Misleading?

[Islandboagie]

Misleading is a popular word these days here. Is Baer, Sabean, Evans or Bochy misleading us? Or are we being mislead by the media? So far the media has the Giants interested in just about every free agent available, while also being included in a slew of trade ideas. Is that why so many of our posters are blinded by pipe dreams and grandiose delusions?

I'll admit, I click on every link that says the Giants are ready to sign Price, or are about to trade Belt to the Rays. They're enticing headlines to make us click on the link.

With the multiple championship titles in recent years the Giants are becoming more and more popular with the mainstream fans. Thus, the Giants have become a target for rumors that have very little to no substance, just for the websites and writers to get hits on the website. It increases their website's value for advertising. It's business, people, not legitimate inside information. Read it all, but take it in stride.

I would love the Giants to sign Greinke, Price and Leake. I'd be overjoyed if they landed Cespedes, Upton, Heyward, Gordon, Murphy, Davis, Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig..Ect Ect...anything that entices us to click. It's all rumors. Rumors with no substance.

Some Giants fans even bought into the idea that the Giants were going to trade for Simmons. It's ridiculous.

I think some of us see all the headlines, and hear what Baer, Evans and Bochy say, and somehow the message becomes cloudy. Did any of the Giants executive powers that be say we were going to sign Greinke and/or Price? Did they say Cespedes or Davis were going to end up in San Francisco next season? No, they didn't. They answer the rumor questions to the best of their ability and it seems they can never win. Most fans leave thinking they're getting everyone, or they're back tracking. It's a no win situation for the Giants, and honestly, as much as I'd love to have some say in the Giants organization, I wouldn't want their jobs. I think that's a big reason Sabean handed over the job to Evans.

[sfgdood]

I pay no attention at all to rumors...what I do pay attention to are statements by Evans and Sabean and Baer. I'm hoping it wasn't just hot air when they told us our rotation will be better than the Dodgers...we shall see if their actions match the words

[Islandboagie]

I need a quote. Because when asked by a member of the media what are the Giants going to do to keep up with the Dodgers, Evans' response was "we don't want to keep up with them, we want to pass them." I expect him to have that response, if his goal was to remain in second place I'd want him fired immediately.

His comments don't mean they're going to have a better rotation. That means they'll do what THEY think is the best method for achieving that goal.

What THEY think, not what Randy or Boly or Mark or Rog or Don or Boagie thinks.

This is just another example of you reading too much into one comment made combined and heightened by the media rumors.

Obviously pitching is something they need to address, and I believe they will, but how they do that is still up in the air. They haven't promised a certain strategy that will make you happy.

Again, it comes down to their ability to get it done and get the Giants another Championship, something they've been pretty good at doing. Better than any of us could have done.

[sfgdood]

The situation of this organization is radically different than when the Championship teams were built. Lincecum and Cain were healthy and sharp and Bumgarner was about to burst onto the scene. In short, the rotation was not only devoid of question marks, it was young, bad ass and healthy. That is no longer the case and there is nothing we can see in the minors that would indicate a resurgence is imminent. The team's starting rotation is in shambles. If the team expects to MAKE the playoffs (much less win another title), something very different needs to take place...namely signing top tier FA pitcherS (plural).

[Rog]

what I do pay attention to are statements by Evans and Sabean and Baer. I'm hoping it wasn't just hot air when they told us our rotation will be better than the Dodgers...we shall see if their actions match the words


Rog -- I think part of the problem we have with the trio's supposedly lying is that we misinterpret them. The above statement is an excellent example. None of the three told we Giants fans that the Giants' rotation would be better than the Dodgers'.

Here is what Bobby Evans said at the press conference. "We don't want to keep up with them," Evans said Monday during the Giants' annual season-ending news conference. "We want to pass them."

We should stop reading into things and remember what we wish and instead look at what was actually said. I am convinced that is at least part of the reason we thought the Giants' lied last winter.

The sad thing is that when asked to come up with the exact quotes of the lies, we get stuff like the above. We get what someone remembers and/or interprets, not what was actually said.

If we're going to criticize, we should at least be accurate with our "facts." Shouldn't we?

[Rog]

Incidentally, we don't think the above was said with a smile on Evans' face?

It reminds me of what my boss said to me on Thursday and how I replied. He said about something I had done, "You were trying to impress me, weren't you?" I replied, "No. I already do that."

Do you think I was serious with what I said? A grain of truth perhaps, but I was just joking around. I mean, really, how do you reply to something such as my boss said -- or the press said to Bobby Evans -- unless you handle it with humor?

One thing that is too bad is that often we read something and don't have either the context or the expression and tone of how it was said. Thus we misinterpret many things. And then are disappointed when our false expectation isn't met.

I believe we may have perfected that into an art form here!

[Rog]

I have to admit that my optimism is ebbing a bit. I believed the Giants were going to spend more than Grant Brisbee believed, and he's a pretty sharp guy. If they spend in accordance with his number, it's going to be tough to acquire two starters of the level we would like and a good outfielder too.

It's possible that Brisbee might be low and that I might be high. If the number comes in at something between his $30-$35 million and my $50 million, it won't be the end of the world, but it will be very tough to acquire Price or Greinke and still accomplish the other two objectives. Maybe Boagie hit it when he said that if the Giants get one of the top two, they'll rely on Heston or Blackburn for starter #5.

Listening to Larry Baer, I think the one player who has the best chance of signing with the Giants is Mike Leake. Baer mentioned him more than once, and said that the history of signing an over-30 pitcher wasn't good and might even be a "null set." He did say that the Giants' offer to Jon Lester last season was very close to the 6/$155 he signed for with the Cubs. As I mentioned before, conflicting messages.

So what COULD that mean? In my world, it could mean that the Giants would go for Greinke or Price if the David is right. Otherwise, they would go in a different direction. In my world, that might be both Zimmermann/Cueto and Leake, but in Grant's world, I don't think that would be possible.

Obviously I hope I'm right -- and not just because I like to be right.

Baer indicated the Giants' budget could be flexible to stay in tune with the market (Mark's concept for last winter) and that the Giants would step up their budget from last season (although obviously he didn't say by how much).

I think the Giants will make a trade this winter for either a starter or an outfielder. I know they would love to dump salary, but so would just about every team, and it's hard to do. Would WE want to spend $11 million on Pagan's last season before free agency, given his injury history?

I'm not a Samardzija fan, but the Samardzija/Leake combination might indeed happen. The idea -- first posited by Boagie IIRC -- was that Dave Righetti could "rehabilitate" Jeff. Meanwhile, the young free agent Leake seems a pretty safe bet as long as we don't expect him to be a #1 starter.

I have mentioned that I am intrigued with Johnny Cueto, and Boly seems to be coming around to the idea as well. The Giants have been linked with Jordan Zimmermann, although I haven't seen to much of it lately.

I think the Giants would LOVE to make a big impact signing, but fear the price will make the risk too high for their tastes. Thus, as with last winter, plans B and beyond.

I think it is very likely that the Giants will extend Brandon Crawford, buying some of his free agency years as well as his arbitration seasons. Baer indicated that was the Giants' M.O. If Brandon Belt is healthy again, he too may make sense. If the Giants extend Belt, I think we can infer that Buster will stay behind the plate for somewhere around the duration of that extension. Maybe the Giants will jump on extending Joe Panik, although that would seem more likely in a year or two. Matt Duffy could be fairly close behind. Depends on how those guys continue to perform.

Without getting into the players involved, what would we think of a combination of a free agent signing, an international signing and a significant trade? Based on what Baer said, that combination is certainly possible.

I'm just guessing here, but I'm pretty sure the Giants would love to move Pagan, and that if they can't do so, they would like to acquire a center fielder who could move him to left field. Angel struggled against right-handed pitching last season, so it also seems possible he could wind up in some type of platoon with Gregor Blanco.

[rxmeister]

Based on what I'm reading, Rog, I think you're more likely to be right than Grant. I just read an article about the GM meetings and it said that other GM's got the impression that the Giants are going to be aggressive, and the three world championships have left them hungry for more, rather than satisfied. Bobby Evans just said that he thinks he was a little too public last year when everyone knew he was pursuing Panda and Lester, and this year he wants to operate quietly. As a result, don't get frustrated by lack of news. It's pretty obvious that change for the better is coming.

[Rog]

Here's a snippet from MLB Trade Rumors that should help put the spending of the Dodgers into perspective. I think we'll like it, especially when we remember that the Dodgers' media contracts are a huge source of revenue for them and perhaps separates them and a few other teams from the Giants in terms of revenue.


"Dodgers co-owner Todd Boehly says his team’s payroll will drop from its $300MM threshold in 2015 to much closer to the $200MM level, Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times reports. The vast Dodger payrolls of the first few years under the Guggenheim group’s ownership were meant to ensure the team could stay competitive while rebuilding the farm system, and once this young talent starts to emerge, the spending will drop. Boehly thinks “sustainable is more like the league average [payroll], plus some, or plus a lot.” As Shaikin notes, this still leaves the Dodgers with the flexibility to maintain a payroll at or near the luxury tax level every year."


The Giants slightly exceeded the luxury tax threshold last season, ranking 4th in baseball in spending. They are one of seven teams expected to "spend big" this off-season.

Clearly the Giants are penny pinchers, and I think we should boycott them both live and on TV and radio (print and internet boycott optional) until they actually spend over $250 million per season to be higher than the Dodgers. I don't think we should stop our boycott merely when they SAY they'll do so, because I'll believe it when I see it. You just can't trust that Bobby Evans.

How can we tell when he is lying? When he has a pulse, no matter how faint.

[sfgdood]

The Dodgers have clearly passed the Giants in the NL West hierarchy, so it's clear that the spending helped them accomplish their goal to some degree. Perhaps the Giants could apply the same model to hold over until they can rebuild the farm system

[klaiggeb]

You bring up an interesting question, Randy.

DO we need to re build the farm system? Or are we just going to have to wait a little longer for some of our pitchers to develop into Major Leaguers?


I think I'd argue that we do have a good farm system. Consider who's come up in the last 2 seasons and been major contributors:

Panik
Duffy
Heston
Strickland
Osich

Those are the first names I can come up with, and THAT'S a pretty darned good list!

Behind them would be Susac who WOULD HAVE BEEN a better contributor IF he hadn't been sidelined so often last year with injuries.

Behind Susac would be the catcher, Brown, and Jarret Parker.


So I'm not sure "re built" is the word I'd use.

IF, and I agree, it's a huge IF... Blackburn(?) and Beede are ready next year or the year after... or if one of the other kids makes a jump like Heston did, that would be very impressive indeed.

Are there pitchers down there like Cain, Bum, and Lincecum?

No.

But then, what farm system HAS guys like that on the farm?

I'd argue... very few.

boly

[sfgdood]

the farm system has reaped some hidden gems in recent years, I fully admit that. But what's there now is mostly just "guys." There are definitely some with a bit of potential but nobody I would say is a can't miss guy. Particularly on the pitching end, it's not great right now. That is why we are in the position we are right now needing to hit the FA market in a big way. Two years ago we re-signed Lincecum and signed old man Hudson because we thought by now Crick and Blackburn would be like Harvey of NY and Cole of Pittsburgh. Unfortunately things have not worked out anywhere near that good.

[klaiggeb]

I think finding "hidden gems" is a true statement, Randy, but they were "hidden" because of intangibles scouts and experts 'couldn't measure.'


Crick, to me, has been a huge disappointment. Huge.

I EXPECT pitchers to find a way to control their stuff especially when they've pitched so many professional innings.

He clearly, has not.


But though the fact that we don't have any "can't miss" guys concerns me a little, I do believe we CAN remedy the problem with smart, SMART FA signings.



Then again, what I'd do, and what our front office will do likely won't be the same.

Again... all that rhetoric with nothing of substance... YET... to back it up.

boly

[Rog]

Two years ago we re-signed Lincecum and signed old man Hudson because we thought by now Crick and Blackburn would be like Harvey of NY and Cole of Pittsburgh.


Rog -- Never in their wildest dreams did the Giants expect Crick and Blackburn to be like Harvey and Cole. Blackburn actually is pretty much on track after his league-leading 2.85 ERA for Sacramento this summer. It became clear a while ago that Crick might never master his control enough to be the #1 or #2 starter the Giants had hoped.

Blackburn was never viewed as more than a back-of-the-rotation type. Some have mentioned that they believe Blackburn could open the season in the Giants' rotation, and while I agree that is possible, I think the Giants view him more as this year's Chris Heston, a guy who could get his chance if injuries open the door for him.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3124/misleading#ixzz3riB2qtcF

[Rog]

But though the fact that we don't have any "can't miss" guys concerns me a little, I do believe we CAN remedy the problem with smart, SMART FA signings.


Rog -- Free agency is for teams who either have seemingly unlimited amounts of money to spend or teams with a strong internal core who need to add a little icing on the cake. Most of the free agents will pass their prime in a few years, whereas as guys in the pipeline should be reaching the majors or even reaching their primes by then.

Free agents and guys in the pipeline are two very different animals.

The Giants have reaped huge benefits from Cain, Lincecum, Bumgarner and Posey. They have built on the two Brandon's as well. They might have been able to count on Zack Wheeler to come back from injury next season if they hadn't traded him. Gary Brown was a bust, but Joe Panik has shown a ceiling higher than most scouts felt he had when the Giants drafted him. Other first rounders are among the Giants' top prospects.

The Giants' window now extends through the Madison Bumgarner/Buster Posey prime. When I saw the two paired for the first time on April 10, 2009 at San Jose, I knew they were a very important part of the future, but I certainly didn't expect Tim Lincecum not to still be right up there with them. And Matt Cain's elbow slowed him down much earlier than I expected.

Madison and Buster are the only superstars the Giants have, but they are two very good ones. Posey is probably the best catcher in the game, and Bumgarner is one of the top 10 pitchers.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3124/misleading?page=1#ixzz3riC46dOR

[Rog]

Again... all that rhetoric with nothing of substance... YET... to back it up.


Rog -- Patience, my son. Very few teams have done anything of substance yet. We're barely scratching the surface.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3124/misleading?page=1#ixzz3riEJW7YH

[Islandboagie]

Randy- the farm system has reaped some hidden gems in recent years, I fully admit that. But what's there now is mostly just "guys." There are definitely some with a bit of potential but nobody I would say is a can't miss guy. Particularly on the pitching end, it's not great right now.

Boagie- When you're winning, having can't miss guys is difficult. It's still early in his professional career, but I have a feeling Phil Bickford will be a notable big prospect by the end of 2016.

[Rog]

Based on the limited amount that I know, I would rank Bickford as the top Giants pitching prospect right now. Christian Arroyo is probably the top position prospect.

It takes really good scouting and development to make a top player from a low first round pick, but the Giants have done a nice job with Joe Panik. Obviously they did even better with lower picks Brandon Crawford, Brandon Belt and especially Matt Duffy.

On the pitching side of the equation, Matt Cain was a low first round pick, and guys like Brian Wilson and Sergio Romo came from the deeper rounds.

With the exception of Hunter Pence, almost all the Giants top players have been drafted. The 2007 and 2008 drafts alone provided Madison Bumgarner, Buster Posey and Brandon Crawford. Maybe Sergio Romo too, although I'm not sure about Sergio's timing.

[rxmeister]

The Dodgers are full of it, they talked about cutting payroll when they hired Andrew Friedman, and the second they struggled they went record number crazy at the trade deadline, literally paying other teams payrolls just to land a player of two they could use. If they let Greinke walk and don't sign Price, Zimmerman or Cueto, (or ALL of them!) then and only then will I believe them.

[klaiggeb]

Big article in the LA times last week about how the Dodgers were going to "get a handle" on their spending.

Yeah. Right.

I don't think so.

I'm with Mark on this one. When it happens, THEN I'll believe them.

Until that happens, I would not be at ALL surprised to see them sign 2 or 3 of the top tier guys:

Greinke being the first.

boly

[Islandboagie]

I'm actually surprised they haven't spent more. I thought last off-season they were going to make a bigger push for Sandoval, Lester and Shields. I would have thought they'd land 2 if not all of them.

[Rog]

Big article in the LA times last week about how the Dodgers were going to "get a handle" on their spending.

Yeah. Right.

I don't think so.


Rog -- Certainly it hasn't happened yet, but it was posted right here on this board two winters ago that the Dodgers' plan was to spend so they could catch up until they began their ultimately plan of developing from within.

I get so tired of the skepticism on this board. Why not just sit back and see what happens. Why the judgmental statements like "Yeah. Right."?

Hey, I don't know what will happen either, but I might as well keep a positive outlook on my life and wait and see.

Or I could just take the negative side right off the bat. Yeah, right!

Incidentally, I don't mean to be so judgmental myself, but what is the harm in staying positive and waiting to see? It's not like the Giants have won three World Series in the past six years. It's not as if all the spending the Dodgers have done haven't gotten them very far in the postseason.

Or is it?

Hey, the Dodgers might sign BOTH Price and Greinke, and the Giants might wind up with leftovers and crumbs. But is there a point to belly-aching about it before it happens?

One last point: At this point the Dodgers have committed about $30 million more than the Giants. Don't know if it will stay that way, but could we live with the Dodgers' spending only $30 million more than the Giants this season?

By the way, that is what HAS happened. (Or perhaps that didn't including Anderson's accepting the Dodgers' qualifying offer.) Would it be worth waiting on the rest until it DOES happen?

I'm not talking about open-minded conjecture. That's half the fun. But it doesn't seem to make much sense to show our biases before things are decided.

Once things DO happen, they'll still be plenty of differences of opinion.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3124/misleading#ixzz3rsY3ha9G

[Rog]

By the way, guys, it's fine to believe it when it happens. But what is the point of believing it WON'T happen until it does? All that shows is prejudice.

One thing we older guys in particular should realize is that about the only thing that stays the same is change. It just keeps rollin' along. And at a faster and faster pace.

One other thing we learn as we age is that flexibility is more important than we realized, that things DO change, often in unpredictable ways. And what is it that the Giants recently decided was highly important?

The Giants are trying to be flexible. How about us?

[klaiggeb]

You're a lot more optimistic than I am, Rog.

From MY perspective, I see GMs like politicians; you basically can't believe a word they say.

Until I see actions, it's all rhetoric.

Too many promises, too little action/upside.

Flexible?

Sure, I'm flexible.

Just don't lie to me, don't purposely mislead me, and never ever make promises you have NO INTENTION of keeping; i.e. Pablo, last year.

boly

[Rog]

Flexible?

Sure, I'm flexible.

Just don't lie to me, don't purposely mislead me, and never ever make promises you have NO INTENTION of keeping; i.e. Pablo, last year.


Rog -- Given that you've said regarding both the Giants that you'll believe it when you see it, I don't see the flexibility. You're essentially saying guilty until proven innocent, aren't you?

The new issue here is that the Dodgers are talking about spending less, and you're showing extreme doubt. Why is that, given that they said two years ago their plan was to spend big money only until they could develop from within?

The Dodgers' committed 2016 payroll right now is $152 million. They are expected to pay $33 million in arbitration contracts. That's a total of $188 million. They need a big-time starter to replace Zack Greinke, and would probably prefer Greinke himself. Let's factor in another $25 million. That would be a total payroll of $213 million.

I am projecting the Giants' 2016 payroll at $190 million, which isn't all that far below the Dodgers. Let's throw in another $7 millon for tinkering, and put the Dodgers' payroll at $220 million. There really isn't too much they need beyond a really good starter and perhaps a little bullpen help. Their everyday players are pretty good, and they have a strong bench headed by Andre Ethier.

Last season the Dodgers spent about $60 million more on payroll than the Giants. This season the difference could be half that. The Giants continue to spend more money, and the Dodgers seem to be cutting back.

We'll have to see how it plays out, of course, but there seems to be a reasonable chance that the difference in Giants and Dodgers payroll is declining. Perhaps it would be best to wait and see how it works out rather than forming pre-judgments.

It's fine to speculate, but it might be good to do so based on the facts for 2016 that we know. The Dodgers seem to be opening up about what they are planning to do (in a general sense), which could well signal change. Why bring it up if you're not really going to do it?

On the other hand, the Giants feel they said too MUCH last off-season and are trying to be less specific. They went public with their plans to pursue Sandoval, then Lester, then Shields last off-season, and when they weren't able to sign any of the players, some fans held it against them.

A year later it appears they are probably the better for NOT signing most of those guys, but that doesn't mean they won't still be blamed. Obviously.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3124/misleading#ixzz3rtvcJlhx

[klaiggeb]

Rog-Rog -- Given that you've said regarding both the Giants that you'll believe it when you see it, I don't see the flexibility. You're essentially saying guilty until proven innocent, aren't you?

***boly says***

You're confusing issues here, Rog.

My statements were (1)don't lie to me (2) don't mislead me (3) Don' make promises you have no intentions of keeping.

Those are the ways I EXPECT to be treated by everyone, because that's the way I TREAT everyone.

Those are statements of the type of character I expect from people in general, and more importantly, people in leadership/management positions.

That has NOTHING to do with flexibility.

Nothing what-so-ever.


When I say I'm "flexible," that means I'm NOT locked into one player or players that I want to see the team acquire.

I'm flexible in the direction the team goes in many areas.

For example, though I WANT Aoki back, and in LF, AND hitting one hole, I would be flexible enough to accept other solutions. Parker and Williamson, for example.

I WANT Greinke...but I'm flexible enough to take Zimmerman, Cueto or Price.



If that's not flexible, Rog, I don't know what is.

boly

[Islandboagie]

Boly, you're the reason why GMs are so careful with their words. They normally don't say anything in fear of getting people too excited or disappointed.

[klaiggeb]

Totally agree, Boagie.

They should say NOTHING, lest they say something to mislead their fans.

All I ask for is up front honesty. Nothing more.

boly

[Islandboagie]

I agree, and not much has been said this off-season except that they want to be better than the Dodgers next season.

That being said, it's time to turn that talk into action.

[sfgdood]

eh, Boagie, that isn't what they said. How meaningless would THAT statement be? OF COURSE they "want" to be better than LA. What team in the division doesn't want that? Evans said the Giants rotation will not be as good as LA's, it will be better. That MUST be the goal if you're going to have any shot to be division champions.