|
Post by Rog on Nov 22, 2015 8:57:28 GMT -5
Let's suppose the Giants have $50 million in average annual salary to spend this winter, which I believe to be fairly accurate and hopefully not too far on the high side. If we're the Giants, which players do we acquire, and how much will they cost in comparison to the Giants' budget?
Then, let's suppose that the Giants can't sign any of those players. Now which players would we want that we could fit into the $50 million available?
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 22, 2015 11:09:44 GMT -5
I don't accept your parameters, Rog. Not in the least.
Why?
I believe Captain James T. Kirk summed up my feelings on the matter perfectly: "I don't believe in a no-win scenario."
With the way fans pack AT&T, with the way our fans buy merchandise, with they way they support our team in other ways, the revenue IS there to go higher than that.
That they choose to or not to, THAT is the real question.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 22, 2015 13:48:18 GMT -5
Signing Greinke for $30 mil a year would greatly improve their chances at least for getting into the post season. Anything after that is a cherry on top. Even with Blanco, Parker or Williamson in LF and Heston in the rotation makes us a Championship caliber team again. But with $20 mil left to spend they could still upgrade the bullpen or LF or even the rotation. The Giants will be in a good position. Of course signing Greike is #1.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 22, 2015 14:39:32 GMT -5
I think your idea of signing Greinke is a fine one. The one things I worry about is overpaying for him because he is coming off such a great season, and his age. But there's almost ALWAYS something to worry about.
I do prefer Price, who has been more consistently excellent and whose fastball rose by a mile per hour. I'm intrigued by Cueto, who may have been the best of all the free agent pitchers over the past five seasons but may come a little cheaper because of coming off a down season (3.44 ERA) in 2015.
Jordan Zimmermann had a down season last year too, after a tremendous 2014, but my gut isn't quite as good about him. He gives up a lot of hits, which may make him subject to more fluctuation.
I believe the Giants can afford both a top starter and Mike Leake. Can they afford to get both those and still come up with an outfielder and a reliever? That becomes problematic, but I do think trading Susac to a team that badly needs a catcher might allow the Giants to acquire a low-priced outfielder. Or they could perhaps re-sign Nori Aoki without breaking the bank. If they trust their young relievers, perhaps they could trade Casilla and pick up an inexpensive reliever or two to flesh out the pen.
Things were simpler when he looked only at signing two good starters. But looking forward at the bullpen and especially the outfield makes sense. Maybe they just have to rely on their young guys for the bullpen, and if they can sign an outfielder they can keep under team control beyond 2016, maybe they can just hope for someone among Williamson, Tomlinson, Blanks and Parker to emerge for the 2016 season.
I do think they need to get a long-term outfielder before a gun might be held to their head next off-season, but I'd lie low on the reliever, relying on the young guys, adding a bargain-basement reliever or two, and figuring that worst-case they can pick up a reliever at the trade deadline if necessary.
Let's not forget that in July of 2010 they added Javier Lopez and Ramon Ramirez at the cost of only John Bowker, Joey Martinez and Daniel Turpin. Those were very important deals and cost almost nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 22, 2015 14:59:35 GMT -5
I don't accept your parameters, Rog. Not in the least. Why? I believe Captain James T. Kirk summed up my feelings on the matter perfectly: "I don't believe in a no-win scenario." With the way fans pack AT&T, with the way our fans buy merchandise, with they way they support our team in other ways, the revenue IS there to go higher than that. Rog -- Sometimes in life we're limited by reality. I have seen no one anywhere who has projected the Giants to spend more than the $50 million I have projected. Grant Brisbee of the McCovey Chronicles is also a national baseball writer who knows a lot more than I do, and he has projected much less. We're merely speculating here anyway, but shall we at least speculate within the realm of reality? You know what? If the Giants spend unlimited amounts and sign Price, Greinke, Leake (for good measure), Upton, Heyward, O'Day and Sipp, I'll take my chances with them. Those chances would be a lot better than the actual chances they will sign more than two of the above. You know I love you, Boly, but with you and Randy, it seems to always come back to their spending far more than they do. Heck, I could go to a lot of 10-year-old fans who could come up with a great team with unlimited money. Where's the challenge in that? Except for finding reality, of course. Let's rephrase the question: If the Giants have $100 million to spend, which players would you sign or trade for? With $75 million, whom would you like? If they have $50 million to spend, which players would you go for? If they have $30-$35 million to spend, as Brisbee thinks, which players would you acquire? At $100 million or even $75 million, it's kind of a no-brainer to come up with a good package. At $50 million it's a reasonable challenge. At $30-$35 million, it's darn tough. Let's not forget, Boly and Randy, that one of the biggest sources of an MLB team's revenue is it's local media contracts, and there are several teams out there who have better TV and radio contracts than the Giants do. Yet the Giants are spending MORE than most of those teams with the great media contracts. Why is that? But, hey, let's combine fantasy with reality with gulp reality and see what we come up with in each of the four above categories. At $100 million, it should be a breeze -- although even then, we'd likely come up with at least one bad contract, and two would be a serious possibility. Even at $75 million it's not much of a challenge. If spending "only" $50 million -- which could conceivably put the Giants behind only the profligate Dodgers in spending -- is a "no-win situation," we'd better just accept that 2016 is going to fall far short of our expectations. And except that we're going to be rooting for a "no-win team" for quite a while. $50 million is nearly twice as much as the Giants spent a year ago. Is there absolutely no sense of reality here? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3133/suppose?page=1#ixzz3sFd7fBDn
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 22, 2015 16:33:10 GMT -5
I'm sorry, Rog, but as Randy has been preaching for the last... ton of years, the money is there. They just won't part with it.
Reality?
That's reality.
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 Nov 22, 2015 19:58:42 GMT -5
I believe Captain James T. Kirk summed up my feelings on the matter perfectly: "I don't believe in a no-win scenario."
Dood - He also said in the same movie..."I don't like to lose."
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 23, 2015 11:06:43 GMT -5
He did, Randy, and I'm with him one hundred percent!
I am a TERRIBLE loser! Terrible!
Now it's management's turn to show everyone where they stand.
Band aids, or players to give us a real chance?
I'm holding my breath, but I'm thinking band aids.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 23, 2015 14:43:20 GMT -5
I'm sorry, Rog, but as Randy has been preaching for the last... ton of years, the money is there. They just won't part with it. Reality? That's reality. Rog -- And on one hand, I'm pretty sure they do. Just like we all probably have the money to go out and purchase a more expensive house. That doesn't mean spending it is prudent. OK, so let's suppose you're right, and they could spend more money if they wished. Maybe they have enough to sign Price, Greinke, Upton and Heyward. I'm pretty sure a commitment of $700 million would do it, although they would raise the market by so much that it's possible it wouldn't. For this exercise it doesn't matter how much they CAN spend. None of us knows that number. No estimate for what they WILL spend has been more than $50 million. One estimate said $30-$35 million. My question isn't what we WANT to do, but what we think would be best for them given say $50 million in average annual salary and $35 million in annual salary. So which players would you sign, and what is your estimate of the dollars and years it would take to do so? Obviously we can easily calculate the annual salary you are proposing. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3133/suppose#ixzz3sLSk0M2m
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 23, 2015 17:58:34 GMT -5
Rog-So which players would you sign, and what is your estimate of the dollars and years it would take to do so? Obviously we can easily calculate the annual salary you are proposing.
***boly says***
Rog, I've already answered this question multiple times.
1-Top tier starter: (and in no particular order) Price, Greinke, Cueto, Zimmerman.
2-Leake
3-Aoki
I also said I'd move Pagan and I'd not be that concerned about whom I got in return.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 23, 2015 23:11:52 GMT -5
Rog, I've already answered this question multiple times. 1-Top tier starter: (and in no particular order) Price, Greinke, Cueto, Zimmerman. 2-Leake 3-Aoki I also said I'd move Pagan and I'd not be that concerned about whom I got in return. Rog -- I like those ideas, and I think the first three are doable, particularly if the top starter is the less expensive Cueto or Zimmermann. Two things regarding Pagan. First, I doubt the Giants can trade Pagan without eating some of his contract (which I could certainly live with). Second though, if the Giants trade Pagan and don't care what they get in return, they'll have only Gregor Blanco to play center field. They wouldn't even have a true backup for the position. Aoki isn't a center fielder, and even if the Giants could move him there, they would risk having a deficit in left. Going back to Pagan, he seemed like a different hitter after coming back in September. He actually hit three home runs after not hitting a single one before that. Health is of course an issue with Angel, but he did show in September that he might be OK if healthy. The Giants' outfield is replete with question marks. I presume Hunter Pence will be fine, but we'll just have to see. I'm encouraged though. Even as he has struggling with his health last season, he was pretty good when he played. So he's maybe a tiny question mark. Everyone else is a big question mark or a backup. I do think Blanco could play full time, but that would greatly deplete the Giants' outfield depth. And Gregor would be at least a small question mark in that he hasn't played a full season before at the major league level. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3133/suppose#ixzz3sNW5k1wE
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 23, 2015 23:52:47 GMT -5
It would depend on price, of course, but based on what we think they might get, what order of preference would you have for the top starters? I prefer Price over Greinke, and Cueto over Zimmermann.
I have mentioned that Price's fastball velocity increased by a mile per hour from 2014 to 2015. I take that as a clear positive. And while I'm not quite sure how to evaluate it, I learned today that Cueto's fastball the third time through the lineup is a mile per hour faster than the second time through, which itself is a mph faster than the first time.
It's as if Cueto gets STRONGER as the game goes on -- at least through the first three times through the order. I think that was an important sign, given that Johnny threw over 240 innings in 2014. Johnny finished second to Clayton Kershaw in the Cy Young voting that season.
If we use the Cy Young voting to distinguish between there top pitchers, Zimmermann has a 5th and a 7th. Cueto has a 2nd and a 4th. Greinke has a 1st, a 2nd, a 7th and an 8th. Price has a 1st, two 2nd's and a 6th.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 24, 2015 10:53:26 GMT -5
Rog, as it is right now, I'd play Blanco over Pagan in CF.
Every report I've read says that he simply isn't the CF he was prior, and he wasn't that good prior to the seasons end.
Blanco is still the better defender even though he's lost a step or two, also, and based upon the changes he made last year, as suggested by Aoki, he's now the much better hitter.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 24, 2015 12:47:59 GMT -5
Totally agree, Boly. I would love to see Pagan have a comeback year next season, because at his best he is a better hitter than Blanco. As Bochy and others has labeled him, he is a spark plug at the top of the order when he's at his best. But we really haven't seen him consistently at his best since the first half of 2013, and that's been quite a while. That's long enough for me to pencil in Blanco as the starting center fielder. But I'd still give Pagan ample playing time to prove he's the player he once was. If he proves he's not, he would have to be moved to a permanent backup role.
That probably won't happen, but that's how it should happen.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 24, 2015 17:22:09 GMT -5
Pagan certainly has a better track record than Blanco, boagie, but last year... man, I was impressed with Gregor. Aoki's influence upon him was huge! I haven't seen that kind of a change in a long time.
And even more impressively, he maintained it all year long. It's like Aoki provided him that one last piece of the puzzle.
IF that's the same guy we get back in 2016, then Blanco's the better hitter, IMHO.
Pagan drives me crazy at the plate. He takes pitches right down the heart of the plate, and the minute the count goes 2-0, he's in swing mode.
He really does NOT get the concept of what a lead off hitter is supposed to do; get on base ANYWAY you can.
But even bigger than that for me, Boagie, is that he's simply not much more than an average CF. He really isn't.
All that speed, so-so jumps, and so-so routes to the ball.
Blanco's defense has always been much better.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 26, 2015 10:18:22 GMT -5
One metric had Angel as the worst center fielder in the league.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 26, 2015 11:28:45 GMT -5
And I would agree with that, Rog.
When we first got him he was above average at BEST.
Last 2 years, the decline was noticeable
boly.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 27, 2015 12:30:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 27, 2015 12:33:47 GMT -5
I see two big questions about Angel:
First, how much has his problems been caused by his back?
Second, did his return to at least SOME power in September (three home runs after NONE prior) indicate a significant improvement in his back health? Anyone remember if his defense was any better in September? I honestly don't.
|
|