Evan Longoria to the Giants....

[garyd4sf]

The third base situation is solved with this trade. He is 32 tihs last Oct and has 6 years let on his contract. The Giants gave up Arroyos contract and 2 lesser minor league  pitchers plus Span. 


Longoria was in Tampa Bay for all his career. He averaged 26 HR and 89 rbis and a .270 BA. He is a multiple gold glover. In 2016 he hit 36 HR, 98 RBI, .273, .521 Slg., .839 OPS. He's an RBI guy. 


IMO, expect another announcement soon as the Giants GM seems to sign 2 players quickly after weeks of no announced activities.

[Islandboagie]

We get Longoria and get rid of Span?

Hell yes!

[klaiggeb]

Now THIS is what I consider a significant move!

And, as boagie said, we move Span in the process?

Oh, my Lord! Yes!

Bobby E., you've just restored my faith in you.

I take it all back.

boly

[sfgdood]

We'll see if Longoria has anything left in the tank. Defensively he should be fine but his offense has been declining. I fear we may have given up too much.

[Islandboagie]

Losing Arroyo is dissapointing, but cmon Randy, we got an all-star caliber third baseman and got them to take perhaps the worst baseball player in history...this was a brilliant trade!

[sfgdood]

"All Star Caliber" is a debatable description. His last appearance was 2010 and he is coming off his worst season at the plate. I would hardly rate this trade as being brilliant unless the 32 year old Longoria can have a miraculous resurgence.

[sfgdood]

One more interesting note, Boagie...the "worst baseball player in history" had a higher OPS than your All Star Caliber 3rd baseman last year. Still think the trade was "Brilliant?"

[Islandboagie]

Yes.

Span is a crappy leadoff hitter with a deceptive OPS. He only started hitting after we were 30 games back. He throws like a chick and he can't catch a baseball. Just the subtraction of him makes us a better team.

I'm not entirely gung ho about Longoria, but he's a consistent run producer and as far as I know he's good in the clutch, and that's what the Giants need. Over the last two seasons he would have led the Giants in homeruns and RBIs by a significant margin.

[klaiggeb]

I don't think we gave up "too much" to get him, Randy.

A fair amount?

Yes.

But Span was dead weight.

Arroyo was a 'nice guy to have,' but that's it.

Average range at BEST, anywhere by 3B, and would never hit with 3B power.



Also, he was never going to be a 'great,' or even a 'very, very' good player.


He was going to be a guy, who, IMHO, could hit around 12-15 HRs, and hit in the .270's.

Nice player to have, but giving him up, AND Span...that opens up some things for us.

As in NOW, he isn't here to platoon with Pence in LF next year.

And that is ONLY a good thing.

bol

[sfgdood]

Boly...do you really believe Longoria is going to produce significantly more here in the twilight of his career than we would have seen from Arroyo, at a vastly higher price tag?

Personally I don't see the subtraction of Span as so great that taking on a top dollar salary for a player well past his prime is a good or even "brilliant" trade off.

[rog]

I know this will shock all involved, but I'm kind of with Randy here. I haven't lost faith, but I don't like the trade.

When I first read about the deal this morning, my initial reaction was positive. Evan was once one of the very best players in the majors. As recently as 2016 he hit 36 homers. He's a good fielder, although he has been declining with age.

When I saw that the Giants had gotten something for Span I was delighted. I've never been a big fan of Arroyo, so that didn't bother me much. I didn't know much about the two pitchers, which likely means they're very minor (no pun) prospects.

So what soured me on the trade?

First, I read that Evan lost four mph off his exit velocity last season. That was the 8th-greatest velocity loss in the majors. It wasn't at all surprising his homers dropped by nearly half.

Then I saw that his ground ball rate spiked by about 10%. Players now are trying to hit the ball harder (duh) and higher. Evan's loss of exit velocity and his new ground ball tendencies seem to indicate he has suddenly become a defensive hitter for the first time in his career. He was a FAR different hitter than in 2016, when he hit his career high in homers. His results weren't awful, but they weren't particularly good either. He was rated a league average hitter.

His fielding seemed to rejuvenate a bit, and he has long been a good fielder. That helped his WAR to reach 2.5. 2.0 is considered to be a league average starter.

What I realized is the Rays traded their long-term salary problem (Longoria) for the Giants'short-term salary problem (Span). If the Giants got the 2016 version of Longoria, his ability should withstand his decline phase, which the Giants will now "enjoy." But I haven't seen many hitters lose their velocity and become a ground ball hitter to the extent that Evan did.

To make things worse, his infield fly ball rate on fly balls rose to a career-high 14.2%, nearly twice his previous career average. My guess was that he was having a hard time hitting the fastball. Sure enough, he went from a great 2016 season against the fastball to a slightly negative one in 2017.

Evan Longoria was a much different hitter in 2017 than he was in 2016. Other hitters changed to, but they hit MORE fly balls, not less, and their exit velocity increased, not dropped drastically as Evan's did.

Change can be good, but in Evan's hitting last season it was anything but. A fly ball hitter over his career, he suddenly began hitting ground balls -- and not every hard at that.

The Giants are going to receive money in the trade, so perhaps a decent amount of the $80+ million Evan is owed over the rest of his contract (through 2022) will be paid by the Rays. My guess though is that the Giants are eating most of it.

The 2016 version of Evan is WELL worth that. Frankly, the 2017 version is probably worth it, as well. But Evan may be entering his decline phase in a rash manner. He could become an albatross late in his contract.

I wish I could be positive on this trade, but I can't. I'm beginning to worry that I always seem to be negative on constructive trades though. I was positive on the Moore deal, but that was primarily a salary dump.

Oh, Evan's walk rate was up a little, and his strikeout rate fell by a lot. Those are positive signs that usually mean something good. But to me it indicates that he has gone from a power hitter to a defensive one.

And it may mean that he's not getting around on the ball as well and has to protect more. His change is a bit baffling. His change was massive. That worries me.

[rog]

By the way, Randy, it's fun to agree with you!

[rxmeister]

When I was reading Randy’s comments, like, Rog, I found myself agreeing with him. They did a great job, so there’s no reason for me to reiterate their points, so I will present what I DO like about the trade. He’s Evan Longoria! He’s a big name at least and that should get even the most skeptical fan excited. With the Rays kicking in money his big contract is basically reduced to a manageable 5/70 according to numbers provided by Baggs. He’s 32 so he’s young enough to bounce back. He replaces Panda at third, and even in a decline, that’s a massive upgrade. He goes from an empty grave yard of a park to the most beautiful park in the majors which is sold out every night. This will fire him up to get in great shape and have a great year. He never misses a game. Might he have been playing hurt last year? He’s not far removed from an incredible 2016 season. His name makes me think of Eva Longoria. Brian Sabean is hinting at another move coming very soon. Jay Bruce’s agent was on KNBR begging the Giants to sign him. In other words, there’s a lot to like, although I once again have to admit I don’t like the trade!

[garyd4sf]

I am the last person  to chide anyone that is down on the Giants last year. I stay away from message boards when that happens because I understand the need to vent. But in this trade I wonder why the negativity. In essence they gave up a prospect in Arroyo and a money problem in Span and picked up a  guy who had a down year that any Giant fan would like to have had in the lineup last year.

He hit .261 with 20 HRs and 86 RBIs. Those numbers in HR and RBIs would have led the Giants. He is a very good 3B and after Nunez and the Panda I know he is a much better solution. Last year the composite for all 3B players for the Giants was .216-9HR-51 RBIs. 

So he has just turned 32.....and he had hit a solid 36 HR in 2017. 32 isn't old age in baseball. There is this guy who wasn't much of a hitter and then at 31 he hit 27 HR and 90 RBI and .275 and got better the next year hitting 321. The guy is 33 year old Justin Turner.

So I guess I may be alone in  waiting to see what he does, but knowing that third base is NOT the problem it was for the Giants.

[rog]

Span is a crappy leadoff hitter with a deceptive OPS. He only started hitting after we were 30 games back.


Rog -- It bothers me that Boly and I always seem to be arguing, as he points out. So I'm going to use this thread as an example of when the numbers ARE right and when they might not be.

Boagie states specifically here that Span "only started hitting after we were 30 games back." His statement is false. On July 1st, Denard reached his best hitting point of the season, hitting .297 with a .348 OBP, a .457 SLG and a .805 OPS. He wound up the season hitting .272 with a .329 OBP, a .427 SLG and a .756 OPS. Clearly, Denard hit better over the first three months and one day than he hit the rest of the season.

The numbers right; Boagie is incorrect.

Now, let's contrast that with my saying that I think Evan Longoria may well be headed the wrong way in his hitting. Randy made the point that overall, Evan hit better early in his career. Randy states a fact. The numbers support his claim absolutely.

My concern that Evan has become a more defensive hitter and will continue in that direction is my interpretation of the stats, which may be right or may be wrong. It is a fact that the ball left his bat on average four mph slower than in 2016. It is a fact that he went from a 32% ground ball percentage in 2016 to 43% in 2017. I am basing my conclusion (which I'll be re-evaluating soon to see how comfortable I am with it) on facts, but my conclusion is an opinion, not a fact.

The numbers don't lie -- but they can be misinterpreted. Once in a while, not often, they can be a mistake too, but unless the stat has been stated wrong, it is a fact.

Anyway, coming back to Span, your statement was false, Boagie. You likely went with your memory of how it happened, but our memory plays tricks on us far more often than the stats do.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4216/evan-longoria-giants#ixzz51uRJztOE

[rog]

Once again Mark makes a good point here. Evan's hitting changed so much from 2016 that he might have been hurt. If that is the case, I'm back on board with the trade. The Rays' paying down Longoria's contract a bit makes that more palatable.

For the OLD Longoria, his contract is a steal. The question is how he will age. I am quite concerned about his trends last season (after a FINE 2016 season that is the only one that goes against Randy's point that Evan has been declining. 2016 looks though like it may have been the outlier.).

Evan was an above-average player in 2017. But he was far cry from the superstar or near-superstar he was earlier in his career. If Evan plays as a Giant they way he played last season, the deal will be a very good one. If his downward hitting trend continues, it wouldn't be too bad a deal. But if last season was the beginning of a downtrend within his downtrend, we might be disappointed -- especially once we reach the (roaring?) 20's.

[rog]

One positive about Longoria is that he should be hurt less than most with regard to hitting home runs. Between 2016 and 2017, only four of his homers were to right or right-center. That's four out of 57.

[rog]

I agree with Boly on Christian Arroyo. As I've described before, he has the POTENTIAL to become a very good hitter if he can become more selective. But while he has been working to do so for at least two years that I know of, he can't quite seem to bring it together.

I don't think Christian will be a bad hitter. He doesn't swing and miss a lot. I just don't think he'll be a particularly good one.

By the way, Boly, it's nice to agree with you!

[rog]

Other than that they're trading the guy who has long been the face of their franchise, I think this is a fine deal for the Rays, who did a lot to open up payroll beginning in 2019. That doesn't mean it can't be a good deal for the Giants too, so I'm hoping when I re-evaluate Longoria, I'll like it more. I'm already not liking it a little less.

[sfgdood]

To me I find it curious that the same fellows on this board who DETESTED the idea of bringing in a reigning MVP and absolute BEAST at the plate are now more than happy to overpay for a player who at one time was good enough to finish in the top 10 in MVP voting but who last year was outhit by the guy everybody now hates, Denard Span.

[Islandboagie]

It doesn't make a lot of sense not liking this deal. Nobody here was even remotely content with Arroyo playing 3rd base next season except Rog and I who thought it should be in a platoon situation.

But even if I was ok with Arroyo platooning, his broken hand last season was a major concern for Arroyo's future. He couldn't prove himself without a plate in his hand, now it's going to be even less likely.

Nobody here thought Span should be in CF and a few thought he offered anything, even off the bench.

The two pitchers were guys I'd never heard of until yesterday.

So what are we losing exactly?

We're losing 2 guys you all didn't want to see on the field, and 2 pitchers we didn't know existed until yesterday.

What we got is a gold glove 3rd baseman who has power and can drive in runs consistently.

What the hell is wrong with that?

[Islandboagie]

Randy- To me I find it curious that the same fellows on this board who DETESTED the idea of bringing in a reigning MVP and absolute BEAST at the plate are now more than happy to overpay for a player who at one time was good enough to finish in the top 10 in MVP voting but who last year was outhit by the guy everybody now hates, Denard Span.

Boagie- I didn't like the idea of giving up Panik and our good prospects for a guy that came with a huge contract. Stanton's contract would have hamstringed the Giants ability to make other needed moves. Plus getting rid of Span sweetens the deal for Longoria considerably.

[rog]

I'm still deciding on this, but here is one way of looking at it:

OPS in his first six seasons: .874, .889, .879, .850, .896, .842

OPS in his past four seasons: .724, .764, .840, .737


Evan's first six seasons were all excellent. With the exception of 2016, his past four seasons have been kind of so-so. What will his next five (contract) or six (option year) look like? While Evan's fielding still appears to be above-average, that too has been declining.

The things that worry me most are Evan's significantly decreased exit speed in 2017 and his jump in ground ball rate. Higher and harder is the hitter's mantra these days, and in 2017 Evan was decidedly lower and slower.

[rog]

Regarding Stanton, his opt-out after three seasons greatly shaded the risk/reward ratio. Opt-outs are great for the player, and lousy for the team.

[klaiggeb]

rANDY-Boly...do you really believe Longoria is going to produce significantly more here in the twilight of his career than we would have seen from Arroyo, at a vastly higher price tag?

Personally I don't see the subtraction of Span as so great that taking on a top dollar salary for a player well past his prime is a good or even "brilliant" trade off.

***boly says***

I like the trade a lot, for a large number of reasons, Randy.

Firstly he's NOT the big bopper we all hoped for.

That's a fact.

But defensively, he's a HUGE upgrade over Pablo or anyone else we've got

2-He's got 20+ HR pop in our park, not 30. And I don't expect 30

3-He's 32 years old, not 42. He's got at least 3 or 4 good years left

4-Span was dead weight and WOULD have taken playing time away from Hunter or someone else, in LF.

5-My problem with Arroyo ALWAYS was his foot speed. He's not slow, but he's a base clogger, and based upon his body build, he's likely to bulk up and get slower.

6-He's a tweener. Not fast enough or quick enough to play SS, not enough power to be a 3B man.

boly

[sfgdood]

20 HR I expect to be a stretch at AT&T for Longoria...he's more likely a 10-15 guy, and declining.

His "good" years are a thing of the past as last year proved, especially in our ballpark.

Span might have been dead weight and I expect we'll be saying the same very soon about Longoria

[rog]

Positives to the proposed Stanton trade would have been that the Giants didn't have to give up a lot, and the $235 million they would have assumed wasn't at all bad for a player of his magnitude.

The other problem with the trade is that Stanton has had a hard time staying healthy, and it's difficult to see that improving by a whole lot as he ages.

As Mark mentioned, a positive to Longoria's career is that he's been healthy enough to play just about every game.

[donk33]

Dec 21, 2017 13:29:45 GMT -5 rog said:

Positives to the proposed Stanton trade would have been that the Giants didn't have to give up a lot, and the $235 million they would have assumed wasn't at all bad for a player of his magnitude.

The other problem with the trade is that Stanton has had a hard time staying healthy, and it's difficult to see that improving by a whole lot as he ages.

As Mark mentioned, a positive to Longoria's career is that he's been healthy enough to play just about every game.

dk..first  let me say that I have been a Longo fan since his days when he was filling in for Tulowitzki at SS for  Long Beach State...however, I think Longo's good days are  over ..I just can't picture a SoCal guy going from playing indoors in Florida to outdoors in cold and windy SF...I just don't understand why the Giants have a farm system if they continue to ignore the performance of their farm hands in AAA...it is a good thing Duroucher was around when Mays came to the Giants...I just think when a guy hits close to .400 in AAA, you have to have some patience with him ...especially when he is young...and by the way, Longo had one year on  the 60 day DL..Longo hits into a lot of DP's ...

Aside, I met Longo"s father at a CC game and found him a little lound, and corky...the introduction of Ball to the   Lakers and the constant attention to his big mouth father reminds me of Longo and his Dad....but it was a brief and short meeting and I probably should have given him the benefit of the doubt 

[rog]

I'm down with the trade now. At $60 million, Evan needs to be only about seven wins over replacement to justify his salary. Then there's the wins lost by not having Christian Arroyo around, but I don't expect that to be a lot. And any wins they gave up by trading Denard Span, but that should be negligible. Due to his precipitous fielding decline, Denard was rated at one win BELOW a replacement player last season.

Longoria has seven wins above replacement over the past two seasons alone, so getting that many over five years shouldn't be a big issue. I guess he'll need to overcome Arroyo's wins as well, but I don't expct that to be too high a barrier. The issues I've been worried about are somewhat offset by his increased walk rate and decreased strikeout rate. As Mark or Randy said, he may have been playing through an injury.

The upside is that the Giants got something for Span. (Of course, they had to give up Arroyo too.) And with Tampa paying a significant amount of money and taking on Span's contract, the risk of a long-term contract with Longoria is reduced.

Longoria should play well enough to justify the contract. The question is how much Arroyo -- who is cost-controlled for six more seasons -- will contribute.

So far the Giants have helped 2018 without significantly hurt their future IMO. Pretty good, actually. If they could get rid of Pence, that would be an off-season I couldn't imagine.