It's still early, but...

[klaiggeb]

Boagie meant it about Sanchez, but I mean it about the team..."I'm tired of watching this crap."

I know we have injuries, but what has occurred is pretty much exactly played out as I expected:

1-Cain, not recovered and not ready to pitch

2-Peavy, not really that effective, hurt or otherwise.

3-Vogey, showing the same spiraling decline we saw last year.

4-Hudson, still in decline, and will wear down even faster than he did last year.

I beat this to death in the off season, but I'll say it again; we needed starting pitching, and didn't get it. We shopped at Wallmart instead of Nordstroms

That lack of starting pitching will be the ultimate death of us, and this season.

5-Injuries. I predicted Pence's injury a week before it came, and before this year is over, I'm predicing a number of critical injuries more that will do to us what the Posey injury did in 2011. Each game I keep waiting for that 'other shoe' to drop.

Crawford? Posey? Belt? Who's next? None of which we can afford to lose.

5-This is the transitional year I expected, and the one Sabean, and so many others, were trying to deny or simply hide from.

6-Heston "might" be a really solid guy. Beede might be, too. But that's in the future. Right now, Heston has been FAR BETTER than I expected, and way better than I thought Cain would be even IF healthy as he fought his way back.

7-Lincecum I have said, and continue to say, should be shopped and shipped to whomever will take him.



I'll be honest with you all: I LOVE the Giants! I bleed orange and black! But Sabean shoved a stake in my heart with his lying and deceit, and quite frankly, after watching them stumble and bumble around this first week... I'm losing interest. It's simply not any fun anymore.

And that is NOT like me.

It's a long season, and it ain't over yet... yet...

But I'd rather them all fess up to the fact that they KNOW we are NOT going anywhere this year; that we are pretty much where I said we'd be in the standings; last or near the bottom by the time it all ends, are NOT likely to finish much, if any, above .500; that this IS a transistional season, that Sabean tried to pull the proverbial wool of the eyes of his fans, and that it isn't working.

Way to go, Brian. Season is 10ish games old... and it seems all of my fears have come to fruition.

Nice job, jackass!

boly

[sfgdood]

like the subject says, it is early...but as you know I was right with you all offseason. It's looking pretty darn good for us to post THE WORST start ever by a SF Giants team...EVER!! That includes some very bad teams, including the 100 loss 1985 team. I actually like what I've seen from Hudson and Lincecum thus far...we'll see if it holds up. But the rest of the rotation, apart from Heston, has been disappointing. Even Bumgarner has failed to be the stopper we need him to be. Vogey is taking up space...he needs to go.

[Rog]

Boly -- Vogey, showing the same spiraling decline we saw last year.

Rog -- We didn't see a spiraling decline from Ryan last season. In fact, he improved his ERA from 5.73 to 4.00, so I guess we could say he showed a spiraling INcline.

This season is an entirely different story, and he appears to be pitching himself right off the roster. Three uglies in a row is pretty tough -- especially when they have been THIS ugly.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early#ixzz3Xf883pPg

[Rog]

Boly -- Hudson, still in decline

Rog -- Tim has "declined" himself into a 2.03 ERA.

[Rog]

Boly -- Lincecum I have said, and continue to say, should be shopped and shipped to whomever will take him.

Rog -- At $18 million for Tim, this is obvious. So obvious, in fact, that other teams can see it too. What makes us think that Tim HASN'T been shopped? We don't think the Giants would trade him for a younger, better, less expensive pitcher?

You are convinced there is a market for Tim. The question I would ask is, why? It's kind of like how we fans package a lot of so-so players in a proposed trade for a good player. Why would the other team make an Ollie Matson trade?




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early?page=1#ixzz3Xf9bLj5V

[rxmeister]

The Giants may have lost the offseason, but you know who won? Boly and Randy. All that gloom and doom that I and others scoffed at might have even been understated! This team is awful. I had concerns about the rotation, but I never thought it would be this bad. I wanted Shields over Peavy like anyone else, but settled for Peavy, thinking he'd be at least average or better, but he's a mess! Cain is going to be one DL trip after another, Timmy continues to decline, and even Mad Bum is below par. The offense is non existent. What a long and disgusting year this will be. I don't expect to win the World Series every year, but why must the years they don't win be such a disaster? Why can't we be a team that at least competes in the years they don't win?

[Rog]

Boly -- But Sabean shoved a stake in my heart with his lying and deceit

Rog -- What specifically was he he said that led you to such a conclusion? The only thing I saw that he said was that the Giants would have an increase in payroll, but they wouldn't go overboard.

Did they increase the payroll? Did they go overboard? Sounds to me as if they did pretty much what Brian said they would.

I hate to keep getting into this, but if Brian lied, how was I able to predict the Giants' spending so closely? Did I say that Brian was lying and that I would somehow adjust my estimates accordingly?

Seriously. Think about it. How did a layman predict practically to the dollar what the Giants' payroll would be? Was he smart enough to make adjustments for Sabean's "lying?" I'm pretty close to that layman, and all I can say is I don't think so.

Specifically, what was the lying and deceit? Is it possible that we misinterpreted his quotes and his actions? How is it that going only with what Brian said, I was able to predict the payroll so closely?

Was I the only one who wasn't deceived? Or is it more reasonable to believe some of us may have misunderstood what Brian was saying.

There is something about an increase but not going overboard that tells me that Brian meant that the Giants would have a payroll raise but not go overboard. Was I misinterpreting what Brian said?

Henry Schulman quotes Brian as saying “We’re not a team that’s going to overspend, because we’re not a team that’s going to bump the luxury tax or surpass the luxury tax,” he said. “We budget into the future, and if you look at our future commitments, they’re quite sizable.”

Where is the lying and deceipt? If it is there, please show me. Apparently I'm missing a good farce.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early?page=1#ixzz3XfAnBKxl

[Rog]

Boly -- But I'd rather them all fess up to the fact that they KNOW we are NOT going anywhere this year;

Rog -- Even at this point, how do they know THAT? And how could they have known it over the winter? They may have been uneasy with their moves, and likely were, but no doubt they were waiting to see how those moves panned out.

Boly -- that we are pretty much where I said we'd be in the standings; last or near the bottom by the time it all ends, are NOT likely to finish much, if any, above .500; that this IS a transistional season, that Sabean tried to pull the proverbial wool of the eyes of his fans, and that it isn't working.

Rog -- Where has Brian pulled the wool over our eyes? Seriously, what is it that he said that was deceitful?

Boly -- Way to go, Brian. Season is 10ish games old... and it seems all of my fears have come to fruition.

Rog -- How can we know 10 games into the season how it will turn out? In 2011, the Giants were 4-6 after 10 games. That season things didn't turn out so well. But they were 4-6 in 2012, and that season turned out extremely well.

Their best 10-game record of the three seasons including 2013 was in 2013 itself. They started 7-3. The rest of the way they went 69-83. Their best start among the three seasons turned out to be the worst season of the three when all was said and done.

Do the Giants look horrible so far? You bet they do. Did they look horrible last season from June 9th to August 12th? You bet they did.

This season we're talking about two weeks of bad play. Last year we were talking about nine. Yet somehow, despite being the 2nd-worst team in baseball over a nine-week period, the Giants went on to win the World Series.

I'm not saying they'll win the World Series this season. I believed going into the year that they were 50/50 at best to make the playoffs themselves.

What I am saying is that 10 games into a season is far too early to predict how a team will finish. When Willie Mays went 1 for 26 to begin his career, did we know how that would turn out? When Kris Bryant went 0 for 4 yesterday with three strikeouts, do we know how that will turn out?

The 2009 Giants began the season with the same 3-7 record, yet went on to win 88 games. Wouldn't we take 88 wins this season? That will likely be good enough to make the playoffs.

I'm not saying you're wrong here. I'm simply saying you're premature. Might we at least wait and see how the Giants play with Hunter Pence and Matt Cain healthy?

Might we wait until they begin hitting with runners in scoring position? It will happen, you know. They're hitting just .188 with runners in scoring position. That will change.

Last season the Giants had a 10-game stretch in April where they scored just 20 runs. Before the season was over, they had a stretch of 22 games where they scored only 52 times. Again, clearly worse.

The Giants have scored a paltry 32 runs in their dozen games thus far. Last April they had a stretch in which they scored 20 runs in 10 games. They had another stretch later in the season where they scored just 30 runs in 15 games, which was clearly worse than anything they have experienced this season.

Later yet last season they scored just 23 runs in 10 games. And yet another streak where they scored 22 runs in 11 games.

On each of those five occasions, we could have given up, saying the Giants just didn't have enough offense to win.

Thank goodness we were patient and didn't write off the season at any of those five junctures. Somehow it turned out alright.

One think about the Giants is that their pitching is getting older. When they won in 2010, the staff averaged just 27.9 years of age. By 2012, that had increased to 30.0. Last season it was 31.7, and this year it has grown to 32.2.

One good thing about the pitching though. It is the strength of the Giants' minor leagues, and younger pitchers -- such as Chris Heston -- will be on the way. This coming winter, the Giants will likely also sign a free agent starter who is younger than this year's staff average.

The bottom line for 2015 though is that despite the many encouraging signs thus far, it is far too soon to give up.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early?page=1#ixzz3XfFIAzRI

[klaiggeb]

Rog, I've answered your question over a dozen times, but in a nutshell, here it is again.

1-He was willing to sign Pablo at 90+ million. Thus we had the money

2-He went on the cheap trying to sign pitching after Pablo left. He continued to stand pat, inspite of Cain's surgery, Lincecum's continual decline, and the fact that Peavy and Hudson were terrible in the post season.

3-HE KNEW we'd be offensively challenged with Pablo likely to leave, but STILL let Morse go. Now Mike was no beauty in LF, but he was a bat we needed to keep.
I said then, I say it again; we should have shifted the Baby Giraffe to LF, and played Mike at 1B.

4-He claims he made a legit effort for Shields, but I'm not buying it. Not after what he signed for in San Diego.


There have been times in my 55+ years watching baseball that I have been disgusted, but never, EVER like I was with Sabean and Pablo this off season.

I have no time, nor patience for people who deliberately lie, or alter the truth. None.


You've given me your rationale as to why my logic is wrong, and frankly, I don't buy it.

Seriously.

I don't care what their payroll is. They offered Pablo 90+ and claim to have made a similar offer to Shields. That means the money WAS/IS there.

He lied. He decieved his fans, and we'll all now pay the price.

boly

[klaiggeb]

Sorry, Rog, but I disagree. As to Vogey NOT in the decline last year... Sorry, but you're just looking at over all numbers.

That doesn't even begin to tell the story.

His command eluded him time and time again, the big pitches he used to make to get him out of jams became less and less. His effectiveness is far less than it used to be.


Using his over all numbers to say he hasn't been in the decline, is like saying how valuable Peavy was for us in the Post season based upon his final 9 starts.

He and Hudson were awful in the post season.

yeah, they helped get us there... but the over all numbers do NOT tell all of the tale.

Disagree.

boly

[Rog]

Roly -- Rog, I've answered your question over a dozen times, but in a nutshell, here it is again.

1-He was willing to sign Pablo at 90+ million. Thus we had the money

Rog -- You're not the only one who is looking at that $95 million and saying the Giants obviously had $95 million to spend. And clearly they did. But not all this YEAR. If the Giants had signed Pablo, they likely would have back loaded the contract to a great degree. Maybe they pay him $14 million this season and make it up later.

At $14 million, the Giants would still have had something like $15 million left. With that $15 million, they could have signed Peavy and Aoki.

Brian has said that the Giants have budgeted payroll not only for this year, but into the future. The vast majority of Pablo's contract would have been allocated to FUTURE budgets.

It is critical to our understanding that we look at THIS year's budget separate from future budgets. Yes, the Giants clearly had $90 million to spend. But only about a third of it THIS YEAR.

The term is much shorter, but signing Pablo would have been something like buying a house. Most of us can't afford to pay cash for a $1 million house, but we can borrow the money and pay it back in much smaller increments over time. The Giants couldn't come CLOSE to affording all of Pablo's contract this season. Saying the Giants had $90 million to spend is like saying we have $1 millon (cash) to spend on a house when what we truly have is only the money for the house PAYMENTS.

The $90 million had little to do with the amount the Giants had to spend for the 2015 season. We shouldn't use the $90 million to get an inflated idea of what they did have to spend for 2015.

Boly -- 2-He went on the cheap trying to sign pitching after Pablo left. He continued to stand pat, inspite of Cain's surgery, Lincecum's continual decline, and the fact that Peavy and Hudson were terrible in the post season.

Rog -- How can you say that when the Giants were willing to go at least 6/$155 million to sign Jon Lester? That's on the cheap? How can you say that when they offered 4/$80 for James Shields? That's on the cheap?

The above have both been verified by multiple sources. What clearly WASN'T true was the 5/$110 offer to Shields that was being bandied about when the Giants made their 4/$80 offer. Shields was thinking more years and more dollars, so he turned them down. Good gamble on his part too. He lost, but it cost him "only" $5 million. Had he won, he might have received an extra $20 million or more.

What wouldn't have been a good gamble was for the Giants to wait months for Shields to make his decision. They could have been left holding the bag with only crumbs in it. So they went for the sure thing, re-signing Peavy and Romo and hoping that the combination of the two would help nearly as much as signing Shields -- and with far less long-term risk.

How did they go on the cheap when they paid Peavy 2/$24 and Romo 2/$15? Those aren't small contracts, although they are brief (reducing the Giants' risk).

Boly -- 3-HE KNEW we'd be offensively challenged with Pablo likely to leave, but STILL let Morse go. Now Mike was no beauty in LF, but he was a bat we needed to keep.

Rog -- Mike seemed to want to play near his Fort Lauderdale home. I'm sure the Giants would like to have re-signed him, but with the injury risk to Pagan, did they truly want to continue to pay another high injury risk?

Boly -- I said then, I say it again; we should have shifted the Baby Giraffe to LF, and played Mike at 1B.

Rog -- You like to win with speed and defense. That makes more sense at AT&T than in most parks. Morse was the antithesis, and while I agree that playing him at first base was the lesser of evils, the Giants would have weakened TWO positions defensively. And they weren't a great defensive team to begin with.

Mike is hitting .244 with Miami, posting an OPS below .700. He is estimated to have already cost the Marlins two runs defensively, and is on pace for a negative 27 runs over 1200 innings (approximately 135 games).

Mike may not have been the answer. Thus far, Nori Aoki has badly outplayed him.

Boly -- 4-He claims he made a legit effort for Shields, but I'm not buying it. Not after what he signed for in San Diego.

Rog - That the Giants offered Shields 4/$80 has been verified by multiple sources. James wanted to gamble on more years and money and actually was the last of the big three pitchers to sign. Everyone thought it would be Max Scherzer, since his agent was Scott Boras, but Boras came up with an affordable contract for the Nationals to sign. To be honest, it was a contract the Giants could have afforded to sign, but they had already ruled out Scherzer because of Boras.
a
So Shields became the guy who didn't sign until less than a week before pitchers and catchers reported. The Padres had much lower expectations and a lot more money at the margin to spend than did the Giants, so they could afford to wait. The Giants -- with five holes to fill and precious little money to do -- couldn't.

What if the Giants had waited for Shields and NOT been able to sign him? Then we could have properly criticized him. As it was, he went with Plan E (after Sandoval, Lester, Tomas -- who isn't even playing regularly -- and Shields).

Everything the Giants did -- step by step -- can be explained, and because some of the contracts would have been spread out over several years and no doubt back loaded, affordable.

I spent my whole career dealing with money. I can take anyone step by step through how the Giants juggled finances and could have afforded to do what they set out to do. But in their early plans, they would also have been paying a lot of money in the future.

Apparently the Giants could afford $150 million (Lester) -- if it were spread out over 6 years. I said from the beginning that they probably had about $30 million to spend on free agents (THIS YEAR), and they spent about ... $30 million.

And all I did was take what Brian said he would do (raises but not exceptional ones), look at how much the Giants already had committed and were likely to commit in arbitration, and calculate out the difference.

Anyone here could have done it. I just happen to be interested in that kind of thing and took the time to do so. I was curious to see how much money they had to spend, since they were replacing close to $50 million per season in players. I knew they didn't have THAT much money -- and in fact they had about $20 million less. PER SEASON, not spread out over four (Shields), five (Pablo) or six years (Lester).

I wish we were all sitting around a table and I could have made a power point presentation. Then we all would have understood the situation.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early#ixzz3XhYecdal

[klaiggeb]

Rog, we can argue this point until we are out of breath, and you're not going to change my mind, and I'm not going to be able to change yours.

I simply can't get past what they offered Pablo and said they offered Shields, and then sit back and believe Sabean when he says they "weren't going to over spend."

By making those offers they HAD TO HAVE HAD THE MONEY in order to offer it.

Yeah, you predicted the spending almost to the dime, Rog, but that does NOT change what Brian said he did; offer humongous bucks to those 2 guys.

For everyone who believes what Sabean said, I say ya'all drank the kool Aid.

boly

[Rog]

Boly -- I simply can't get past what they offered Pablo and said they offered Shields, and then sit back and believe Sabean when he says they "weren't going to over spend."

Rog -- I'm guessing that had they signed either Pablo or James, they would have paid them about $15 million in the first season of the deal. That would have left around $15 million to fill their other spots. $15 million is just about what they're paying Aoki, McGehee or Vogelsong, and Aoki this season.

So in theory, the Giants could have signed Pablo plus Aoki and Peavy, or they could have signed Shields plus McGehee, Aoki and Romo.

Where is the lie or deceit?

Boly -- By making those offers they HAD TO HAVE HAD THE MONEY in order to offer it.

Rog -- Of course they did, but you're looking at the money spread over four (Shields), five (Pablo) or six years (Lester). Only a small portion of those large contracts was available for THIS season.

How do you explain how the Giants' free agent payouts were virtually identical to what I estimated they would be? Am I a soothsayer -- or did I understand what Brian meant when he first spoke about the 2015 payroll?

I'm not patting myself on the back. Anyone here could have figured it out just as I did. The point I'm making here is that I UNDERSTOOD what Brian was saying about the payroll. Others here looked at and appear to have misunderstood what happened thereafter. They think Brian lied.

All I did was estimate the payroll based on what Brian said and then do the math. And that's just about the way it turned out. I wasn't lied to, and I wasn't deceived.

If I had been deceived, how could I have foreseen the future so clearly? If others had understood, how could they have foreseen the future so awkwardly?



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early#ixzz3Xk9Y9H4n

[Rog]

Boly -- Sorry, but you're just looking at over all numbers.

That doesn't even begin to tell the story.

His command eluded him time and time again, the big pitches he used to make to get him out of jams became less and less. His effectiveness is far less than it used to be.

Rog -- Yet despite that, he pitched much better last season than in 2013. Ryan began the season poorly and ended it poorly. But from May through August, his ERA was 3.43.

Has Ryan declined so far this season? It's hard to believe how much he has declined. Did he decline in 2014? No. In fact he improved, lowering his ERA by nearly a run and three-quarters.

Ryan's 2.60 K/BB rate last season was actually his best since returning to the Giants. Sadly that has fallen off to 1.11 this year.

You spoke last season about how he became less aggressive. Yet his his swinging strike percentage was his highest as a Giant, his first-pitch strike percentage was within one tick of his previous high as a Giant, and his pitches in the strike zone were right in the middle of his four-season range.

When he went to 0-2, he was just about as likely to avoid going beyond that count, and when he went 1-2, he was likewise just about as likely to go beyond it as he had been in 2011 and 2012.

I worry when I see one thing, and the accurate, objective numbers say another.

I'm just not seeing an objective measure that says that Ryan declined from 2013. In fact, the evidence says he improved considerably from 2013 to 2014.

This season is a whole different story. Clearly he has declined GREATLY from 2014 to this season, but I can't find objective evidence that he declined from 2013 to 2014. Quite the contrary in fact.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early?page=1#ixzz3XkCvdgug

[klaiggeb]

Roger-This season is a whole different story. Clearly he has declined GREATLY from 2014 to this season, but I can't find objective evidence that he declined from 2013 to 2014. Quite the contrary in fact.


****boly says****

Rog, just look at his location; his command.

But because you're a numbers guy, and I'm not, here's my quesitons: "What were his numbers in the 1st 1/2 vs the 2nd 1/2?

What did he do in the post season?"

For me, those will answer our perspectives better than overall numbers.

boly

[Islandboagie]

Obviously Ryan has struggled early on, but is 10 innings enough time to create an accurate judgment?

Thus far, Lincecum has been better than Bumgarner and Kershaw, should we assume Lincecum is back? I like what I see from Lincecum, I'm one of his biggest optimistic supporters, but even I'm hesitant to make a judgment this early.

If we're rushing to judgment, Aoki would be considered one of the best off season pickups. Better than Sandoval or Shields...if we want to make judgments now, maybe those who were hard on Sabean are ready to apologize, at least for the Aoki deal?

I love what I see from Aoki so far, but obviously logic tells me he can't continue his current pace the entire season.

Just as our excitement for Aoki and Lincecum has seen restraint from our often pessimistic posters, it's only fair to give Vogey and McGehee the same patience.

That goes for the entire team, do any of us truly believe the Giants will continue their pace?

I believe this is Bochy's style of managing. He doesn't rush to judgment, he doesn't make knee jerk decisions. Of course, at times I believe him being too patient has hurt us (Aaron Rowand, Miguel Tejada) but more times than not, his patience has helped us win Championships.

[Rog]

Boly -- But because you're a numbers guy, and I'm not, here's my quesitons: "What were his numbers in the 1st 1/2 vs the 2nd 1/2?

Rog -- In April, May and June, his ERA was 3.96. In the last three months of the season, it was 4.04. In the first three months of the season, his WHIP was 1.32, and it shrunk to 1.28 in July, August and September. Ryan was pretty much the same pitcher in each half, although he might have been a little better in the second.

Boly -- What did he do in the post season?"

Rog -- He was excellent in his first start and poor in his next two. The Giants have never lost a postseason game that Ryan started.

Boly -- For me, those will answer our perspectives better than overall numbers.

Rog -- And they don't show a huge decline. If the Giants hadn't made the postseason, one could have argued that Ryan was better in the first half than the second. No matter HOW we split up his 2014 season, it was far better than 2013.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2800/early#ixzz3Xlqbkjxz

[klaiggeb]

Boagie-Obviously Ryan has struggled early on, but is 10 innings enough time to create an accurate judgment?

***boly says***

Obviously, I agree with you; It's not.

BUT....and it's a big BUT... I see his outtings so far as a continuation of what I saw last year; a continuing loss of command.

Yes, he still throws strikes, but they are not as many quality strikes as we've seen from Ryan.

More and more, he falls behind in counts early on.

Thus my statement.

boly

[Rog]

Boly -- Yeah, you predicted the spending almost to the dime, Rog, but that does NOT change what Brian said he did; offer humongous bucks to those 2 guys.

For everyone who believes what Sabean said, I say ya'all drank the kool Aid.

Rog -- Brian said the Giants would have a decent increase in payroll budget. Looking at past seasons I estimated that meant the Giants had around $30 million to spend in this year's budget.

Had they re-signed Pablo, I don't think they would have paid him more than $15 million for the first year of the contract. That would have left $15 million or so to fill their other needs. That would likely have allowed them to re-sign Jake Peavy and sign Nori Aoki. So Pablo, Peavy and Aoki likely would have been doable, filling their top three needs of starter, third baseman and left fielder.

It would, however, have left about $80 million payable over 2016 through 2019. Still, no sign here that Sabean lied.

Had they re-signed Lester, I doubt they would have paid him more than $20 million for his first season. That would have left about $10 million for McGehee and Aoki. Once again it would have been doable, although they would have had about a 135 commitment from 2016 through 2020.

No sign of lying here either. Simply a case of mistaking money available in future budgets as money available this year. Misunderstanding, not misstatement.

The facts are congruent with this point of view. They aren't congruent with the other point of view, since that point of view mixes this year's budgets in with future budgets.

Because we can afford $300,000 in house payments ($5000 per month) the next five years doesn't mean we can afford to pay $300,000 RIGHT NOW toward that same house.

In this comparison, Brian Sabean said that he could afford to spend $300,000 in monthly payments made equally over the next five years, and some are mistaking that for saying he could afford to pay $300,000 in the first year.

His saying that the Giants would have a decent but not large increase THIS YEAR isn't at all inconsistent with his offering much more money over four, five or six years.

There is no discernible lie here. Only misunderstanding on our parts. It's as if we were saying that Brian was speaking jibberish, when in fact he was Croatian. It just seemed like jibberish to us, since we don't understand Yiddish.

Meanwhile, the Ashkenazid Jews are saying, "That Brian Sabean, he's pretty good with a buck. No wonder the Giants have won three World Championships in five years."

And the rest of us are saying, "Yiddish? No, that's just jibberish. After all, it was the Tower of Baseball, not the Tower of Babel. If it's not jibberish, then it must be babbling, so help me Brooks Conrad."