|
Moves
Jan 28, 2014 20:20:02 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Jan 28, 2014 20:20:02 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
|
Moves
Jan 28, 2014 20:51:01 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Jan 28, 2014 20:51:01 GMT -5
If the owners insist on continuing the priority of increasing profits over winning championships, our seasons will more likely resemble 2013 than 2010 and 2012 from now on. And you can celebrate the higher owner profits and the "pretty good" product on the field with no more parades.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Moves
Jan 28, 2014 22:18:46 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Jan 28, 2014 22:18:46 GMT -5
Dood - excuse me for wanting better than just average.
Rog -- No one said you shouldn't want better than just average. What I said was that it was presumptious to EXPECT it.
Dood - oh so we should expect mediocrity. I see
|
|
|
Moves
Jan 29, 2014 1:05:10 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by islandboagie on Jan 29, 2014 1:05:10 GMT -5
Randy- If the owners insist on continuing the priority of increasing profits over winning championships, our seasons will more likely resemble 2013 than 2010 and 2012 from now on. And you can celebrate the higher owner profits and the "pretty good" product on the field with no more parades.
Boagie- Correct me if I'm wrong, Randy, but aren't you the one who rips on Rog for predicting the Dodgers as the division winners? It seems to me you're right on board with that theory.
Sure, having Tanaka would be nice, but we have our core. Going into this off season we just needed to beef up our supporting cast. I believe we did that by resigning Vogelsong, Lopez and landing Hudson and Morse.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Moves
Jan 29, 2014 1:49:16 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Jan 29, 2014 1:49:16 GMT -5
Boagie- Correct me if I'm wrong, Randy, but aren't you the one who rips on Rog for predicting the Dodgers as the division winners? It seems to me you're right on board with that theory.
Dood - Allow me to correct you, Boagie...I rip Rog for being a stats geek, for rooting for the Dodgers to win in the playoffs, for believing that baseball is all about luck and for numerous other things. I don't make predictions or projections because I see it as pure folly and I see others as doing so as pretty much picking numbers out of thin air. I rarely pay them much mind, whether they come from Rog, fans, stats geek publications, or other self-proclaimed experts. As the defending Division champions and by virtue of being more aggressive in the offseason, the Dodgers SHOULD be favored to win the division if for no other reason, the Giants havent done enough this offseason to show they care too terribly about overtaking them. That doesn't mean the Dodgers WILL win it again, of course, but they should be the favorites, for whatever that's worth.
Don't get me wrong. If the Giants were too lazy or indifferent to even make an offer for Tanaka (which really is my beef, more than actually obtaining his services)then I am relieved that the Dodgers lost out on the sweepstakes. But unless we see both Timmy and Ryan have big resurgent seasons, nothing else done this offseason is going to make a huge difference in the standings, I don't believe. We would need an avalanche of misfortune and injuries to crash down on LA (hopefully starting with Brian Wilson's elbow) in order to compete in the division if both Timmy and Ryan don't go off.
|
|
|
Moves
Jan 29, 2014 10:00:06 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Jan 29, 2014 10:00:06 GMT -5
Randy -- If the owners insist on continuing the priority of increasing profits over winning championships, our seasons will more likely resemble 2013 than 2010 and 2012 from now on. And you can celebrate the higher owner profits and the "pretty good" product on the field with no more parades. Rog -- That isn't congruent with the facts. One could have argued (wrongly IMO) that the Giants were more interested in profits going into 2010, when their payroll was a bit under $100 million. That argument is a little tougher to make now that their payroll has increased by more than 50% since. By the way, how did 2010 turn out when they allegedly emphasized profit over performance? You don't think the Giants are smart enough to realize that if they fail to provide good baseball as the novelty of their stadium disappears, they will see attendance -- and profits -- decline? Perhaps you didn't realize that entering the 2010 season, the Giants' payroll was only $6 million higher than it had been five years previous. Now, four years later, the payroll is up over $50 million since 2010. Your comment seems ill-timed. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2113/moves?page=4#ixzz2rncwXbqk
|
|
|
Moves
Jan 29, 2014 10:02:30 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Jan 29, 2014 10:02:30 GMT -5
---Randy Says---But unless we see both Timmy and Ryan have big resurgent seasons, nothing else done this offseason is going to make a huge difference in the standings, I don't believe. We would need an avalanche of misfortune and injuries to crash down on LA (hopefully starting with Brian Wilson's elbow) in order to compete in the division if both Timmy and Ryan don't go off.
---boly says---
Randy, I think you and I are pretty much the ONLY ones who see this.
I think you nailed it perfectly.
Their top starters, Kershaw,Greinke and Ryu, as are hands down, no contest the best front three in the NL; I don't even think it's close.
Now add to that, Beckett and Billingsley to round out the top 5, and theirs is much better than ours.
I DON'T expect Uribe to have ANYWHERE NEAR the kind of year he had last year. I believe it was his FSY, but I DO expect a huge rebound from Kemp.
Rameriz has suddenly decided he likes playing baseball again, and should have a terrific offensive season. Defensively, he'll hurt them, no question, because he has limited range. But for them, he's their version of range-limited-but-offensively-strong, Rich Aurilia.
Gonzalez is still solid to very good, and after 2 injury plagued, not-so-good seasons, I expect a rebound for Ethier, too.
Now we throw a healthy Carl Crawford into the mix, along with a dynamic, but juvenile Puig... And that's a line up that will be hard to keep down.
As excited as I am for baseball to begin, if ONLY to get this basketball CRAP off the sports pages and TV and radio, I think that unless what you said above happens... we're in for a long, long... long season.
All the money they have to throw around WILL make the difference.
And please, don't start with "look at all the money the Yankees had and blah, blah, blah."
That was Georgy, that was then.
This is a different management group, and this is now.
boly
|
|
|
Moves
Jan 29, 2014 10:11:23 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Jan 29, 2014 10:11:23 GMT -5
Randy -- Dood - Allow me to correct you, Boagie...I rip Rog for being a stats geek, for rooting for the Dodgers to win in the playoffs, for believing that baseball is all about luck and for numerous other things. Rog -- First of all, Randy, why do you feel the need to rip someone at all? I merely let the facts speak for themselves. I feel no need to call you names or doubt your loyalty. Second, you DON'T seem to want to use facts. An example is above. I have NEVER said that baseball is all about luck. You seem to feel the need to criticize to the point where you exaggerate and misstate. To misstate is a mistake, and to miss steak is to miss a meal. Third, the other night on the Warriors game, I heard Jim Barnett talk about the game in which Freddie Brown got 58 points against the Warriors. That started me thinking about a chain of events that shows how much of a Giants fan (and Warriors, for that matter) I am. I find it in my best interest -- and the best interest of the truth -- not to talk about stuff I don't really know about. You might consider doing the same. It's really your call. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2113/moves?page=4#scrollTo=18625#ixzz2rnedCCOk
|
|
|
Moves
Jan 29, 2014 10:15:31 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Jan 29, 2014 10:15:31 GMT -5
---Randy Says---But unless we see both Timmy and Ryan have big resurgent seasons, nothing else done this offseason is going to make a huge difference in the standings, I don't believe. We would need an avalanche of misfortune and injuries to crash down on LA (hopefully starting with Brian Wilson's elbow) in order to compete in the division if both Timmy and Ryan don't go off. ---boly says--- Randy, I think you and I are pretty much the ONLY ones who see this. Rog -- I'll have to add my name to that list. And I believe most of those here on the board see it that way, as well. I previously stated that the Giants are very likely playing for a Wild Card berth. I have also stated that if they make the playoffs, they've got a chance -- just as was the case in 2010 and 2012. Have we all forgotten that the Giants didn't make the 2010 playoffs until the final game of the season -- a game pitched by Jonathan Sanchez, no less? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2113/moves?page=4#scrollTo=18627#ixzz2rnhaLYHc
|
|
|
Moves
Jan 29, 2014 10:24:47 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Jan 29, 2014 10:24:47 GMT -5
Boly -- Their top starters, Kershaw,Greinke and Ryu, as are hands down, no contest the best front three in the NL; I don't even think it's close. Now add to that, Beckett and Billingsley to round out the top 5, and theirs is much better than ours. Rog -- We probably shouldn't forget Dan Haren, either. His ERA from July on last season was 3.29. Even more impressively, is WHIP was just 1.04. The Dodgers still might be pursuing David Price. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2113/moves?page=4#scrollTo=18628#ixzz2rnj2cWwM
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Moves
Jan 30, 2014 0:09:37 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Jan 30, 2014 0:09:37 GMT -5
Randy -- If the owners insist on continuing the priority of increasing profits over winning championships, our seasons will more likely resemble 2013 than 2010 and 2012 from now on. And you can celebrate the higher owner profits and the "pretty good" product on the field with no more parades. Rog -- That isn't congruent with the facts. One could have argued (wrongly IMO) that the Giants were more interested in profits going into 2010, when their payroll was a bit under $100 million. That argument is a little tougher to make now that their payroll has increased by more than 50% since. By the way, how did 2010 turn out when they allegedly emphasized profit over performance? You don't think the Giants are smart enough to realize that if they fail to provide good baseball as the novelty of their stadium disappears, they will see attendance -- and profits -- decline? Perhaps you didn't realize that entering the 2010 season, the Giants' payroll was only $6 million higher than it had been five years previous. Now, four years later, the payroll is up over $50 million since 2010. Your comment seems ill-timed. You're comparing apples to oranges. Back in 2010 the competition in the NL West was considerably weaker. The Dodgers ownership was pathetic and they werent spending nearly as much as the current ownership group has shown itself willing to spend. Even still and having made the mistake of keeping Buster Posey off the roster for 2 months and needing the completely unforeseen contributions of Pat Burrell and Cody Ross, the Giants just barely eked out a division title. Imagine how much more dominant they could have been with a decent payroll. They might not have needed to be so "lucky" to win the title.
|
|
|
Moves
Jan 30, 2014 11:06:30 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Jan 30, 2014 11:06:30 GMT -5
Randy -- You're comparing apples to oranges. Back in 2010 the competition in the NL West was considerably weaker. The Dodgers ownership was pathetic and they werent spending nearly as much as the current ownership group has shown itself willing to spend. Rog -- Just because a competitor becomes better and/or has more money to spend doesn't mean your own team suddenly has more to spend. Randy -- Even still and having made the mistake of keeping Buster Posey off the roster for 2 months and needing the completely unforeseen contributions of Pat Burrell and Cody Ross, the Giants just barely eked out a division title. Rog -- And you don't think any luck was involved there? Burrell did indeed make a very big contritubion, having arguably the 3rd-best season of his career, but as you mentioned, he came off the scrap heap, with the Phillies having cut him loose despite owning him quite a bit of money. The Giants acquired Ross not because they wanted him, but because he fell into their laps when they tried to block him from the Padres. When Mark DeRosa talked about the Giants' rotation horses getting hot at the right time, he didn't even mention the fortunate acquisitions of Burrell and Ross. It is good that you did. They were also a bit fortunate with Aubrey Huff and Juan Uribe. Randy -- Imagine how much more dominant they could have been with a decent payroll. They might not have needed to be so "lucky" to win the title. Rog -- You make a very good point here. This comment isn't meant in any way to disparage or question it, but I've long wondered how a decision now will affect decisions made in the future. If the Giants had signed a better left fielder before the season, they probably wouldn't have signed Burrell, who was something of a desperation move. After the 2011 season it would have paid off to sign Carlos Beltran, but then they might not have traded for Angel Pagan and Melky Cabrera and probably wouldn't have traded for Hunter Pence later. This is all hypothetical, of course, and somewhat off the topic here. It is simply something that intrigues me. But I think the key point here is that a team is limited financially in its ability to respond to a competitor when that competitor suddenly has a huge spending advantage. Would we love to see the Giants suddenly also go wild with their spending? Of course. Is that a practical way to run a business? Probably not. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2113/moves?page=4#ixzz2rthG1LDx
|
|