When the Giants Come to Town, It's Bye-Bye Baby

03.28.2008
Sabes Against the Machine

Yesterday’s post brought much debate over blame for the current mess. Brian Sabean’s fault? Ownership’s fault? Who’s really in control? Unless we get incriminating e-mail off the Giants’ servers…

From: P-Mags [mailto:thebigguy@sfgiants.com]
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 12:54 PM
To: ‘Brian Sabean,’ ‘Dick Tidrow,’ ‘Larry Baer’
Subject: RE: Get Zito?

I don’t care how much Boras wants. Get him. Sign him. Love him. Baer: Get the marketing campaign fired up. Order 20,000 “Zito 75 jerseys” from that discount factory in Guangdong. Zito: he’s hot, he’s now, he’s what we need. Everyone with me? If not, maybe Peter Angelos is hiring. Good luck with that.  

…we’ll never know for sure how these decisions came down. However, yesterday’s Brian Sabean show — Razor Ralph Barbieri’s weekly grilling of Sabean on KNBR 680 — gave us a few revelations. Other than Sabean’s diss of the segment’s intro music, the totally excellent guitar riff from Rage Against the Machine’s “Killing in the Name of…”, the most interesting tidbit was his admission that the team “rode the Bonds wave” as long as it could and should have started the transition a couple years earlier.

This is different than the non-Bonds Jedi mind-trick the Giants are trying to foist upon us this spring. This is saying the last few years have been a foolish errand. (And for all of it, Joe Sheehan of BP says today the Giants are “the worst team in baseball, and rapidly challenging for the label of worst organization.”)

That’s cold comfort to those of us who were pleading for a rebuild in 2004. And note that Sabean still won’t use the R word; he calls the current situation a “march to get younger,” which hopefully won’t come to resemble a slightly more famous march.

But there it is: we should have done this earlier. (Which leads to the question, are you really doing it now? Let’s discuss that next week.) The turning point was during the All-Star break, when Sabes got his extension instead of his pink slip. He said Magowan agreed to commit significant dollars to scouting — he mentioned Latin America and the draft specifically. Read between the lines: Until then, there wasn’t enough money committed to those areas. That’s ownership’s fault.

Then Sabean said they’ve “overloaded” previous drafts with pitching. That’s his own fault, and about as clear a mea culpa as you’ll get from the guy. He said the goal is to get an impact position player in this summer’s draft, in which the Giants have the #5 overall pick.

Other notes from the interview (and kudos, by the way, to Barbieri, who always puts Sabean on the spot):

* Frandsen “probably would have been the starting 3rd baseman” if he hadn’t gotten injured.

*Rajai Davis will get plenty of at-bats because Lewis and Roberts aren’t “adept against left handed pitching” and Rowand will need time off.

* There’s a bit of worry about Kevin Correia’s shoulder. He’ll pitch Sunday if it feels better. But keep an eye on the situation.

* Steven Holm is battling for the backup catcher spot.

* Brian Bocock is “All-Star caliber with the glove, and way off with the bat.” It seems certain he’ll start the year with the team and be sent down when Vizquel returns.

* The team is well aware that Merkin Valdez and Erick Threets wouldn’t get through waivers if they failed to make the team. He gave shout-outs to Yabu and Fortunato for pitching well, but he said the Giants “don’t want to risk losing arms at 26 [years old].”

* Crede and Inge deals dead? Sabes: “I think so.” He’s now more concerned about getting a real “presence” in the lineup, preferably a left-handed hitter to break up the Rowand-Molina-Aurilia righties. This is more of a problem because Ortmeier isn’t doing much from the left side, which isn’t a surprise to anyone who knows how to read historical batting splits. Sabes alternately said the team is committed to giving Ort a chance and threatened to demote him if he doesn’t produce out of the gate.



Also on the Network:



[March 28, 2008 6:39 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Jefferson said

I'm sure there's plenty of blame for everyone in the front office. Except Lou Seal. That dude's teflon!

[March 28, 2008 7:24 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Frank said

A lot in this story - and for us not in SF and, therefore, unable to hear these weekly shows: Thanks.
It is encouraging to hear 1) more money and more focus on Latin Amer and Int'l (sure it could have come sooner, but it also could have come never. So, later is better than never) 2) hear a statment of too much emphasis on pitching 3) hear they will affirmatively focus more on bats and posiiton players.

While I am very discouraged about this year and completely unable to discern a 'strategy,' I am encouraged by all the arms in the minors and by last year's draft. If Villalona is for real and if we get a real star at #5 then the rest can fall into place. I guess "hope" depends on this year's draft and who many contracts are dropped by this time next year.

[March 28, 2008 7:25 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Frank said

A lot in this story - and for us not in SF and, therefore, unable to hear these weekly shows: Thanks.
It is encouraging to hear 1) more money and more focus on Latin Amer and Int'l (sure it could have come sooner, but it also could have come never. So, later is better than never) 2) a statment of too much emphasis on pitching 3) hear they will affirmatively focus more on bats and posiiton players.

While I am very discouraged about this year and completely unable to discern a 'strategy,' I am encouraged by all the arms in the minors and by last year's draft. If Villalona is for real and if we get a real star at #5 then the rest can fall into place. I guess "hope" depends on this year's draft and how many contracts are dropped by this time next year.

[March 28, 2008 7:36 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Josh from Hollywood said

Now wait just a minute there, Lefty. You may have written your beautiful poetry in 2004, but I clearly remember you taking a very different position in a heated debate you and I had in the comments section of this site in 2005, following the Jerome Williams-LaTroy Hawkins deal, and this post, in which you wrote the move was "just what the Giants needed: instant quality in the bullpen". It seems all the comments were lost after you moved/updated the site, but as I recall, I argued the Giants should be hoarding young pitching for the future, not trading it away for veteran stop-gaps, and you defended the move as a means of competing that year, saying if I ran a team it would resemble the Pirates or Royals, and the fans would revolt.

[March 28, 2008 11:48 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Aaron B. said

Despite all the Giants' marketing/front office bullshit, I'm still optimistic about the future. Not really in 2008 but definitely 2010 and maybe even 2009 if everything breaks right.
I also think that if Ortmeier struggles, Schierholz needs to be the first guy called up. Gotta see if he can make it or not.

[March 29, 2008 2:50 AM]  |  link  |  reply
reeky said

Good reading of the tea leaves. There's always hope in baseball! You can catch Razor and Mr. T (which is which?), including the Sabean interview, at http://knbr.com/razorMrT/index.html .

[March 29, 2008 11:44 AM]  |  link  |  reply
obsessivegiantscompulsive said

Thanks for the reportage!!!

Well, that pretty much confirms that ownership has been the problem, with their tight grip on the purse strings. I've been complaining about that since the "Maddux" slush-fund money was revealed. I still like my suggestion long ago that the owners sell out to Larry Ellison, I think he could get the team going.

I think it's way to early to say the Giants are the "worse team in baseball". With a rotation like they have, as long as they perform as expected, they will be no where close to the worse team in baseball. Now "worse offensive team in baseball", I definitely can hang with that. And I'm OK with that. Better than to trade away young guys for an illusion of offense.

I think history has shown that the Giants got the better of that Hawkins trade, he and Kline have been valuable out of the bull whereas Williams and Aardsma have not. Aardsma didn't even make the team this year (not that I can recall) and Williams is begging to pitch in A-ball (do not get him ANYWHERE near Villalona).

The problem with getting an impact position player with our pick this year - and I am all about getting one, don't get me wrong - is that the impact position players available at our pick are almost all firstbasemen, and we already have an impact firstbaseman in our farm system, Villalona. This is the Giants old McCovey-Cepeda dilemma all over again.

I am happy about most of the info bits that came out of the interview, particularly about Threets and Valdez. And too bad about Frandsen, but that verifies what I've been saying all along about all the 3B rumors, the Giants were leaving 3B open in case Frandsen lost the 2B gig to Durham.

[March 29, 2008 1:49 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Josh from Hollywood replied to obsessivegiantscompulsive

My point was not that the Giants lost the Hawkins trade -- in hindsight, it's pretty clear neither team was helped or hurt much by the deal. My point was that any trade which sent a young prospect away for a veteran stop-gap was a bad idea for the organization's progress at that time (and should've been opposed by those hoping for the re-building process to begin). Remember, while that particular trade didn't cost the Giants any arms they wish they had back, that same philosophy led to similar (read: "short-term minded") moves for Hillenbrand and Stanton a year later, which resulted in the loss of more young arms, including one Accardo.

[March 29, 2008 3:56 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Boof replied to Josh from Hollywood

Not to mention the 3 quality arms (one who is now the best closer in baseball) for that asshat, AJ Dickhead.

[March 29, 2008 11:43 PM]  |  link  |  reply
ELM replied to Josh from Hollywood

Damn, you busted me. It's true, I've gone back and forth the past few years. I've thought at times a "gentle" rebuild would work, as opposed to a "tear the fucker down" rebuild like Beane is doing right now across the Bay. Depends on the mood you catch me in.

[March 29, 2008 9:19 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Elbo replied to obsessivegiantscompulsive

Aardsma did make the team -- the Boston Red Sox, that is.

[March 29, 2008 12:53 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Boof said

Ok, let's assume that you are correct and the Giants are not the worst team in baseball (which requires a huge leap of faith), can you tell us who has a worse team than the Giants right now and why?

[March 30, 2008 12:10 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Matt Schiavenza replied to Boof

The Giants are pretty clearly in the bottom four of the major leagues along with Pittsburgh, Florida, and Baltimore. Florida's starting pitching is an absolute disaster and losing Cabrera from the offense will cost them (by David Pinto's estimation) about nine wins this season.

As for Pittsburgh, their offensive won't be that much better than the Giants and I'd say we've got better pitching than them, if just slightly.

Baltimore is pretty weak across the board with only one really quality player on the whole roster (Markakis).

An injury to Cain or Lincecum, though, would move the Giants straight to the bottom I'd say. Their offense will almost certainly be the very worst in the majors and even with reasonable health it's unreasonable to expect the Giants to win more than 65 games or so.

[March 30, 2008 1:14 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Frank said

Washington, Houston, and St Louis could all finish worse than us, even though they don't have to play in the much more difficult NL West.