That guy we want to get rid of

[Rog]

That guy we want to get rid of led the Giants in 2B, HR, BB, OBP, SLG, OPS, TB, HBP and fewest GDP.  He finished second in R, 3B  and RBI.  He was fourth in BA and SF.  That's the kind of hitter we want to get rid of alright, especially when he's a very good fielder.

Makes perfect sense to me.

[sfgdood]

In a group of ugly women, even the homely girl can look good.

[Rog]

In a group of ugly women (one of whom is likely a future Hall of Famer and another of whose non-choice for the All-Star game we are decrying), one would usually start by throwing out one of the least attractive, not the least ugly.

Now, one COULD make an argument for trading Belt. Since he's a good player coming off a career year and still in his prime, he might bring a lot in return. A decent first base replacement would be necessary, but trading Belt could make sense if the right deal came along.

But trading him for the sake of trading him is stupid. I try to look at all sides of a situation -- as one can see with my pointing out the circumstances under with it WOULD make sense to trade Brandon. But I can't find any reason for trading him just for the sake of trading him.

But for the sake of argument, with whom would we replace him? What would we expect to get in return? What is the minimum we would accept? If Brandon were gone, who would be our choice to pick on?

And while coming up with these answers, let's not forget how close Brandon came to being the offensive hero of the Wild Card playoff game. And on a team that truly needs more power, he led the ugly women in home runs. And that he was atop or close to atop almost every other important category. And that he's a very good fielder at an important defensive position, the position that is involved in the second-most chances.

With so much to consider, let's get on those choices right away. Either that or drop the preposterous idea of trading Brandon just to trade him. In other words, if we have no solutions, it's pretty foolish to harp on a problem -- especially when it's likely not a problem at all.

And if it is a problem, that should be simple to prove, beginning with answering the above questions.

[klaiggeb]

Brandon is hot right now, Rog, so that sways opinion.

I still think we could do better.

he's prolonged swing-and-miss slumps are something I am no longer willing to tolerate.

I still WOULD explore trade avenues...and if he has a big post season, his value will likely skyrocket.

boly

[sfgdood]

In a group of ugly women (one of whom is likely a future Hall of Famer and another of whose non-choice for the All-Star game we are decrying), one would usually start by throwing out one of the least attractive, not the least ugly.

Dood - if by throwing out the homely one, it will make the HOFer regain her beauty and makes the entirety of the group more attractive, then I will choose getting rid of the big oaf every time...particularly since prior to this year she has been nothing but hideous.

[Rog]

Brandon is hot right now, Rog, so that sways opinion.

Rog -- I try to stay steady on a player whether he's hot or not. Somewhere Brandon's first season I tempered my expectations for him, but they still remained relatively high. And since his rookie season, he's actually been pretty good. Some maddening inconsistency, but all players have that to an extent. His biggest problem has been staying healthy. It's likely not coincidence that in the 2016 season in which he achieved a career high in games played, he also put up a career year.

When Brandon comes up to lead off an inning, for instance, I'd love to see him lay the ball down to force teams to cut down on their over shifting, but despite the hits he loses to the shift, he's become a very good hitter. Not a great one, but certainly good and likely very good.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get#ixzz4MQsBc8S3

[Rog]

I still think we could do better.

he's prolonged swing-and-miss slumps are something I am no longer willing to tolerate.

I still WOULD explore trade avenues...and if he has a big post season, his value will likely skyrocket.


Rog -- I would pursue trades on virtually every player virtually every year. No question the Giants could do better. Brandon is likely a second quartile player, which means at least a quarter of the first basemen are better than he.

But as a second quartile player, he's clearly not the problem either. And I most certainly wouldn't trade him just to trade him, which some here apparently would.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get?page=1#ixzz4MRRhALeE

[sfgdood]

Brandon is hot right now, Rog, so that sways opinion.

I still think we could do better.

Dood - we HAD better, his name was Adam Duvall...then we traded him for rental bust Mike Leake.

[Rog]

if by throwing out the homely one, it will make the HOFer regain her beauty and makes the entirety of the group more attractive, then I will choose getting rid of the big oaf every time...particularly since prior to this year she has been nothing but hideous.


Rog -- Calling Brandon the Big Oaf isn't only discourteous, it's ridiculous. He's NOT the Giants' problem. In fact, with players as good as Brandon at every position, the Giants could win it all.

The one argument for trading Brandon -- and of course not indiscriminately even then -- would be to protect Buster's health. As you say, perhaps he would also hit better if he played more first base. That has been true in the past, although as I have pointed out, that may be in part because Buster is more likely to play first base against lefties, and he hits southpaws quite a bit better than righties.

This year Buster hit slightly less when playing first base than when catching, although not by a lot.

The reality is that while perhaps it WOULD be best to move Buster to first, the Giants consider him such an asset as a catcher that barring injury they're not going to do so. So using that as an argument for trading Brandon is a moot argument.

If the only good argument for trading Brandon is a moot argument, it is likely he shouldn't be traded just to be traded.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get?page=1#ixzz4MRWwkKHq

[Rog]

we HAD better, his name was Adam Duvall...then we traded him for rental bust Mike Leake.


Rog -- There is a lot that is questionable about those statements.

First, few would agree that Adam Duvall is better than Brandon.

Second, Leake wasn't so much a bust as he was injured. The Giants have had great luck trading for guys at the deadline, but the two guys who come to mind as "busts" are considered failures primarily because they became injured.

It usually doesn't make sense to indiscriminately trade a guy with a 4.3 WAR.

It usually doesn't make sense to indiscriminately trade a guy with 82 RBI's.

It usually doesn't make sense to indiscriminately trade a guy with 41 doubles.

It usually doesn't make sense to indiscriminately trade a guy with a .394 OBP.

It usually doesn't make sense to indiscriminately trade a guy with a .474 SLG.

It usually doesn't make sense to indiscriminately trade a guy with a .868 OPS.

It usually doesn't make sense to indiscriminately trade an All-Star.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get?page=1#ixzz4MRckqopr

[sfgdood]

That guy we want to get rid of led the Giants in 2B, HR, BB, OBP, SLG, OPS, TB, HBP and fewest GDP. He finished second in R, 3B and RBI. He was fourth in BA and SF.

Dood - AAAAAAAAND, he gets pinch hit for in the 9th inning of game 1

[Rog]

Dood - AAAAAAAAND, he gets pinch hit for in the 9th inning of game 1


Rog -- Which was a good idea and a very special situation.

The Giants were down to their final three outs, and they had Eduardo Nunez on the bench. Nunez is a right-handed hitter who has a bit of power. Against most pitchers, he would have pinch hit for Gorkys Hernandez, who is easily the worst hitter of the three who were coming up. But Gorkys did have a few things going for him:

. First and foremost, he hits right-handed against the best one-inning southpaw in the game. Belt hits left-handed and isn't a good high fastball hitter.

. If Hernandez does get on as the lead off hitter, he has speed to either steal or otherwise advance.

Against most pitchers, Hernandez would have been the easy choice for whom to pinch hit. But Chapman isn't most pitchers, and Belt was the correct choice.

Remember how we talked about Pagan's being a good hitter against power pitchers? Belt feated on finesse pitchers to the tune of .344 this season, while hitting just .214 against power pitchers.

Given that a team sees more power pitchers in the postseason, we could use that as an argument to trade Brandon. He might help the Giants make the playoffs more than he would help them in the playoffs -- and I say that despite his hitting a ball very, very hard last night against possibly the most powerful starter in the game. That was one at bat. His season stats are a hugely bigger sample.

Maybe the Giants can get a lot for Brandon. They likely can, since most teams would consider him a second-quartile first baseman. But this is a see what is available call, hoping to get a truly big return. This is a how do we replace the guy call, hoping that won't be too tough or expensive to do. This is a do we trade the guy we just signed to a big contract with something of a hometown discount, perhaps sending the wrong message to his teammates?

So go back and answer the questions previously asked. Then you can get a better idea of whether the Giants should trade Brandon or not. If you're not willing to do that, you don't get it, although hopefully you eventually will.

I'm not against the idea of trading Brandon Belt. I'm not against the idea of trading Buster Posey or Madison Bumgarner either. It all comes down to whether the move helps the team. Simply trading a guy indiscriminately runs too high a risk of not accomplishing that.

That's what I hope we all get. That, and the fact that Brandon Belt is a pretty good player.

I do like though, Randy, that you got me to look deeper into Brandon and find out that he doesn't hit power pitches well. That is indeed a factor, one that is likely more important than his inconsistency, which may be overly exaggerated. Brandon has so many positive factors going for him though.

But his not hitting power pitchers well is certainly a negative. That said, the time a batter is most likely to face a power pitcher is in late and close situations, and Brandon handled those well this season, hitting .289/.365/.469/.834. The only thing he didn't do as well this season in late and close situations was to get on base as often as in other situations. And even then he reached base at a very good rate.

Over his full career Brandon has still done pretty well late and close, batting .283/.369/.435/.803. So the statistical signals we get are somewhat mixed.

Overall though, I would take this as a negative, since in the postseason one hits against more power pitchers in the early innings, perhaps more so than the comparison between the regular season and the postseason with regard to the late innings, where almost every team uses power pitchers to set up and close games no matter which time of year.

But that is one negative, giving us two when we count is inconsistency, which statistically also doesn't appear to be as bad as we sometimes make it out to be.

So what we've got so far is one of the team's best overall hitter (and likely their very best this past season) who unfortunately doesn't hit power pitchers well (although he still performs well in late and close situations) and is less consistent than average. Add in that he's a very good fielder, and on balance that still sounds like a good player.

The right course would seem to be to recognize just what the team has in Brandon, what effect if any trading him would have on team chemistry, what they can get for him and how they will replace him, and then decide whether to trade him or not.

Simply saying he should be traded is far too simplistic. It's simply not getting it.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get#ixzz4MTCAxlMN

[klaiggeb]

I thought that pinch hitting for Belt was very smart in THAT situation.

1-Nunez NEEDED a high velocity at bat.

2-Belt is all too often tardy on high cheese.

Can't have that there.

3-Belt needs to be humbled some, and being PH for will do that. As well as likely tick him off, which, if I'm Bochy, I WANT.

boly

[sfgdood]

The point is, if Belt was the new Bambino like Rog says, then there would be NO situation were we should ever consider pinch hitting for him

[sfgdood]

Dood - AAAAAAAAND, he gets pinch hit for in the 9th inning of game 1


Rog -- Which was a good idea and a very special situation.

Dood - I agree. And if there is ANY situation where pinch hitting is the right option, then that hitter being lifted is clearly NOT your best hitter. Either that or your entire lineup sucks.

[Rog]

And if there is ANY situation where pinch hitting is the right option, then that hitter being lifted is clearly NOT your best hitter.


Rog -- Did you know that Joey Amalfitano once pinch hit for Willie McCovey? I understand your point, but Aroldis Chapman is a special situation.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get#ixzz4MnelhWse

[Rog]

if Belt was the new Bambino like Rog says


Rog -- This is what is particularly galling, Randy. Neither nor even his mother says that Brandon is the new Babe Ruth.

That Brandon isn't Babe is a fact. That Brandon is a good hitter is pretty close to a fact as well. The only question would be whether Brandon is a good hitter or a very good hitter.

There really isn't much point in making things up here (or almost anywhere).

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get?page=1#ixzz4MnfRIPnm

[Rog]

Here is the problem I see. Like just about any player, Brandon has pluses and minuses. So does Buster Posey. Don overemphasizes Buster's faults and perceived faults, and I believe you do the same with Brandon, Randy. Neither of you guys are winning awards for your objectivity.

[donk33]

Oct 11, 2016 12:56:16 GMT -5 Rog said:

Here is the problem I see. Like just about any player, Brandon has pluses and minuses. So does Buster Posey. Don overemphasizes Buster's faults and perceived faults, and I believe you do the same with Brandon, Randy. Neither of you guys are winning awards for your objectivity.

dk...funny thing is that I think I'm one of the few guys who are objective when it comes to assessing the pro's and con's of Posey....I almost swallowed my chew when Posey squatted like a robot when Romo lost it when he walked his first batter. To me, with Bryant coming up with the possible tying run, the catcher or pitching coach has to go out to the mound and calm the pitcher down...Posey just does not give the leadership I like to see with a catcher..... and as to all the knocks against Belt, I think he saves more runs with his deft footwork and ability to stretch more than most first basemen in baseball...he may not be the best clutch hitter on the team, but neither is Posey   and the audience is quiet about him...

[Rog]

dk...funny thing is that I think I'm one of the few guys who are objective when it comes to assessing the pro's and con's of Posey...


Rog -- Thank goodness. I was beginning to think NO ONE was going to say anything objective here!

[klaiggeb]

The one ball Belt HAD to pick, he couldn't and didn't.

Then again, Crawford making ANY errors stunned me.

That guy is STEADY!

Especially his accurate arm.

But 2 bad throws?

Never ever seen that happen to him before.

boly

[Rog]

But 2 bad throws?

Never ever seen that happen to him before.


Rog -- This isn't a put down of Crawford's fielding, which I have more respect for than ever (even after the unfortunately-timed errors). But as surprising as his two bad throws were last night, his three-error game soon after the All-Star break was even more surprising. And perhaps most surprising of the bunch is that all five of those errors came on throws. Brandon made five throwing errors in those two games combined -- with only two other errant tosses in his other 158.

Among Brandon's 3343 regular season fielding chances, he has made only 38 throwing errors in the regular season. Even with the three-error game on July 22nd, Brandon's fielding percentage this season was a career-high .983.

He's pretty good!


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get#ixzz4Mthw7daA

[Rog]

But 2 bad throws?

Never ever seen that happen to him before.


Rog -- I guess technically you're right here, since on July 22nd, Brandon didn't make two throwing errors but three -- including two in just two innings. But this is another example of how we just can't remember everything.

When we consider that we can't remember all the plays, that we don't see all the plays all the players make, and how difficult it is to properly judge all the plays that are made, it's no wonder evaluating defense is such a challenge. Analytics have helped us a lot in that regard, but they're not perfect either.

I still maintain that the best defensive evaluations I've seen are either those compiled by John Dewan or for a broader look, the 10-source evaluations done by Dewan for Bill James annual Handbook. In 2015, the compilation for James ranked Buster #1, Brandon Crawford #2, Brandon Belt #4, Matt Duffy #5 and Joe Panik #13 at their positions. Johnny Cueto ranked #9 among pitchers, and Gregor Blanco was rated #16 among multi-position players.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3523/guy-get?page=1#ixzz4MtlGzGfi