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 22, 2014 14:39:47 GMT -5
I think a lot of you see me criticizing Sabean and take it to mean I am predicting God-awfulness for the 2015 season. Not at all.
Most of you know me and know that I hate pre-season projections in general, number one...and number two, I have seen enough to love about Bochy and the staff to know that they will get the most out of their team on most occasions. That's not to say I wont at times criticize them and disagree with tactics but overall the guy knows what he is doing and has shown himself to be, in my opinion, the best in the bigs.
Here's my problem. It's with the general strategy of Sabean's staff. Once the team makes the playoffs I have nothing but confidence that in short series, they can pull it off. However in the 162 game season they have proven that they in recent years cannot overtake the Dodgers using the methods Sabean is employing. 20112 and 2013 were AS ugly as 2010, 2012 and 2014 were beautiful. And now the Padres are moving up in the division also. I wanted Pablo signed, and barring that I wanted a top pitcher--Lester or Scherzer or even Shields--signed. Niether happened so therefore my confidence is low that this roster is capable of overtaking both of those teams. I would LOVE to be proven wrong but right now I'm just not seeing it.
I'm happy for those of you with confidence in the likes of McGehee...and by the way, I have liked Casey at times in his career, but there is absolutely no question we are getting a severe downgrade at that position. I don't care what manner of Bill James stats geekery you pull out of his hat, it wont convince me otherwise. I said all along that the options at 3rd base if we missed out on Pablo were grim and so even though Sabean did about as well as could be expected, I'm still disappointed because he did NOT, in my opinion, do everything that they needed to try to get Pablo back. The loss of both him AND Morse required that TOP quality replacements needed to be obtained or that an upgrade to the starting rotation was in order, and in my view that hasn't happened. To me that constitutes failure on Sabean's part.
All that being said, the Giants are my team and I will be hoping they prove me wrong. But for right now, I just don't see it. Right now I see a team that at best will equal the win total of last year's team and I don't believe that will be enough to get it done in 2015.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 22, 2014 15:06:34 GMT -5
Randy -- I wanted Pablo signed, and barring that I wanted a top pitcher--Lester or Scherzer or even Shields--signed Rog -- You realize there would likely have been very little money left over for the other needs, right? Then the Giants would have been forced to go on the cheap, which you have stated you don't want them to do. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2636/clarify#ixzz3Mev6vGmZ
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 22, 2014 15:09:31 GMT -5
Randy -- I don't care what manner of Bill James stats geekery you pull out of his hat, it wont convince me otherwise. Rog -- I think a closed mind shows that something valuable is being wasted. I personally have been swayed many times by analytics, just as I was swayed on Gary Brown by scouting reports. What I try to do is evaluate each. I think that would be a better route for you to follow. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2636/clarify?page=1#ixzz3MevdrPlX
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 22, 2014 15:14:00 GMT -5
I don't know about Randy, but if they had managed to resign Pablo and signed Lester, I'd be perfectly fine with an Ishikawa/Perez/Blanco platoon in LF and saying goodbye to Romo. One thing we do have in our system is young arms that can be plugged into relief roles.
But, that's over and done with. I'm happy having Romo back, and the more I think about McGehee, the more I'm content with him at 3rd base.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 22, 2014 15:24:29 GMT -5
Randy -- The loss of both him AND Morse required that TOP quality replacements needed to be obtained or that an upgrade to the starting rotation was in order, and in my view that hasn't happened. To me that constitutes failure on Sabean's part. Rog -- Brian has to work with what he is given. The writer quoted on one of these threads said the Giants had lots of money to spends, since they could spend $160 million. Thank goodness he wasn't right, since the Giants have already overspent that (when we add in the expectations for arbitration-eligible players). I believe the budget is actually somewhere between $170 and $175 million, which still leaves the Giants a fair amount of money to spend even after addressing three or the four positions in which they are losing players. I was actually more worried that they would spend too MUCH on one of the needs, to the detriment of properly filling the others. So far they've done a decent job of filling the three holes, and I think they have enough money left over. Allen Craig, for example, is being paid $5.5 million this season. I'm pretty sure that would fit the budget, and they might have the pieces to trade for Craig. Craig is owed $9 million in 2016 and $11 million in 2017. His team has a $13 million option for 2018, with a $1 million buyout. That's a lot of money to commit ($26.5 million over three seasons), and Craig was awful last season (.215 batting average), but he had hit over .300 each of the previous seasons with an OPS averaging about .870 those seasons. Craig had only a .266 BABIP last season (compared to .325 career), so he could well have a significant bounce back. He hit 21% line drives and a 54.5 ground ball rate, with a marvelous 1.1% infield fly ball rate, so .266 seems like quite an aberration. There is a November 13th article on Fan Graphs entitled "Is Allen Craig This Bad?" I haven't had a chance to read it yet (hopefully tonight, although there is a ton of good sports going on, not to mention my fiancee). I would be very surprised if the conclusion wasn't "No, he's not. Not even close." As I look at the total picture of how much money left and how comparitively little the Giants had to replace it, I'm beginning to get excited. There are several left field possibilities out there that would complete the package nicely IMO. Most of the puzzle has been filled in. Let's see how the final piece or pieces round things out. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2636/clarify?page=1#ixzz3MewOZ0sN
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 22, 2014 15:26:54 GMT -5
Boagie -- I don't know about Randy, but if they had managed to resign Pablo and signed Lester, I'd be perfectly fine with an Ishikawa/Perez/Blanco platoon in LF and saying goodbye to Romo. Rog -- Intriguing idea, but they lost neither player because of money. And you know what? The would have overspent their budget by about $15 million to sign both those guys. Your idea isn't necessarily bad. It's just not realistic. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2636/clarify?page=1#ixzz3Mf0ILeex
|
|
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 22, 2014 16:08:44 GMT -5
Randy -- I wanted Pablo signed, and barring that I wanted a top pitcher--Lester or Scherzer or even Shields--signed
Rog -- You realize there would likely have been very little money left over for the other needs, right? Then the Giants would have been forced to go on the cheap, which you have stated you don't want them to do.
Dood - I said before, I'm fine with going cheap in some spots as long as you get top quality in one or two spots. It's the mediocrity across the board method that the Giants are employing that bothers me.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 22, 2014 17:55:39 GMT -5
And you know what? The would have overspent their budget by about $15 million to sign both those guys.
Your idea isn't necessarily bad. It's just not realistic.
Boagie- Again, a World Championship team with sellout crowds extending their budget by $15 million is entirely realistic
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 22, 2014 23:15:42 GMT -5
Dood - I said before, I'm fine with going cheap in some spots as long as you get top quality in one or two spots. It's the mediocrity across the board method that the Giants are employing that bothers me. Rog -- To me it depends on the WHOM. To make this easy, let's say the Giants signed Jon Lester. That would have left about enough money to sign Chris Denorfia, so he could platoon with Gregor Blanco. Based on the forecasts listed in Fan Graphs, let's see if that direction projects better than say Romo, Peavy, McGehee and Craig. They project Lester for 3.6 wins and Denorfia for 1.0 wins. That's a total of 4.6 wins. Romo is projected at 0.2 wins, Peavy and McGehee at 1.0 each, and Craig at 0.5. That's a total of 2.7 wins. Essentially signing Lester and Denorfia would be worth about two wins more than the players the Giants acquired (and assuming Craig). That would indicate the Giants would have been better off signing Lester and Denorfia, as you mentioned. Perhaps that is indeed the way it will work out. Here is something else to consider though. Lester's production will likely decline over the course of his contract, and the Giants would have committed something like $27 million a season to him. Lester should work well for 2015, but he might well work less well over time. Another advantage to signing the four players instead of putting almost all the money into Lester is that the Giants spread their risk out, and diversification usually reduces risk. Another advantage is that the four players likely have more combined upside than Lester and Denorfia. Not a clear-cut call, although it appears that signing Lester might well work out better in the short run and worse in the long run. How long is the Giants' window, and how much will they have available to spend in the future? I like what the Giants have done so far, but it depends in part on where they go from here. One other factor to consider is that the Giants didn't lose either Pablo or Lester for financial reasons. We don't know for sure that they could have signed either, and it may be that in order to do so they would have had to wildly overpay. Based on the forecasts I cited though, the Giants would likely have been better off signing Lester and going on the cheap (assuming they could have gotten Lester at a price not too much higher than he actually signed for). They would have tied up at least $155 million dollars though, about $110 million more than they have tied up thus far. There are so many factors that enter into a decision like this that it is tough to make a clear-cut call. Going Pablo or Lester may have been the better call, or spreading the risk as the Giants are doing may be better. In the case of Lester and his six-year contract (maybe seven for the GIANTS to sign him), it would be quite a long time before we would know how things turned out. I like the way they're going, but I could certainly build a case for Pablo or Lester -- assuming the Giants could have signed either. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2636/clarify#ixzz3Mgoq4MTh
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 22, 2014 23:18:38 GMT -5
Boagie- Again, a World Championship team with sellout crowds extending their budget by $15 million is entirely realistic Rog -- Unless the fans get too spoiled and/or the Giants completely fall apart, we'll see sellout crowds for quite a while regardless. As for whether it is realistic, the Giants don't believe it is. If we're going to make any reasonable recommendations, we need to live within the constraints the Giants have set -- just as they do. Projecting what they should do/should have done with an extra $15 million is fun -- but unrealistic. With $20 million more, by the way, my own recommendation included Lester. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2636/clarify?page=1#ixzz3MgunFUH8
|
|