|
Post by Rog on Dec 14, 2016 16:56:32 GMT -5
Bobby Evans took over from Brian Sabean as the Giants' general manager prior to the 2015 season. Here is how I rank his primary moves at the major league level:
Mike Leake -- Grade D One could rank this one an "F" if he wanted to. Leake became injured, and a year later, Adam Duvall became an All-Star. But I think the concept was a good one. Leake was one of the hottest pitchers in the majors at the time of the trade. Duvall had a nice season for the Reds, but he dropped off as the season went along and may have had by far the best year of his career.
To put Duvall in perspective, I am reminded of Boly's recent comment on signing Mark Reynolds. Mark strikes out too much for Boly's taste, even as mostly a right-handed pinch hitter. Reynolds struck out once every 3.5 at bats last season. Adam struck out once every 3.4 at bats.
22-year-old pitcher Keury Mella was sent to the Reds as well.
Johnny Cueto -- Grade A Arguably the best signing of the 2015-2016 off-season.
Jeff Samardzija -- Grade C- Jeff has potential, but the Giants haven't consistently tapped it yet. $18 million a year for five years is a lot to pay.
Denard Span -- Grade D+ Denard is a platoon player. Dexter Fowler was available.
Conor Gillaspie and other minor signings a year ago -- Grade A- Gillaspie was a low-risk move that panned out, and other minor signings performed amazingly in the first half of 2016.
Matt Moore -- Grade B+ Hated to give up Matt Duffy, but Moore was one of the solidest trades of the season.
Will Smith -- Grade B- Because of what the Giants gave up, I didn't like this trade at the time, but it's growing on me a little. Smith is very good, and the stars of Phil Bickford and Andrew Susac have been tarnished since the trade. If Bruce Bochy had simply used Smith to his capacity, we might be viewing this as one of the Giants' best mid-season deals in a while.
Eduardo Nunez -- Grade B+ Nunez was an All-Star, and Adelberto Mejia was a good but not top prospect. I would go higher except that Nunez is eligible to become a free agent at the end of the 2017 season.
Mark Melancon -- Grade A- Evans filled the Giants' biggest hole with one of three top free agent closers who ranked far ahead of other free agent relievers.
2015 and 2016 drafts -- Grade B Admittedly I don't know much about these drafts, but based on the little I know, they seem OK.
Overall -- Grade B/B- Evans has gotten a lot done. (I didn't even mention the Marlon Byrd and Alejandro De Aza deals, which weren't bad.) He had the advantage of having a lot of money available a winter ago, making a wonderful signing in Johnny Cueto but performing less well with Jeff Samardzija and Denard Span. Aside from a closer, which came back to hurt the Giants badly, he buffed up three needs at the 2016 deadline. In closer Mark Melancon, he strongly addressed the Giants' top need this off-season, and he should have room to make deadline trades if he needs to fortify left and/or center fields.
Evans has had good money but few prospects available, and he has done a little above-average IMO. Nice creativity in trades, and decent free agent signings overall. Some very nice hits, but some misses as well. Haven't seen any complete whiffs (with Leake coming the closest).
|
|
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 14, 2016 19:38:05 GMT -5
I grade him this way...F for failing miserably at the deadline to solve the greatest weakness and the team's ultimate demise...lack of a reliable closer. F for failing to do what he said about International signings. F for failing to reach the only goal that matters...winning the pennant.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 14, 2016 20:18:59 GMT -5
I grade him this way...F for failing miserably at the deadline to solve the greatest weakness and the team's ultimate demise...lack of a reliable closer. F for failing to do what he said about International signings. F for failing to reach the only goal that matters...winning the pennant. Rog -- Take this however you wish, Randy. I mean it as a play on words (or letters). You seem to be showing us you're a real F-er. As for winning the pennant being the only goal that matters, I believe you don't believe that and simply misspoke. One other point: I don't think you will find many who think your grading reasons are very objective. And finally, while Bobby Evans himself second-guessed himself for not going harder after Mark Melancon (as in, he thought he had a good enough offer on the table but should have upped it), who is to say the Giants wouldn't still be playing if Bruce Bochy had given the closing responsibilities in game four with the Cubs to Will Smith? From August 20th on, Smith was one of the very best relievers in the game. Surprisingly, he was even better than Melancon. But he wasn't closing you say, and indeed who knows how he would have fared doing so, but all we can evaluate him on is how he DID pitch, and that was outstandingly. I think most baseball people will tell us that had the Giants brought in Smith, there was at least a 90% chance he could close out a three-run lead. What Smith did do while facing just two batter was give up a single on a ball that was hit hard enough to be an out over 78% of the time, and induce what should have been a double play had Brandon Crawford not incredibly thrown away the relay. In fairness, the double play would have come on a bunt, but again, we should evaluate a pitcher by what he does. And Smith induced a 78% out ground ball and a double play that should have been. Essentially, while the circumstances were a bit odd, Smith pitched well enough to get three outs. Luck went against him, and he not only blew the save, he was charged with the loss on an unearned run. Which brings up a question I hadn't considered until now. We take unearned runs out of ERA. To the extent that we consider pitcher wins to be meaningful, should we give a pitcher the loss on an unearned run? Much as it probably makes sense to call a team error on plays that are missed through the fault of no individual defender, it might make sense to call a loss via an unearned run a team loss (which they all ultimately are anyway). Here is another gripe. This stupid official scoring thing that you can't anticipate a double play. That's kind of like saying you can't anticipate an out, which would then mean no errors. The double play pivot isn't the easiest of plays, but we see errors called all the time on plays that are harder than the pivot. What REALLY irks me is that if the throw is in time for the double play but the first baseman drops it, under the official scoring rules that exist, he can't be charged with an error, when clearly he should be. Came across an explanation today on the MLB Network of Deserved Run Average (DRA). It factors in things like park effects, defense, strength of hitters faced, plate umpire, etc. Like ERA and every other stat that tries to give a clearer picture than ERA, it isn't perfect. But what it does do is vary less for a pitcher from season to season and, perhaps more importantly, predict FUTURE ERA better than past ERA itself does. ERA is a good measure of pitching, but more and more we're finding how defense (including pitch framing) affects it. Take a Giants pitcher out of AT&T, and he'll likely perform worse for another team. On the other hand, take a hitter from the Giants, and he's got a shot at improvement. Maybe some team should take a shot at Angel Pagan. I think the two big issues though are his fielding and his age. And his health. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans#ixzz4SrcKR2Ue
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 14, 2016 21:01:29 GMT -5
Roger, I couldn't disagree with you more in analyzing the acquistion of Samardizja and Span.
At the time those deals were made, those two were EXACTLY what we needed.
Exactly.
That Span still wasn't healthy is moot.
And I disagree further about Span being a platoon player.
Look at his lifetime splits. I'll take them.
The Leake deal was a good one, too... AT THE TIME.
I more agree with Randy; Bobby doesn't get an F from me BECAUSE he got Nunez and Moore and Smith.
But he gets a C- for the reason he cited. We NEEDED a closer, and him NOT GETTING ONE? Sort of said to me... "well, we don't think we can win anyway, so we'll stock up for next year with Moore and Smith.
And if Casilla rebounds, our good fortune!"
That's the way I see it.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 14, 2016 22:33:21 GMT -5
Roger, I couldn't disagree with you more in analyzing the acquistion of Samardizja and Span. At the time those deals were made, those two were EXACTLY what we needed. Exactly. That Span still wasn't healthy is moot. And I disagree further about Span being a platoon player. Look at his lifetime splits. I'll take them. The Leake deal was a good one, too... AT THE TIME. Rog -- I hoped Dave Righetti could turn Samardzija around. But I wouldn't have paid $90 million to find out. Jeff STILL has a career ERA over four. On a truly good team, that's a fifth starter. Samardzija WASN'T just what the Giants needed. He was signed as a #3 starter and paid at LEAST accordingly. Let's look at the two teams in the World Series. Samardzija would have been the fifth starter behind Lester, Arrieta, Hendricks and Lackey, and perhaps the SIXTH starter behind Hammel as well. Hammel was easily the better of the two until he fell apart in September. On the Indians, he likely would have been the #4. As for Span, you're right that his lifetime splits aren't horrible against southpaws. A .695 OPS against southpaws isn't horrible, but it isn't very good, either. I don't think you would have come close to liking Gregor Blanco starting against lefties, but he has a career .671 OPS against southpaws. What is most disturbing is how -- something like Pablo Sandoval, although not to quite the same extreme -- Denard has really fallen off against southpaws in three of the past four seasons. In 2012, Denard had a .739 OPS against southpaws. Couple that with a .374 OBP and very good defense, and I'm in. But in 2013 his OPS fell to .539 against southpaws. In 2014 it bounced back to a reasonably acceptable .695. But in 2015 it dropped back again to an atrocious .542, and last season it was still at only .566. You are right that it makes sense to evaluate a player by his bigger sample of career stats. But one usually gives a higher weighting to the most recent years. And three out of the past four have been unkind to Denard. Add to that Denard's less than average defense last season, and he is indeed a platoon player. I do expect his defense to bounce back some this season. I felt it was better late in the year than early. But do we truly want a guy whose OPS against southpaws over the past four seasons is in less than .600 playing against them? Maybe he'll bounce back against southpaws this season. But I'd certainly be ready to play someone else against them if he doesn't do so fairly quickly. When he left the Giants, Pablo Sandoval's career OPS against lefties was pretty close to what Denard's is now. Would you REALLY want Pablo to hit against lefties? Pablo isn't horrible against righties, by the way. He just might bounce back. But believing he will once again hit southpaws requires quite a stretch. Not as much of a stretch for Denard, but a bigger stretch than I'd like to see. IMO the $132 million the Giants spent on Johnny Cueto was far better spent than the $121 million they spent on Samardzija and Span. Just think if they had spent that money on J.A. Happ and Dexter Fowler instead. Those two were signed for only a combined $44 million guarantee, little more than a third of what was guaranteed to Samardzija and Span. Getting Cueto, Samardzija and Span in the same off-season without giving up a single player was a good accomplishment. But with the money Bobby (and I like Bobby) had available, he could have done a fair amount better. Although he gave up players because they were trades, I liked his picking up Nunez, Moore and Smith better. Too bad he couldn't have picked up Melancon too. But at the trade deadline, Santiago Casilla was actually on a hot streak. The Giants certainly knew they had a clear need, but I'm not sure the existing evidence showed how STRONG that need was. And apparently Bruce Bochy didn't read that Smith deserved at least a chance. I hope Samardzija and Span pan out. I would be a fan of their clan. But thus far Samardzija has been just an average starter, and Span has been just a platoon player in three of his past four seasons, including last season with the Giants. If you were to project an OPS against southpaws for Span this season, what would it be? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans#ixzz4Ss6ULgWW
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 14, 2016 22:38:02 GMT -5
Sort of said to me... "well, we don't think we can win anyway, so we'll stock up for next year with Moore and Smith. Rog -- Moore and Smith were clearly acquired for 2016 as well as the subsequent three seasons. If you were to ask Bobby on a stack of Bibles (and he's a Christian), he would tell you he most certainly hadn't given up. At the trade deadline, the Giants certainly weren't playing well, but they were 17 games over .500. Why would he have given up? Bobby picked up Nunez, Moore and Smith at the deadline. How many teams picked up more? Bobby certainly wasn't a seller. Nor should he have been. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans?page=1#ixzz4SsG8yYPn
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 14, 2016 22:40:43 GMT -5
The Leake deal was a good one, too... AT THE TIME. Rog -- Even though the deal doesn't look good now, I liked it when it was made. I don't think it was reasonable to expect the red hot Leake to become injured and for Duvall to have such a good 2016 season. I would have given the trade a much higher rating at the time, but this time I went with a combination of what it looked like at the time (at least a B) and how it has thus far turned out (an F). Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans?page=1#ixzz4SsHHLrzg
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 14, 2016 22:42:27 GMT -5
And if Casilla rebounds, our good fortune!"
Rog -- This seems weird looking back, but at the trade deadline, Santiago was hot.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 14, 2016 22:55:54 GMT -5
It's ironic, Boly, but if I valued Samardzija and Span as highly as you, I would have given Bobby at LEAST a B+. Acquiring Cueto, Nunez, Moore, Smith and what you think of Samardzija and Span (and what the Giants hoped for from them) would be an extreme haul over just a nine-month period. Throw in Leake, Byrd, De Aza and Gillaspie in his first four or five months, and he got a lot without giving up an inordinate amount in prospects.
As I mentioned, he did spend a lot of money though, and I do feel he could have spent some of it more wisely. But it is unrealistic to expect a GM to get a hit every time, and he didn't truly whiff on any of the deals.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 14, 2016 23:18:27 GMT -5
Boly- Roger, I couldn't disagree with you more in analyzing the acquistion of Samardizja and Span.
At the time those deals were made, those two were EXACTLY what we needed.
Exactly.
Boagie- EVERY move ever made by any GM could be considered exactly what the team needed. Unfortunately the success of deals is determined mainly by the future. What if Jonathan Sanchez turned into a 20 game winner after trading him for Melky, and Melky had fizzled out? That would have been considered a horrible trade.
We needed a starting catcher when we traded for Pierzynski. Does that make it a good deal?
We thought we were getting a pretty good player in Beltran when we traded for him. Was that a good deal?
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 15, 2016 11:02:44 GMT -5
I said no to both deals, boagie.
I thought moving Nathan for Pierzynski was dumb. I hated the deal the moment it was made.
When I posted that, Mark replied that we were getting an All Star catcher. What wasn't to like?
I disliked, and still dislike Beltran.
Don't care what his numbers are, or were.
I don't think he ever was a team player.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 15, 2016 11:04:28 GMT -5
We needed a starting catcher when we traded for Pierzynski. Does that make it a good deal? Rog -- Pierzynski is a tough call. With the Giants it sounds like he was a jerk. Yet he's had a long, successful career. The thing that most made that a bad trade was that the Giants seriously underestimated Joe Nathan, who at times had been a very dominating pitcher the previous season. The second-most factor is that the Giants non-tendered Pierzynski the next season instead of re-signing him and trading his butt (or simply keeping him). As well as Nathan pitched after the trade, Francisco Liriano could have been the gem in the deal. But the Giants figured correctly that his career would be marred by arm injuries. Pierzynski's single season with the Giants wasn't a bad one. The only thing he really stunk at was hitting into 27 double plays, and that was an aberration. They equaled his total of the two previous seasons, and they were more than his total of the next two. His walk total of just 13 was also very bad, although that was somewhat to be expected. His average fell from an outstanding .312 the prior season to .272, but that still was pretty good for a catcher. He drove in 77 runs, three more than his previous season. The thing he did incredibly well was to avoid striking out. He struck out just 27 times in 471 at bats, which is better than a Joe Panik season. A.J. certainly isn't a Hall of Famer, but he does have over 2000 hits, which not many catchers can say. 2000 hits by a catcher is probably like 2800 or so hits by a player at another position. A.J.will turn 40 in 15 days, so he's probably about done, but if he plays in 2017 and has as many hits as he's averaged over the past two seasons, he'll pass Mike Piazza -- IMO the greatest hitting catcher of all time -- in hits. Ted Simmons' 2472 hits is the most I can find by a player whose primary position was catcher. Pierzynski has hit .280 over his career, which is quite good for a catcher. As mentioned before, the trade's failure can be summed up in two quick phrases -- underestimating Nathan, and cutting Pierzynski after just one season. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans#ixzz4SvAtneZ5
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 15, 2016 11:37:13 GMT -5
We thought we were getting a pretty good player in Beltran when we traded for him. Was that a good deal? Rog -- I didn't like the trade when it was made (because of Zack Wheeler's potential and Carlos Beltan's health. And you're right. The Giants didn't get a pretty good player. What they got was a borderline Hall of Famer. Last season at the age of 39, Beltran hit .295 with 29 homers and 93 RBI's. His OPS would have been second on the Giants. Beltran has made the All-Star team three times -- since the Giants let him go in free agency. He is one of baseball's rare 300/300 men, and he has done so with one of the highest stolen base success rate in history (86.4%). Had Beltran been able to stay healthy in his career, he quite possibly already would be a Hall of Famer. He has endured at least three surgeries, including two on his knee, which was very seriously injured and caused him to miss the equivalent of a full season in 2009 and 2010. Boagie derides him because of how he played for the Giants, and indeed he got off to a poor start and didn't drive in runs at his usual pace. But he hit .323 with a .920 OPS, so it's a little tough to say he played poorly. It was mostly that after having played the most games of any Met in the 2011 season before he was traded, he became injured, and the Giants fell out of it while he was unable to play. Boagie and Boly tell us he's a bad influence, but clubhouse presence seems to be a plus for him. He won the 2013 Roberto Clemente Award. Boly will tell us how he doesn't play hard, but let's look at the causes of some of his injuries over his career: Running into a structure Diving into another fielder Player collision while fielding Rib cage diving for ball Player collision Ribcage running into wall Diving over fence Seriously, does that sound like a player who isn't playing hard? Carlos may be the most underrated and misunderstood player in this board's history. Just for fun, let's check out some of what has been written about Beltran's clubhouse presence. From two months ago, a headline: "How Carlos Beltran's clubhouse presence made up for some inconsistent numbers". From a month ago: "...Carlos Beltran would replace David Ortiz both on the field and in the clubhouse." From two months ago: "Carlos Beltran was the de facto leader of the (Rangers) team -- especially in the clubhouse." From three months ago: "Beltre and Beltran are revered in the clubhouse." From two months ago: "(Beltran) exert(s) considerable influence in the clubhouse." Most of these things were written AFTER the Rangers were swept in three games in the ALDS, NOT a time when players are usually praised. Do we get the idea why I say Beltran is so badly underrated and misunderstood here? We're criticizing a player who both on and off the field is perhaps better than any of us. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans?page=1#ixzz4SvJEcT4X
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 15, 2016 14:39:11 GMT -5
The problems with Pierzynski, for me anyway, STARTED with what we gave up; Nathan and Liriano, I believe were the 2.
The problems for me CONTINUED Pierz in the locker room. From all I read and heard... "team" player never entered his vocabulary.
And Rog, you can throw all the numbers for Beltran you'd like... but I don't like him on my team.
Same with Strawberry. Great numbers... but I didn't want him, either.
I NEVER said Beltran didn't play hard.
Not once.
So where did you get that?
I never questioned his abilities.
Not once.
I don't and didn't and never will like his attitude.
He never led on the field, anyway, but example.
He always carried himself as if HE were the most important guy on the team.
Mays never did that.
Nor did Aaron, nor Billy Williams.
I EXPECT my top players to lead by example, NOT by mouth, as Reggie memememe Jackson did.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 15, 2016 15:48:23 GMT -5
I'm going from memory here, but I believe that in the Pierzynski trade, Boof Bonzer went along with Nathan and Liriano. Liriano had been a HUGE prospect (along the lines Lincecum, Bumgarner and Posey would later be), but the Giants rightly believed he would have serious arm problems.
We certainly didn't read good things about Pierzynski in the clubhouse, but when a catcher plays long enough to get over 2000 hits, he's got something going for him.
As for Beltran, we agree that he plays extremely well and that he plays hard. Where we disagree is on his effect in the clubhouse. I posted several recent articles praising him in the clubhouse, and I haven't seen any in rebuttal. As for his acting like he's the biggest player on the team, why would he be so respected in the clubhouse if that were the case?
Carlos played much more of his career in New York than anywhere else. Let's see what Mark has to say about Beltran. Maybe Mordy would even chime in.
As for Carlos's allegedly not playing hard, I thought you had brought that up in discussing his demeanor on the field. I thought you said he didn't hustle. Sorry if I misunderstood. To be honest, I'm not sure Carlos DOES hustle anymore. He's got such a bad knee that I'm surprised he's even still playing.
My biggest memory from Carlos's time with the Giants came when he made a sliding catch in right field. I knew he had endured huge knee problems and was really worried that he might re-injure himself. As it turns out, I was overly worried about his health.
The mistake the Giants made with Beltran was in not re-signing him. He hasn't been overly expensive or required a long-term contract, and he's been a very good player. At this point he's really an American League guy, but in the two years after he left the Giants, he was really good with the Cardinals.
I think Carlos will fall just short of the Hall of Fame (although he might get in through the Veterans Committee), but if he hadn't missed that time with the Mets when he very seriously injured his knee, that time might have put him over the top. If he hadn't missed that time and had walked less, he likely would have reached 3000 hits, which is pretty close to Hall of Fame lock for a non steroid player. Throw in 400+ homers and 300+ steals, plus nine All-Star teams and three Gold Gloves, and we're beginning to sound like a Hall of Fame player here.
Especially one who is by recent accounts, a strong player in the clubhouse.
Here is my challenge to Boagie and Boly. I have come up with several sources that indicate Carlos is a good guy and a clubhouse presence. I'd like to see you guys come up with a handful of references that show he isn't.
I mean, what are we really holding against him?
. He got off to a very slow start when he came to the Giants, and then he got injured. Yes, he hit very well overall with the team, but he got off to a very slow start and then he got injured.
. He went to a hospital to visit children when he was recovering from a cold. Yeah, he was showing excellent community awareness by visiting the hospital, but the kids could have caught his cold.
. He "stole" Bruce Bochy's number when he came to the Giants. Yes, he gave Bochy an unexpected Rolex in return, but he "stole" Bochy's number when he came to the Giants.
. He's not a team player. Yeah, we've got references that he's great in the clubhouse, but he's not a team player. ' I'm not seeing it, guys. Give me some evidence so I can agree with you guys.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 15, 2016 16:56:42 GMT -5
Rog, I've got no "evidence" to offer other than observation and what I've read.
He's not a 'bad' club house guy, but his demeanor is always one of "ME" first.
I want guys like Panik, Pence, Posey, Crawford and others who LEAD by example.
Whose hustle is NEVER questioned, as Beltran's frequently was.
I want guys who continually demonstrate they are team guys...
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 15, 2016 17:46:33 GMT -5
Often if we read something, we can later find it online. That's the type of evidence I'm looking for. I've looked Carlos up online a bunch of times now, and I just don't find much in the way of negative references.
Remember, I didn't like the Beltran trade when it was made. I spoke out against it. I don't have that kind of an ax to grind. But objectively I'm just not finding anything negative, and I feel Boagie gave him a bad rap.
I'm looking for the stuff that has lead Boagie and you to your opinion. Mark probably knows more about Carlos than any of us, and I don't think he feels negatively about Beltran. I probably know the second-most, since I've looked at all kinds of stuff written about him, and I'm just not finding the negative stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 16, 2016 9:37:43 GMT -5
Rog- Remember, I didn't like the Beltran trade when it was made. I spoke out against it. I don't have that kind of an ax to grind. But objectively I'm just not finding anything negative, and I feel Boagie gave him a bad rap.
I'm looking for the stuff that has lead Boagie and you to your opinion. Mark probably knows more about Carlos than any of us, and I don't think he feels negatively about Beltran. I probably know the second-most, since I've looked at all kinds of stuff written about him, and I'm just not finding the negative stuff.
Boagie- What does it matter how many articles you read about him? It's plain and simple Rog, we were 4 games up when we acquired him, and 6 games back when he started to hit. Pretend this is an article written by one of your mainstream heroes and let it really sink in. As a rental player that was just acquired by a team for that team's #1 prospect your job is to produce IMMEDIATELY! Not 3 weeks later. As a rental player that makes you a huge disappointment.
His character is up for debate. But we've talked about it over and over, you just have a different opinion than I do. Is Beltran going to hell? Probably not. But I seriously question ones character when they say they want to fit in but then bribe the manager for his number. I also question a player that takes himself out of big games immediately without even a noticeable limp, or trying to stretch it out.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Dec 16, 2016 10:32:38 GMT -5
You've certainly gotten off the topic of Evans here, and I'd like to comment about Beltran before I talk about it. I'm constantly amazed by Giants fans criticizing his character or saying he's a bad guy. Can anyone please show me even ONE negative thing said about him by a manager or teammate? Boagie is right that I have had access to tons of information about Beltran because of all his years in New York, and I've never read a single bad word about him. His teammates and managers all loved him and considered him a team player. They marveled at his unselfishness, especially when he volunteered to move from CF because he realized that young Angel Pagan had now become a better centerfielder than him, and he even did it in his free agent year, when it was obvious he could make more money selling himself as a CF rather than a corner outfielder. I can prove my Carlos Beltran point very easily. Do you know which teams were the finalists for Beltran this year? The Rangers, the Astros and the Yankees. What did they have in common? He had played for them all previously. There were even rumors the Giants were interested. All the teams he played for wanted him back. If he wasn't a good guy and left such a good impression, why would they all want him back? Now about Bobby Evans. I disagree with Boly's belief that it's a good move if it "seemed like it at the time." You are judged by results. If you spend money on a player and he doesn't perform, it's on you. Brian Sabean trading Matt Williams for Jeff Kent seemed idiotic at the time, but it turned out to be brilliant. So do we judge this move as idiotic or brilliant? Obviously the latter. Trading three young pitchers for a much needed all star catcher like AJ Pierzynski seemed great at the time, but of course turned out to be one of the worst trades of all time. Signing Span with Fowler still out there at similar money is an F. However I've liked almost every other move. Randy said he gets an F for not bringing in a closer at the break, but perhaps he did and Bochy never gave him a chance. Of course Smith made it tough for Bochy by pitching poorly his first week or two before turning it around. I loved the Matt Moore trade, and his contract makes it even more incredible. He gave up a lot to get him, but this is a pitcher worth twice what he's being paid, and his contract will never get in the way of the Giants improving. This trade gets an A. Melancon an A. Cueto A plus. Samardzija a B, and Nunez a B plus. I think he'll be even better going forward, with Righetti continuing to refine him. You could see the progression throughout the year. I think Evans has done an excellent job, but as I mentioned before, you're judged by results and these minor leaguers he traded could alter the grade as they go boom or bust. The Leake trade was obviously bad, but Duval's play might have taught them a lesson, as he's determined to give Mac or Parker a fair shot. You can't judge your GM championship or bust, it's unfair. They're limited by payroll, the roster they inherited and the minor league system. I bet he wishes he had the money the previous GM gave to Matt Cain to spend on a free agent or two. Now comes an important part of his job, which is adding to the roster the hard way, because there's no more payroll. This is what separates a good GM from a bad one. And by the way, Randy, you can't have it both ways. You're constantly criticizing ownership for being cheap. If that's the case, then you can't criticize the GM. Aren't they preventing him from properly doing his job?
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 16, 2016 11:28:29 GMT -5
The New York Times
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT MARCH 2, 2010 The federal investigation of the Canadian-based doctor Anthony Galea continued to take on a distinct New York tone on Tuesday as the third Met or Yankee in three days acknowledged that he had been contacted or interviewed by the authorities in connection with Galea’s activities.
Carlos Beltran, the Mets’ injured center fielder, told reporters at the team’s spring training facility in Port St. Lucie, Fla., that he had met with federal agents in recent days to discuss his interactions with Galea during the 2009 season, when Beltran was sidelined for several months with a bone bruise in his knee.
Beltran was interviewed after federal investigators met with his teammate, shortstop Jose Reyes, who went to see Galea last summer while he was sidelined with a hamstring injury.
During Reyes’s meeting with investigators, they asked him how he learned of Galea, and Reyes told them the doctor had been recommended by Beltran, according to a person with knowledge of that interview who did not want to be identified discussing a federal investigation. It was Reyes’s statement that apparently led investigators to Beltran.
Reyes acknowledged to reporters on Sunday that he had met with investigators last week. Beltran’s turn with reporters came Tuesday. In between came Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez, who told reporters on Monday in the team’s spring training clubhouse in Tampa, Fla., that the federal authorities wanted to talk to him, too.
When reporters asked Rodriguez if he had been treated by Galea, he responded: “I can’t really get into that. You’ll know within time, all at the same time.”
Carlos Delgado, left, and Carlos Beltran at Mets camp in 2009. Beltran said he referred Jose Reyes to Anthony Galea when both were hurt. BARTON SILVERMAN / THE NEW YORK TIMES Galea, who is based in Toronto, has been charged by the Canadian authorities with conspiring to smuggle human growth hormone and other drugs into the United States. In this country he is being investigated by an assortment of federal authorities, including the F.B.I., the Department of Homeland Security and the United States attorney’s office in Buffalo.
In his remarks to reporters on Tuesday, Beltran said he was asked by federal agents if Galea had injected him with human growth hormone and that his answer was “of course not.”
“I just want to say that all my treatments were related to my knee; he didn’t inject me with H.G.H. or anything like that,” Beltran told reporters. “It was something that was related to my knee and like I say, when I was there, I was put in contact with the team; they knew what they were doing to me.”
Beltran played in only 81 games last season. His knee had been bothering him for a month before the Mets placed him on the disabled list on June 22, and he then sat out until early September. At some point during the season, although it was not clear exactly when from Beltran’s remarks, he decided to go outside the Mets’ medical staff and seek treatment elsewhere.
He turned to Galea, who he said “was one of the guys that was recommended, and by a lot of friends.”
“I got in touch with him and also put him in contact with the team,” Beltran said. “He was able to meet for maybe a month; he was able to put a program for me being able to rehab.”
Reyes, meanwhile, had been out since mid-May with a hamstring injury that, like Beltran’s bone bruise, seemed resistant to healing. So, Beltran said, he told Reyes about Galea.
Carlos Beltran has been treated by Anthony Galea, according to several people briefed on the matter. AL BEHRMAN / ASSOCIATED PRESS “I say, ‘Reyes, give it a try, make sure, he helped out other athletes, so he might help you also,’ ” Beltran said.
When Reyes went to see Galea last summer, he underwent plasma replacement therapy, a procedure that is not considered doping under baseball’s rules and has been aggressively embraced by Galea.
The procedure did not appear to do much for Reyes’s injury. He had surgery in the off-season and is now healthy. He, too, said that the federal agents who interviewed him asked if Galea had injected him with performance-enhancing drugs.
“I said no,” Reyes said.
What Rodriguez will tell federal investigators is unknown. The New York Times reported on its Web site Monday that Yankees officials had reached out to representatives of Rodriguez in December after the investigation of Galea became public.
They knew that Galea had worked closely with a chiropractor who monitored Rodriguez’s condition last season after he underwent hip surgery and were concerned about that link.
The response they received from Rodriguez’s representatives was reassuring. Rodriguez had not met with Galea, the representatives said.
But now the Yankees are not so sure. On Monday they issued a statement that distanced themselves from Rodriguez, their highest-paid player, by stating that they had never authorized Galea to treat him.
Dr. Anthony Galea at his Toronto clinic. He is under investigation as a possible supplier of performance-enhancing drugs to pro athletes. SAMI SIVA FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES In Mets camp, it was unclear who in their management knew that Beltran had gone to see Galea in the first place. On Tuesday night, General Manager Omar Minaya said he did not know that Beltran had sought treatment from Galea, at least when that treatment began.
Asked who on the Mets did know, Minaya said Beltran told him on Tuesday that he had informed a team official that he planned to see Galea. “I believe the player,” Minaya said, although he declined to identify the official.
As for Beltran’s assertion on Tuesday that the team had consulted with Galea over the treatments for the center fielder, Minaya said, “Yes, we did have communications.” He declined to provide details.
The revelation that Minaya did not initially know about Beltran’s dealings with Galea in some ways echoed the dispute the Mets had with Beltran in January, when he underwent arthroscopic surgery in Colorado by a surgeon who was not one of the Mets’ team doctors.
The Mets contended Beltran did so without their approval; Beltran and his agent, Scott Boras, said the Mets knew about his plans to have the operation.
Meanwhile, both the Yankees and Major League Baseball would like to know what dealings, if any, Rodriguez had with Galea. Both will wait until Rodriguez meets with federal agents before they attempt to question him.
Rodriguez met with baseball’s investigators a year ago in the wake of his admission that he had used steroids in a period ranging from 2001 to 2003.
Then he had the stage to himself. Now he is sharing it with the Mets.
Boagie- There's your boy scout, referring his buddies to juice doctors and then lying to cover it up.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 16, 2016 13:41:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 16, 2016 14:59:12 GMT -5
As a rental player that was just acquired by a team for that team's #1 prospect your job is to produce IMMEDIATELY! Not 3 weeks later. As a rental player that makes you a huge disappointment. Rog -- Because of his slow start and his injury, it was actually one day short of four weeks. And of course that was a huge disappointment. But it doesn't mean that he was a wash-out with the Giants. Perhaps the biggest mistake the Giants made was in not re-signing him, although it didn't prevent them from winning it all in 2012. By the way, if Carlos were the downer you and Boly portray him to be, why would the Giants have given up their top prospect in the first place? Why would the Rangers have given up three pitching prospects for him as a 39-year-old rent-a-player in 2016? Why would the Astros be paying him $16 million for his 40-year-old season? Carlos is still a fine player, but he's not good enough to be worth upsetting a team's chemistry, which you guys seem to be indicating would be the case. Incidentally, I'm going to back off my saying that Carlos won't make the Hall of Fame unless he's voted in by the Veterans' Committee. He's right at the average level of a Hall of Fame center fielder. He has 70 WAR over his career, while the average HOF CF has 71. 44 WAR over his 7-year peak compared to 44 for the HOF CF. 57 JAWS (a reliable HOF measure) compared to 58 JAWS for the average CF. Maybe the huge competition from the great players who are becoming eligible for the Hall these days and the backlog of steroid users will keep him out. But give him another good season or two, and I think he'll break the door down no matter how tough the situation. Only Willie Mays, Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, Andre Dawson and Beltran have 300 steals and 400 homers. Carlos has more steals than Vada Pinson, and he has more home runs than Duke Snider, Al Kaline and Johnny Bench. I don't know if Carlos's Roberto Clemente Award for best exemplifying the game of baseball, community involvement, and contribution to his team will help with the Hall, but it can't hurt. One final factor regarding Carlos's chances of making the Hall. Right now his stats are similar and somewhat better than Andre Dawson's. Andre was induced in 2010. Beltran is Dawson's #1 comp, with Billy Williams being his #2. Dawson is Beltran's #2 comp, with Williams his #1. Billy Williams and Andre Dawson. That's pretty good company. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans?page=1#ixzz4T1nRUH1e
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 16, 2016 15:53:18 GMT -5
There's your boy scout, referring his buddies to juice doctors and then lying to cover it up. Rog -- Good job of coming up with something, Boagie. I like that you provided backup. I don't see anything there that is completely damning to Carlos, but it certainly doesn't put him in a good light. If there are serious doubts about his having used PED's, he'll have a hard time making the Hall as I predicted in my above post. He's a very legitimate candidate, but not a totally overwhelming one. Billy Williams made the Hall easily, but it took Dawson quite a long time. One point I will make is that Beltran seems to be somewhat revered by his teammates, which I don't think has been the case with Rodriguez or Reyes. I don't think this looks good for Carlos, but I haven't seen anything else about it, and I wouldn't call it conclusive. But, again, you're certainly right that it doesn't look very good. I thought Mark made some tremendous points about Carlos, particularly that the the teams that were bidding for him in free agency were the teams he had played for before. Now, a couple of other things. First, I don't think you truly knew about this until now, Boagie, even as you criticized Beltan before. Maybe you had written about it previouslly and I just missed or don't remember it. It seems like a big enough item that you would have been stressing it far more than that he visited a children's hospital while he was recovering from a cold. As for Boly, we're still not seeing anything from you that shows Carlos to be a player that hurts his team by not playing hard or that he isn't a good clubhouse presence. Remember you didn't like Johnny Cueto at first (dreadlocks?), but later realized you had misjudged him. (I greatly respect you for admitting that, by the way. I would expect nothing less from either you or me. The rest I'm skeptical about! Just joking guys.) By the way, I thought Mark made another great and somewhat related point when he said that at least base cloggers are doing so because they're on the bases. Of COURSE we'd love all Giants player to be great base stealers and base runners. Boagie made a great point that while we dont' think of Brandon Crawford as a base stealer or anything approaching a burner, he's a very fine base runner. Buster Posey has very poor speed, but he usually does a good job of not getting thrown out. I think we often don't give enough credence to the cost of a base runner's being thrown out. It's kind of like with Brandon Belt. No, he isn't the best at driving in runners when given the chance. He isn't the worst either. But if we're going to criticize him as heavily as some of us do here for not driving in runs (even though he was a close second on the team in 2016), we also need to give him proper credit for getting on base and not making too many outs, which gives his teammates chances to drive in runs. One could argue that Crawford had two more RBI's than Belt because Belt got on base enough times for Crawford to drive him in 17(!) times. One could argue that Posey's base clogging cost Belt RBI's and instead gave the opportunity to Crawford, who drove in Posey 22(!) times. And we should at least give Posey credit for not getting thrown out and thus providing RBI opportunities. The two guys that Crawford drove in by far the most (Hunter Pence was next with 9) were the ones who got on base the most. Crawford drove the two in a combined 39 times. Belt drove in no single player more than 9 times. No question that is in part because Belt was moved around in the order a little more. But I don't think there is much question either that Posey and Belt himself gave Crawford a lot of RBI opportunities, likely being the difference in which Brandon led the team in RBI's. If we're going to criticize Belt for his "dumb" mistakes, we should also give him credit for his very fine defense, which saves a lot more runs than his "mistakes" cost. If we're going to criticize Belt for not hitting enough home runs, we should give him credit for still leading the Giants in total bases because in addition to leading the team in homers, he also led in doubles and was second in triples (to Crawford). We should realize that Brandon tied for 10th in the majors in doubles and that he tied for 2nd in the majors in combined doubles and triples. Does that sound like a guy who had homers turned into doubles, triples and outs by the difficulty of his home park? I see guys here picking on Beltran (a likely Hall of Famer unless what Boagie posted turns out to be verifiable), Belt (the guy the fans voted onto the All-Star team, even though he isn't anything approaching the best-known player in the league -- remember that old East Coast bias!), and Terry Collins, who were are excoriating because in a difficult choice brought on primarily by the fans, he didn't make the choice we liked. Never mind that he had a very tough choice to make. It didn't go our way, so we're going to take our ball home. Mark made another really good point. We've got a poster here who actually gave up on the 2014 Giants -- GAVE UP -- but who just can't resist jumping all over the Giants for not spending enough -- never mind that they are among baseball's top spenders, just not THE top spenders -- while simultaneously criticizing a GM who picked up six important players (very close to half the key players on the team) despite the salary restrictions, and jumps down Bobby Evans' throat because he didn't pick up a closer -- on which Evans himself second-guessed himself publicly -- but both provided a viable opportunity (unfortunately not used by Bruce Bochy) and then closed the hole in excellent fashion this winter. Why don't we try being a little more positive? Sure we were disappointed that Carlos Beltran started slowly, then got injured, before finally winding up playing very well for the Giants, and the Giants didn't magically win another World Series. But does that make him lazy, a bad clubhouse influence and a horrible person? Sure, we'd like to see Brandon Belt drive in more runs and hit more homers, we might not want to forget that just as Brandon Crawford is probably among the two best ALL-AROUND shortstops, Belt himself may be in the top five. Sure, it's easy to pick on Terry Collins, but do we truly know enough about him to be critical, and should we be basing our judgment on a difficult choice he had to make that didn't go our way? Sure, we'd love the Giants to spend more. But can't we simply be happy that they are among the top spenders (Think if we rooting for Tampa Bay or one of the other low-rent teams) and are arguably the most successful team of the decade? Can't we happy they didn't only win their first World Series in 56 years, but also won two more over the next four years after that? Do we truly need to be critical of the front office when over the past year or so it has now added SEVEN key players to the roster. Seven IS over half the key players on the team. How did the vast majority of the Giants' key players become Giants? If we look at the Giants' 13 key players, only one -- Hunter Pence -- either didn't come up through the system or was acquired in the past 13 months. As I told my wife earlier today, if someone wants to complain about something, he'll easily find something to complain about. Why not take the high road and be thankful for what we have and not just complain, but DO something to improve the things we aren't happy with? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans?page=1#ixzz4T28bHSET
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 16, 2016 20:35:49 GMT -5
Though I appreciate Barb's thoughts, Rog... as a Giant fan who's been watching the front office bumble and fumble the football AND NOT get us past the wild card for TWO consecutive years...all I've got LEFT is to whine and bitch!
The front office spit the bit at the trade dead line this year, plain and simple.
Yeah, they've done some good things...but as good as this club CAN BE? To NOT get past the Wild Card is a crime.
and THEY need to be held accountable.
But of course, they aren't.
So what's left for us?
To whine and complain because we are powerless to change things.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 17, 2016 23:21:26 GMT -5
Why so much angst toward the Giants higher ups? They did pretty much what you and Randy wanted them to, and they still fell short. They can't fix everything with money.
Sometimes you just have to blame the players.
Hunter Pence and Joe Panik have been injury prone for two season now.
Our young bullpen hasn't done much maturing.
Span didn't show us anything near what his career numbers would indicate the player he was.
Samardzija was up and down, and the down was WAY down.
The only players I think that stepped it up this season (besides Bumgarner and Cueto) were Belt and Pagan. The two that have probably been the focus of your and Randy's most negative posts between the end of last season and now. If you and Randy had your way the Giants probably wouldn't have even made a wild card birth. The funny thing is you and Randy still think you're in a position to point fingers.
|
|
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 18, 2016 9:04:33 GMT -5
Evans himself admits he blew it by not getting a closer at the deadline. The angst as you call it is for settling for pretty good when they should be striving for greatness. Barely eeking into the playoffs and choking in the LDS is not great.
|
|
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 18, 2016 9:07:40 GMT -5
The angst is ALSO about hearing this happy "oh well" tone being struck by the team. I want to hear anger...fire...determination not to make the same mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 18, 2016 10:52:12 GMT -5
Boagie, I think Randy summed up our "angst" quite well.
I've said before last year I thought the acquisitions of Samardizja and Cueto and Moore and Span were outstanding!
I also liked the Nunez pick up.
But that is the FIRST year in which I thought we made some great, bold moves.
That is not to say other moves didn't turn out well.
Some very well. Freddy R, Scutaro, Burrell, Ross and a couple of others.
But NONE of those moves had a long range future in sight.
None of those moves were game changers.
Scutoro...NO ONE saw that coming.
Cueto, Samardizja, Moore and Nunez are all potential game changers.
But our FO failure to GET that arm we needed at the break is one I just can't forgive, boagie, I can't.
And until recently, Randy is right: We DID go on the cheap.
I mean, for crying out loud! Look at the bargain basement stuff we picked up!
Renteria, Ross, Burrell, Huff, Freddy, Scutoro...yeah, they did well, but I would argue it's a fluke, and NONE had any umpff for the following years.
On the plus side, we had Affeldt, and Lopez... but they had too many opportunities that they just wasted.
That's my take.
Yours is obviously different, and that's okay.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 18, 2016 12:01:21 GMT -5
then bribe the manager for his number.
According to Jon Miller, Bruce Bochy gave up his number voluntarily, then was delighted when Beltran gave him a Rolex after the season. But really, Boagie. What if Beltran HAD "bribed" Bruce for his number? It happens all the time in sports.
Now, when Rick Barry signed with Houston, he didn't get Moses Malone's soon to be Hall of Fame #24 (which became Barry's favorite for the same reason as it became Rickey Henderson's -- Willie Mays was his favorite player). Rick instead wore #2 at home and #4 on the road.
Barry gave the Rolex to himself! (Joking)
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 18, 2016 12:12:00 GMT -5
The front office spit the bit at the trade dead line this year, plain and simple. Rog -- It's certainly not that plain and simple, and I don't even believe it is true. Nunez, Moore and Smith at one trade deadline? If that's spitting the bit, Evans' horse should remain unbridled. Now, Bruce Bochy's not using Smith with nearly enough leverage, of that I am critical -- unless Bochy knew something we don't. But although Evans later admitted publicly that he should have gone harder after Mark Melancon (finally got him though!), he filled three of several holes the Giants had. And as strange as it seems in hindsight, Santiago Casilla was HOT at the trade deadline. And as strange as it appearantly seemed to Bochy, Smith is considered a potential closer. As are Law and Strickland, although likely not for last season. Getting an All-Star (Nunez), a highly regarded middle rotation guy (Moore) and one of the most highly regarded lefty relievers (a large need with Lopez having such a tough season) in Smith, Evans hardly spit the bit. JUst as he hadn't with Cueto, Samardzija and Span. Just as he hasn't this winter with Melancon. How those guys will all turn out we'll have to see, but he didn't go after little band aids. He went after top players, proven players and/or high potential players. More objective observers of the game who are outside San Francisco feel Evans has made moves of both quality and quantity. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3639/grading-bobby-evans?page=1#ixzz4TD5EtDWT
|
|