|
|
Post by Rog on Feb 27, 2015 15:23:08 GMT -5
Bleacher Reports has an article enunciating each team's best and most moves of the winter. Naturally I was interested to see what they had to say about the Dodgers, Padres and Giants. Here goes:
Dodgers -- Best: The lack of bullpen was a reason for the Dodgers' playoff exit, so trading for Tampa Bay relievers Joel Peralta (veteran) and Adam Libertore (prospect) was considered their best move. Worst: Signing starter Brandon McCarthy for 4/$48. McCarthy is considered a very good 4th starter candidate, but Bleacher Report criticized them for taking so much risk (4/$48).
Padres -- Best: Signing James Shields. Reasonable contract (4/$75) for a veteran starter to add proven experience to an inexperienced but deep rotation. Worst: Creating very poor outfield defense in a park with a very big outfield. Upton/Myers/Kemp can hit, but that outfield is very, very big.
Giants: Best: Signing Nori Aoki to an outfield that lost one starter and has an injury-prone center fielder. At $4 million, Aoki could be a steal. Worst: Not signing a front-line starter. Boly has said this from the beginning. At least Matt Cain is looking good, and Tim Hudson appears to be ahead of schedule.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 28, 2015 11:03:38 GMT -5
Giants: Best: Signing Nori Aoki to an outfield that lost one starter and has an injury-prone center fielder. At $4 million, Aoki could be a steal. Worst: Not signing a front-line starter. Boly has said this from the beginning. At least Matt Cain is looking good, and Tim Hudson appears to be ahead of schedule.
***boly says***
thank you, Rog. I hope I'm wrong, but if we don't pick up someone along the way, our NOT signing a front line starter WILL be our undoing.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 28, 2015 12:36:05 GMT -5
I agree with the Aoki signing. I said not too long after the last out was made in Kansas City, the Giants needed to focus on getting a good leadoff type hitter rather than another middle of the order hitter. Pagan's constant trips to the DL needed a solid plan B leadoff hitter, now we have one.
I still think Pagan and Aoki should bat 1st and 2nd in the lineup when Pagan is healthy, but I doubt that's going to happen. I understand why Blanco is pushed back to the 7th or 8th spot, but Aoki is a solid .280 hitter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Feb 28, 2015 12:37:46 GMT -5
Boly -- if we don't pick up someone along the way, our NOT signing a front line starter WILL be our undoing. Rog -- I wish there weren't so many questions in the rotation, but I think the Giants may have a decent approach here (although there are two possible flaws, which I will mention soon). The Giants have six different starters who have pitched at a high to very high level along the way. The least of those is Ryan Vogelsong, and as I have often mentioned, he was the most consistent starter in baseball for most of the 2011 and 2012 seasons. The most baffling is Tim Lincecum, for reasons discussed here ad infinitum. An intriguing seventh possibility is Yusmeiro Petit, whose curve ball is one of the most effective pitches in the game and whose swing and miss rate is among the elite. The minors offer a few possibilities, although none get the blood rushing. So the Giants will sort it all out -- and no doubt be prepared to add at the trade deadline if appropriate. That strategy worked very well this past season with the addition of Jake Peavy. As mentioned, there are two main risks: . One is that the rotation still contains too many holes to repair midseason. . The next is that the Giants are already too far behind for such a move to make enough difference. But given what appear to be the Giants' salary limitations (and I'm not trying to open that old can of worms again), their strategy may make sense. Making sense and being successful are two different colors of horse, of course, so hopefully I can know what I'm talking about, and it won't be a case where the plan will crash and Will-Burn. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves#ixzz3T3snJV2R |
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 1, 2015 10:42:55 GMT -5
--boagie---I agree with the Aoki signing. I said not too long after the last out was made in Kansas City, the Giants needed to focus on getting a good leadoff type hitter rather than another middle of the order hitter. Pagan's constant trips to the DL needed a solid plan B leadoff hitter, now we have one.
I still think Pagan and Aoki should bat 1st and 2nd in the lineup when Pagan is healthy, but I doubt that's going to happen. I understand why Blanco is pushed back to the 7th or 8th spot, but Aoki is a solid .280 hitter.
***boly says---
I liked the Aoki signing, too, Boagie, but moving Pagan to the 2 hole creates other line up problems.
Where do you hit Panik?
He's NOT a run producer.
Moving Pagan to the 2 hole puts Crawford or Panik 2 hole; a terrible waste of Joe's and Brandon's skills.
I still say:
Aoki
Panik
Pence/Belt
Posey
Belt/Pence
Pagan
McGehee
Crawford
Base upon the talent we have, in my proposal players hit where their specific talents are optimized.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 1, 2015 12:05:04 GMT -5
I don't necessarily have a problem with your lineup. But my first choice would be the top 3 OBP guys batting ahead of Posey and Pence. Posey has the best OBP, but the 3 next best OBP hitters are Pagan, Aoki and Panik.
I like Belt, but he hasn't really proven he's a smart hitter yet. I wouldn't bat him 3rd. Belt is a raw power, mistake hitter, perfect for batting 6th or 7th.
1. Pagan
2. Aoki
3. Panik
4. Posey
5. Pence
6. Belt
7. McGehee
8. Crawford
|
|
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 Mar 1, 2015 14:44:45 GMT -5
I agree with the Aoki signing. I said not too long after the last out was made in Kansas City, the Giants needed to focus on getting a good leadoff type hitter rather than another middle of the order hitter. Pagan's constant trips to the DL needed a solid plan B leadoff hitter, now we have one.
I still think Pagan and Aoki should bat 1st and 2nd in the lineup when Pagan is healthy, but I doubt that's going to happen. I understand why Blanco is pushed back to the 7th or 8th spot, but Aoki is a solid .280 hitter.
Dood - What I would have done is let Ishikawa go, bring in both Aoki and a right handed power hitting corner outfielder (or kept Morse). Then we could have had multiple options at both Left Field and Center Field.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 1, 2015 16:22:16 GMT -5
Boagie -- I don't necessarily have a problem with your lineup. But my first choice would be the top 3 OBP guys batting ahead of Posey and Pence. Posey has the best OBP, but the 3 next best OBP hitters are Pagan, Aoki and Panik. I like Belt, but he hasn't really proven he's a smart hitter yet. I wouldn't bat him 3rd. Belt is a raw power, mistake hitter, perfect for batting 6th or 7th. 1. Pagan 2. Aoki 3. Panik 4. Posey 5. Pence 6. Belt 7. McGehee 8. Crawford Rog -- Good analysis here by you and Boly. Here are my thoughts, which are closer to Boly's: Lead off hitter -- Gets on base. Speed a benefit. Power not a high priority. Aoki #2 hitter -- Gets on base, but not quite as important as for the leadoff hitter. Power nice, but not critical. If not powerful, can handle the bat. Panik #3 hitter -- One of the top 2 all-around hitters on the team. Gets on base. Some power expected. Belt #4 hitter -- One of the two most powerful hitter on the team and one of the top 2 or 3 all-around hitters. Posey #5 hitter -- Sort of a second cleanup hitter, just not quite as good as the actual cleanup hitter. Pence #6 hitter -- The next best hitter on the team, preferably with at least some power. Pagan #7 hitter -- The better of the two hitters left. McGehee #8 hitter -- The worst non-pitcher hitter. Crawford There is a more recent philosophy of placing a better hitter #2, perhaps giving up bat control for stronger hitting with more pop. That is the situation in which Pagan, Pence or Belt would bat #2, moving Panik down in the order. The biggest question in the Giants' lineup is whom to lead off with. Given that Aoki has less power than Pagan but gets on base better, I think most of us agree he is the better leadoff man. Tne next question is whom to bat second. A traditionalist would think this is a no-brainer in favor of Panik. Those with newer thinking would likely choose Pence or Belt, with the other player batting third. A hybrid approach might be to bat Pagan second. Another player some would choose to bat 2nd is Brandon Crawford. But Brandon doesn't appear to be a good enough hitter to bat there. Regardless of whether one uses the traditional or the newer philosophy, one of the team's better hitters should bat #2. In fact, one could make an argument that the guy with little power who gets on base and has some speed should lead off, followed by the team's top four hitters. Those top four hitters would be arranged according to hitting ability and power, with speed also being a factor. I'm not sure that the order makes a huge difference, although it seems to me that leading off with the best on-base guy who isn't the team's best hitter and followed by the team's top four hitters makes a lot of sense. If a traditional #2 hitter is used, the top four hitters left would bat #3 through #6. Probably a good idea to group the team's best hitters together, since keeping the line moving is important, and the team's best hitters should be best at doing so. Boly and Boagie both have good ideas here, although to me Panik doesn't have enough power to bat #3, and Belt is somewhat wasted at #6, given that he might be the Giants' best combination of power and ability to reach base -- or at least #2 behind Buster. Brandon is underrated as a hitter IMO. Since their respective rookie seasons, Brandon's OPS is ahead of that of Pence. In addition, Belt might be the most powerful hitter on the team. He's a streaky hitter, and one could certainly argue for moving him down to #6 or #7 when he's slumping, but when he's on, he's about as good a hitter as anyone on the team. Buster is streaky too, or else it almost certainly would be Belt. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves#ixzz3TA21fO7U |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 1, 2015 21:34:02 GMT -5
Rog- #3 hitter -- One of the top 2 all-around hitters on the team. Gets on base. Some power expected. Belt
Boagie- Belt isn't one of the top two hitters on the team. Posey and Pence are easily better. Pagan when healthy is better, and based on a small sample last season, Panik is also better. I might even make the case that under stressful conditions Crawford is better, although I admit that is a stretch.
Pagan and Panik don't have the Power that Belt does, but Belt hasn't really established himself as a power hitter yet. If Belt wants to crack 25+ out this season I'd say he's worthy of the power argument, until then, all I see are a number of season where Belt hasn't really lived up to the hype we heard back in late 2010.
His 2013 season was on the cusp of him turning into something we could rely on, but last season he again took a step back.
But even in his best years, he still has periods where he's completely lost at the plate. Its not like Posey during the post-season. Posey at his worst can still put the ball in play, and it appears he's just a tick off on his timing. Still not a guy a pitcher feels good facing.
When Belt is off, everyone knows it. The bat boy on the opposing team can see it, and could likely expose the hole in his swing as much as the pitchers do. I'm not comfortable with that batting 3rd, sorry.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 1, 2015 22:16:09 GMT -5
Dood - What I would have done is let Ishikawa go, bring in both Aoki and a right handed power hitting corner outfielder (or kept Morse). Then we could have had multiple options at both Left Field and Center Field. Rog -- The Giants probably had enough money to sign one of the bigger-named outfielders instead of Aoki and Romo. They all pretty much had flaws. Torii Hunter returned to the Twins. I wonder if the Giants might have considered him if not for his desire to return home to apparently end his career. Aside from Torii and the more expensive and non-fielding Nelson Cruz, I think I am as happy with Aoki as any of the other outfielders. Following your idea, Randy, I would have liked to see them sign Chris Denorfia as a fifth outfielder, but he may have signed where he had a better chance to be a fourth outfielder. Not sure about that one. He's not a great player, but I believe he signed for something like $2.6 million. If the Giants' outfielders can stay healthy though, they should be OK there. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves#ixzz3TC6n2b4I |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 1, 2015 22:44:22 GMT -5
Rog- #3 hitter -- One of the top 2 all-around hitters on the team. Gets on base. Some power expected. Belt Boagie- Belt isn't one of the top two hitters on the team. Posey and Pence are easily better. Pagan when healthy is better, and based on a small sample last season, Panik is also better. I might even make the case that under stressful conditions Crawford is better, although I admit that is a stretch. Rog -- I think Belt is very underrated as a hitter, and it appears you are among the non-believers, Boagie. I'm looking for a breakout season from Brandon. As I posted, since their respective rookie seasons, Brandon has outhit Hunter Pence. He's not as good a hitter as Buster Posey, but IMO he is the only Giant with the potential to be. Panik isn't a better hitter than Belt. I love Joe, but his OPS is nearly 100 points lower than Belt's. Since Brandon's rookie season (meaning the past three years), he has hit .275/.351/.453/.804. Given the injuries he has had to overcome and his premature call up, he's been a very good hitter. As you said, making him the lesser of the two Brandons as a hitter is a stretch, and it's a Manute Bol-like stretch. This is only about a half-season sample, but from the beginning of August in 2013 through May 9th, the day Brandon's finger was broken, he hit .302/.359/.500/.859. Those figures are very close to Buster Posey's .308/.374/.487/861 career marks. The point is that Brandon seemed to be coming around before his hand was broken. That's why he might be up to that breakout season I see. That is probably why Bruce Bochy has mentioned him as a candidate for the #3 spot. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves?page=1#ixzz3TC87C7Y6 |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 1, 2015 22:58:49 GMT -5
Aside from Torii and the more expensive and non-fielding Nelson Cruz, I think I am as happy with Aoki as any of the other outfielders.
Boagie- Melky Cabrera? That's the guy I believe the Giants could have gone after more aggressively.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 1, 2015 23:05:43 GMT -5
Boagie -- Belt hasn't really established himself as a power hitter yet. If Belt wants to crack 25+ out this season I'd say he's worthy of the power argument, until then, all I see are a number of season where Belt hasn't really lived up to the hype we heard back in late 2010. Rog -- In his last 723 at bats over the past two seasons, Brandon has 29 home runs. Based on a full season, that's right at 25 home runs per. In other words, Brandon may be the most powerful hitter the Giants have. Over the past two seasons, he has averaged 1.714 bases per hit. Jeff Kent was considered a pretty good power hitter, and over his career he averaged 1.725 bases. Over their entire careers, Buster Posey and Pablo Sandoval have averaged 1.58 bases per hit. Hunter Pence has averaged 1.66. Brandon has averaged 1.67. Did I mention that Buster's hitting is underrated? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves?page=1#ixzz3TCFDTncS |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 1, 2015 23:19:30 GMT -5
Boagie -- But even in his best years, he still has periods where he's completely lost at the plate. Its not like Posey during the post-season. Posey at his worst can still put the ball in play, and it appears he's just a tick off on his timing. Rog -- I haven't done a study, but I'll bet Buster is just about as streaky as Brandon, although thus far at a higher level. As an example, last season Buster hit .277/.333/423/.757 in the first half and .354/.403/.575/.978 in the second. In Brandon's last full season, he hit .274/.344/.441/.784 in the first half and .326/.390/.525/.915 in the second. That's nearly as streaky as Buster was last season. Buster may look better than Brandon when he's slumping, but the results aren't extremely dissimilar. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves?page=1#ixzz3TCKej9gi |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 1, 2015 23:32:50 GMT -5
Rog -- Aside from Torii and the more expensive and non-fielding Nelson Cruz, I think I am as happy with Aoki as any of the other outfielders. Boagie- Melky Cabrera? That's the guy I believe the Giants could have gone after more aggressively. Rog -- I forgot all about Melky. He would have been my first choice. But he signed for 3/$42. Would we rather have Melky for $3/42 or Aoki and Romo for a combined 2/$24.5? I would probably take Melky, but it's close. If we go simply by Wins Above Replacement (WAR), we might go with Aoki and Romo, who according to Baseball Reference have combined to 10.5 WAR over the past three seasons compared to Melky's 7.5. Melky missed a lot of games in both 2012 and 2013 or else his WAR would have been much closer to the combined totals of Aoki and Romo. The Giants certainly didn't get a lot of credit from much of anybody, but I think they actually did a nice job of replacing their five free agents without making any commitments over two years and while giving up only moderate prospects for Casey McGehee. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves?page=1#ixzz3TCO2q2RM |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 1, 2015 23:34:19 GMT -5
One think I would say is that if both Belt and Buster are slumping at the same time in the 3 and 4 holes, the Giants aren't likely to score many runs from the middle of the order.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 2, 2015 5:17:37 GMT -5
I'm like Randy, I don't really care about the money. The Giants have plenty of money to spend. I think Sabean talked his way into the ownership opening the pocket book for resigning Pablo or landing Lester, once those got away, the Giants ownership put away their pocket book. There's money there, they just want to spend it on players that make sense to the future of the Giants. I know you like to break down every dollar spent, but this isn't the Oakland A's. The Giants have a fan base that won't be happy if Posey is traded for some prospects. The Giants care more about keeping that fan base and being competitive each year, rather than saving a few million on one player. If the Giants wanted Cabrera, and Cabrera wanted to come back, they would've made it happen, and kept Romo too.
I know you love Beane, but the money ball premise just doesn't apply to the Giants. And I hope to hell it never does.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 2, 2015 10:58:40 GMT -5
Boagie -- I'm like Randy, I don't really care about the money. The Giants have plenty of money to spend. Rog -- They do, and that has helped them be among the top quartile of spenders in baseball despite not being in one of the very top markets. As of right now, they are rank #4 in spending entering the season. Given that the three teams above them -- the Dodgers, Yankees and Red Sox -- are considered teams that OVERspend, I think Giants are right about where they should be. Five or 10 years from now I think spending could be a concern, but like you, I don't see it as a problem now. Boagie -- I think Sabean talked his way into the ownership opening the pocket book for resigning Pablo or landing Lester, once those got away, the Giants ownership put away their pocket book. Rog -- He may have, although they also opened their pocket book for James Shields, whose annual salary is virtually the same as Pablo's. Boagie -- There's money there, they just want to spend it on players that make sense to the future of the Giants. Rog -- I think that's a good way of looking at things. I think the Giants spent just about as much as they said they would, but you are probably right that they would have dug deeper for what they considered to be just the right guy. Boagie -- I know you like to break down every dollar spent, but this isn't the Oakland A's. Rog -- Of course it isn't. The Giants spend twice as much as the A's. Boagie -- The Giants have a fan base that won't be happy if Posey is traded for some prospects. The Giants care more about keeping that fan base and being competitive each year, rather than saving a few million on one player. Rog -- The Giants aren't going to trade Buster anytime soon. He's the best Hall of Fame candidate to come up through the system since Gaylord Perry. I was merely pointing out to Randy that if the Giants had borrowed this year from next year's budget, they would have gotten themselves into one heck of a bind. Boagie -- If the Giants wanted Cabrera, and Cabrera wanted to come back, they would've made it happen, and kept Romo too. Rog -- I agree and disagree here. I think if the Giants had really wanted Melky to come back, they would have found a way to sign him. But I'm not sure that would have included keeping Romo. Obviously the Giants wanted Romo back, but they help up on re-signing him until they were unable to land Pablo, Lester or Shields. The Giants said they told their free agents just where each one stood, and I think they made it clear to all but Pablo that it would depend on whether they signed Pablo or their next big target or two. I would have loved to get Melky, but the Giants' signing of Nori Aoki was likely the better deal. VERY little risk in Aoki's deal, and given that he stays healthy, he's probably not all that far away from Angel Pagan. He's been healthier than Cabrera too, for that matter. Boagie -- I know you love Beane, but the money ball premise just doesn't apply to the Giants. And I hope to hell it never does. Rog -- I don't love Billy nearly as much as you think I do. I almost never think about him, and even though I have the book, I have neither read nor seen Moneyball. I don't think he's the best GM in the game, but I do think he was the first of the new breed of GM's that are finding value in their signings. That is what Moneyball is about. Finding value where others may not yet be looking. That ability applies to EVERY team. What you don't want is for the Giants not to spend money. It's not that you don't want them to spend their money wisely. An example (at least thus far) is Tim Lincecum. The Giants weren't at all cheap with him. I don't know how many 2014 free agent pitchers were paid more per season than he, but the number wasn't large. The problem wasn't not spending enough. It has been in not getting value from Tim. The Giants spent a ton on Matt Cain. The problem is that he could no longer overcome the elbow chips he has had since high school. The Giants spent a ton on Barry Zito, who had one of the highest and longest contracts given to any pitcher at that time. The problem was that they didn't get value. When you spend more than all but three major league teams out of 29, it's not that you're not spending enough. If there's a problem, it's mostly that you're not getting VALUE for your dollars. The Giants have been receiving tremendous value from Posey and Bumgarner, but now those guys are starting to get paid (although Bumgarner's contract may be the most team-friendly arbitration or beyond contract in baseball). They are paying Cain, Lincecum and Pence, and they would have liked to pay Pablo. If the Giants had signed Pablo, they would have been paying six players an average of $105 million per season. That's more than nearly half the teams in MLB are paying their entire ROSTERS. What we've got in baseball is a top salary tier of the Dodgers and Yankees, followed by a second tier of the Red Sox, Giants, Tigers, Nationals and Angels. The third tier is the Rangers and Phillies. Then come the Blue Jays, Orioles, Mariners, Reds, Cardinals, Cubs, Royals, White Sox, Mariners, Brewers, Twins and Rockies also at $100 million or more. The remaining 10 teams dwindle down to the Marlins at $60 million. The Giants are near the top of the second of five tiers. There are 26 teams below them. Neither the ability to spend nor actual spending is an issue. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves#ixzz3TF5FymKa |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 2, 2015 13:44:58 GMT -5
Rog -- I don't love Billy nearly as much as you think I do. I almost never think about him, and even though I have the book, I have neither read nor seen Moneyball. I don't think he's the best GM in the game, but I do think he was the first of the new breed of GM's that are finding value in their signings.
That is what Moneyball is about. Finding value where others may not yet be looking. That ability applies to EVERY team.
Boagie- Perhaps you should watch or read it before you tell me what it's about, because that's not the main premise, although it is part of it. And I don't know that Beane is the first to find value in his signings. Small market teams have always had to adopt a money saving strategy.
Getting the "best bang for your buck" part of moneyball does apply to the Giants as I believe it applies to all teams, even the Yankees have a payroll the owners set.
What sets the Giants and A's apart is the Giants overpay to keep a good dynamic to appease the season ticket holders. The A's don't.
Barry Zito is a good example. I give you full credit in spotting a bad move when it happened. I remember you breaking down his numbers and explaining to everyone here that Barry was declining and fast. I'm certain Sabean and his scouts saw the same, but they wanted him for a veteran leader to anchor a young pitching staff that Sabean was set out to create. In that aspect it was a good move. But Brian Kenny would NEVER see it that way. That's the difference between moneyball and building a contender. Moneyball is once dimensional, building a lasting championship team is far more complex.
|
|
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 Mar 2, 2015 14:18:18 GMT -5
The part that would put a knot in my stomach if I was an A's fan was the part where Billy says "my objective is not to win titles, it's to change the game." It's all ego for Billy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 3, 2015 2:55:13 GMT -5
Boagie -- Moneyball is once dimensional, building a lasting championship team is far more complex. Rog -- Maybe I don't even understand Moneyball, but based on what I think it is, it is far more complex than building a lasting championship team, which is usually done by spending a lot of money. (The Giants aren't an exception to that rule.) I see Moneyball as spotting inefficiencies in the market place, then building a team on that and on inexpensive young players. When those young players start getting paid, continuity is formed by trading them off for younger, less expensive players. That is easier said than done, of course, but teams such as Tampa Bay have gained some continuity despite a small budget by using the technique. Moneyball began by placing proper value on getting on base, which was an underrated baseball talent at that time. The next phase was in placing more value on defense, which also wasn't a well-paid talent. Anyway, I admire the low-paying teams that develop some winning teams, even if it is in up and down fashion more than high-paying teams that have more on-field success. I'm not saying that I would rather ROOT for the lesser, cheaper team. I'm simply saying I admire them more because when they succeed, they have overcome far more hurdles than most high-paying teams. Looking at the Giants, they have been a very good team over the 1993 through 2014 seasons. Most of that success was built around Barry Bonds, one of the top talents ever to play the game and probably the best player the younger ones here have seen. The next layer of success has come from success with very high draft picks (Lincecum, Bumgarner and Posey), players who contributed far more than they were paid over much of their Giants careers. The Giants have also done a good job with trades (Pagan, Cabrera, Lopez, Peavy, Pence, Scutaro and hopefully McGehee) and with low-to-medium-priced free agents (Uribe, Huff, Casilla, Affeldt, Morse and hopefully Aoki). They have also had nice success with lower draft picks (Romo, Belt, Wilson, Crawford, Panik and Susac). There is little doubt that beginning with the 2011 season, the Giants have been pretty big spenders. Naturally they haven't spent enough to keep us happy as fans. Even the Dodgers' fans likely want them to spend more. But the Giants have spent a lot of money, and that has allowed them to hold onto players such as Pence, Lincecum, Bumgarner, Posey, Cain, Huff and Scutaro. The only fish I can think of who got away was Pablo. One might add Michael Morse, but I don't think the Giants wanted him back all that badly. Morse didn't sign a huge contract, yet the Giants let him go quietly. The Giants' recent formula has been to spend enough money to make the playoffs and give their team a shot in the postseason. Clearly they have capitalized on those shots. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves#ixzz3TJ2DFWUE |
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Mar 3, 2015 23:24:23 GMT -5
The part that would put a knot in my stomach if I was an A's fan was the part where Billy says "my objective is not to win titles, it's to change the game." It's all ego for Billy. dk...nobody objected to Walter O'Malley saying..."If I had my druthers, I would finish second, just close enough to keep the fans interested."...nor did the same statements from Peter O'Malley and Al Camporis get any reaction from the LA media or fans....these 3 guys made the exact same statement at different times on the Dodgers post game talk radio.... |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 4, 2015 7:04:16 GMT -5
Boagie -- The part that would put a knot in my stomach if I was an A's fan was the part where Billy says "my objective is not to win titles, it's to change the game." It's all ego for Billy. Rog -- Again, I have neither read the book nor seen the movie, but wasn't he saying that his objective wasn't JUST to win titles, but rather to change the game itself? I like the way writers sometimes say that a team has enough money to build a team that makes the playoffs but not one good enough to win the World Series. Just how good a team do we think the Giants were in 2010, 2012 and 2014 -- yet they won World Series in each of those seasons. In those three seasons, the Giants were a combined 62 games over .500. The 1954 Indians that the Giants had swept in their previous World Series win was 68 games over .500 just in that one season. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves#ixzz3TPvWDn5A |
|
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 Mar 4, 2015 11:49:29 GMT -5
I didn't read the book but in the movie, Brad Pitt's line did not include the word "just"...I remember it distinctly because it was so stomach-turning. The other disgusting part of the movie--and from what I understand, the book too--is how Art Howe is portrayed as a stupid unmoving jerk that merely stood in the way of Beane's "brilliance"...the way Billy tells it, all of the baseball personnel were idiots and only the stats geeks knew how to run a team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 4, 2015 13:35:40 GMT -5
Randy -- the way Billy tells it, all of the baseball personnel were idiots and only the stats geeks knew how to run a team. Rog -- I guess now I'll have to read the book -- and I just bought Boly's Aiden's Cauldron Trilogy plus ordered about a dozen baseball and basketball books from Amazon and the library. Prior to doing so, here is my sense: First, let's look at some facts. Billy is a former player, although one who had almost no success as a major leaguer. According to Wikipedia though, he was considered for the the #1 pick over in the 1980 amateur draft but fell to #23 because teams were concerned he would attend Stanford University instead of signing. When Beane was sent to the minor leagues by the A's in 1989, he went to A's GM Sandy Alderson and asked for a scouting job, thus ending his playing career. Beane went on to succeed Alderson in 1997, and ten years later was concurrently named a director of the company Netsuite. According to Wikipedia, "Netsuite co-founder co-founder Evan Goldberg cited Beane's ability to combine facts with instinct as an important factor in the decision to involve him in the company." So what we have in Beane appears to be a smart man and very talented (if ultimately very unsuccessful) player turned scout prior to becoming the A's GM. My sense (without reading the book) is that Billy realized the fallacy of the scouts (Remember, he WAS one) and came to appreciate metric analysis. He believed he found a flaw in player evaluation that didn't give enough consideration to a player's ability to get on base (avoid making outs). He gave high consideration to metrics and likely discounted (not ignored) the opinions of his scouts. He likely made his decisions by combining the two information sources. I'll let you know how I feel after reading the book, but that is my initial take based on what I know at this point. Others here may want to read the book as well and see how we begin to view Billy when acquainted with more facts. First though, I've got to finish "Willie and Mickey," an intriguing book by the same Allan Barra I mentioned a week or so ago. One thing Billy certainly flies in the face of is the statement "stats geeks never played the game..." Billy played it with a degree of skill that allowed him to be a first-round draft pick. Then he scouted it. While he never attended Stanford, he did study at the University of California, San Diego. So it would appear that Billy has a nice combination of education, smarts, business experience, playing experience and scouting experience. To say that he "(doesn't) get it and never will," likely isn't a true statement. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2733/best-worst-moves#ixzz3TRSp3WC8 |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Mar 4, 2015 13:37:30 GMT -5
So let's see how we feel after we read the book. My sense is that even after reading the book, there will be disparate opinions as to what it means. But it should make for some intriguing discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 4, 2015 14:56:47 GMT -5
I never read the book, but I did see the movie, and in the movie he treated his scouts like they were a bunch of bumbling idiots. I doubt that's the reality of their relationship because his scouts have done a great job for him. Just because that's the way the author spins it, doesn't make it a fact. Keep that in mind when you read or watch 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 Mar 4, 2015 15:05:56 GMT -5
I'm not giving Billy a pass...it would be ludicrous to think he had no final say on how certain events were depicted in either the book or the movie. It seems to me when the movie was being promoted Billy was saying all over the place how true to real life it was. Art Howe was, very rightfully, PISSED OFF about it. I'm pretty sure the scouts were too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 4, 2015 15:11:23 GMT -5
So it would appear that Billy has a nice combination of education, smarts, business experience, playing experience and scouting experience. To say that he "(doesn't) get it and never will," likely isn't a true statement.
Boagie- Billy ain't stupid. But he is a progressive thinking egomaniac, which did hurt the A's last year. He ignored that age old golden rule "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Instead he wanted the full credit and traded away Cespedes so he could wind up in a position for the baseball world to collectively stroke his ego yet again. As we know, it backfired horribly and he still tried to take credit for the A's even getting into the post-season. He might not be stupid, but that was a monumentally stupid move.
|
|
|
|
Post by BBoysAcelm on Feb 25, 2019 19:52:51 GMT -5
Backstreet Boys BSB are an American rock band. The band was founded on April 20, 1993 in Orlando, Florida, by Lou Pearlman. Now this is the most successful band with more than 130 million records sold worldwide. The band was named after a flea market in Orlando, the "backstreet flea market". In 2019 Backstreet Boys has more than 50 concerts in the US with their DNA US tour. Check concerts at <a href=https://backstreetboystourdates.com>Backstreet Boys DNA tour US 2019</a> page. Full list of tour dates & concerts!
|
|
