what is important?

[sfgdood]

Just curious because we seem to be hearing the same things from the resident stats geek here about the Giants being "saved from themselves" when they were rejected by their top 3 FA targets thus far. This brings a question to mind...what is more important to you all? Is it more important for the Giants to find "bargains," seeking to get FULL value from contracts? Or should it be the goal to get guys that can help us win more titles NOW while we have a lot of the winning pieces in place and not worry too much about what happens at the back end of these contracts?

[Islandboagie]

I don't know if the Giants were saved, just like I don't know if they are screwed now. There are still a lot of good free agents or trade possibilities out there. Far too many to bring back a verdict on the Giants off season.

I do want to win now, but the Giants have proven they can win without landing that big free agent. They have a lot of good young arms in the system. Too many to throw in the towel if the Giants don't make that big move we were expecting.

Let's not forget we were expecting a big move during the trade deadline and that never came either. But yet our "nonexistent" farm system gave us Panik during the stretch run, who was a big part of our success. It also gave us Duffy and Susac who helped us off the bench.

Just some positive things to think about while we wait.

[sfgdood]

Panik is good but overall our farm system lags far behind the rest of the league in stud material. Susac and Duffy project out to no more than bench players on a decent team. Maybe they could start for a lousy one. Even Panik, who I love, has no superstar potential. He'll be solid and make very good defensive plays but he has no pop or sizzle. There are some pitchers who could turn into something but even still, there is no bona fide aces in the hole. You don't build your farm system to get role players and #3 starters...you try for aces and studs...I'm not seeing that in our system

[rxmeister]

The Giants acquired Jake Peavy during the deadline and I would classify that as a big move, especially the way he pitched in September. And Dood, I think you're underestimating Joe Panik. He's a number one draft pick who hit .300 as a ROOKIE! That's not a role player. He's a solid defender, who not only hits .300 he rarely K's and walks a lot. Maybe he loses points for lack of flashiness, but he's a potential star. Just a little more power as he ages so the defense has to respect him and no telling how good he'll be.

[Islandboagie]

Peavy turned out to be a big move, but at the time, we were expecting something more news worthy.

[rxmeister]

At the time of the deadline the Giants were in a long streak of terrible baseball. Listening to the comments that Sabean was making I got the impression he was almost ready to pack it in and not make any moves at all at the deadline. Considering the way the team was playing I wasn't expecting a big move and I was very happy with the Peavy acquisition. By the way, the way the Red Sox picked up two starters already and are also talking to Shields, shows they don't think much of the kid Escobar that we gave them for Jake.

[sfgdood]

Not sure about that Rx. I liked Escobar at San Jose...but of course I realize how little stock you all put in that. The Sox just may feel he's not quite ready and they are going to season him up and if he progresses, they may trade one of those signees at the next deadline for a missing piece.

[rxmeister]

Rog and I were having a discussion on the difference between a prospect and a major league ready prospect. He's a perfect example. He was excellent at the lower levels but was exposed last year at Fresno. Suddenly at a higher level he wasn't very good. And it's great and not meaningless when someone is good in A ball, but the difference is for some reason you think that someone who's good at A ball will be good in the major leagues despite how badly he fails at a higher level. Gary Brown should be a major league starter because he was good in A ball three years ago. It doesn't work like that.

[Rog]

Randy -- what is more important to you all? Is it more important for the Giants to find "bargains," seeking to get FULL value from contracts? Or should it be the goal to get guys that can help us win more titles NOW while we have a lot of the winning pieces in place and not worry too much about what happens at the back end of these contracts?

Rog -- That depends in great part on how much the Giants are planning to spend once they pay off the stadium. And how long we view their window of success.

The basic pieces of Posey, Bumgarner, Belt, Panik and Crawford should be effective for a long time. Susac and Duffy might be too. Hopefully some of the young pitchers on the way. Cain and Pence should last a while too.

I think what it boils down to is how confident adding a particular piece makes one in the short run, and how much overpay will be involved later.

Overall, the bird in the hand is better than the bird in the bush, so I would favor the short term. We saw what happened though in the mid-to-late 2000's when the Giants paid the price for that strategy. Had they not fared so well with their first-round picks during that down period, it is likely we would still be experiencing a drought.

That said, it was the Giants' poor seasons that gave them the opportunity to draft in the top 10 for four straight seasons.

Ideally, a team keeps winning while somehow turning the team over with younger players to keep the run going. Panik, Susac, Duffy and Sanchez are aids in that regard. Ideally though, the Giants will be able to leverage players nearing expensive free agency in deals to stay younger. A tough concept, but the Rays were able to use it for a long time to stay competitive despite a low payroll.

That strategy worked very well for the Rays from 2008 through 2013. They ran out of steam last season though. Then again, last season they spent roughly $100 million less than the Giants will spend this year.

So here is how I would rank the three strategies for the Giants right now:

. Make moves to win now and also build for later, as tough as that is to accomplish.

. Make moves to win now.

. Make moves for later.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2617/important#ixzz3LjPl3CHG

[Rog]

Randy -- Panik is good but overall our farm system lags far behind the rest of the league in stud material. Susac and Duffy project out to no more than bench players on a decent team. Maybe they could start for a lousy one.

Rog -- I'm not so sure about that, especially in the case of Susac. Andrew projects to be a decent defensive catcher who has decent power and walks a lot. The question of whether he could start for a good team will likely be determined by whether he can cut down his strikeouts enough to hit for a decent average. Catchers who can hit for decent average, get on base well for a catcher, hit with some power plus field and throw can be above-average catchers.

I like to look at K/BB ratio, as weighted by power. Andrew comes out fairly well on that scale, although he still strikes out too much.

You saw Joe at San Jose, which was easily his worst season in the minors. He's still just 24.

Duffy is a little bit younger. He's 23, meaning he was a year younger than Susac in making the major leagues. Matt has a very good K/BB ratio in the minors, although he has been short on power and was particularly so last season. You are probably right that Matt will be primarily a utility player, but he has a chance to be at least a second-division starter. Remember, he hit 75 points higher in AA than Panik did.

My guess would be that Susac is a 2nd-division starter, but he could easily be a 1st-division starter. Duffy I see as probably a utility man over much of his career but also is a starter at times. And I think he has the potential at least of becoming a 1st-division starter, although a 2nd-division starter seems more likely. I like Matt's quickness with the bat, but I wish he were stronger and did a better job of laying off breaking pitches low and outside.

You're probably not too far off on Duffy, although I think you might be giving Susac a bit of short shrift. By the way, a scouting report on these two guys would be greatly appreciated. Don't worry that you might be wrong. When it comes to young prospects, EVERYONE is wrong a lot.

Different sport, but occasionally I think how poorly I evaluated Marc Gasol, being considered as one of the top 5 NBA MVP candidates this season. I saw him play three games in high school and wasn't sure he could be an effective player even in college.

It is to his credit that he lost a lot of weight and further honed his already good skills by playing four or five years in Spain. One of his conditioning techniques has been running hills.

Gasol is a fair amount lighter than when I saw him in high school, and he's got a LOT more muscle. He's still a smart and well-rounded player (doubly so in high school), and he's in condition to show it now. Very fundamentally sound.

When he was in high school, I couldn't see far enough past his weight. He did block quite an area from vision!

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2617/important?page=1#ixzz3LjTRNYWW

[Rog]

Mark -- The Giants acquired Jake Peavy during the deadline and I would classify that as a big move, especially the way he pitched in September.

Rog -- As Boagie and Randy pointed out, it wasn't viewed as being nearly as big a deal as it later turned out to be.

Mark -- And Dood, I think you're underestimating Joe Panik. He's a number one draft pick who hit .300 as a ROOKIE! That's not a role player. He's a solid defender, who not only hits .300 he rarely K's and walks a lot. Maybe he loses points for lack of flashiness, but he's a potential star. Just a little more power as he ages so the defense has to respect him and no telling how good he'll be.

Rog -- I didn't think Randy put Joe in the same category as Andrew and Matt. I think he appreciates Joe.

Joe fielded a lot better than I thought he would. He hit more or less the way I thought he would. I see him as a .290 hitter, and including the postseason he batted .288. He continued to strike out very little, but I was surprised he didn't walk more.

This season I suspect he'll hit for a little lower average but get on base about the same by walking more often. As Mark hinted, he's tough to project power-wise. He hit the HECK out of a couple of balls last season, but overall his power was limited. I don't expect a lot of power from him.

Last year I compared him to Marco Scutaro. I think he'll hit for a better average than Marco but not as much power. The closest item of comparison is that neither swings and missed often, and both can take a walk. Marco had a little better ability to avoid swings and misses, but both are very good in that regard.

Marco was a shortstop early in his career, so I imagine the two are close in that regard too. I find it hard to believe that Marco was much better than Joe is.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2617/important?page=1#ixzz3LjZiPY2x

[Rog]

Randy -- Not sure about that Rx. I liked Escobar at San Jose...but of course I realize how little stock you all put in that.

Rog -- No need to be so defensive, Randy. I for one would like to see MORE scouting reports from you. You see the guys coming up a lot more than we do. I too have seen a few games in San Jose (and four in Fresno), but the last minor league game I saw was April 10, 2009.

That should change next year though, with the AAA Giants moving to Sacramento. I have asked for a River Cats gift certificate for Christmas! The Giants probably won't have all that much there this season, but I'll try to go at least a little.

I haven't seen the Giants' AAA team since April 29, 2007.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2617/important?page=1#ixzz3Lje3Z39t