Petit looking pretty sweet

[allenreed]

I understand that my statement was controversial,


Allen- I can think of alot of words for your statement, but I don't think I'd lead with "controversial".

[sharksrog]

Randy -- More than half the major leagues gets DFAd in August and lots of good ones don't get claimed.

Rog -- I think you may be talking about two different things, Randy.

You are right that a high percentage of players do get put on waivers in August. There is really almost no risk in putting ANYONE on waivers then, since the waivers are revocable.

But a player being DFA'd is different. When a player is DFA'd, he counts against neither the 25- or 40-man rosters. His team then has something like 48 or 72 hours to trade him or waive him. When a player is claimed on revokable waivers, his team has something like 48 hours to work out a trade with the lowest claiming team, give him up on the waivers or pull him back.

If a player is claimed and not traded at that point, I don't think he can subsequently be traded -- unless he were to clear irrevocable waivers, which wouldn't be the case if someone could pick him up on waivers rather than giving up something in trade.

Anyway, players who have been DFA'd WILL go to another team if they are claimed. If not, they could go to the minors.

I didn't say this at all clearly, but suffice it to say that placing a player on revocable waivers is far different from DFA'ing him. In the first case, the team doesn't risk losing the player if it doesn't want to lose him, while in the latter, they most certainly do.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990#ixzz2eJuSBWMx

[sharksrog]

Allen -- On the other hand Bud Norris won his tenth today, going seven strong, one earnie, four hits, eight Ks and just one walk. 4-1, 4.27 as an Oriole. Baltimore is 6-1 in games Bud has started.


Rog -- I get a kick out of guessing how much run support a pitcher gets when his won-loss record is out of sync withh his ERA. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Bud's run support has been five runs or higher. In fact, I would be surprsied if it WEREN'T.

Looking it up, Bud's support has been higher than SEVEN runs with the Orioles. So his won-loss record isn't very relevant to his performance level.

I would have traded Gary Brown and Joe Panik for him if the Giants were in contention. I probably would have traded them for him even if the Giants weren't. But Bud has been basically a league-average pitcher this season and mostly below it over the rest of his career.

Bud would have value to the Giants because he is under team control for another two seasons after this one -- and he has said it would be a dream to play for the Giants, meaning he should be somewhat easier to re-sign.

Another pitcher who has said he would love to be a Giant is Bronson Arroyo. Arroyo has been a little better than a league-average pitcher, and his has a sub-4.00 ERA in four of the past five seasons.

Arroyo is making $11.5 million this season and will almost certainly do even better in free agency. Perhaps he would be willing to give the Giants a slight discount. Arroyo will be 37 before the beginning of next season, so I'm guessing he might be available on a two-year contract.
Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990&page=1#ixzz2eJyQFiOW

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- If that's your opinion Allen (that Yusmeiro wont' be as good as Bud Norris), why would you want to give him a shot?

Rog -- That's a nice question, Boagie, but please allow me to help Allen answer it.

Petit will be arbitration-eligible this season for the first time. He won't be eligible for free agency for three more years. Even with his near-perfect game, he will almost certainly be very affordable for next season. I doubt he's making much more than the major-league minimum this season.

So the Giants risk essentially only a spot on the 40-man roster if they give Petit a shot at making the rotation. What's to lose? Worst case, perhaps he becomes this year's Guilermo Moscoso.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990&page=1#ixzz2eK3PlUoB

[sharksrog]

Allen -- We're talking fourth and fifth starters here. Heck, we once thought Jonathan Sanchez was good enough.

Rog -- And from his no-hitter through the end of May, 2011, he absolutely, positively was. Given that he actually pitched at or above the level of a #3 starter, one would be foolish to think otherwise.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990&page=1#ixzz2eK55pCw3

[sharksrog]

I hadn't realized it until just now, but had Hunter Pence not had to shade right-center field because of AT&T, he almost certainly would have caught Chavez's ball. On the other hand, I wonder if Hunter in fact varied his position a little toward the line, since the key was in maintaining the perfect game, not preventing an extra-base hit.

[sharksrog]

Allen -- When Timmy threw his no-no there were people here who were willing to hand him a 5yr/$100 million contract on the spot.

Rog - Very few.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990&page=1#ixzz2eKBJl7wG

[sharksrog]

Allen- Absolutely. Guillermo Mota, better than Willie Mays. I can see that. Put up a statue for him. Just because someone happened to be along for the ride a couple of times doesn't make them a great player.

Rog -- But the point is that NO one single player has that much impact. A great player without a team around him doesn't win World Championships. A less great player with a great team around him often does.

Since wins and World Championships are team awards, we shouldn't get overwhelmed by how many World Championships a player wins.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990&page=1#ixzz2eKBYfrwD

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- I would hand Timmy a nice contract regardless of his no-hitter. Tim Lincecum is the greatest player to ever play in San Francisco.

Allen- You were the guy who never saw Mays, right?

Boagie -- Based on what he's already done he deserves it. They should erect a Lincecum statue next to Mays' statue and make it a foot taller.

Rog -- You KNOW how much I love Tim Lincecum. But you're WAY off base here. WAY, WAY, WAY off.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990&page=1#ixzz2eKCDUMfw

[sharksrog]

Allen -- His career ERA is four points better than Atlee Hammaker's,

Dood - which tells us that Hammaker wasnt as bad as lots of people made him out to be.

Rog -- For a while, Atlee was OUTSTANDING.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1990&page=1#ixzz2eKCapUEz

[allenreed]

Sept 8, 2013 12:21:01 GMT -5 sharksrog said:

Boagie -- If that's your opinion Allen (that Yusmeiro wont' be as good as Bud Norris), why would you want to give him a shot?

Rog -- That's a nice question, Boagie, but please allow me to help Allen answer it.

Petit will be arbitration-eligible this season for the first time. He won't be eligible for free agency for three more years. Even with his near-perfect game, he will almost certainly be very affordable for next season. I doubt he's making much more than the major-league minimum this season.

Allen- Geez, all that huh? I was just going to say because Norris isn't available.
Interesting that you said that Arroyo wants to be a Giant. I hadn't heard that. If he pitched for us like he pitches against us, he would be a great acquisition. I can't imagine him giving us much of a discount though, unless he really wants to get out of the Cincy ballpark.

[allenreed]

I liked Atlee until the 87 playoffs. Jose Oquendo for crissakes.

[Islandboagie]

Boagie -- Based on what he's already done he deserves it. They should erect a Lincecum statue next to Mays' statue and make it a foot taller.

Rog -- You KNOW how much I love Tim Lincecum. But you're WAY off base here. WAY, WAY, WAY off.


Boagie- Am I? Do the Giants win the WS in 2010 if we replace Lincecum with Mays? Offensively they'd be better, no question. But without an ace to out-duel Hudson, Halladay and Lee we probably wouldn't have made it past any of the rounds in the playoffs. I'd say that's pretty much a guarantee.

Whereas, you could replace Mays with Lincecum in '62 and they would have likely beat the Yankees. And who knows about the other seasons when the Dodgers pitching dominated the NL West. In my opinion they'd be more suited to be able compete against the Dodgers with Lincecum on their staff.

Its sad to think that even now, after we've won the World Series, even the long time Giants fans still don't know what it takes to win. Give me Lincecum and Cain, you can have Mays and McCovey.

[sharksrog]

Boagie- Am I? Do the Giants win the WS in 2010 if we replace Lincecum with Mays?

Rog -- There is no way of knowing. But the accurate question when asking which player contributed more to the Giants is, well, which player contributed more to the Giants. And that clearly was Willie Mays.

Using your convoluted logic, one could say that Matt Cain, Jeremy Affeldt, Sergio Romo, Pablo Sandoval, etc. contributed more to the Giants than Willie Mays did.

Ask virtually anyone who understands major league baseball and its players whether Tim was more valuable than Willie, and they will answer Willie.

You're trying to say a two-time Cy Young Award winner who wasn't even in the regular rotation in the second of two World Series is more valuable than the player virtually anyone who follows baseball closely would put in the top 10 of all time?

I understand your logic. It's just convoluted, that's all. There is no way to know if the Giants would have won the 2010 and 2012 World Series with Willie or not -- of if they would have won in 2009, or 2000, or 2001.

You're asking a question that can't be accurately answered in order to prove your premise. Not being able to make a better argument than that would usually indicate your premise isn't valid.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#14802#ixzz2eQt7wAho

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- Its sad to think that even now, after we've won the World Series, even the long time Giants fans still don't know what it takes to win. Give me Lincecum and Cain, you can have Mays and McCovey.

Rog -- Almost anyone who knows baseball history would take that trade with you. You're so short-sighted here that I can't believe it, Boagie.

You give 100 serious baseball fans who know its history that choice, and it is unlikely that any of the 100 would join you.

Ask anyone, ANYONE on the board that question, and see how much agreement you get.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#ixzz2eQurpR4K

[sharksrog]

By the way, if a team had Mays and McCovey in their primes, I doubt you could get them with Lincecum, Cain, Bumgarner, Posey, Belt, Crawford, Sandoval, Pagan and Pence. The only way I could see even that happening would be if all the rest of the key players on the team were replacement-level players, and the team needed a very broad base of players.

I may be overstating this slightly, but let's just say that you couldn't get Mays and McCovey for Lincecum and Cain even if you threw in a tremendous amount of other talent.

With Cain, Lincecum, Posey and Bumgarner, you might be able to get discussions at least started if the Mays/McCovey team were starved for pitching. Throw in Belt and Pagan, and the Mays/McCovey team would likely want more still. Pence begins to make it interesting, and perhaps Sandoval and Crawford COULD be the deciders.

But do you get the idea that Mays and McCovey were great enough to command FAR more than just Lincecum and Cain? Mays was a virtual nonpareil, and the only present Giant in McCovey's class is Buster Posey.

I don't think a team would trade Juan Marichal alone for Lincecum and Cain. Maybe back two or three years ago, but not now.

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- Whereas, you could replace Mays with Lincecum in '62 and they would have likely beat the Yankees

Rog -- What makes you say that? The Giants' pitching staff gave up 20 runs in that 7-game series. It wasn't necessarily more pitching they needed. In the Giants' four LOSSES they gave up only 15 runs. In two of the losses, they yielded only 1 and 3 runs.

Anyway, there is no way one can answer the question you posed not as a question but as a statement.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#ixzz2eQxl0aCH

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- Its sad to think that even now, after we've won the World Series, even the long time Giants fans still don't know what it takes to win.

Rog -- Your statement doesn't hold water, Boagie. How the heck do you know that long-time Giants fans don't know what it takes to win without asking?

Your statement is self-serving.

Even though Mays and McCovey were clearly more valuable players than Lincecum and Cain (including threee MVP Awards between them), would it be right for us long-time Giants fans to say you don't know what it takes to win?

Of course it wouldn't. So why do you make that statement about us?

By the way, take guys like Boly and me. You don't think we knew at your age as much about baseball and the Giants as you do now? What did we do, forget it?

Or did we simply continuing learning?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#ixzz2eR5mER82

[Islandboagie]

By the way, take guys like Boly and me. You don't think we knew at your age as much about baseball and the Giants as you do now? What did we do, forget it?

Or did we simply continuing learning?

Boagie- I grew up playing baseball, t-ball to high school. I became a fan of the Giants when I was about 10 years old, ever since then I have followed the Giants.

I had the benefit of watching every game since Comcast has established the baseball networks, which you didn't have in your day. Before that I followed them on the radio and ktvu, or any other outlet I could find them on (wgn, tbs..ect.) But, we all know prior to CSN, games on TV were not nearly the amount we get to see now.

Considering all this, I think its fairly certain I've seen more games than you did when you were my age. And, unless you became a die hard Giants fan before you were 10 years old, then I've followed the Giants longer too.

We know that stats are more detailed now, I have the benefit of learning from those, while the stats in your day were limited.

But who cares? I don't really consider who knows more, I think we all know a lot, and have different ways of looking at different aspects of the game.

Its my opinion that two front line starters are a bigger key to winning than two good power hitters. I believe history supports that.

So yeah, give me Cain and Lincecum, you can have Mays and McCovey, or Tulowitzki and Gonzalez or Cabrera and Fielder. Give me Johnson and Schilling over Bonds and Kent. Give me Maddux and Glavine over Bonds and Kent too.

[allenreed]

Could go either way. The only team I can really remember being a big winner without power hitters are the Dodgers of the mid 60s with Koufax and Drysdale. They also had another pretty fair pitcher in Claude Osteen.
I think what you're missing here Boagie, is that the Giants teams that won the titles probably aren't better than the Giants teams of the mid 60s. The present day Lincecum wouldn't even have made those teams, much less players like Blanco or Torres. They just played when there were better teams.
Not to take anything away from the title teams, they were among the best teams in those seasons, and won the clutch games in the post season.

[Islandboagie]

Yet they only made it to the postseason twice between the time they came to S.F. and '86 when I became a fan. Yeah, that's pretty good.

[allenreed]

To be fair, half the teams didn't make the postseason, as they do now. Two made it, versus the current 10.

[Islandboagie]

This is true, but the point remains, the Dodgers had the same disadvantage and they went to the post season 10 times during the same period, winning the World Series 4 times. 3 times with Koufax and Drysdale. I hate being on the side of the Dodgers, but pitching wins. The Dodgers proved it in the '60s, just like the Giants proved it in 2010 and '12.

We're getting off the topic though, my original comment was Tim Lincecum being the best player to ever play for San Francisco, which I still stand behind, and nobody has given me a solid argument to prove otherwise.

[allenreed]

It's a baseball axiom that good pitching beats good hitting, most of the time. The Big Red Machine would be anj exception. The Murderer's Row Yankees another, the "We Are Family" Pirates yet another. The Yankees of the 50s and early 60s were more hitting than pitching, though they had both.
Lincecum the best player to ever play for the SF Giants? The argument is absolutely ridiculous on it's face. I haven't heard you make any argument to support it. Lincecum had three very good seasons, the rest has been pretty mediocre. He's never won 20 games, has lost in the teens the last three years, double figures in the last four, and was the worst starter in baseball in 2012.
Mays had 20 very good to great seasons. I believe he's the only player to win two MVP awards 11 years apart. He's in the HOF. He is third all time among legitimate HR hitters. Defensively he has no peers.Lincecum doesn't even know when he's supposed to cover a base, or back it up.
McCovey, Cepeda, Marichal, all in the Hall, all way ahead of Lincecum. Timmy's way down the line. He's Jim Barr or Shawn Estes. Maybe Jack Sanford.

[allenreed]

Here's a question, Boagie. If Tim's career ended after this season, do you see him making the HOF?

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- Yet they only made it to the postseason twice between the time they came to S.F. and '86 when I became a fan. Yeah, that's pretty good.

Rog -- You're not forgetting that fewer teams made the playoffs back then, are you? Also, in the '60's, they just kept missing out on the pennant. Under today's rules they would have made the playoffs a LOT.

No one is saying the Giants were a great team from 1958 through 1986. But they WERE a really fine team in the '60's and through 1971.

By the way, after your initial season as a Giants fan, did you look at their team and think that they were going to be pretty good in 1987, that one of their few needs was a utility infielder? That's how my dad and I looked at it -- and he told Chris Speier just that when he and my mom stayed at Chris and Aleta's house while they attended a funeral in Sun City.

My dad suggested Chris contact his former third base coach, Don Zimmer, who had just joined the Giants, and less than a week later, Chris was a Giant.

But apparently I've forgotten everything I knew then and understand only numbers now. I do tell my girlfriend though that I'm pretty good with figures.

Of course, she figured out pretty quickly that I'm not.

I don't mean to pick on you for not understanding how good Mays and McCovey were. You never saw them play.

On the other hand, you MUST have read a little about Giants history. I myself don't know as much as Don, but I probably know as much or more than anyone else here. Even the part that isn't covered by numbers.

If you get a chance, read one of the books about Mays. The most recent one came out just a couple of years ago. And get your hands on a book about the amazing 1951 season. I wasn't old enough to be a baseball fan then, but I learned a lot about that season from my dad, and I learned even more by reading about it.

One thing I will say about Willie. There is just no way to fully understand how brilliant he was without having seen him play. One quote about Willie that gives just the tiniest glimpse was "He made the hard plays look easy, and the easy plays look hard." The most exciting player I've seen in my life.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#14829#ixzz2eYkJkOhs

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- I had the benefit of watching every game since Comcast has established the baseball networks, which you didn't have in your day. Before that I followed them on the radio and ktvu, or any other outlet I could find them on (wgn, tbs..ect.) But, we all know prior to CSN, games on TV were not nearly the amount we get to see now.

Considering all this, I think its fairly certain I've seen more games than you did when you were my age.

Rog -- I suspect you're right -- although I'll bet I've seen a lot more in person than you have. Not meaning to get into a "mine's longer, no mine's longer" discussion with you, but I do resent it when you say that all I know is stats. You couldn't be more wrong.

Boagie -- And, unless you became a die hard Giants fan before you were 10 years old, then I've followed the Giants longer too.

Rog -- Aside from Don, I'll bet I'm the only person here who was a Giants fan before they moved to SF. I have the benefit of being a 3rd-generation Giants fan (despite being from a family based in Indiana until 1961). I learned a little about the baseball and the Giants from my grandpa, and a LOT from my dad.

When I was your age, I hadn't gone out to dinner with Tim Lincecum's dad. Heck, I certainly didn't know there WAS a Tim Lincecum.

But I had been out to dinner with a few Giants over the years, and knew Chris Speier well. It's probably been 25 years since I've seen Chris, but if you went up to him and told him my name, he'd know who you were talking about.

I have a bat from his final game as a Giant (and as a player). Two of Chris' kids came up from Scottsdale to the Bay Area to attend my dad's funeral. Although Justin Speier was a catcher in college before becoming a pitcher at that level, I was there one afternoon when Justin came home and proudly announced he had pitched a no-hitter (at about 14 years of age, so probably in Babe Ruth ball).

So do you see why I am a little aggravated when you and others here say all I know about the game is numbers?


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#ixzz2eYo7mGV3

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- So yeah, give me Cain and Lincecum, you can have Mays and McCovey, or Tulowitzki and Gonzalez or Cabrera and Fielder. Give me Johnson and Schilling over Bonds and Kent. Give me Maddux and Glavine over Bonds and Kent too.

Rog -- The logic flaw here though, Boagie, is that all your comparisons are between Hall of Famers or very likely future Hall of Famers -- except for Lincecum and Cain.

Tim has likely derailed his chances with his poor seasons the past two years, and poor Matt hasn't gotten enough run support to have posted a good won-loss record.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#ixzz2eYqdtMpz

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- We know that stats are more detailed now, I have the benefit of learning from those, while the stats in your day were limited.

Rog -- I've got to give you credit on that one. On the other hand, from a non-stats point of view (and even including stats, based on what was available at each of our times), I almost certainly knew as much as you.

If you're basing your argument on baseball stats, I think I might have a better knowledge of them today than you do.

So I've got the advantage of knowing roughly as much as you at your age, continuing my learning about the game outside the stats area, and likely knowing stats today better than you do.

It's possible I know as much about the game as you do -- and am not just about the numbers. That's my primary point.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#ixzz2eYrexGkV

[sharksrog]

Allen -- I believe he's the only player to win two MVP awards 11 years apart.

Rog -- There is one other guy, who won them 14 years apart. That guy won 7 of them, and also finished 2nd twice, 4th, 5th twice, 8th and 12th.

I am almost certain though that you are right that Willie is the only player who won two MVP's 11 years apart with none in between. He could easily have won a few others.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1990&page=2#ixzz2eYsySVf3