul has been an amazingly consistent pitcher the past three seasons: 3.66, 3.67, 3.68. Mark Buehrle signed last winter for 4/$58, and prices are only going up. Mark's previous three ERA's had been 4.28, 3.59 and 3.74, and he was two years older then than Maholm will be. Buehrle did have a longer record of success. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#11343#ixzz2VALTAzNp
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 3, 2013 10:43:20 GMT -5
If you would pay that for Paul Maholm, you'd be one of the stupid GMs. Maholm has been a seviceable lefty who is 15 games below .500 for his career with an ERA of 4.23. Granted, he's been better than that the last four years, ERA wise. But his record from 2010-12 was 28-40. You want to compare him to Buerhle? Mark's career record is 40 games over .500, his career ERA is 3.86. He's won in double figures 12 times, Maholm has done it twice. Buerhle has a long record of being a successful pitcher. Maholm has just recently become successful. For most of his career, he's been barely hanging on to a major league job. Even at that, we now see that signing Buerhle at 4/$58 was a huge mistake, especially since they traded him after one year for Yunel Escobar and some flotsam. Why make a similar mistake with Maholm? Now, I'm not saying Paul's a bad pitcher,hes certainly better than Lincecum right now, but 4/$60 is way too much. If I called Paul's agent and he told me 4/$60, I'd thank him, hang up, draw a line through Paul's name and move on to the next guy.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Jun 3, 2013 11:11:52 GMT -5
Rog- From Austin Chang:
Instead of starting over the weekend against the St. Louis Cardinals, the San Francisco Giants decided to have Tim Lincecum available out of the bullpen. He wasn’t called upon to pitch and long reliever Chad Gaudin was given the start on Sunday, his first since 2009.
According to manager Bruce Bochy, the move to the bullpen was temporary. Due to the rainout on Friday and the doubleheader on Saturday, he wanted to have Lincecum available to help bolster the bullpen. This rotation shift was also more doable with the Giants’ two off days this week.
That being said, should the Giants ultimately consider moving Lincecum to the bullpen given his struggles as a starter this season and his successes as a reliever in the postseason last year? Lincecum himself has mentioned that he would be okay with the move.
“Whatever they need, I’ll do” Lincecum said. “You go with whatever the team calls for.”
He has acknowledged his struggles over the past two seasons and perhaps he is a better fit for the bullpen at this point in his career. However, the team has few starting pitchers in the minors ready for the big leagues.
In his first career start in the majors, Michael Kickham showed promise but had a rough outing in his first go around. Ryan Vogelsong, the player Kickham pitched for in the rotation, is on the disabled list and will likely be out until July.
While Lincecum’s paycheck doesn’t dictate to that of a reliever, his regression and current skill set makes him a better fit for shorter appearances. No longer possessing extraordinary stuff all the time, he’s more prone to being exposed when pitching for long stretches.
However, given the team’s current rotation struggles, the Giants need to keep him there in hopes of seeing him possibly turn his season around and help right the ship for the team’s pitching. With only one reliable starter at the moment (Madison Bumgarner), just a string of good starts by Lincecum or any of his rotation comrades could make a huge difference in the group’s overall success.
Boagie- This about sums it up, and backs up what I had said before. I WOULD move him to the bullpen if we had that option, but we don't right now. Down the stretch we might have that option.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 3, 2013 17:27:31 GMT -5
Boagie -- I WOULD move him to the bullpen if we had that option, but we don't right now. Down the stretch we might have that option. Rog -- Possibly the injury to Ryan Vogelsong had a silver lining in that it allows the Giants the opportunity to find an additional starter (Gaudin, other minor leaguer or via trade). Depending on how Tim fares in the meantime, the Giants might use the added rotation depth as well as Tim's willingness and versatility to use him as a Super Reliever going down the stretch. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#11362#ixzz2VC8RvFQk
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 3, 2013 17:34:08 GMT -5
Allen -- If I called Paul's agent and he told me 4/$60, I'd thank him, hang up, draw a line through Paul's name and move on to the next guy. Rog -- You made a good point about Maholm's not having a long track record of success. So perhaps he won't get 4/$60. But we're talking supply/demand here, and I would be shocked if what he received weren't closer to 4/$60 than to the 1/$9-11 you mentioned. I know Boly thought I was nutso in pointing out that just over half the starters this year have enough innings to qualify and yet have an ERA better than Tim Lincecum's. That ties in here, showing why a league-average starter with a low injury risk has value. If someone were to give Tim a contract now, I doubt they would look at him as less than an average starter. His performance has indeed been poor, but even these past two seasons, there haven't been huge numbers of pitchers who can pitch as many innings as he as well as he has. When we think of how a #3, #4 or #5 starter pitches, we often forget about such things as injuries and off seasons. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#ixzz2VC94o1qp
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 3, 2013 17:35:12 GMT -5
I was pretty happy with what Gaudin did yesterday. I'm not sure why Bochy is conflicted about giving him another chance. The way he pitched yesterday, compared to how our other starters have been pitching) he might become our ace.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 3, 2013 17:35:57 GMT -5
You are right, Allen, that Paul Maholm isn't truly worth 4/$60. But delayed free agency just might allow him to receive that much.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 3, 2013 22:25:08 GMT -5
All I can tell you is he wouldn't get it from me. I was suprised to find how many highly paid "aces" there are living near Timmy in the high ERA district. Names like Yovanni Gallardo, Matt Cain, Cole Hamels, Edwin Jackson, Dan Haren, RA Dickey, Mark Buerhle, Ubaldo Jiminez, and Ian Kennedy are all in the high 4s or 5s. Spending alot of money on pitching is at best, an inexact science, at worst, a fool's game.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 3, 2013 22:30:41 GMT -5
Let's add in something about Maholm. While I wouldn't give him 4/$60. I'm not saying 1/$9 would be my top offer. I might go 2/$20 or even 3/$27. That could change of course, depending on how he does the rest of the season.
Also, your boy Puig started for the Dodgers tonight. Bloop single first time up. They gave him #66, they have to improve on that.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 4, 2013 9:37:23 GMT -5
Allen -- Also, your boy Puig started for the Dodgers tonight. Bloop single first time up. They gave him #66, they have to improve on that. Rog -- Puig is extremely immature emotionally, but he's got explosive talent that could haunt the Giants for years. As for the #66, he might be the best athlete wearing it aside from Jarimir Jagr. It is indeed a weird baseball number, but I was quite surprised when the Giants gave Tim Lincecum #55 and it stuck. We should let Don tell us about old number 96 though. It's a brief but nice story that should fit the bill. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#11388#ixzz2VG45bRKu
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 4, 2013 9:46:45 GMT -5
Allen -- I'm not sure why Bochy is conflicted about giving him another chance. Rog -- Bruce may becoming infatuated with the Super Reliever idea. Certainly Tim Lincecum was dynamite in that role last postseason, and Gaudin has been quite useful out of the pen this season. I agree with you that Chad should keep starting as long as he does the job, but I also understand Bruce's reluctance to part with a tool that helps make his job easier. For Gaudin, this could be the opportunity he's no doubt been hoping for and may have thought would never come. If he takes hold as a starter, the Giants would likely view him similarly to how they viewed Ryan Vogelsong two years ago. As Zack Wheeler and the Mets wait for the Super Two deadline to pass before he is called up, the Giants need a bridge to their young wave of starting pitchers, who are all still in Class A ball. Chad could be a solid part of that bridge. Chad has come a long, long way this season, almost making it look easy at times. Remember, this is the guy who was felt here to be a mistake compared to instead choosing Scott Proctor for the final reliever role. I would be interested in an analysis by Boly of Chad's mechanics. He seems so stiff and upright, yet he can throw the ball perhaps harder than any other Giants starter. This is the opportunity Chad has craved. So far, so good. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#ixzz2VG5Nu2qy
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Jun 4, 2013 10:13:12 GMT -5
I watched the game because Rog has been talking about this Puig kid (and nothing else was on t.v.) so I wanted to see him for myself. however, this move just shows how desperate the Dodgers are. I Love it.
This kid could be great, but it's still too early to tell. He had good numbers at AA, but not crazy good, if he's such an incredible talent the Dodgers should let him get some seasoning.
Btw, I saw the throw he made to first base from deep right, it was a nice throw, but not a wow throw, and his two hits were not exactly squared up, one bloop and one ball that should have been fielded by the first baseman.
|
|
donk
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by donk on Jun 4, 2013 11:23:39 GMT -5
Allen -- Also, your boy Puig started for the Dodgers tonight. Bloop single first time up. They gave him #66, they have to improve on that. Rog -- Puig is extremely immature emotionally, but he's got explosive talent that could haunt the Giants for years. As for the #66, he might be the best athlete wearing it aside from Jarimir Jagr. It is indeed a weird baseball number, but I was quite surprised when the Giants gave Tim Lincecum #55 and it stuck. We should let Don tell us about old number 96 though. It's a brief but nice story that should fit the bill. dk...Bill Voiselle, Ninety Six, North Carolina...pitched for the Giants and wore 96 to honor his town...
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 4, 2013 15:45:46 GMT -5
I think Boagie is right that Puig may or may not be ready. He was the best hitter in baseball during spring training, but as Boagie points out, he did very well but not off the charts in AA.
On the Giants' farm, Gary Brown is thus far 0 for 2 today -- a pop out and a bunt out. Brown is now 1 for 23. He's the second batter this inning, so let's hope he breaks the slump that has dropped him to .203 on the season.
Brown's bunt attempt came with two outs and the bases empty. Bunting for a base hit with two outs and no one on isn't a great percentage play, but I applaud him for trying anything to break out of his slump.
Hey, he just doubled to center! His double was in the middle of singles by Kensuke Tanaka and Francisco Peguero, so Fresno now leads 3-1 with runners on second and third and no outs in the bottom of the 6th.
Old buddy Boof Bonser (with an ERA over five) yielded a home run to the first batter of the game but has been unscored upon since.
I have a feeling a southpaw is now being brought in to pitch to lefty-hitting Roger Kieschnick. And that's as far as I can go right now.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 4, 2013 15:56:59 GMT -5
What choice do they have? Crawford's out again (shocking!), Kemp's out, Ramirez has played all of four games, Beckett's quit on them to the point of talking retirement (shocking again!). Gonzalez is the only one playing, (when the mood strikes him) and probably will be telling them to dump the manager soon. I believe I said I saw nothing special about the Dodgers. I take that back. This is a special kind of mess.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 4, 2013 16:50:40 GMT -5
Allen -- I believe I said I saw nothing special about the Dodgers. I take that back. This is a special kind of mess. Rog -- Perhaps the most cogent comment prior to the season would have been that the Dodgers were set up for injuries -- although I don't think anyone could have anticipated this many. I know the Dodgers were considered by many not to have chemistry, but haven't injuries truly been their biggest problem. It's nice for them that they had something like 7 or 8 starters, since at least half of them have gotten hurt. They were lucky to have Puig available in the minors, but at 22 it's hard to say if he's ready. I guess I'd have to say yes playing-wise, but he had some incident I have forgotten that showed his significant immaturity. Here is the sad thing from the Giants' point of view: Gary Brown has for two or three years been considered their top outfield prospect. Gary is two years older than Puig and has experienced the refinement of college ball, yet he doesn't seem at this time to be nearly as good as Puig. Brown's top asset is his speed, yet he has stolen only 6 bases while being thrown out 5 times, while Puig has stolen 13 with the same number of thwarted thefts. Whether the Dodgers can come back to challenge the Giants later in the season likely depends on their health, but their biggest threat isn't all the spending they did last summer. Their biggest threat is that their goal is to AVOID such spending sprees by improving their scouting and development, particularly overseas. Despite their recent woes, I'm not overly concerned with the Giants, but they are probably lucky to be above .500. They have been clearly outscored on the season. Obviously, decent pitching could quickly help rectify the situation. The Dodgers have been killed by horrible seasons from Kemp and Ethier, by injuries to their pitchers, and by being unable to find a shortstop who can replace the injured Hanley Ramirez and hit even .200. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#11404#ixzz2VHmMo9zV
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 4, 2013 20:50:24 GMT -5
I told you this would happen earlier. These guys are fine when things go well. When it gets a little rough, they quit. Beckett did it in Boston, Crawford did it in Boston. Gonzalez didn't play up here because it's a tough park for lefties. As soon as the Dodgers went elsewhere, he was suddenly healthy again. Ethier too, is known for packing it in when things don't go well.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 5, 2013 9:55:56 GMT -5
Allen -- I told you this would happen earlier. These guys are fine when things go well. When it gets a little rough, they quit. Beckett did it in Boston, Crawford did it in Boston. Rog -- Both Beckett and Crawford have suffered significant injuries during their respective careers. Beckett is out for at least four weeks. The Dodgers medical staff appears to think his injury is more than minor. Crawford missed the first three months of 2012, as well as the last month and a half. That certainly suggests a lot more than a minor injury. They also suggest you don't know what you're talking about. Allen -- Gonzalez didn't play up here because it's a tough park for lefties. Rog -- Link? Is it too much to ask for facts here, Allen? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#11422#ixzz2VLyrGhZi
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 5, 2013 11:28:18 GMT -5
No one's going to print that Rog. You know better than that. But it sure is coincidental that every time these guys get on a team that doesn't do well, suddenly they're injured. Wasn't Beckett part of the beer and chicken during games crowd in Boston? Didn't Gonzalez cry for Valentine's ouster? Yeah, Crawford sat out alot of last year. Because Boston was going nowhere and because he wasn't doing well. Why would a player of Gonzalez's ability be moved three times. Why did he play all the games leading up to the Giants series, and then all the games (but one) after? Why have Beckett and Crawford been moved twice, despite being very talented? Connect the dots, (or in this case, dogs) Rog.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 5, 2013 11:39:19 GMT -5
Scott Feldman went 6+ vs. the Angels last night, giving up two runs, with one walk and one K. He left with the lead but Villanueva gave up a long home run to Pujols and the Cubs lost. Scott's ERA remained steady at 2.83. Very nice outing by Tim last night, although Torres spent a significant amount of time on the warning track. Just so baffling. So I guess we wait until his next outing to see if he can put some sustained improvement together.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Jun 5, 2013 12:23:04 GMT -5
Allen- Very nice outing by Tim last night, although Torres spent a significant amount of time on the warning track. Just so baffling. So I guess we wait until his next outing to see if he can put some sustained improvement together.
Boagie- Believe it or not Allen, the fly balls to Torres was the best sign to me. Timmy was jamming those right handed hitters who couldnt get fully extended and get the ball on the sweet spot. They were looking fastball, swinging hard and still not squaring it up, that tells me Tim was hitting his spots.
I still say he sucks though, get rid of him.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 5, 2013 12:39:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 5, 2013 12:44:56 GMT -5
Allen -- All I can tell you is he wouldn't get it from me. I was suprised to find how many highly paid "aces" there are living near Timmy in the high ERA district. Names like Yovanni Gallardo, Matt Cain, Cole Hamels, Edwin Jackson, Dan Haren, RA Dickey, Mark Buerhle, Ubaldo Jiminez, and Ian Kennedy are all in the high 4s or 5s. Rog -- Which comes back to my point that #1 - #5 starters don't always pitch like they're a #1 - #5. I have to admit I was a bit surprised myself at how few qualifiers had lower ERA's than Tim. But I probably wasn't as surprised as most. Injuries are a part of the game. I'm not big on guys "gutting it out" and playing when they hurt the team by doing so. But there is more value in a pitcher who can go out for every turn and perform at even a decent level than we might expect. Replacement-level pitchers tend to be pretty awful. There's just too much hitting in today's game. Spending alot of money on pitching is at best, an inexact science, at worst, a fool's game. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#ixzz2VMfq5S3v
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Jun 5, 2013 12:50:05 GMT -5
Allen -- Spending alot of money on pitching is at best, an inexact science, at worst, a fool's game. Rog -- The high cost of pitching would augur for team's taking the draft approach the Giants have taken; the Giants have fared best with pitchers. There are a couple of negatives in emphasizing pitching though. First, pitchers are much bigger injury risks. Second, a pitcher -- even a starter -- almost never has as much value during the season as does a position player of equal ability. Even starting pitchers each pitch a small percentage of their team's innings. So, yeah, signing free agent pitchers is fraught with danger. If you team has enough starters, there is no need to take such a risk. Few teams, though, are in that position. One nice thing for the Giants' rotation: If we go back to say 2007 when the Giants signed Barry Zito and brought up Tim Lincecum, the Giants have had fabulous health among their rotation. They have lost almost very, very little time to arm injuries. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1801&page=1#ixzz2VMguTETT
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 5, 2013 15:14:06 GMT -5
Rog -- So in reality, you have no facts here; merely coincidences which may or may not have a cause and effect relationship. Right?
Allen- Sure, Rog. Just like the fact that only conservative groups were harassed by the IRS was merely coincidence, just like the fact that the DOJ has been caught in lies multiple times since Holder took over is merely a coincidence.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jun 6, 2013 10:52:11 GMT -5
Jason Marquis went 6.1 innings last night, giving up two runs on three hits (two walks, six Ks) and winning his sixth straight decision against the Dodgers. Jason ($3 million) outdueled Clayton Kershaw ($11 million). Jason Vargas on the other hand, had a rough night against the Cubs, giving up five runs and 11 hits in five innings. Jason walked two and struck out four. I know this has little to do with the current Giants, but these are guys who may become available in the offseason, and our rotation may be in need of a revamp.
|
|