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

05.28.2008
Joe Castle Made of Sand?

PM UPDATE: If you didn’t know, former LA GM Paul Podesta has a blog. He’s now a consultant for the Padres. He doesn’t write every day, but this one is interesting. He breaks down the reasons behind a recent trade of fringe relievers: the Padres traded pitcher Jared Wells to Seattle for pitcher Cha Seung Baek. It’s a great window into some of the factors behind personnel moves. Even better, Podesta uses “whom” correctly.

And for everyone who likes the Giants’ new emphasis on speed and defense, Podesta has a warning: 

Since 2004 (opening of Petco), there have been 14 NL teams who have won at least 89 games, and there have been 14 NL teams who have won 71 or fewer games. What is a common characteristic of the 14 winning teams? Every single team that won at least 89 games out-homered their opponents over the course of the season. Every single one. Of the 14 teams at the bottom, just 3 out-homered their opponents. So, out-homering your opponent does not guarantee success. However, getting out-homered generally leads to tee-times in October. 

***

Nice win last night, led by Molina and Lincecum, the Giants’ two leading All-Star candidates.

Watching Jose Castillo go 2–for-4 with a booming home run, though, I thought about my assertion that Randy Winn is the team’s best trade candidate right now. I’m not so sure that’s true. Castillo is still young (27), he’s cheap (salary under $1 M), and so far he’s not bad.

His .263/.323/.462 line puts him in the middle of the pack of major league third basemen. Put it this way: he’s having a better year with the bat than Ryan Zimmerman and Bill Hall. Check back in September, and I’ll be shocked if this is still true, but for now them’s the facts.

Sure, he’s grounded into a lot of double plays — often by swinging at the first pitch, it seems — but do you know his averages when he swings at the first pitch? .321/.321/.679. That’s a cool 1.000 OPS. First-pitch swingers drive me nuts, too, but at least he often hits the ball hard in that situation. (Kids, don’t try this at home.)

His defense has come under fire, but whaddya know? BP’s Rate2 stat puts him above average (though well below average as a second baseman). Hardball Times ranks him next to last in RZR, a measure of his range. As always, defensive stats come with the caveat of my suspicion. For example, last year’s runaway RZR winner, Pedro Feliz, is 11th this year. Maybe he’s injured and has lost range. Maybe the sample sizes are too small.  

The larger point is that Castillo could be attractive to a team that needs utility infield help or an emergency second or third baseman down the stretch. He also could be attractive to the Giants as infield insurance for 2009, but if the opportunity to sell high on him arises, Sabean shouldn’t hesitate. Rich Aurilia and Travis Denker could handle 3B for the rest of the year.



Also on the Network:



[May 28, 2008 3:30 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Anonymous said

Why not trade Rowand? He may fetch more and get a lot in return. Of course, the other team has to take a lot of salary, but if there is a suitor, sell him off.

[May 28, 2008 3:42 PM]  |  link  |  reply
ELM said

>Why not trade Rowand?

Highly unlikely, perhaps impossible. No one wants the risk of his last two or three years as he reaches his mid-30s. Plus the giants wouldn't do it. He's a gamer.

[May 28, 2008 3:55 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Chris said

I don't know much about Rate2, but does it use FRAA/FRAR in any way in it's calculations?

I put much more stock into PBP data like the RZR stuff than I do most of BP's defensive metrics, just because they don't use PBP data. I think Castillo's D is as every bit as bad as the Revised Zone Rating makes it out to be.

I'll admit that he's hitting way better than I could have ever imagined. He's hitting for more power and walking more than any other time in his career, so I'm naturally a little skeptical if he can continue it, but it's been a pleasant surprise.

I still think his D is atrocious, though.

[May 28, 2008 4:30 PM]  |  link  |  reply
obsessivegiantscompulsive said

Why trade Rowand our one good legitimate hitter in our lineup? He's hitting .331/.398/.538/.936 which is way better than all the people pooh-poohing the deal when it was made.

Unless we are getting two top hitting prospects for him (say, LaRoche and Kemp), which is not going to happen in any case, and particularly since we have no legit CF in our farm system, I don't see the value in trading him. If he's traded, then we'll just have another re-building year in 2009, whereas if we can add another good hitter, we should at least be competitive in 2009 with the pitching we have.

[May 28, 2008 5:11 PM]  |  link  |  reply
obsessivegiantscompulsive said

If you look at his defense in 2006 at 2B, he wasn't that bad, about average it seemed, for the most part, accrdig to Baseball Musing's analysis: http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/DisplayCharts.py?PlayerID=1866&fpos=4&year=2006

I think that 2007 is not worth comparing, both due to lack of a lot of chances in any one position, and to the fact that he didn't even play full-time.

If the other team offered a half-decent prospect, I would be more than happpy to trade him and play Aurilia there for the rest of the season - that would open up more play at 1B for either Ortmeier or Bowker.

[May 28, 2008 10:36 PM]  |  link  |  reply
PM said

Regarding Rowand, the Giants will not be competitive anytime soon. 2009 is not going to be the year. He is not a bargain, i.e., with the amount of money he is making, you could get another free agent at about the same cost and get similar performance. Contending teams will not want junk from the Giants, but may be willing to pay very good prospects for someone like Rowand. Of course, in reality, most probably, they will balk because of his high salary. But if someone takes him for a high price, then go for it. I do not see the Giants contending anytime before 2010 or 2011. His spot can be utilized to give to Ortmeier, Bowker, and Schierholtz. Of course, trading Winn is the other option, but, teams may not be willing to part with real blue-chip prospects for him.

[May 28, 2008 10:47 PM]  |  link  |  reply
PM replied to PM

Sorry, probably, Rowand has a no-trade clause for 2008.

[May 29, 2008 12:54 AM]  |  link  |  reply
Ben said

I don't know why we are talking about Rowand being traded that will never ever happen. However I am interested in what kind of return we could get from some of the other guys. Castillo is an interesting guy to bring up and I agree that he is no long term solution and would love to see him flipped for a decent prospect. Durham has been swinging the bat really well as of late too and could possibly raise some interest from a team competing that needs a solid hitting 2B. I still have to think that Winn has the most trade potential though. He has the ability to bring a really good bat lower in the lineup that could turn a really good team into a great team.

[May 29, 2008 2:12 AM]  |  link  |  reply
Jonathan said

The Giants can compete for a playoff spot if Lincecum and Sanchez continue their current progress, Cain returns to his 2007 form and Zito continues his own progress to recapture his form from the last third of 2007. I don't really think this is a farfetched scenario. The 2009 free agent class is pretty weak though, and there will be a feeding frenzy for a handful of players, like Teixeira.

Let's hope Neukom is reading Paul's blog.

[May 29, 2008 11:59 AM]  |  link  |  reply
ELM replied to Jonathan

>Let's hope Neukom is reading Paul's blog.

Who's Paul?

[May 29, 2008 1:54 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Johnny Disaster replied to ELM

I think DePodesta...

[May 29, 2008 11:53 AM]  |  link  |  reply
PM said

Winn has a partial no-trade restriction in that he can block deals to 10 teams. Cott's Baseball contracts says that Durham and Molina have "no-trade restriction". They also say that Zito has a "full no-trade clause". How does "no-trade restriction" differ from a full no-trade clause? I was hoping that "no-trade restriction" was actually a typo for "no trade restriction", but I don't know. Does anybody know what trade restrictions are on Durham and Molina?