|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 6, 2019 15:07:47 GMT -5
We have a shot at signing Harper? Sure...and clowns aren't scary.
Of course, if this did happen, which is as likely as snow in the Arabian desert, I'd change my entire opinion of Zaidi.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 6, 2019 23:20:16 GMT -5
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3 
|
Post by rog on Feb 7, 2019 9:46:34 GMT -5
I'm not entirely sure why Bryce Harper would want to play for the Giants. Lousy team. Lousy hitters' ballpark. Older team that isn't good now and doesn't look like it will be good soon. Not a great recipe for a player who likely is concerned about building his legacy, hoping not only to make the Hall of Fame, but to be considered one of its top players.
But should the Giants simply ignore that Harper's likely signing price has dropped this offseason? Or while realizing it likely won't amount to anything, shouldn't we be happy that the Giants are recognizing that Bryce may be a better bargain than it appeared entering free agency and are looking to see if something could possibly be worked out?
When the Giants make little moves, we criticize them because we realize that while little moves could help, the ground to be made up is much too large for the little moves to add up high enough simply by themselves. Then when it appears the Giants are pursuing this offseason's #1 free agent, we put them down because it seems highly unlikely that they'll be successful.
So far we've criticized them for the little moves; we're criticizing them for pursuing the biggest move; we've criticized them for looking at possible trades for their #1 trading asset.
What do we want them to do -- just roll over?
By the way, most clowns aren't scary, are they? Are you guys watching the wrong clowns? If a clown is scary, I'm not going to pay attention to him.
Is Emmitt Kelly the most famous clown of all time? Emmitt's son didn't follow his dad into clowndom, but he did become a trapeze artist, although I'm not sure if he pursued it professionally.
Are we ourselves being scary clowns here, seemingly critizing everything?
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 7, 2019 11:52:45 GMT -5
Clowns ARE down right scary, Roger, and if you don't think so, talk to 10 or 20 little kids.
They don't find them funny at all.
They give them nightmares.
As for me... they always made me... 'uneasy' as a child.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 7, 2019 14:36:24 GMT -5
If clowns are scary, they aren't doing a very good job of being clowns. Why were you uneasy about clowns when you were a kid? I simply thought they were, well, clowns.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 7, 2019 14:40:15 GMT -5
Stop and think about it: Circuses are for kids. Clowns are an important circus act. If clowns were truly scary, don't you think the circuses would eliminate them?
I think it is possible that clowns have been used by Hollywood in a way that sometimes makes them seem scary, but I don't think clowns are inherently scary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 7, 2019 15:41:28 GMT -5
A lot of people have a fear of clowns, and as you pointed out, Hollywood probably has a lot to do with that. The movie 'IT.' The scene in Poltergeist where the clown toy attacks the kid.
I think it's a psychological thing as well, this is why Hollywood uses them often as a creepy character in a scary movie. A clown can disguise his or her identity to appear almost inhuman. The drawn on smile can mask their true intentions. Because the clown is well disguised it creates an unknown because the actual true emotions of the person underneath are masked.."is this a good clown or a bad clown?" It creates the same anticipation in a film as a shadow of a monster. Or like in Jaws, you didn't actually see the shark until the very end of the movie, because not knowing where the shark is or what the shark looks like can be just as creepy. Same goes for a clown, you dont know what that person under the clown makeup truly looks like.
Oh, and John Wayne Gacy was also a part time clown.
I wouldn't say I'm fearful of clowns, as in I wouldn't run away if I saw one, but I'd be lying if I said they weren't a little creepy.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 7, 2019 19:39:43 GMT -5
If you're a pitcher, Bryce Harper at the plate is scary!
That said, aside from his amazing MVP season of 2015, Bryce has been only a 3-win-per-season player in his other six campaigns. That's a good player -- Brandon Belt has been about a 3-win-per-season player over his past seven seasons -- but it's certainly not a superstar.
Like Belt -- and probably to an even greater extent -- Harper would be more valuable if he had been able to stay healthier.
Don't get me wrong. I'll be as excited as heck if the Giants sign Bryce, but it takes a fair leap of faith to spend what it will likely take to get an injury-prone and inconsistent star as Harper is. All things considered it will likely be a bigger risk than if the Giants had acquired Giancarlo Stanton a year ago. And of course with such a high-visibility player, it would be a similarly perceived impact move.
It seems highly unlikely that the Giants will sign Harper, but who would have thought that with as few prospects as they had that they would have been able to work out a deal for Stanton a year ago? Of course Stanton had full veto rights, and he placed a stake into the heart of the agreed-upon deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 7, 2019 19:42:35 GMT -5
At the time when 'circuses' were the big entertainment, they 'may' have been funny.
But circuses haven't been a big deal since the 1950's.
Talk to kids born in the 1950's and 1960's a ton of us were afraid of clowns.
And, as boagie points out, Hollywood has made that even more so.
Like boagie, I, too, always thought they were creepy.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 7, 2019 23:22:02 GMT -5
I must have lived a sheltered childhood. I've always thought that clowns were pretty cool.
Would Judy Collins have asked to send in the clowns if they were truly scary? (By the way, Frank Sinatra's version is my favorite. As usual, extremely nice phrasing.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 7, 2019 23:58:59 GMT -5
The song is referring to clowns as fools, not circus clowns. Like Brian Kenny and Joe Maddon, not Bozo or Ronald McDonald.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 8, 2019 0:15:35 GMT -5
Don't bother ... They're here.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 8, 2019 0:19:14 GMT -5
I just heard Barbra Streisand's version. What a voice!
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 8, 2019 0:48:10 GMT -5
And she sang it with Susan Boyle too.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 8, 2019 0:50:10 GMT -5
This thread started out with signing Harper. Regarding signing, I nearly wrote singing. And now the thread has come full circle and is about singing. Hopefully it won't turn out to be about singeing.
|
|
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 Feb 8, 2019 18:06:40 GMT -5
If we acquire Harper it would be a waste for boh him and the Giants because this roster has NONE chance of making any kind of hay in the playoffs.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 8, 2019 22:56:43 GMT -5
I agree with your comment quite a bit, Randy, but I do want to amplify on one factor that could make a difference.
The contract Harper signs will almost certainly be for at least eight seasons. So he could contribute well beyond this season, becoming the centerpiece of the rebuild.
And how about this season? The Giants were projected for 76 wins prior to adding Holland and Pomeranz. I don't think it would be unusual if that pair added three wins between them.
Now let's suppose that the Giants sign Harper, and he adds five wins. And the Giants come up with two lesser outfielders, but the pair combines to add three wins between them.
I'm not sure we've talked about anything unreasonable here, and suddenly the Giants are up to 87 wins. The Rockies earned the final NL playoff berth last season with 91 wins, but they would have made them with just 83 wins. If we split the difference, we're at 87 wins. Which just happens to be the Giants' projection after redoing their outfield. Who knows, maybe one or two of the little moves they've already made provide a win or two, and suddenly the Giants look like a team that could win 90.
Should we be totally happy with that? Of course not. I can't see being truly happy until the Giants put together a team that should win 100 or more games. But the 2014 team that won the last of the three World Series won 88 games in the regular season. With Harper and another couple of smaller outfield moves, the Giants might suddenly find themselve capable of being competitive.
So how would the Giants attract Harper to San Francisco without totally overpaying for him? The city itself is an attraction, and Harper would likely enjoy playing with the Giants' players, who as a group have a lot of character -- a factor that helped win them World Series. You sell the organization, not its present state.
You flatter Bryce. You show him he will make his reputation as an all-time great because he will be the only player without a steroid taint to hit the ball OVER the difficulties of AT&T. You show him how the team's fortunes will suddenly turn around, and he will get credit for being the superstar who made it happen. You show him now outfielders play differently in the park, and a lot of his line drives to the outfield that were caught last season when he hit just .243 despite hitting the ball very hard will fall in, and that he will hit for a high average as a Giant. Harper needs his .279 career average to move toward .300 if he's going to be known as an all-time player.
And to be honest, you probably have to overpay for him. But the cost of a win today is around $8 million or more. If five extra wins mean the difference between 76 wins and a .500 team, the cost isn't worth it. But if they mean the difference between making the playoffs and not making them, the cost IS worth it. If they mean the difference between just making the playoffs and winning it all, the cost is WORTH it.
A little over a year ago the Giants were willing to blow the budget to pick up a superstar who just completed his age 27 season and still had 10 years left on his massive contract. Might they be willing to sign a superstar two years younger than that to a 10-year contract this winter?
Maybe.
Today Farhan admitted that the Giants had met with Harper in Las Vegas. (Farhan joked that a fan "made" Giants CEO Larry Baer in the casino.) Our buddy (and Farhan's too, if one believes what he reads here) Alex Pavlovic writes that the meeting lasted longer than expected.
Later Farhan met with agent Scott Boras on Boras' private jet. Farhan had joked that when he first went to Boras' room, he went to the wrong one, prompting a wag to write that apparently Farhan isn't good with numbers!
It has been reported that the Giants have yet to put a contract in front of Harper and Boras, but they are expected to do so in short order (if they're really cooking).
I certainly wouldn't automatically put Bryce in a Giants uniform yet, but are we finally becoming convinced that Farhan is at least trying?
|
|
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 Feb 9, 2019 3:09:24 GMT -5
I think 76 wins was and still is ambitious. And by the time the roster is good enough to compete, how old and weathered will Bryce be? He surely will only be a fraction of what he is now
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 9, 2019 10:38:46 GMT -5
I think 76 wins was and still is ambitious. And by the time the roster is good enough to compete, how old and weathered will Bryce be? He surely will only be a fraction of what he is now Rog -- By your own definition, the Giants will have been World Champions by the end of Bryce's 30-year-old season, or Farhan will have been a failure. Joey Votto finally showed decline last season in his 34-year-old season, although he still played at a very high level. So it is possible that if the Giants were able to sign Bryce to "just" an eight-year contract, he would show virtually no decline at all. It seems ironic that by your definition, Farhan is a failure if the Giants haven't won it all before the 26-year-old Harper is old and weathered, and yet Harper will be old and weathered before it is reasonable to expect the Giants to compete. Does that point out to you how unrealistic you are in at least one of the two directions if not both? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/5065/yeah-right#ixzz5f33xDvgB |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 10, 2019 12:39:17 GMT -5
I dont see how 76 wins is too ambitious for any team.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 10, 2019 13:31:34 GMT -5
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 10, 2019 13:37:42 GMT -5
You realize that when Babe Ruth retired, he held the record for career strikeouts, right? I think maybe it was Mickey Mantle who first broke it.
When one looks at the career leaders in strikeouts, he's sees a lot of Hall of Famers listed.
|
|
