|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 10, 2015 20:55:43 GMT -5
What is realistic this off-season? A top-tier pitcher and a Mike Leake type IMO.
The Giants have said they don't want to keep up with the Dodgers, they want to outdo them. They have indicated they are looking in every possible direction, from free agency to trades, from right in their back yard to the international market.
It's possible all the top-tier pitchers will price themselves into bad deals, and then I don't think the Giants SHOULD sign one of them. But it that were the case, I would expect their scouting to provide two guys who are very good -- and improve the team somewhere else.
I believe the Giants finally have some trading chips. Andrew Susac remains very attractive, and Trevor Brown opened some eyes after being called up late. The Giants could exercise their option on Nork Aoki and then trade him. Aoki was a valuable player when he was healthy. They also have two young pitchers in Chris Heston and Clayton Blackburn who should have trade value. And if they can strengthen the pitching staff solidlly enough for long enough, they have a couple of younger starters who also have value.
We have asked in the past, why not trade Tim Lincecum and Angel Pagan? The reason is because just as we too would like to jettison their salaries and get something in return, other teams aren't stupid -- or at least not stupid enough to make such a preposterous trade. If the Giants could have found a taker, you can bet they would have already move that pair.
Lincecum's days of high salaries are gone for a while or for forever. Pagan is still around, but at least this is the final season of his contract. Lincecum could be back, but it would almost certainly be on a one-year low-value, incentive-laden basis.
Last winter I didn't think the Giants had the wherewithal to do much more than they did -- and the free agent market wasn't overflowing. This winter I do believe they have enough available to do some negotiating damage -- and the market is much fuller as well.
Regarding starters, I find even some of the 3rd-tier guys intriguing. I could be happy with less than a top-tier guy and a 2nd-tier guy -- even though I am anticipating such. But I would be happy only if they improved the team elsewhere.
Something I was curious about and just looked up: Santiago Casilla just did finish exactly 55 games and vested his $6.5 million option. The Giants would likely have picked it up anyway, but now there is no guessing. Casilla wasn't great last season, but he wasn't bad either. His season was similar to his 2012 season, the first season he was a closer. Surprisingly, his strikeout rate last season was the best of his career.
The Giants are better behind the plate than any team in the majors. Their infield is quite good too. The bullpen has experience and depth. The outfield is sketchy, but Gregor Blanco showed last season he might be even more than a 4th outfielder. When healthy, the Giants were a very good team in 2015. The problem was that they weren't very healthy at all.
The money seems to be there for the rotation. I could possibly be setting myself up for disappointment, but I'm pretty excited. More so than last winter, when I felt the Giants' hands were a little tied -- and the free agent crop wasn't as deep.
One last point: The Giants have told Mike Leake that they're very interested in having him back, but they don't expect to sign him right away. What could that mean except that they're going hard after one of the top starters? And wouldn't that be good news? As long as they keep offering market value, sooner or later a top starter just about has to choose them. Their efforts weren't rewarded last winter, but this time I believe they will be.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 11, 2015 9:48:01 GMT -5
Rog-We have asked in the past, why not trade Tim Lincecum and Angel Pagan? The reason is because just as we too would like to jettison their salaries and get something in return, other teams aren't stupid -- or at least not stupid enough to make such a preposterous trade. If the Giants could have found a taker, you can bet they would have already move that pair.
***boly says***
As I said in another thread, Rog, here's where you, Mark and I disagree.
There is a fool born everyday, and some foolish GMs would have taken them trying to get their FSY.
Happens in every sport, every year.
I loved Trevor Brown's defensive work. As good as I've seen in a rookie since I can't remember when.
But IMHO, he's Kurt Manwaring at the plate. We'll be lucky if he hit's .220
He doesn't have a long enough track record, or even a decent minor league track record to be useful in a deal.
And I do NOT want him behind Posey. Give me Susac, and move Hactor to whomever will take him.
I see Aoki as a MUST keep. We need that 1 hole guy.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Oct 12, 2015 8:23:24 GMT -5
Pagan might be a bit more moveable now in the final year or his deal, but I totally agree that both were previously untradeable, unless you ate the entire salary and took little to nothing back on their salaries, and what sense would that make when they're not clubhouse headaches?
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 12, 2015 9:22:36 GMT -5
Mark:
Obviously, I don't agree.
Even if we ate most of Lincecum's salary, and some of Pagan's, we'd STILL have had more money to make deals.
I have little to no respect for most GMs, and it doesn't matter which sport it is.
They're always looking for that "sleeper" in a deal. One of those "someone everyone else but ME thought was done," kind of ego moment.
all we have to do is watch each year and see what moves GMs make.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 12, 2015 9:48:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 12, 2015 9:50:30 GMT -5
I have little to no respect for most GMs, and it doesn't matter which sport it is. Rog -- You have demonstrated by insisting there is always someone out there dumb enough to trade for a player you think needs to be traded. There may be other GM's out there who see the same thing you do. In fact, it usually appears they are pretty unanimous in their opinion. And since they agree with your opinion of the player, that's a good thing, right? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3081/realistic-off-season?page=1#ixzz3oMhw8UlV |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 12, 2015 9:52:25 GMT -5
There is a fool born everyday
Rog -- But most of them don't become GM's. Not that mistakes aren't made, but why would a team hire a fool as its GM? It is possible that on occasion we don't give enough credit.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 12, 2015 10:23:37 GMT -5
boly-I have little to no respect for most GMs, and it doesn't matter which sport it is.
Rog -- You have demonstrated by insisting there is always someone out there dumb enough to trade for a player you think needs to be traded. There may be other GM's out there who see the same thing you do. In fact, it usually appears they are pretty unanimous in their opinion. And since they agree with your opinion of the player, that's a good thing, right?
***boly says***
Rog, can you please translate what you wrote. Honestly, I have no idea whether you're agreeing or disagreeing with me.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Oct 12, 2015 10:30:29 GMT -5
The thing with Pagan is that when he's healthy he's productive and the Giants have had more success when he's in the lineup than when he's not, so why would you even want to eat salary and take a token prospect in return for him? To turn CF over to Gregor Blanco? Juan Perez?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 12, 2015 21:07:45 GMT -5
boly-I have little to no respect for most GMs, and it doesn't matter which sport it is. Rog -- You have demonstrated by insisting there is always someone out there dumb enough to trade for a player you think needs to be traded. There may be other GM's out there who see the same thing you do. In fact, it usually appears they are pretty unanimous in their opinion. And since they agree with your opinion of the player, that's a good thing, right? ***boly says*** Rog, can you please translate what you wrote. Honestly, I have no idea whether you're agreeing or disagreeing with me. Rog -- I left out a word or two, but I was disagreeing with you. Why would a team want to take over say Lincecum this season? Maybe early in the season when he was going well the Giants could have dealt him while eating less than half his salary. But of course at that time, they needed his pitching with Peavy and Cain out. And as Mark points out, why simply give up Pagan when his best value is likely not in trade but whatever he can contribute when he's healthy? As for Mark's point that the Giants have played well with him in the lineup, I don't think that is as true as it once was. A year ago they slumped badly when he got hurt, but they were already in a small slump when he went down, and they didn't immediately pop out of the slump when he returned. I'm not sure how the team performed with each in the lineup, but Gregor outplayed Angel this season. In fact, WAR has Gregor at one WAR better than Angel over their careers. Angel had a big advantage in 2012, and Gregor won big this past season. In the two intervening seasons, Gregor was rated about a win higher than Angel. The two are pretty close in plate appearances with the Giants. Gregor gets the advantage due to his glove. A center field platoon of Blanco and Perez would likely be better than Pagan all by himself -- even if Angel is healthy. It's a contract season coming up for Angel. I don't know if that will lead to improved performance, but he'll certainly be motivated for his season to be a good one. Here's the funny thing about Lincecum. We complain about the Giants' overpaying him -- but then feel someone else will take on his contract. It's kind of, well, gee, the Giants overpaid Lincecum. Followed by -- see what I mean? He isn't doing that well, and they're paying him all that money. Followed quickly by -- but the Giants should be able to trade him to one of PT Barnum's customers. Why do we take the position, the Giants made a mistake, which we could clearly see and can see even more clearly now. But we're probably the only ones who see that and at least one of the other teams must be idiots. It usually doesn't work that way. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3081/realistic-off-season#ixzz3oPOR0dwK |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 12, 2015 21:09:19 GMT -5
I just realized that I don't think I'm as smart as others here seem to think they are. Maybe that's why I feel the need to solidly justify my opinions, while some others here seem to expect us to take their word on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Oct 16, 2015 7:49:49 GMT -5
As long as you accept that, Rog, we'll all be fine! Seriously though, I'm not excited about a Blanco/Perez platoon for some reason, and I'm a little concerned that Blanco is declining defensively as well, although he fell off a small hill compared to Pagan's falling off a cliff.
And now let me change the subject. When Justin Turner was asked what changed him from a bench warmer to a .300 hitter, NL all star, and only Dodger who didn't choke it up against the Mets this past week, he mentioned that it was talking hitting with Marlon Byrd. Not a manager, not a coach, but his teammate for a short time with the Mets. Who? That guy nobody wanted back next year? If he doesn't return, I'm kind of hoping the Giants young hitters took advantage of his time here and learned from him.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 16, 2015 10:06:02 GMT -5
Mark:
My only problem with Byrd returning next year has nothing to do with him as a player, or person, it has everything to do with how much money it would cost us.
Too much.
If we had an unlimited, we don't care how much we spend, budget, then I'd feel differently.
But right now, with this management group, almost every available dollar MUST go to pitching; starting pitching.
I'm hoping the Giants learned from watching this Met/Dodger series.
To win, you need 2 things first and foremost:
An outstanding group of starters, and a shut down closer and bullpen.
As things stand right now, we don't have either.
Yes, Casilla is a solid closer, but he's NOT, and hasn't been for a while, a shut down kind of guy.
A Rob Nen, Rod Beck, Aroldis Chapman, and so forth.
If we plan to be in the playoff games next year we simply cannot afford to roll the dice with THIS group of starters, and with Casilla and/or Romo closing games.
We cannot.
Familia and the Met staff proved that, at least to me, in this series.
Then again, I knew that to begin with.
Closer by committee might work over the short run, but over the course of a season? IMHO,
and to quote Tom Cullen, from The Stand, by Stephan King, M O O N, that spells disaster.
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 Oct 16, 2015 17:03:55 GMT -5
I don't really care if we bring Byrd back or even at what price...he just has to understand he's not entitled to a starting spot. The more important thing to me is to solidify the rotation. Anything past that is gravy. The main thing I have against Byrd is that he would be blocking the opportunity of both Williamson and Parker. And we all know how stubbornly Bochy sticks with old guys (cough, McGehee, cough).
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 16, 2015 17:47:42 GMT -5
To win, you need 2 things first and foremost: An outstanding group of starters, and a shut down closer and bullpen. As things stand right now, we don't have either. Yes, Casilla is a solid closer, but he's NOT, and hasn't been for a while, a shut down kind of guy. A Rob Nen, Rod Beck, Aroldis Chapman, and so forth. Rog -- We all agree on the rotation. That's pretty darn obvious. But we're not giving enough credit to the bullpen. They're far from perfect, but haven't yweread here on multiple occasions that there were only four teams with fewer blown saves than the Giants? As for Nen, he wasn't really as good as we remember him. (How often is that true of our memories?) Remember how great he was in his final season of 2002? His save percentage that season was 84%. We criticized Santiago Casilla's performance this season, yet his 86% save percentage was slightly better than Nen's. The bullpen wasn't great, but it wasn't really a problem area either -- unless we considered Robb Nen to be a problem. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3081/realistic-off-season#ixzz3olovIzgz |
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Oct 16, 2015 18:00:16 GMT -5
I agree that the bullpen is good enough and we have arms like Osich and Strickland that will get even better. And we have kids in the minors too. Ray Black won't be ready next year, but he actually threw a pitch 104 mph in the Fall League on Wednesday. I also agree that I'd like to see Mac and Parker get a shot in spring training next year and that might not happen with Byrd and Aoki back. We have to straighten out that rotation before we do anything else.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 16, 2015 20:07:33 GMT -5
So we're all saying the same thing: Rotation, Rotation, Rotation.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 16, 2015 20:30:35 GMT -5
At a net $4.8 million, Nori Aoki is a bargain. I would exercise his option even if only to trade him. The Giants should beware of cutting themselves too short in the outfield, given all their injuries. I don't think Mac or Jarrett are guys we would want filling in every day, even in a platoon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 16, 2015 20:31:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 17, 2015 10:01:26 GMT -5
I'm with you on this one, Rog; at that price, Aoki is a steal!
I like Mac and Jarrett, but I've not seen enough of Mac yet to believe he's even close to ready.
Jarrett complicated the picture with his power. But CAN he do it over a long season?
I'm not convinced.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 17, 2015 13:08:31 GMT -5
I don't believe that either young outfielder is of starting caliber. Since both are mostly corner outfielders, it would be difficult to keep them both as bench players. Not impossible though if the Giants carry "only" a dozen pitchers, which they should be able to get by with.
I realize that's hard to believe in the case of Parker, who just destroyed National League pitching for a while there. But he was red hot, and pitchers hadn't figured him out yet.
Of the two, I think Williamson is the better prospect. Here's an intriguing tidbit about Mac. He isn't nearly as prolific at base stealing as Parker (whose high was 28 at San Jose in 2012), but Mac has been successful on 20 of 23 tries. That actually has more value than Jarrett's much more impressive 93 out of 128. Mac also strike out "only" once out of every four at bats, while Jarrett strikes out more than once every three trips.
I wouldn't give up on Jarrett, but if he continues to strike out more than once every three at bats, his chances of being a good player are minimal.
|
|
