|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 5, 2016 21:08:32 GMT -5
Nicely done, Bob-Oh. Nicely done!
Got a deal done and got it done QUICKLY!
Meloncon is a ground ball guy, which As Billy Bob Evans said is perfect for our defense.
I had just heard this morning that a club, Miami(?) had a deal on the table for 4 years, 80 million, and the Dodgers were panicked that he would leave.
You could make the argument, and they did this morning, that he was the SECOND most important Dodger behind Kershaw.
They lose Jansen, and maybe Turner... and with THEIR payroll problems... this could be a joyous off season for Giant fans.
Now, Billy Bob, go out and get us an outfielder!
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 Dec 6, 2016 1:34:26 GMT -5
The only problem I have is that he got his guy 5 months too late
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 6, 2016 10:29:03 GMT -5
Except they haven't lost Jansen or Turner yet. We shall see. Not only that, if you saw the way the offense collapsed after the all star break, you know that an elite closer solves our biggest problem, but not the only one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 6, 2016 10:47:32 GMT -5
The only problem I have is that he got his guy 5 months too late Rog -- And Bobby Evans has admitted that. But how in the world can we be truthfully critical of him when in less than a year he picked up Cueto, Samardzija, Span, Moore, Nunez and Smith? Smith isn't proven as a closer, but many think he could be effective as one. One can say that not having Melancon cost the Giants game four with the Cubs, and that is true to an extent. But it ignores that the Giants likely had their man for the job, Smith, and that Bruce didn't recognize that. From September on, Melancon gave up five earned runs. Smith gave up none. One could argue that Smith was even MORE qualified to pitch that ninth inning than Melancon. That would be a stretch, but it's not a stretch to say that Smith was far more effective down the stretch than Melancon. That is a fact. Evans made a mistake he regrets. I'm not sure Bruce even understands the mistake he made. The only qualifier I make here is my usual one, that Bruce may have had knowledge we didn't. But I'm not sure what that would be. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3623/deal-early#ixzz4S4R2Mybt |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 6, 2016 10:51:32 GMT -5
A couple of things I'm concerned with regarding the Dodgers. They spent a lot of money on Rich Hill, so maybe they'll be spending more than we think. And they have prospects to trade, giving them the ability to acquire good, cost-controlled players in trade.
Right now I believe the Giants are clearly the better team. But the Giants may well have done most of their work already, and the Dodgers may just be getting started.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 7, 2016 19:30:27 GMT -5
As Boly opined, the Giants did do well to sign Melancon early. There were at least six teams (Giants, Dodgers, Cubs, Yankees, Marlins and Nationals) who were chasing four proven top closers, and one of those -- Greg Holland -- is coming off Tommy John surgery 14 months ago. Jansen, Chapman and Melancon were widely believed to be the plums.
I figured Mark would hold off until the top two closer were signed and the market had been set. With four teams going after Mark as the top choice at that time, his value should have gone even higher.
It's possible, of course, that the Giants were Mark's first choice, and that once he got what he believed to be excellent offer, he didn't push the envelope further. Mark has a strange personality, and I mean that in a good, if offbeat, way.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 8, 2016 8:28:30 GMT -5
He could have gotten more if he waited, but how much money do you need? Plus, the Giants gave him a no trade and an opt out. Tough deal to turn down. Looks like the market is drying up on Edwin Encarnacion and it's costing him to wait. Perhaps that would have happened to Melancon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 8, 2016 13:21:36 GMT -5
Melancon got a very nice contract indeed. His record won't last long, and it will be decimated, not just broken, but right now he has the biggest contract ever for a closer -- by $12 million. Plus an opt-out and a no-trade. The Cubs reacted by quickly trading for Wade Davis. Sounds like maybe Mark was their top (or most likely) target and they felt the need to react quickly when the Giants signed Melancon.
That still leaves the Yankees, Dodgers, Nationals and Marlins without a closer, and three top ones (Jansen, Chapman and the recovering Holland) available, although Brad Ziegler has also had prior success. Maybe there will enough closers to go around after all. Clearly Jansen and Chapman are 1A and 1B, with Holland #3 and Ziegler #4. There may also be good trade options available.
The bar is being set higher though. Both the Indians (Allen and Miller) and the Cubs (Davis and Rondon) have TWO proven closers. With Melancon, Smith, Law and perhaps Strickland, the Giants themselves may have nice depth at the back end of their pen. Two LOOGY's with potential too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 8, 2016 13:25:00 GMT -5
Mark makes a good point about how much does a player truly need? For some, it's all or mostly about the money. For others, it can also be about other factors.
Funny though isn't it how we decry a player who turns down a higher offer from the Giants because of those other factors? And how we go on to say the Giants simply should have made their offer so high the player didn't really have any choice but to accept it?
Sometimes it's not all about the money. Nor should it be.
|
|
