|
Post by klaiggeb on Aug 21, 2013 16:28:44 GMT -5
Boly -- I know most don't think a lot of Nolasco, but I think he's a solid, #3 guy.
Rog -- And then you go on to say that Tim Lincecum is a #3 AT BEST. I'm going to need to throw a few facts into the issue here.
Regarding Nolasco, he's had a very nice season, and has certainly continued it better with the Dodgers than I expected. But let's look at his ERA's the past five seasons, looking backward:
3.60 4.48 4.67 4.51 5.06
Ricky has had only one full season in which he ERA was below 4.00 (3.52 in 2008).
Clearly Tim hasn't pitched close to consistenty well the past two seasons, but his 5.18 and 4.53 ERA's aren't much different from Nolasco's ERA's the previous four seasons.
IMO, to say that Nolasco is a solid #3 while Tim is AT BEST a #3, isn't fully congruent with the facts.
I guess the question with Tim is how consistent can he be? At his best, he has surprisingly been the Tim of old. At his worst, he has pitched about as well as Tiny Tim sang.
The money will be different of course, but disregarding money, I would sign Tim over Ricky. Tim would appear to have more upside.
---boly says---
I'm not doubting that Rick's numbers, CAREER wise are better than Tim's...
But let's look at the last 2 years.
Let's look at WHOSE career is on the upswing, and WHOSE is on the down swing.
THAT'S why I prefer Nolasco to Tim.
Once again, Rog, you're looking only at numbers and nothing else.
I see a kid who can't control his stuff, vs a kid who is just getting control of his.
And late blooming has a precedent. Look at Vogey.
I believe Ricky is in the same boat.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Aug 21, 2013 16:42:09 GMT -5
---boly says---
I'm not doubting that Rick's numbers, CAREER wise are better than Tim's...
Dood - you should doubt it, because Ricky has been far worse in his career. As to who is will be better in the future, it's anyone's guess. Tim IS 2 years yonger than Nolasco. I am having a hard time comprehending why people are giving up on the relatively young Tim and Pablo so quickly and easily.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 17:12:58 GMT -5
Boly -- And late blooming has a precedent. Look at Vogey. I believe Ricky is in the same boat. Rog -- You could be right. In fact, one could make an argument that he has pitched better the past few years than his ERA indicated. Certainly he doesn't walk many batters. On the negative side, despite his success this seaon, his walk rate is actually higher than since 2007. His line drive percentage is the 2nd-highest of his career. His ratio of ground balls to fly balls is the highest since 2010. His infield fly ball percentage is the 2nd-lowest of his career. Ricky may be a pitcher who pitched in poor luck the past few seasons and is pitching in good luck this year. On the positive side, that would mean he has been more consistent than he appears. On the negative, he may not have improved as much as it seems, either. No QUESTION Tim has gone downhill the past two seasons. His consistency is shot. On the poitive side, Tim HAS improved significantly since the first half of 2012, and of late he has thrown a couple of the best outings of his career. I like the argument you are making for Nolasco, and I do see some good things about him. Based on the money involved, he quite possibly will be a better value than Tim. Based on my expectations of future performance though, I would give Tim a better projected performance than Ricky. It will be intriguing to see what each commands this off-season. A lot still depends on how each performs the rest of the season. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1964&page=2#14121#ixzz2cdy287GC
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 17:14:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 21, 2013 19:51:10 GMT -5
How long do you go with it Randy? Lincecum will lose in the teens this year for the third year in a row. He may lead the league in losses two years in a row. Pablo has missed a ton of games over the last three seasons, and now he's hurt again. He hasn't hit that well in three of the last four years. Of late Tim has given up 11 runs in his last 11 innings pitched.
It hasn't been quick or easy. It's not like these guys have had a bad couple of weeks. They've been bad for quite a sustained period.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Aug 21, 2013 20:48:16 GMT -5
How long do you go with it Randy?
Dood - the question is...do you think at 27 and 29 you look at the last year or two and decide he's never going to be great again or do you say "hmmm, he's still pretty young with loads of talent. We should bank on that youth and talent" instead of rolling the dice on being able to acquire someone that probably wont be as good as Tim and Pablo have the ability to be.
Lincecum will lose in the teens this year for the third year in a row. He may lead the league in losses two years in a row.
Dood - if w/l record meant something for a starting pitcher I might care. It means squat. Everyone this century understands that except you
Pablo has missed a ton of games over the last three seasons, and now he's hurt again. He hasn't hit that well in three of the last four years.
Dood - he hit .283 last year (I call that hitting well) and the way he's been swinging lately I wouldnt count on him to not surpass that this season. And he hit .315 in 2011. I would say he hit well in 2 of the last 4 years and if he gets hot this next 5 weeks, he has a shot to make it 3 out of 4 on the good side.
It hasn't been quick or easy. It's not like these guys have had a bad couple of weeks. They've been bad for quite a sustained period.
Dood - Show me the names you want to replace them with and I guarantee I can find sustained periods of mediocrity or just plain awfulness for them in the last few years also.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 9:24:07 GMT -5
With both players it's risk vs. reward, and what can we get for you instead.
Pablo carries injury risk, and he seems to struggle at the plate for a period after being injured. His level of play can fluctuate in reverse proportion to his fluctuating weight.
He has been injured a lot, although for the most part that can't be blamed on his weight. He has shown that he CAN lose weight, but like most dieters, can't keep it off.
He has done by far his best job of in-season weight loss this season. He stated a year or two ago that he would need to get his weight down in a year or two or else risk his career.
He is a two-time All-Star power hitter on a team without much hitting or power. He ranks right at the top of SF Giants third basemen in OPS, just behind Jimmy Ray Hart's .823 and Matt Williams' . 811. His career batting average of .297 is the highest of an SF Giants third baseman.
His play has been declining, yet he still has .909 and .789 OPS in his past two complete seasons. His OPS with the Giants the past two seasons has been about the same as Hunter Pence's.
Next season he will be paid perhaps half as much as Hunter. He's under contract for only one more season, severely limiting his trade value.
Lincecum's trade value is virtually nill -- although it likely does exist, since he has probably cleared waivers. Lincecum has declined even more than Pablo, although his health has remained top notch.
His pitching the past two seasons hasn't been good, yet he's continued to be an innings-eater.
The two questions are how much can he rebound, and how much wll he cost?
I see no true point in trading Pablo unless the Giants can somehow get a lot for him. It is likely best to keep him, hope he gets consistently serious with his training, and that the team can re-sign him at a reasonable rate as a free agent.
Lincecum is a former Cy Young winner and a fan favorite. He would likely rather play in San Francisco or Seattle than anywhere else. How likely and how far is a rebound, and how much will he cost?
When one simplifies them, the choices aren't all that hard. The Giants are pretty much "stuck" with Pablo (although that very well may be a good thing rather than a bad one), and with Tim, it will come down to the money. Starting pitching is an extremly valuable commodity, based on eating innings alone.
I believe the best the Giants could hope for if they traded Pablo would be another good player with just a year left on his contract. How well would one expect that player to play in 2014, and what would be the Giants' chances of re-signing him?
It would be tough to get a player with Pablo's potential, and the Giants would probably have a better chance of re-signing Pablo than the other guy.
With Tim, it's a $$$$ thing. The Giants might overpay, but it's unlikely they overpay by a lot.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 22, 2013 11:04:06 GMT -5
How long do you go with it Randy? Dood - the question is...do you think at 27 and 29 you look at the last year or two and decide he's never going to be great again or do you say "hmmm, he's still pretty young with loads of talent. We should bank on that youth and talent" instead of rolling the dice on being able to acquire someone that probably wont be as good as Tim and Pablo have the ability to be. Allen- Or do you look at them and say "Maybe these guys aren't as good as we thought they were. One can't get his head on straight and is really doing nothing but losing games for us, the other won't stay in shape and misses way too much time." Lincecum will lose in the teens this year for the third year in a row. He may lead the league in losses two years in a row. Dood - if w/l record meant something for a starting pitcher I might care. It means squat. Everyone this century understands that except you Allen- No sale. Winning games is what it's all about. You can't pay a guy what you'll have to pay Tim and have him just go out there and lose, lose, lose. Hey, his ERA stinks too, if you want to go that way. Pablo has missed a ton of games over the last three seasons, and now he's hurt again. He hasn't hit that well in three of the last four years. Dood - he hit .283 last year (I call that hitting well) and the way he's been swinging lately I wouldnt count on him to not surpass that this season. And he hit .315 in 2011. I would say he hit well in 2 of the last 4 years and if he gets hot this next 5 weeks, he has a shot to make it 3 out of 4 on the good side. Allen- We've lowered are standards quite a bit, haven't we? Before it was "How can we trade this guy, he's a .300+ hitter. Now .283 is good. If we want to look further into 2012, we see that he didn't even get 400 ABs and drove in just 63 runs. He only had 112 hits, and missed 54 games. This year? Hurt again, and again, and again. More weight issues. Hitting .266 with a Slg. under .400 and an OPS of just .706. We're almost to September and he doesn't even have 10 homers. This probably will be the third consecutive year he won't reach 150 hits. I understand you don't want to trade low, but there also comes a time where you have to cut your losses. I could see keeping Pablo if no good deal comes along, but I think we're past the point where you're looking at him in terms of potential. What you have is pretty much what you're going to get. With Timmy, you're just throwing good money after bad if you re-sign him. How many false resurrections do you want to go through before we realize the old Timmy (or even a reasonable facsimile) isn't coming back? A writer in the CCTimes (Mark Purdy) estimated that three years at $11 million per is as far as the Giants would go. That seems reasonable (though I wouldn't go that high). I don't think Tim would sign for that, simply because I believe someone out there would be stupid enough to offer him more. It hasn't been quick or easy. It's not like these guys have had a bad couple of weeks. They've been bad for quite a sustained period. Dood - Show me the names you want to replace them with and I guarantee I can find sustained periods of mediocrity or just plain awfulness for them in the last few years also. Allen- That involves so many factors, you can't accurately come up with names. Who do I want to replace them with? Miguel Cabrera and Clayton Kershaw. Who can one reasonably expect to replace them with? You won't know until you see who's available. Yesterday Bochy mentioned both Posey and Pill as third base possibilities. If I'm Pablo, I'm not comfortable hearing that. Another possibility is acquiring a power bat at another position and going with Arias. Given a full season worth of ABs, he can probably equal what Pablo has done this year.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 22, 2013 11:17:19 GMT -5
His play has been declining, yet he still has .909 and .789 OPS in his past two complete seasons.
Allen- Those numbers were compiled in 2011 and 2012, in which Pablo played 117 and 108 games, respectively. Neither is a complete season.
His OPS with the Giants the past two seasons has been about the same as Hunter Pence's.
Next season he will be paid perhaps half as much as Hunter.
Allen- He'll probably play about half as much as Hunter as well.
I see no true point in trading Pablo unless the Giants can somehow get a lot for him. It is likely best to keep him, hope he gets consistently serious with his training, and that the team can re-sign him at a reasonable rate as a free agent.
Allen- Sounds reasonable. Though we may be hoping against hope on the training thing.
Lincecum is a former Cy Young winner and a fan favorite.
Allen- Actually, Tim's fan appeal would seem to be the only thing he has going for him at this point.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Aug 22, 2013 12:00:38 GMT -5
Allen- Or do you look at them and say "Maybe these guys aren't as good as we thought they were. One can't get his head on straight and is really doing nothing but losing games for us, the other won't stay in shape and misses way too much time."
Dood - ypu could go that way...but their youth and resumes say excellence is more likely than not for both of them.
Allen- No sale. Winning games is what it's all about. You can't pay a guy what you'll have to pay Tim and have him just go out there and lose, lose, lose. Hey, his ERA stinks too, if you want to go that way.
Dood - still hanging on to that flat earth stuff eh? Well good luck with that. GMs and managers disagree with you but, oh well. You keep throwing out this "last 3 years of double digit losses" thing but it doesn't wash. In 2011 Tim was 13-14 with a 2.74 ERA. If you're going to hold out that year as a bad one because of the losses then you don't really understand what good pitching is. Last year Tim was awful, I grant you. This year, not great but not awful. ERA took a huge hit with a horrid May...since then he's been very good, a couple stinkers aside.
Allen- We've lowered are standards quite a bit, haven't we? Before it was "How can we trade this guy, he's a .300+ hitter. Now .283 is good.
Dood - I haven't lowered my standards for Pablo one bit. Yes 283 is not very good for him, given his career average is near 300...but as a measure against the league and, more importantly, what he might be replaced with, 283 IS very good.
I understand you don't want to trade low, but there also comes a time where you have to cut your losses. I could see keeping Pablo if no good deal comes along, but I think we're past the point where you're looking at him in terms of potential. What you have is pretty much what you're going to get.
Dood - I'll say it again...he's JUST 27 MAN!! You really want to give up on his talent at this young an age and not even get full value in return? You're ok with that? I'd rather make a QO at the end of next season and get a high draft pick. Sure the more recent Giants track record sucks with drafting/developing but it's better than picking up garbage like Ruggiano and whatever other throwaway prospect you could get right now.
With Timmy, you're just throwing good money after bad if you re-sign him. How many false resurrections do you want to go through before we realize the old Timmy (or even a reasonable facsimile) isn't coming back?
Dood - I don't think the Giants ever considered any of the "false" resurrections a true resurrection, regardless of what Krukow was saying. If they did, they wouldnt have put him in the bullpen for the postseason. Fact is he was dominant in the postseason last year after a very bad season. This season there was early stumbles and then later there's been solid improvement. Not ACE-like consistency, but definitely much better than last year. My personal opinion is that whoever signs him--be it the Giants or some other team--will be getting a very talented, still young pitcher back on the rise. He wont get the contract he could have gotten two years ago (and I'll bet his agent regrets those decisions now) but he will have lots of interested teams.
A writer in the CCTimes (Mark Purdy) estimated that three years at $11 million per is as far as the Giants would go. That seems reasonable (though I wouldn't go that high). I don't think Tim would sign for that, simply because I believe someone out there would be stupid enough to offer him more.
Dood - depending on what we see in his last 5 or 6 starts, I would say that is reasonable. I wouldnt go a lot higher than that, but I doubt the Giants would be rejected if their offer is close to what the market is showing.
Dood - Show me the names you want to replace them with and I guarantee I can find sustained periods of mediocrity or just plain awfulness for them in the last few years also.
Allen- That involves so many factors, you can't accurately come up with names. Who do I want to replace them with? Miguel Cabrera and Clayton Kershaw.
Dood - I'd be in with those guys.
Who can one reasonably expect to replace them with? You won't know until you see who's available.
Dood - so basically you're talking about some phantom that you HOPE will be as good and who most likely wont measure up, talent wise, and who probably wont have the youth or track record on their side either.
Yesterday Bochy mentioned both Posey and Pill as third base possibilities. If I'm Pablo, I'm not comfortable hearing that.
Dood - ok, so the way i read that, writers were throwing out possibilities and Bochy didn't totally discount them but that doesn't mean they are seriously considering them. Pill would be cheaper and possibly more durable--we dont know that yet--but his production would have to improve greatly to compare with Pablo's talent. Posey is not an awful infielder but after catching for so long and also the injury, his quickness is completely shot. I don't even like him at first base...at third he would be a train wreck. Plus his numbers would be less special coming from a corner infielder than from a catcher.
Another possibility is acquiring a power bat at another position and going with Arias. Given a full season worth of ABs, he can probably equal what Pablo has done this year. Dood - Arias is a backup. That's all he has been and that's all he ever will be. Try to play him everyday and it wont be good. For example, let's extrapolate his numbers this year over a full season's ABs. You would be getting a .674 OPS, 4 HRs, 60 RBI and a wopping 16 walks. In this, Pablo's worst season to date, he is better than those numbers in far fewer ABs. The phantom "power" player you acquire--although who and how you make no allowance for--has to be All Star quality to even consider putting Arias out there everyday.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 22, 2013 14:26:27 GMT -5
Allen- Or do you look at them and say "Maybe these guys aren't as good as we thought they were. One can't get his head on straight and is really doing nothing but losing games for us, the other won't stay in shape and misses way too much time." Dood - ypu could go that way...but their youth and resumes say excellence is more likely than not for both of them. Allen- I had a boss who used to say "It doesn't matter how good you are if you're not here." That would apply to Pablo. He simply misses too much time Allen- No sale. Winning games is what it's all about. You can't pay a guy what you'll have to pay Tim and have him just go out there and lose, lose, lose. Hey, his ERA stinks too, if you want to go that way. Dood - still hanging on to that flat earth stuff eh? Well good luck with that. GMs and managers disagree with you but, oh well. You keep throwing out this "last 3 years of double digit losses" thing but it doesn't wash. In 2011 Tim was 13-14 with a 2.74 ERA. If you're going to hold out that year as a bad one because of the losses then you don't really understand what good pitching is. Last year Tim was awful, I grant you. This year, not great but not awful. ERA took a huge hit with a horrid May...since then he's been very good, a couple stinkers aside. Allen- Call it what you will. Why pay big money for a guy that doesn't win? And Tim decidedly doesn't win. Again, if you want to go by ERA, that sucks too. I didn't say 2011 was a bad year, but he did finish under .500 for a winning team, and he did lose 14 games. The last two years have sucked. Plain and simple. So far 16-28, 4.88. There's just no way you can justify spending $42 million for that, which the Giants have. To throw even more millions after it is just foolhardy. A couple of stinkers? In 11 of his 25 starts, Tim has been touched for four or more earnies. In eight, five or more. Seven times he's had as many or more earned runs than innings pitched. Allen- We've lowered are standards quite a bit, haven't we? Before it was "How can we trade this guy, he's a .300+ hitter. Now .283 is good. Dood - I haven't lowered my standards for Pablo one bit. Yes 283 is not very good for him, given his career average is near 300...but as a measure against the league and, more importantly, what he might be replaced with, 283 IS very good. I understand you don't want to trade low, but there also comes a time where you have to cut your losses. I could see keeping Pablo if no good deal comes along, but I think we're past the point where you're looking at him in terms of potential. What you have is pretty much what you're going to get. Dood - I'll say it again...he's JUST 27 MAN!! You really want to give up on his talent at this young an age and not even get full value in return? You're ok with that? Allen- Who said anything about not getting full value? You seem to have a problem retaining what you read. I'll repeat myself yet again. I'd shop Pablo. I'd shop him real hard. And I'd let him know in no uncertain terms that he's being shopped. If a good deal comes along, I'd pull the trigger. Rog, is probably right though. Given his performance and abysmal conditioning, we're probably stuck with him. But you don't know if you don't ask. It's not like I'm wanting to trade him for Jonathan Sanchez. I'd rather make a QO at the end of next season and get a high draft pick. Sure the more recent Giants track record sucks with drafting/developing but it's better than picking up garbage like Ruggiano and whatever other throwaway prospect you could get right now. Allen- Who said anything about right now? There's a whole offseason ahead. And who said anything about trading him for a throwaway prospect? With Timmy, you're just throwing good money after bad if you re-sign him. How many false resurrections do you want to go through before we realize the old Timmy (or even a reasonable facsimile) isn't coming back? Dood - I don't think the Giants ever considered any of the "false" resurrections a true resurrection, regardless of what Krukow was saying. If they did, they wouldnt have put him in the bullpen for the postseason. Fact is he was dominant in the postseason last year after a very bad season. This season there was early stumbles and then later there's been solid improvement. Not ACE-like consistency, but definitely much better than last year. My personal opinion is that whoever signs him--be it the Giants or some other team--will be getting a very talented, still young pitcher back on the rise. He wont get the contract he could have gotten two years ago (and I'll bet his agent regrets those decisions now) but he will have lots of interested teams. Allen- I'm sure there will be interest. I'm sure some team will pay far more than they should. I just hope it's not us. I don't know if I would call his last two starts signs of solid improvement. Much better than last year? He's on pace to lose more games than last year (when he led the league in losses) and win less. He's on pace to give up a whole eight less earnies than last year, when he led the league in ER surrendered. Improved? A bit. Much improved? Uh, no. On the rise? From what? Where he was last year? If he didn't rise above that, he might be out of baseball. He had nowhere to go but up. Who can one reasonably expect to replace them with? You won't know until you see who's available. Dood - so basically you're talking about some phantom that you HOPE will be as good and who most likely wont measure up, talent wise, and who probably wont have the youth or track record on their side either. Allen- That's putting a rather pessimistic spin on it. What are you basing your rosy projections for Pablo and Timmy on, besides hope? Yesterday Bochy mentioned both Posey and Pill as third base possibilities. If I'm Pablo, I'm not comfortable hearing that. Dood - ok, so the way i read that, writers were throwing out possibilities and Bochy didn't totally discount them but that doesn't mean they are seriously considering them. Allen- Actually, I believe Bochy said he thought Posey would be a really good third baseman, If he plays, he can be better than Pablo. I agree with you about Pill. Whatever others are seeing, I'm not seeing it. Either way, if I were Pablo, the fact that the manager is considering holding auditions for my job would give me pause. Another possibility is acquiring a power bat at another position and going with Arias. Given a full season worth of ABs, he can probably equal what Pablo has done this year. Dood - Arias is a backup. That's all he has been and that's all he ever will be. Try to play him everyday and it wont be good. Allen- Well, at least you have an open mind. I'm not sure you can make that judgment until he does play every day. I think most hitters will improve in some aspects of their offensive game with regular playing time. Especially pitch selection, though that doesn't seem to be the case with Pablo. You'd take a bit of an offensive hit playing Arias over Pablo. That's for sure. But you would get a full season. Something Pablo hasn't delivered since 2009. You'd also get better defense, better speed on the bases. The phantom "power" player you acquire--although who and how you make no allowance for--has to be All Star quality to even consider putting Arias out there everyday. Allen- So in your mind, it's best to just sit on our hands with a last place club. It's baseball, not the Supreme Court or the Mafia. These aren't lifetime jobs.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Aug 22, 2013 18:12:42 GMT -5
Allen- I had a boss who used to say "It doesn't matter how good you are if you're not here." That would apply to Pablo. He simply misses too much time
Dood - he has...but nothing about it is chronic, and I disagree that many--if any--of it is weight related. I agree that he has to play but I don't think at this point you can say he is injury prone...some bad luck went into a lot of that missed time.
Allen- Call it what you will. Why pay big money for a guy that doesn't win? And Tim decidedly doesn't win. Again, if you want to go by ERA, that sucks too. I didn't say 2011 was a bad year, but he did finish under .500 for a winning team, and he did lose 14 games. The last two years have sucked. Plain and simple. So far 16-28, 4.88. There's just no way you can justify spending $42 million for that, which the Giants have. To throw even more millions after it is just foolhardy. A couple of stinkers? In 11 of his 25 starts, Tim has been touched for four or more earnies. In eight, five or more. Seven times he's had as many or more earned runs than innings pitched.
Dood - choose pretty much any pitcher who is not among the elite the last two years and you can pick and choose sample sizes to fit your argument either way. Lump Tim's 2012 with pretty much any other year he has had (including the two CY seasons) and you can say his numbers suck. I agreed that he got off to a bad start this year but since May ended he has been steady--not consistently great, some flashes of greatness--very steadily improving, although not without some hiccups.
Allen- I'm sure there will be interest. I'm sure some team will pay far more than they should. I just hope it's not us. I don't know if I would call his last two starts signs of solid improvement. Much better than last year? He's on pace to lose more games than last year (when he led the league in losses) and win less. He's on pace to give up a whole eight less earnies than last year, when he led the league in ER surrendered. Improved? A bit. Much improved? Uh, no. On the rise? From what? Where he was last year? If he didn't rise above that, he might be out of baseball. He had nowhere to go but up.
Dood - Overall he IS improved from last year and since June began he is VERY much improved over last year. If you don't see that, well then you're locked in to your opinion.
Allen- That's putting a rather pessimistic spin on it. What are you basing your rosy projections for Pablo and Timmy on, besides hope?
Dood - youth, pure talent, experience under pressure situations and the fact that they have achieved much in a short time in the big leagues.
Allen- Actually, I believe Bochy said he thought Posey would be a really good third baseman, If he plays, he can be better than Pablo.
Dood - I think Bochy probably said "could" not "would"...if Posey had continued to play infield in college and in the pros then maybe it would be more of a sure thing. Now, not so much. Have you seen him run out ground balls? It would be like playing Benjie Molina at 3rd base. I dont even want to think about Buster fielding bunts.
I agree with you about Pill. Whatever others are seeing, I'm not seeing it. Either way, if I were Pablo, the fact that the manager is considering holding auditions for my job would give me pause.
Dood - that would be a good thing for Pablo. The last time the Giants challenged him, he had his best full season.
Allen- So in your mind, it's best to just sit on our hands with a last place club. It's baseball, not the Supreme Court or the Mafia. These aren't lifetime jobs.
Dood - didn't suggest lifetime contracts for either. But at their age and with their talent a little patience would be rewarded, especially with players who have come through for us many times before. If the "last place" club (it hasnt yet been determined...they still could finish as high as 2nd, IMO) hadn't been the same one--minus some severe injuries-- that won the WS less than a year ago, then i might be in favor of a house-cleaning. I think an overreaction would be the worst possible thing at this poiint. Keep as many of the championship pieces as you can while adding to them in the right places (left field, pitching depth).
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 22, 2013 21:52:30 GMT -5
Allen- I had a boss who used to say "It doesn't matter how good you are if you're not here." That would apply to Pablo. He simply misses too much time Dood - he has...but nothing about it is chronic, and I disagree that many--if any--of it is weight related. I agree that he has to play but I don't think at this point you can say he is injury prone...some bad luck went into a lot of that missed time. Allen- I'd say four years without a full season could be defined as chronic. He missed games in late 2010 specifically because of his weight. I guess if you want to bad enough, you could define any injury as bad luck. Dood - choose pretty much any pitcher who is not among the elite the last two years and you can pick and choose sample sizes to fit your argument either way. Lump Tim's 2012 with pretty much any other year he has had (including the two CY seasons) and you can say his numbers suck. I agreed that he got off to a bad start this year but since May ended he has been steady--not consistently great, some flashes of greatness--very steadily improving, although not without some hiccups. Allen- For $22 million, shouldn't you be getting elite? Since the end of May, Tim is 3-8, 4,04. I think we're going to need more improvement than that. Allen- I'm sure there will be interest. I'm sure some team will pay far more than they should. I just hope it's not us. I don't know if I would call his last two starts signs of solid improvement. Much better than last year? He's on pace to lose more games than last year (when he led the league in losses) and win less. He's on pace to give up a whole eight less earnies than last year, when he led the league in ER surrendered. Improved? A bit. Much improved? Uh, no. On the rise? From what? Where he was last year? If he didn't rise above that, he might be out of baseball. He had nowhere to go but up. Dood - Overall he IS improved from last year and since June began he is VERY much improved over last year. If you don't see that, well then you're locked in to your opinion. Allen- Saying Tim has improved from last year is setting the bar pretty low, don't you think? The improvement has been miniscule, and certainly hasn't translated into wins. Allen- That's putting a rather pessimistic spin on it. What are you basing your rosy projections for Pablo and Timmy on, besides hope? Dood - youth, pure talent, experience under pressure situations and the fact that they have achieved much in a short time in the big leagues. Allen- Youth? If youth did it, we can put my granddaughter out there, she's five. The rest sounds more like wishful thinking than anything else. Lincecum can't access his talent on any kind of a consistent basis, and Pablo doesn't play enough to make the talent meaningful. At 27, he's already breaking down. Allen- Actually, I believe Bochy said he thought Posey would be a really good third baseman, If he plays, he can be better than Pablo. Dood - I think Bochy probably said "could" not "would"...if Posey had continued to play infield in college and in the pros then maybe it would be more of a sure thing. Now, not so much. Have you seen him run out ground balls? It would be like playing Benjie Molina at 3rd base. I dont even want to think about Buster fielding bunts. Allen- I believe he did say would. You make it sound like we're just going to put Buster out there cold. With work, I think he'd do quite well. I don't recall many 90 foot sprints involved with playing third. Pablo could actually pass for Bengie, even the current one. Dood - that would be a good thing for Pablo. The last time the Giants challenged him, he had his best full season. Allen- Pablo hasn't played a full season since 2009. Allen- So in your mind, it's best to just sit on our hands with a last place club. It's baseball, not the Supreme Court or the Mafia. These aren't lifetime jobs. Dood - didn't suggest lifetime contracts for either. But at their age and with their talent a little patience would be rewarded, especially with players who have come through for us many times before. If the "last place" club (it hasnt yet been determined...they still could finish as high as 2nd, IMO) hadn't been the same one--minus some severe injuries-- that won the WS less than a year ago, then i might be in favor of a house-cleaning. I think an overreaction would be the worst possible thing at this poiint. Keep as many of the championship pieces as you can while adding to them in the right places (left field, pitching depth). Allen- Randy, if you had your way, we'd bring back Todd Wellemeyer and Brandon Medders so we could reunite the 2010 team. You have to change man. You can't just keep the same players, especially when they, (like Pablo) often can't play.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:13:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:14:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:16:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:23:04 GMT -5
Allen- We've lowered are standards quite a bit, haven't we? Before it was "How can we trade this guy, he's a .300+ hitter. Now .283 is good. Rog -- Pablo's career average is .297. Go ahead and trade him, Allen, and hurt the club. Perhaps the Giants should simply keep Barry Zito. After all, the Giants won something like 14 straight games he pitched. Isn't it about winning? You seem to have it in for Pablo, and you're just not going to give up. What are you going to get in trade for him? And don't say you don't know. If you simply want to shop him, fine. The Giants should be continually shopping their players. The primary reason they aren't likely to get much for Pablo is that he isn't signed beyond next season. Put Pablo out on the open market and see what he gets. Believe me, it would be plenty. And don't give me the old "of course someone would overpay." What the top bidder will pay is market value. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1964&page=2#ixzz2clL8DMaQ
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:29:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:31:37 GMT -5
Allen- I had a boss who used to say "It doesn't matter how good you are if you're not here." That would apply to Pablo. He simply misses too much time Rog -- Would you rather have a good player who plays 2/3rds of the games, or an average player who plays them all? Remember now, you can have Joaquin Arias -- the player you mention as a possible replacement for Pablo -- play the other third. Don't be down on Pablo, Allen, and see the light. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1964&page=2#ixzz2clOGZkRB
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:33:43 GMT -5
Allen -- A writer in the CCTimes (Mark Purdy) estimated that three years at $11 million per is as far as the Giants would go. That seems reasonable (though I wouldn't go that high). I don't think Tim would sign for that, simply because I believe someone out there would be stupid enough to offer him more. Dood - depending on what we see in his last 5 or 6 starts, I would say that is reasonable. Rog -- If I were the Giants and I could sign Tim right now for 3/$33, the ink would be dry before you could blink. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1964&page=2#ixzz2clP3MybD
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:38:00 GMT -5
Dood - Overall he IS improved from last year and since June began he is VERY much improved over last year. If you don't see that, well then you're locked in to your opinion. Rog -- And when it comes to Barry Bonds, Pablo, Tim and possibly others, Allen is just that. The on thing I will give Allen credit for is that he recommended trading Tim after 2011. That was sound thinking. Now he wouldn't pay 3/$33 for Tim. That's NOT sound thinking -- or at least Allen can't make a strong argument for it, and not many would agree with him. If Allen is Nostradamus, then I'll give him credit. Otherwise, I'll give him credit for being biased, non-analytical, or unwilling to change an opinion once he sets his mind to it. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1964&page=2#ixzz2clPPpvQK
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:42:30 GMT -5
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Aug 22, 2013 23:48:37 GMT -5
Allen- For $22 million, shouldn't you be getting elite? Since the end of May, Tim is 3-8, 4,04. I think we're going to need more improvement than that.
Dood - you're making two different arguments here. Do you want to talk about whether the current contract didnt pan out or do you want to discuss reasons why a new contract, at about half the former salary, would be the right or wrong move?
Allen- Randy, if you had your way, we'd bring back Todd Wellemeyer and Brandon Medders so we could reunite the 2010 team. You have to change man. You can't just keep the same players, especially when they, (like Pablo) often can't play.
Dood - to my recollection neither of those players were on the postseason roster...so no, I wouldnt want them back.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 23, 2013 12:15:41 GMT -5
Allen- We've lowered are standards quite a bit, haven't we? Before it was "How can we trade this guy, he's a .300+ hitter. Now .283 is good. Rog -- Pablo's career average is .297. Go ahead and trade him, Allen, and hurt the club. Allen- What an absolutely idiotic comment Rog. Something I would expect from Don. Of course whether the trade hurt or helped the club would depend on what you got in return. Right now, Pablo is an out of shape, part time player performing far below his ability. Perhaps the Giants should simply keep Barry Zito. After all, the Giants won something like 14 straight games he pitched. Isn't it about winning? Allen- And when he did, they did keep him. You seem to have it in for Pablo, and you're just not going to give up. What are you going to get in trade for him? And don't say you don't know. Allen- How would I possibly know? But here you are sticking up for a player you think is so bad he wouldn't bring anything worthwhile in a trade. If you simply want to shop him, fine. The Giants should be continually shopping their players. The primary reason they aren't likely to get much for Pablo is that he isn't signed beyond next season. Allen- And what have I said before? That I would shop him, and if a good deal came up I would trade him. Did I ever say dump him, no matter what you get in return? Put Pablo out on the open market and see what he gets. Believe me, it would be plenty. And don't give me the old "of course someone would overpay." What the top bidder will pay is market value. Allen- Do you just go into any store and pay whatever they want to charge for something, assuming it's market value? Or do you shop around for a better price? You don't think GMs overpay? See ARod, and Pujols, Albert. See Lincecum, Tim. Heck you could come up with any number of other examples.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 23, 2013 12:23:37 GMT -5
The Giants won 16 straight Barry Zito starts. How good is he?
Allen- At that time, pretty good. The thing is player's performances change. That's the trap many here seem to fall into. They think because Tim was good in 2009, he's still that good. Because Pablo hit .300 one year, he's still a .300 hitter. Times change, players change.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 23, 2013 12:29:42 GMT -5
Allen -- Another possibility is acquiring a power bat at another position and going with Arias. Rog -- First of all, how would you? Secondly, why would you? Allen- Say, for the sake of argument, that you could make a trade for a big power guy who could drive in alot of runs. Say Chris Davis or Giancarlo Stanton. Say you had to include Pabloat to make the deal. Play Arias at third, and you have a better lineup than you do now.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Aug 23, 2013 12:42:40 GMT -5
Times do indeed change and players do change...sometimes for the better. There are ups and downs in every career. But players with big talent who achieved a lot early, will very rarely stay down for long. They are a better bet than an older veteran that has had a couple good years after years of mediocrity. You have trumpeted the cause of many a player with less talent and more age on them than Tim and Pablo. Yet you continue to think they will never be great again, as if they are old and used up. You seem to have it in for both of them for some reason and I'm baffled by it.
I think Rog's right...if you can get Timmy for 3/$33 mil, I think you jump on that gleefully. And you ride Pablo in 2014 until he proves that Allen was right. If he proves the haters wrong, then we probably will be having a nice year. Even if that's not the case, you will be able to get more at the trade deadline for him than you will in the offseason, I can pretty much guarantee that. Or you can go the QO route and receive a high draft pick if he signs elsewhere.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 23, 2013 12:43:27 GMT -5
Allen- For $22 million, shouldn't you be getting elite? Since the end of May, Tim is 3-8, 4,04. I think we're going to need more improvement than that. Dood - you're making two different arguments here. Do you want to talk about whether the current contract didnt pan out or do you want to discuss reasons why a new contract, at about half the former salary, would be the right or wrong move? Allen- If you think Tim will take a 50% pay cut, maybe you sign him for that. I don't think he will nor do I think he'll have to. Thing is do you even want to pay $11 million for a pitcher who wins about a third of his decisions, leads the league in losses, and has an ERA in the mid 4s? Over the last two seasons, the Giants are 23-35 in Timmy starts. This season 9-16. Do you even want to pay $11 million for that?
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Aug 23, 2013 13:01:27 GMT -5
Allen- If you think Tim will take a 50% pay cut, maybe you sign him for that. I don't think he will nor do I think he'll have to.
Dood - I think if the offer is close to market value, Tim would accept 3 years at 11 per. No telling quite yet what the market will bear. Then again I wouldnt be shocked if it bears a lot more because, once again, he is only 29. You're not talking about an old, aged, broken down washed up has been. It's highly foreseeable that a return to greatness could be in the not too distant future.
Thing is do you even want to pay $11 million for a pitcher who wins about a third of his decisions, leads the league in losses, and has an ERA in the mid 4s? Over the last two seasons, the Giants are 23-35 in Timmy starts. This season 9-16. Do you even want to pay $11 million for that?
Dood - It's less important what he has done and more important what you foresee him doing under his upcoming contract. That's the reason someone will pay him to play. That's the reason people will always come to see him pitch. His ability--even lessened somewhat since his CY days--is not questioned or overlooked by fans or opposing managers. What he has done recently can shape the terms of the contract but the decision to sign him is based mostly on what you believe he will do in the future.
It's like when a great hitter with lots of power is on deck late in a tie game. The guy in front of him isnt as accomplished but he is hot. The great hitter is cold as a stone, 3 for his last 50. Do you walk the lesser guy to get to the great but cold guy? Or do you figure that greatness is due to come through?
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Aug 23, 2013 18:59:23 GMT -5
I would think Tim could do alot better than $11 million. There are alot of stupid GMs out there. Even if he were a broken down has been. Look at Pujols and ARod. I wish I could see the "return to greatness", but I just can't. Tim can't sustain anything. He does good for a bit, then falls back again. It's been that way for nearly two seasons now. I don't see a return to former form as "highly forseeable". What Tim is now is what he is, I'm afraid.
What he has done is all you have to go on. Your decision is whether you want to pay for what he is now, or do you want to pay for what he was three years ago. As dumb as it seems, there are GMs out there who will choose the latter. Tim will do fine, financially.
|
|