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

03.19.2008
Veteran Savvy and Untested Rookie

Item #1: Behold the words of Dave Roberts in today’s Chron and know why athletes shouldn’t be counted on for rational analysis.

Regarding Eugenio Velez making the team, Roberts said, "I don't see how he couldn't. He's obviously got talent. He's having a great spring. But we've still got time left. We've all seen great springs not have any correlation to the season. He's fearless with speed and aggressiveness. You've still got to see it over a period of time."
 
Did Roberts reach out and slap himself halfway through that quote? He’s having a great spring, but — SLAP! — No, you fool, spring performance often has no correlation to the season!
 
Item #2: The Crede-to-Giants trade talks have “all but ceased” according to Chicago Trib reporter Mark Gonzales (hat tip to MLB Trade Rumors). Gonzales doesn’t quote anyone directly, but we can only hope the following sentiment in fact reflects what the Giants brass have told Gonzales: “…the Giants wonder how much difference Crede actually can make to a team clearly behind the rest of the National League West. And surrendering a top prospect for Crede would stunt some of the rebuilding the Giants need to return to the upper echelon of the division.” 

Item #3: you catch this tidbit in today’s Merc? Brian Bocock will be the Giants’ opening day shortstop.

[Brian] Sabean said he was unconcerned that Bocock hasn't played above Class A, that he hit .220 in 87 games at San Jose last season or that he has a .182 average this spring.

"He'll have to play the little game till he gets his feet on the ground," Sabean said. "He's making more contact this spring, that's the good thing."

As for the danger of starting Bocock’s service clock, which would put him in danger of running out of options in 2010 instead of 2012 (I think), Sabean said this: "It'll be good for him to get exposure," Sabean said. "You can't worry about the clock."

In this case I agree. Clock, schmock. The kid has about a 2% chance of ever sticking in the big leagues, so why not use him now when the team really needs a good glove for a couple weeks? Some will argue this is another instance of short-sighted blundering by the Giants front office, and I don’t totally disagree. But as I noted here, at least it’s fun short-sighted blundering.

Get your predictions in now: What will Bocock’s major-league AVG / OBP / SLG be? Even better: What will his nickname be?







[March 19, 2008 3:13 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Frank said

1) It's only for a couple weeks, 3 max, I assume. 2) Isn't Ochoa nearly as proficient and a slightly better hitter? 3) Since Ochoa is older doesn't it make much more sense to start, or restart, or rewind, his clock and save Bocock's?

[March 19, 2008 4:34 PM]  |  link  |  reply
FelipeForever said

I'm not convinced that there is any difference (in terms of using up options) to playing Bocock. If I am right, it frightens me a little that Sabean does not seem to understand the rule. Here's what I posted on MC yesterday:


After looking at a BP article that explains options - I won't link because it's subscriber-only - I don't think there is such a concern about "starting the clock" on our young middle infielders. Consider:

"A player is eligible for a fourth option season if he has been optioned in three seasons and has not yet amassed five full seasons of professional baseball experience. A little slower now: if a player runs through his three option years very quickly in his professional career than his team is granted a fourth option.
Consider another Giant, pitcher Kevin Correia. As you can guess from his professional record he was added to the Giants 40-man roster in 2003 and optioned down to the minors in 2003, 2004 and 2005. Three options burned so he can't be optioned again in 2006, right? Well, because his options were burned before he amassed five seasons of professional experience, he gets a fourth option year.

What counts as a season of professional baseball for the option rule? Generally speaking, a player has to be on the active list of a major-league or minor-league team for at least 90 days during a championship season to be credited with a season of service."

I think that this 4th year rule would apply to both Bocock and Burris (41games and 65 games respectively in their first year of play) if they are used at the start of this season. They would burn an option this year, but even if they continued to burn 'em in '09 and '10, they would get options in '11 as well. Funny thing is, if you don't put them on the 40-man this year, the timeline would be the same (if they put in a full season in the minors this year).

I lose the thread a little when the rule-5 thing surfaces, so maybe someone can correct me?

[March 19, 2008 4:41 PM]  |  link  |  reply
ELM replied to FelipeForever

I'm confused about the fine points, too, but we should assume Sabean knows exactly how it works. Whether you agree with the move or not, he's not making it because of gross misunderstanding of a fundamental personnel rule. If it turns out he doesn't understand it, it's grounds for instant dismissal.

[March 19, 2008 5:03 PM]  |  link  |  reply
FelipeForever replied to ELM

Agreed. I expect Sabean gets it, and he can even use the general confusion about it to look good from a PR standpoint (i.e., our club doesn't worry about these petty details).