|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 28, 2013 8:33:02 GMT -5
This according to Henry Schulman. Sabean sat there and crowed about having lots of money to spend and now it appears they're going cheap on the number five starter, and bringing back a 36 year old who had a 5.73 ERA. Of course if they're still planning on signing another starter and he was brought back as insurance, I have no problem with the signing. You can't have enough starting pitching.
The Giants were very busy yesterday, cutting loose Johnny Monell and Frankie Peguero, and claiming Jose De Paula on waivers and signing a lefty reliever named Erick Cordier. DePaula had nice minor league numbers last year and appears to be a nice find. The reliever is wild, but consistently hits 98-100 miles on the gun, so he instantly becomes the hardest thrower in the organization. Cordier struck out 11 batters per nine innings last year, but also walked five batters per nine. That was actually an improvement over the year before when he walked 32 batters in 32 innings!
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 28, 2013 9:55:29 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see if they end up paying him more than his option was.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 28, 2013 10:31:16 GMT -5
I see no chance of that. I'm guessing the amount will tell us if the Giants view him as a fifth starter or insurance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 28, 2013 11:03:30 GMT -5
I have a hard time believing Ryan and his agent couldn't get an offer from another team for more than 6 mil.
All speculation on my part. I figured picking up his option was a done deal, so nothing that's happened has made sense to me. I could just be grossly overestimating Ryan's value.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 28, 2013 15:30:29 GMT -5
I was just reading that the contract will probably have a smaller base salary, with incentives that can push it back to the option amount if he pitches well. I'm not optimistic about Vogey as the fifth starter, so I'm hoping that Edwin Escobar will be ready sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 28, 2013 16:46:02 GMT -5
There's something going on here that's being kept beneath the surface. The whole situation just doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 28, 2013 16:46:42 GMT -5
There's something going on here that's being kept beneath the surface. The whole situation just doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 28, 2013 17:22:08 GMT -5
Obama is taxing the Giants at such a ridiculous rate to fund Obamacare that they can't afford a competent fifth starter!
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 28, 2013 18:11:07 GMT -5
Well, we can't afford a competent President, so it all goes together I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 28, 2013 18:51:22 GMT -5
What we can't afford is another incompetent one. I can barely afford health care after this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 29, 2013 11:58:17 GMT -5
Supposedly working on a one year deal worth $4 million.
Also said to be ready to attempt a comeback: Brad Penny.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 29, 2013 16:52:30 GMT -5
Vogelsong has apparently re-signed for 5 million plus incentives. Unless the Giants are going to step up now and obtain an expensive left fielder, this signing makes no sense and is a complete contradiction of everything they have previously said this offseason.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 29, 2013 18:01:03 GMT -5
I don't think you can say they haven't spent. They got Pence, Lincecum, and Hudson, and probably overpaid for all three.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 29, 2013 20:48:30 GMT -5
Mark -- Vogelsong has apparently re-signed for 5 million plus incentives. Unless the Giants are going to step up now and obtain an expensive left fielder, this signing makes no sense and is a complete contradiction of everything they have previously said this offseason. Allen -- I don't think you can say they haven't spent. They got Pence, Lincecum, and Hudson, and probably overpaid for all three. Rog -- A lot of meat here. First, if the Giants are going to pay Vogelsong $5 million with incentives that could carry the deal to $8 million, I'm not sure they wouldn't have been better off exercising his net $6.2 million option. Second, it would appear the Giants may have originally gotten away from Vogelsong in order to give themselve the flexibility to get as many as two new starters. Third, the timing of all this might indicate the Giants were hoping to land Dan Haren in addition to Tim Hudson. There may have been another pitcher or two they have now given up on. Fourth, I'm not sure what expensive outfielders are out there who would be worth the money to the Giants. The Giants don't seem to believe there are any. Fifth, spending less money on starting pitching may give the Giants another area of flexibility, this time in addressing left field. I wouldn't expect them to do so, but an example might be sending money to the Red Sox as part of a trade for Daniel Nava. Sixth, the Giants clearly have spent this off-season. Seventh, I would agree with Allen that Pence was a bit of an overspend, but I disagree on Hudson and think Lincecum's re-signing could be viewed either way. Eighth, the Giants without Pence and Lincecum would have dug themselves holes in the rotation and outfield that they would have had a hard time digging out of. Ninth, I understand what Mark is saying that re-signing Vogelsong goes against what they have been saying they were going to do this off-season, but I'm pretty satisfied with the three pitchers they signed or are retaining. The $43 million guaranteed cost may seem a bit high, but would you rather have Santana, Nolasco and Vargas for about the same amount -- and with a possible combined commitment of 13 years compared to the five the Giants have now committted to between Lincecum, Hudson and Vogelsong? Tenth, the time frames of the three starting pitcher signings (Lincecum 2, Hudson 2 and Vogelsong 1) would seem to fit nicely with the development patterns of the young Giants pitchers. Eleventh, if I could have had any two starters after Lincecum, my first choice may well have been Hudson for two years and Haren for one. I don't consider Vogelsong as a bad alternative to Haren. Let's go back just 16 months. Ryan Vogelsong is leading the majors with a 2.22 ERA. He has a remarkable 18 quality starts in his 19 outings on the season. He has gone at least six innings in each of his outings. This extraordinarily consistent season to date piggybacks on his 2.71 ERA in 2011. It's looking as if the Giants might be well-served to lock up Ryan through as far away as 2016. Clearly a whole lot has changed in those 16 months, but remember how we suggested it might be most cost-effective to sign a pitcher coming off a bad season? The Giants' three starting pitcher signings this off-season were coming off either one bad year or two -- or a serious ankle injury that likely cut his cost by $5 million or more per season. I can understand the desire for a #5 starter who seems to carry less risk than Vogelsong, if one looks at his three seasons combined since he returned to the Giants, he's been pretty darn good. Won-loss record is far from everything, but Ryan has posted a 31-22 record over that time despite run support of 3.67, 4.70 and 4.44. That's certainly good run support, but it's not so good as to carry a pitcher's record. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2112#ixzz2m5UPIJNsRead more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2112#ixzz2m5UGnWx3 |
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 30, 2013 7:42:06 GMT -5
The problem Rog, is Vogelsong's age. He's 36. When you take a pitcher coming off a bad year, it's far less risky when it's one who's young, because then you could assume it's a fluke. Hopefully Ryan's bad year was a fluke, but at his age it makes plenty of sense to assume he's done. Now that we've re-signed him, let's hope he isn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 30, 2013 15:53:17 GMT -5
Mark -- The problem Rog, is Vogelsong's age. He's 36. When you take a pitcher coming off a bad year, it's far less risky when it's one who's young, because then you could assume it's a fluke. Hopefully Ryan's bad year was a fluke, but at his age it makes plenty of sense to assume he's done. Rog -- You make a good point, which neither of us hope is correct in this case. If it helps, Bronson Arroyo came off 5.07 at age 34 to bounce back with 3.74 and 3.79 and may receive a three-year contract on top of that. Although we now know he was aided by steroids, Roger Clemens came off 4.60 at age 36 to continue pitching until age 44. Robin Roberts bounced off 5.85 at age 34 to pitch through age 39. But, yeah, the scarcity of positive comparisons is concerning. If it doesn't work out, they do have Petit now and Encarnacion on the come. Heck, I think if Kyle Crick could start putting the ball closer to where he wants it, he could pitch in the majors right now. That could take a while though, and a lack of command could bother him for some time. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2112&page=1#17205#ixzz2mABiPwJd |
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 30, 2013 16:45:27 GMT -5
Heck, I think if Kyle Crick could start putting the ball closer to where he wants it, he could pitch in the majors right now. That could take a while though, and a lack of command could bother him for some time.
Allen- Yes. As long as seven years into his ML career, like Timmy.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 30, 2013 16:54:08 GMT -5
I meant Escobar, not Encarnacion.
I hope Randy is able to weigh in on the starter prospects at San Jose this past season. I would think between TV and being at games, he has seen a little bit of them and can help us learn.
|
|
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 Dec 4, 2013 13:33:58 GMT -5
Last night Baggs said Arroyo is looking for Lincecum numbers, which explains why Vogelsong suddenly became more attractive to the team. No way Bronson is going to get $17 mil per year but the Giants arent going to wait him out. I personally am looking forward to the Winter Meetings for the first time in a while because I think the Giants will be talking trade a lot. Maybe they wont confirm a deal but they will definitely be busy talking to teams.
~Dood
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Dec 4, 2013 13:45:08 GMT -5
Alot of deals have already been made. The guys on the Baseball Channel are worrying that the winter meetings will be boring.
I agree with you about Arroyo. If he's looking for Lincecum numbers, he can keep looking.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 4, 2013 15:30:45 GMT -5
The free agent dominoes are beginning to fall. The Giants have recently been pursuing the tack of moving quickly. I saw where on of the MLB guys ranked the Giants 3rd in what they've accomplished beginning with the re-siging of Hunter Pence.
The only player they've added has been Tim Hudson, but they were able to retain three important pieces that could easily have been lost.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 4, 2013 21:51:26 GMT -5
People who said the Giants overpaid for Pence are now admitting they were wrong after they see what Ellsbury got.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Dec 5, 2013 0:00:31 GMT -5
I wouldn't necearily say that. The Giants did overpay for Pence. The Yankees just overpaid by alot more.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 5, 2013 10:10:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Dec 5, 2013 12:20:14 GMT -5
Actually, I think it means that teams were stupid enough to overpay, or have alot of money to throw away. Even numbered years haven't necessarily been Jacoby's best friend. I'd like to know who bid just under $153 million for Ellsbury.
|
|
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 Dec 5, 2013 15:56:18 GMT -5
Allen you are being rational in the overall scheme but not within the baseball marketplace scheme of things. It's obvious that you, and others (Boly), believe that ballplayers are grossly overpaid as a general rule. You have a point there. But within the confined arena of the baseball marketplace, the market value is defined by what teams are paying for equal or near equal talent. Since other teams are paying out what the Giants payed for Pence, it follows that the team did not overpay, relative to the defined market value.
~Dood
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Dec 5, 2013 16:17:58 GMT -5
Just because someone is stupid enough to throw away a ridiculous amount of money on someone doesn't mean that's what the market place is. If you can show me another team that was willing to pay Ellsbury anywhere close to what the Yankees paid, then you have a point. Otherwise, it's just the Yankees being morons and bidding against themselves, much as the Giants did with Zito.
What makes it worse is that Ellsbury isn't even all that great a player. Frankly, I'd rather have Pence. Ellsbury may get hurt and be virtually useless to the Yankees. It's happened twice before.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Dec 5, 2013 16:56:26 GMT -5
Here's another example. Robinson Cano supposedly has a $170 million offer from the Yankees. So he goes to meet with Seattle, who offers him $230 million. Stupid. Why not offer $175 million?
What makes it even worse is that Cano isn't going to change things dramatically for Seattle. He's not going to help them win that division. There are three teams that are all better than they are, even with Cano. So not only are they going throw away a ton of money, they're going to throw it away on something they can't even make maximum use of.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 5, 2013 18:30:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 5, 2013 18:34:57 GMT -5
Randy -- Allen you are being rational in the overall scheme but not within the baseball marketplace scheme of things. It's obvious that you, and others (Boly), believe that ballplayers are grossly overpaid as a general rule. You have a point there. But within the confined arena of the baseball marketplace, the market value is defined by what teams are paying for equal or near equal talent. Since other teams are paying out what the Giants payed for Pence, it follows that the team did not overpay, relative to the defined market value. Rog -- Succinctly stated, Randy. What the players make is CRAZY in the world the rest of us normal Joe's live in, but within its own context, their salaries are indeed determined by the market. That's not to say that there aren't good (or lucky) signings and bad (or unlucky) signings. But signing free agents is just about the only way a team can improve itself without giving up players, and some signings are going to work out well and a lot of others, not so much. The cost of a marginal win is about $7 million right now, so if a player can generate an extra three wins per season, he's worth $20 million. Not in terms of what policemen, firemen and teachers make, but in terms of what ballplayers make. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2112&page=1#ixzz2me89QMYo |
|
