Misleading?

[Islandboagie]

I commented on that before, Randy. I can't find a quote where Evans says they need a better pitching staff than the Dodgers. All I saw, and remember him saying was his response to one reporters question. The reporter asked what the Giants are going to do to keep up with the Dodgers, Evans responded "We don't want to keep up with them, we want to pass them.

[rxmeister]

Rog, how could you not be skeptic of what the Dodgers said, when the Dodgers spent all that money at the trade deadline even though they were already in first with a fairly comfortable lead? And what did they do already this off season? Throw a 15.8 million QO at an always injured constantly ineffective Brett Anderson, who could very well be their fifth starter or even out of their rotation.. Be patient and see what they do? Sorry the jury has already rendered their verdict!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Islandboagie]

I don't think it was as comfortable of a lead as the standings suggested. The Giants abused the Dodgers during the first half, and they had a good amount of games left against each other. But you're right, the Dodgers have arguably the deepest pockets in baseball, and maybe in all sports.

[Rog]

Rog, how could you not be skeptic of what the Dodgers said, when the Dodgers spent all that money at the trade deadline even though they were already in first with a fairly comfortable lead? And what did they do already this off season? Throw a 15.8 million QO at an always injured constantly ineffective Brett Anderson, who could very well be their fifth starter or even out of their rotation.. Be patient and see what they do? Sorry the jury has already rendered their verdict!


Rog -- I see your point, Mark. With Anderson, they took a gamble that he wouldn't accept the qualifying offer, and they got burned. But how badly did they get burned?

As you point out, Anderson has had an extremely hard time staying healthy. But the Dodgers took a $10 million gamble on him this past season, and it paid off. If Anderson equals this past season, the $15.8 million will be about right.

The Dodgers aren't paying him $15.8 million per season over 3,4 or 5 seasons. They're taking a $15.8 million gamble. If they hadn't made a qualifying offer, it wouldn't have been surprising to see Anderson get a one-year contract at close to the $15.8 million, or perhaps a 2/$25 contract.

Actually, I see that on November 9, MLB Trade Rumors predicted that the Dodgers would re-sign Anderson for 3/$39. He's only 27 years old. Let me ask this? Would we rather the Dodgers have signed Anderson for 1/$15.8 (the qualifying offer) or 3/$39? Personally I would rather have seen them tie up the $39 million.

MLB Trade Rumors mentioned that Anderson's value would be held down by the Qualifying Offer. (This was apparently written before he accepted the offer.) That is likely part of the reason they thought it would be the Dodgers who re-signed him, since they wouldn't be losing a draft choice by doing so. So if Anderson's free agent market was held down by the QO and was still expected to have him wind up with $39 million over three years, what might he have gotten if not for the Qualifying Offer?

Does $45 million sound reasonable? Isn't 1/$15.8 a far lesser risk than the 3/$45 or so that MLB Trade Rumors seems to think would be Anderson's value on the open market without a QO?

The more we look at this, the less badly it seems that the Dodgers got burned by Anderson's decision. It would have been nice for the Giants if they had indeed re-signed him to a longer, more expensive contract as MLBTR projected.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3124/misleading?page=2#ixzz3s4N6dLWu

[Rog]

I don't think it was as comfortable of a lead as the standings suggested.


Rog -- Remember, IIRC the Dodgers outscored their opponents by only 72 runs, while the Giants outscored theirs by 69 runs. That would back up your point that the two teams were far more equal than the standings indicated.

I was just thinking about this this morning. Let's suppose Team A scores 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, and then 10 runs while holding Team B to 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, and 9 runs. Team A wins all 10 of the games.

Now let's suppose Team C scores 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2, and 1 runs in those same games. Team C wins 5 games, lose 4 and have one game go to extra innings.

Team A hasn't played better than Team C, yet they have won 5 or 6 more games. This is an exaggeration, but in essence, the Dodgers were Team A this season, while the Giants were Team C.

That's one of the reasons I am a little more optimistic about next season than many here. Another reason is that I believe the Giants have a lot of money to spend. Depending on whether they're looking at next year's payroll or long-term payrolls in their signing decisions this winter, the extension for Brandon Crawford and the potential extension for Brandon Belt might have only a little impact on their signings. If they're looking long-term though, it would hurt but not come close to wiping out their signing efforts.

If I were they, I would look much more at the short-term impact. I would figure that the payroll budget would continue to increase each season and would expect that to take care of the several escalating salaries as well as those of the free agents who are signed. I would figure by say signing Cueto and Leake plus trading for a decent outfielder who could play center field, I would provide a nice window for the team for as long as five or six years.

Joe Panik and Matt Duffy won't be eligible for free agency for five more seasons. Same with Andrew Susac and Hunter Strickland. I think it might be six years before Chris Heston becomes a free agent. The Giants have the potential to open a significant window, and if they can sign two starters and a a nice outfielder, they'll have set that window up nicely.

All the Giants would really need a year from now would be another outfielder. Hopefully Mac Williamson, Jarrett Parkinson on Kelby Tomlinson can fill that need cheaply. Who knows, perhaps it would even be Christian Arroyo, although that might come later in the 2017 season or even in 2018.

In order to trade for an outfielder, the Giants are going to have to give up something, of course. They don't have the world's greatest prospects, but they do have a few good ones, including Andrew Susac at the major league level. A team with an excess of outfielders and a need for catching might be willing to trade even an outfielder under team control for two or three years for a package headed by Susac.

I believe the Giants could have had Aaron Hicks, probably about a league average starting center fielder, for Susac, but the Giants seem to feel they can get more (or simply hold onto Susac).

It's probably not going to happen, but that Larry Krueger idea of signing Greinke and trading for Tyson Ross and Matt Kemp doesn't seem crazy. Make it Johnny Cueto instead of Greinke, and it still doesn't look too bad -- and should be affordable (although the 6/$144 I just saw Cueto projected for isn't nearly the bargain the 5/$80 I saw earlier was). But the Giants just might be able to afford Cueto at $24 million per season, Kemp at a net $18 million per annum, and Ross, who is expected to earn $10 million this season in arbitration. Maybe the Giants could even lock up Ross to go along with the two Brandon's.

The Cueto, Ross, Kemp thing isn't likely to happen -- especially with the Giants locking up Tyson for a while -- but it certainly is intriguing. Wouldn't it be GREAT to have the Dodgers paying $3.5 million per year to a Giants player (Kemp)?

By the way, for those who think Brandon Belt hasn't come anywhere close to his potential, he was projected to earn about $500K more in arbitration than was Brandon Crawford. For those who would trade him, yes, he certainly would have some value if he's healthy. But since it seems highly unlikely that the Giants will move Buster Posey any time soon, they would then need a first baseman. And to replace Belt with a good veteran would be quite expensive and almost certainly greatly diminish the quest for the two good starters (one of them VERY good).

Landing Cueto and Ross would be a coup. Depending on what the Giants would have to give up to San Diego, taking on Kemp at a net 4/$73 could be worth it.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3124/misleading?page=2#ixzz3s4SDQazJ

[Rog]

Being skeptical of what the Dodgers said about lowering their salaries isn't a horrible position to take. But they said two years ago that was their plan, and their committed payroll at this time isn't huge, which might allow them to do so.

I'm more a guy who simply likes to see how things play out. It's fun to speculate, but we don't really know which way the Dodgers will go. Either way, it may be hard for the Giants to outbid the Dodgers for Greinke. I surely wish the market would open up though. The suspense is both thrilling and hard to wait on.