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 10, 2014 17:10:55 GMT -5
High Taxes have often been a drawback when trying to draw in free agent hitters to Northern California. The ballpark itself doesn't help either. But I wonder if we're losing some FAs for the plain fact that they do not want to bring their families to live near the left-wing San Francisco culture. We have heard such things from players before. Dale Murphy and Lance Berkman come immediately to mind. It seems to me players from the south and from Latin America might also consider this. I wouldn't be surprised if the Yankees are falling victim to this as well. If this is indeed a factor for many FAs then it would behoove the Giants to upgrade it's scouting and development departments and also go heavy on international players. I mean if a team with the World Series pedigree the Giants have is having trouble attracting FAs to sign on the dotted line, then there must be SOME reason, particularly if their offers are generally pretty competitive. Whatever is the reason, the Giants clearly need to invest more in the farm system because it is becoming comical how inept they are at attracting FAs.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 10, 2014 19:50:46 GMT -5
I doubt it, Randy. With this thinking, wouldn't the Giants attract more international players? I don't like San Francisco's politics any more than you, but this idea is a stretch.
|
|
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 10, 2014 20:48:37 GMT -5
You would think Latin American players might be attracted to the large latino community in SF...or maybe their agents warned them against the big taxes...I don't know. Point is, if that's not it, I simply cannot understand how we're getting our clocks cleaned on the FA market even though you would think that with our postseason success and making competitive offers, we would be able to land some fish. My mind is officially baffled.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 10, 2014 22:26:18 GMT -5
Perhaps it's the fact that the Giants already have their winning nucleus. We could have landed Jon Lester, but no matter what Lester did in S.F. he'd never be in the same group of players that the fans adore. If Lester wins with the Cubs, he'll be the toast of the town. To me that would be a deciding factor.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 10, 2014 22:28:46 GMT -5
I think the Giants have more Southern boys than any team in the league. Buster Posey, Madison Bumgarner, Matt Cain, Tim Hudson, Brandon Belt. The first three signed long extensions to stay in this liberal town. NYC is pretty liberal too, and somehow the Yankees sign more free agents than anyone. I think your theory is way off base. Not only that, but you're way overboard when you say players don't want to come here. We're talking about one guy, Jon Lester, who went to Chicago because the management team in Chicago was one he was familiar with. Suddenly that translates into nobody wants to come here in your mind. I'm disappointed that Lester didn't come here too, but the next guy will as long as the Giants show them the money.
|
|
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 10, 2014 22:43:03 GMT -5
It's not just one guy...it was Pablo, who has many ties here, then it was Tomas, then it was Lester. The problem is we are now down to a FA pool made up almost exclusively of players who can accurately be characterized as "just a guy." Nothing left that I'm excited about whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 10, 2014 23:10:44 GMT -5
Pablo is Latino though, and I'm sure as someone who closely follows politics, you're well aware that Latinos are liberals. I just think you're frustrated with the meetings about to end and the Giants doing nothing but talking at this point. I'm sure they'll make their moves soon.
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Dec 11, 2014 0:59:43 GMT -5
Pablo is Latino though, and I'm sure as someone who closely follows politics, you're well aware that Latinos are liberals. I just think you're frustrated with the meetings about to end and the Giants doing nothing but talking at this point. I'm sure they'll make their moves soon. dk...do you think there is still a stigma attached to the Giants because the guy they employed in the Latino territory was a pervert....also, SF is cold and windy and as opposite of the climate these Latinos are used to....I would never volunteer to sign with the Giants as a pitcher...too cold for my liking...of course there are plenty of teams that have cold Springs and Falls, but you can get the heat in the summer...I liked to sweat when I pitched and I felt it kept my arm loose......and do you really think the city of Chicago is a Conservative haven with a controlled environment of peace and low crime?? ..There are some guys that can't keep their politics out of this board...yes sir, I can't wait to see the party that drove our country into the worse recession in history ( and also the great depression) and started 2 wars without any success are back in power...what short memories....
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 1:01:34 GMT -5
Randy -- I simply cannot understand how we're getting our clocks cleaned on the FA market even though you would think that with our postseason success and making competitive offers, we would be able to land some fish. Rog -- A few points: . The free agents may realize how precarious success is. . There are a lot of teams bidding on the free agents. The odds aren't all that high that the Giants wouldn't have been able to sign any of their top three priorities. . There is still plenty of time to land fish. The free agent season doesn't close tomorrow, does it? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2615/liberal-sf-culture-hurting-signings#ixzz3LZAW3pAj
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 1:13:21 GMT -5
Randy -- Nothing left that I'm excited about whatsoever.
Rog -- You're a tough guy to impress. Here are the players Jon Lester listed in his top 20 free agents who are still available:
#1 Max Scherzer
#4 James Shields
#9 Melky Cabrera
#10 Ervin Santana
#15 Edinson Volquez
#16 Chase Headley
#17 Brandon McCarthy
#19 Jed Lowrie
That's half the top 4. 40% of the top 10. 40% of the top 20.
Surely there is SOMEONE to get excited about there.
Here's a though too. If the Giants had signed Pablo Sandoval or particularly Jon Lester, they would have been putting a very high percentage of their eggs in one basket. That's fine if the basket works out well, but a potential disaster if it doesn't.
By spreading their $30 million between three or four players, they Giants spread their risk. Last season, for instance, their highest paid player was Matt Cain. The Giants overcame it, of course, but how much value did they get for the $22 million or so for Matt last year?
How would we feel if Jon Lester -- slightly older than Matt -- became injured this season and didn't contribute more than Matt did last season? Would the Giants be able to overcome such a serious financial injury again? How about if Matt at $22 million and Jon at $25 million BOTH had poor and/or injured seasons?
Would it be wise for the Giants to have close to $50 million a season tied up in two arms, when there is a 39% chance a pitcher will go on the disabled list in a season? By the way, that would mean having about $75 million (over 40% of the payroll) tied up in the team's #2 through #5 starters in 2015.
Perhaps we should wait and see what the Giants do before criticizing them for it.
|
|
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 11, 2014 1:30:00 GMT -5
of those guys the only one that impresses me is Scherzer and the Giants aren't going to fork over the kind of lettuce it will take to land him. Shields and Volquez each got rocked in postseason. Melky's a cancer in the clubhouse. Santana is basically just a guy who also has a history of getting rocked in the playoffs. Headley, McCarthy and Lowrie? YAWN!
Is that all you got? Not excited yet.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 1:34:15 GMT -5
Speaking of the above free agents, how about Brandon McCarthy? He had a ground ball to fly ball ratio of over an impressive two to one, and he threw 92.9 mph, an increase of two mph over what he had ever thrown before. He is 31 years old and is projected to go for 3/$36.
How about McCarthy, Melky and Jed Lowrie (or work a trade for Casey McGehee)? Oops. I see the Dodgers just signed McCarthy for four years.
|
|
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 11, 2014 1:36:49 GMT -5
oh and Upton...he might not be a bad add if it weren't for the fact that he absolutely HATES playing at AT&T and has made that clear in the past
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 1:57:44 GMT -5
Randy -- of those guys the only one that impresses me is Scherzer and the Giants aren't going to fork over the kind of lettuce it will take to land him. Rog -- You're probably right. But a month ago you didn't think the Giants would ever pay enough to land Jon Lester. Sure enough, they didn't get their man. But apparently it wasn't because of the money. Randy -- Shields and Volquez each got rocked in postseason. Rog -- I think you're putting FAR too much emphasis on the postseason. Pablo Sandoval has performed much better there than Clayton Kershaw. You'd rather have Pablo than Kershaw, right? Randy -- Melky's a cancer in the clubhouse. Rog -- From what I've read, he was very well liked in the Blue Jays' clubhouse. Randy -- Santana is basically just a guy who also has a history of getting rocked in the playoffs. Rog -- Pablo Sandoval or Clayton Kershaw? Randy -- Headley, McCarthy and Lowrie? YAWN! Rog -- Those guys aren't very sexy -- but as a trio they combined for nearly two more Wins Above Replacement last season than the five top guys the Giants signed last winter. Randy -- Is that all you got? Not excited yet. Rog -- The cup is half empty for you. Let me ask you this? Were the Giants in this bad shape back in August of 2012 when you gave up on them? The cup was pretty much empty back then too, wasn't it? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2615/liberal-sf-culture-hurting-signings#ixzz3LZMJWaZ2
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 2:04:31 GMT -5
Randy -- oh and Upton...he might not be a bad add if it weren't for the fact that he absolutely HATES playing at AT&T and has made that clear in the past Rog -- I think you have a point there. Outside of Arizona, Atlanta and Denver, he hasn't really hit all that well. And he's been at his worst in AT&T and in Dodger Stadium. Would you be willing to see how this all plays out before we judge the Giants' off-season? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2615/liberal-sf-culture-hurting-signings?page=1#ixzz3LZQ768Nb
|
|
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 11, 2014 2:33:11 GMT -5
Randy -- Shields and Volquez each got rocked in postseason.
Rog -- I think you're putting FAR too much emphasis on the postseason. Pablo Sandoval has performed much better there than Clayton Kershaw. You'd rather have Pablo than Kershaw, right?
Dood - It depends on what I need and what the second part of the 3B/SP pairings end up being on both ends. I know this...after September, I'd take Pablo all the way.
Randy -- Melky's a cancer in the clubhouse.
Rog -- From what I've read, he was very well liked in the Blue Jays' clubhouse.
Dood - before he got suspended and ran away like a thief in the night without a word of apology or explanation to his teammates, he was well-liked in the Giants clubhouse too...things kind of changed a bit after 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 Dec 11, 2014 2:36:06 GMT -5
Rog -- Would you be willing to see how this all plays out before we judge the Giants' off-season?
Dood - only if you agree to never use another stat again in any post you make.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 11, 2014 7:42:46 GMT -5
Brandon McCarthy signed with the Dodgers last night so there goes another one. I'm more inclined to agree with DK's reasoning about players not loving the cool summer weather in SF instead of the political reasons. There's also the unfavorable ballpark conditions for a hitter although I think Justin Upton would see things in a different perspective if he actually played here as a hometown player as opposed to coming in for a short series.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 11, 2014 7:46:58 GMT -5
The Dodgers practically acquired a whole new ball club yesterday, I'm wondering what you guys think of their moves. I thought signing McCarthy was a good move for them, but I thought the rest of the trades weakened them. There's some rumors that they acquired some prospects in an attempt to acquire Cole Hamels, and if they pull that off I think on paper they'd be the best team in baseball. I await the Giants response to all these moves. They were described as being very aggressive last night.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 11, 2014 8:18:37 GMT -5
Rog -- I think you're putting FAR too much emphasis on the postseason. Pablo Sandoval has performed much better there than Clayton Kershaw. You'd rather have Pablo than Kershaw, right?
Boagie- How about Bumgarner or Kershaw?
Some of us MIGHT put too much emphasis on the post season, but you act as if giving any kind of consideration to post-season stats is just ignorant.
It's the post-season. You're up against the best teams. If any stats should be focused on, its those of the post season.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 10:29:30 GMT -5
Rog -- I think you're putting FAR too much emphasis on the postseason. Pablo Sandoval has performed much better there than Clayton Kershaw. You'd rather have Pablo than Kershaw, right? Boagie- How about Bumgarner or Kershaw? Rog -- Although Bumgarner certainly made an argument for himself this postseason and has by far the more team-friendly contract, I would still take Kershaw if the contracts were equal. Boagie -- Some of us MIGHT put too much emphasis on the post season, but you act as if giving any kind of consideration to post-season stats is just ignorant. Rog -- Where exactly did I indicate that? Boagie -- It's the post-season. You're up against the best teams. If any stats should be focused on, its those of the post season. Rog -- I understand your point, and if regular season stats and postseason stats were of similar sample sizes, I would agree with you completely. But they're not. Some consider Willie Mays to be the greatest player who ever played. Yet his postseason stats are .247/.660. (He did make a fairly decent catch!) Some would argue that no pitcher has ever done more through age 26 than Clayton Kershaw -- yet he too has been awful in the postseason. Reggie Jackson earned the nickname "Mr. October" for his exploits early in his career. In the second half of his postseason career, he wasn't very good. Barry Bonds was the opposite -- horrible early, great late. Al Weis was a middle infielder for the White Sox and Mets. He batted .219/.553 in his career. Yet in the postseason, he was a hero, batting .417/1.196. Which was the true Al Weis? Edgar Renteria was pretty bad with the Giants. Yet he closed out his career with them as the 2010 World Series MVP. One way to look at a player is to look at ALL his statistics, both during the regular season and in the postseason. Maybe we should double weight or even triple weight the postseason stats. Try that, and see how players look. Don't ignore the postseason, but don't overate it, either. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2615/liberal-sf-culture-hurting-signings#ixzz3LbQZPI3m
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 10:43:24 GMT -5
Rog -- Would you be willing to see how this all plays out before we judge the Giants' off-season? Dood - only if you agree to never use another stat again in any post you make. Rog -- Where is the logic in that? Judging the Giants' off season before it is done is a bad thing. Using stats in posts is a good thing -- although they can certainly be overused or misused. When we make premature judgments, might we not be setting ourselves up for premature speculation? I hate to keep coming back to it, Randy, but didn't you learn from giving up on the Giants in 2012? You declared them dead on August 2nd, with 57 games remaining. Because they'd just lost three of four to the Mets -- AT HOME. Maybe it's because I've made so many mistakes, but I'd like to think I have learned a lot from them. One important lesson I've learned is that I'm not as good as I once thought I was. That's not a fun lesson to learn, especially from oneself. But I think it was a humbling and important lesson. I remember back when I thought you made some great posts. Now it seems they are often bitter and premature. I know you're capable of MUCH better. We've all seen it. Even after the Giants have made their moves, we won't know how they will work out. But at least we can judge them, based on what we know. How do we judge the moves the Giants will make this off-season, when we don't know what they will be? What we can do is judge the non-moves they have made. Many think those non-moves have been pretty good, even if unintentional. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2615/liberal-sf-culture-hurting-signings?page=1#ixzz3LbUGEwQb
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 11, 2014 10:56:12 GMT -5
We have questioned why a free agent would sign with the hapless Cubs rather than the 3-times-in-5-Years World Champions. But perhaps we underestimated the Cubs.
They are now favored by the oddsmakers over the Giants.
This off-season the Cubs have gone from 40-1 to just 12-1 to win the 2015 World Series. The Giants are 14-1. Before their moves yesterday, the Dodgers were given the best odds at 17-2.
The team Pablo Sandoval signed with, the Red Sox, are given the 2nd-best odds at 9-1.
Do Pablo and Lester have a better chance to win with the Cubs and Red Sox respectively than they would have had with the Giants? Given the Giants' recent history, it's tough to say that.
But the fact is that those who make their livings based on probabilities believe both Pablo and Lester have a better chance than, say, Madison Bumgarner.
Being big Giants fans, it's easy to be myopic toward the rest of baseball. And being fans, it's easy to overrate our team when it is going well and to underrate it when it is going poorly.
Whether the Giants are doing poorly this off-season is open to discussion, but it's tough to be down on the moves they have made.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 11, 2014 11:13:01 GMT -5
Roger, on your list ONLY Scherzer and Shields are worth even getting excited about.
The rest? Flotsam.
You can keep Volquez. I WATCHED his face during his playoff start.
He was scared; He was nervous, and that's NOT a guy I want out there in a big game.
The rest on the list, Roger, I could care less about
boly
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 11, 2014 11:26:13 GMT -5
The Dodgers practically acquired a whole new ball club yesterday, I'm wondering what you guys think of their moves. I thought signing McCarthy was a good move for them, but I thought the rest of the trades weakened them. There's some rumors that they acquired some prospects in an attempt to acquire Cole Hamels, and if they pull that off I think on paper they'd be the best team in baseball. I await the Giants response to all these moves. They were described as being very aggressive last night.
--boly says---
I pretty much agree, Mark.
the ONLY Dodger hitters that concerned me last year were Gonzalez and Gordon.
Gordon is/was a modern day Maury Wills. Get him on base, and your staff now has a HUGE
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 11, 2014 11:33:35 GMT -5
Screw this frickin' mode to do the board!
Hit the wrong key and it uploads! Bite me!
Now, to finish my post.
Get him on base and a HUGE ball of stress is dropped squarely on the backs of the pitcher and catcher.
He IS a disruptive force.
Infielders can't even blink or bobble a ball, and he's on.
Singles/BB become doubles and maybe even triples.
Rollins is long past his prime. right now, he's an average defender, and maybe an above average hitter.
Now McCarthy is different. He's a different animal.
IS he an upgrade over Haran? I'm not sure.
But THEY are making moves, which, by and large "seem" like good ones.
The Giants?
Once again it's stay tuned; Same Bat-time, Same Bat-channel.
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 Dec 11, 2014 12:58:15 GMT -5
Rog -- I think you're putting FAR too much emphasis on the postseason. Pablo Sandoval has performed much better there than Clayton Kershaw. You'd rather have Pablo than Kershaw, right?
Boagie- How about Bumgarner or Kershaw?
Some of us MIGHT put too much emphasis on the post season, but you act as if giving any kind of consideration to post-season stats is just ignorant.
Dood - Rog thinks postseason is all about luck anyway, so it's no wonder he assigns little or no value to those stats.
|
|
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 11, 2014 13:02:24 GMT -5
Boly - Roger, on your list ONLY Scherzer and Shields are worth even getting excited about.
The rest? Flotsam.
You can keep Volquez. I WATCHED his face during his playoff start.
He was scared; He was nervous, and that's NOT a guy I want out there in a big game.
The rest on the list, Roger, I could care less about
Dood - and the list gets less impressive every day while Sabean sits around and does NOTHING.
|
|
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 11, 2014 13:17:44 GMT -5
Rog -- Where is the logic in that? Judging the Giants' off season before it is done is a bad thing. Using stats in posts is a good thing -- although they can certainly be overused or misused.
When we make premature judgments, might we not be setting ourselves up for premature speculation? I hate to keep coming back to it, Randy, but didn't you learn from giving up on the Giants in 2012? You declared them dead on August 2nd, with 57 games remaining. Because they'd just lost three of four to the Mets -- AT HOME.
Dood - if you really hated to keep bringing it up, then you wouldn't. But I don't mind. Everybody here has strong opinions and we rarely do not voice them (including you), whether they be or seem premature at the time.
Rog - I remember back when I thought you made some great posts. Now it seems they are often bitter and premature. I know you're capable of MUCH better. We've all seen it.
Dood - if by bitter and premature you mean I am not afraid to immediately criticize my team when I feel they are not doing their jobs or not doing them up to the standards of world championship organizations, then by all means, color me bitter!
Rog - Even after the Giants have made their moves, we won't know how they will work out. But at least we can judge them, based on what we know.
How do we judge the moves the Giants will make this off-season, when we don't know what they will be? What we can do is judge the non-moves they have made. Many think those non-moves have been pretty good, even if unintentional.
Dood - we can certainly judge what we know they will NOT be, based on what is no longer remaining in the pool of players still available to be had. And the fact that this pool gets shallower with each passing day, it is quite reasonable to be sour about the Giants ineptitude in closing deals thus far. They may have more guys in mind but these players obviously aren't as desirable or good as the players they had previously targeted and missed out on...and this list gets thinner every day...AND there's no guarantee they wont fail with even more players and end up nearer to the bottom of their wish list. That is the way it is trending right now and I don't like it one little bit.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 11, 2014 15:02:41 GMT -5
Boagie -- Some of us MIGHT put too much emphasis on the post season, but you act as if giving any kind of consideration to post-season stats is just ignorant.
Rog -- Where exactly did I indicate that?
Boagie---Every time you talk about the post-season.
Boagie -- It's the post-season. You're up against the best teams. If any stats should be focused on, its those of the post season.
Rog -- I understand your point, and if regular season stats and postseason stats were of similar sample sizes, I would agree with you completely. But they're not.
Boagie---You're right. And an even larger sample size is combining the regular season AND the post-season and seeing what you come up with.
I'm not taking a biased approach here. I know Kershaw is a great pitcher, doesn't matter what jersey he's wearing. But if you assess each pitcher's year, regular season and post-season, even consider the offensive numbers, I think you have to give the edge to Bumgarner.
I'm at work at the moment, so I don't have time to do the math, but I bet if you combine the numbers of the regular season and post-season, it would be close. Then figure in the fact the Bumgarner helped his team more offensively and consider his best pitching was during the post-season (when it really counts) while Kershaw's worst was during the post-season, you end up with a clear winner, Bumgarner.
|
|