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

09.07.2008
You Can't Spell Gillaspie Without "Gasp!"

As in, good golly Miss Molly, the Giants just called up their #2 draft pick Conor Gillaspie, the fastest a draftee has reached the majors in club history. So he must have been absolutely killing the ball in his few minor league at-bats, no?

No. But the front office guys say they want to see how he handles himself at the plate and at third base before they go out and sign Casey Blake to a three-year contract this winter. If that's really true, it's a self-delusion, what Joan Didion would call magical thinking -- even if they start Gillaspie every game the rest of the way, it's not enough data to make important decisions in the off-season. There must be some other motive at play, perhaps contractual small print that forced the Giants to add Gillaspie to the 40-man roster, which they're not willing or able to make public.

According to the complicated rules, a team can keep a player on the 40-man roster for three years and move him back and forth without subjecting him to waivers. (If I'm wrong, please correct me.) So for a while it won't matter if Gillaspie is in S.F. or in the minors. But this move shortens the deadline for the Giants to decide what to do with him. It gives the team less control.

Perhaps they feel that if he's not on the big club for good by his fourth professional year, he won't ever be a legitimate major leaguer. That would be a dumb assumption; he's only just turned 21. The more I mull it over, the more it seems a contractual obligation. And with that, I hope he starts Wednesday because I've got tickets.
Also on the Network:



[September 7, 2008 12:23 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Johnny Disaster said

September call-up as a contractual item? That's interesting, but is it legal? If so, would it be possible to use early call-ups as a way to separate draftees from Scott Boras?

[September 7, 2008 4:07 PM]  |  link  |  reply
obsessivegiantscompulsive said

That's an interesting idea, I was wondering why the Giants moved him up so fast, other than they think he can make it up here in that time.

He is supposed to be a very polished hitter. He's noted for his pure hitting ability - it's his best tool - and been rated as a "very good hitter who has a good idea of what he's doing at the plate."

I think the main problem is his lack of power and thus he's in the wrong position for that type of output. 2B has been mentioned before, but we have a lot of prospects there.

[September 7, 2008 9:01 PM]  |  link  |  reply
giantsrainman said

You are in error in your understanding of the rules for options. This year will not count as an option year since Connor will not be optioned this year to the minors after he was added to the 40 man roster. Time spent in the minors prior to being added to the 40 man roster does not count. Further, according to Steve S at the McCoven Gillaspie will actually have four option years since he was added to the 40 man roster so quickly.

[September 7, 2008 9:06 PM]  |  link  |  reply
giantsrainman said

With regards to getting enough ABs to be a statistically significant sample this only applies to you, me, and the rest of us amature GMs since we do not have a scout's eye to make an evaluation without stats. Sabean and company are looking to get a scout's view of Connor Gillispie's readiness not a stat geek's view.

[September 8, 2008 12:17 AM]  |  link  |  reply
Ryan said

giantsrainman,

actually, you are wrong about the option year(and you are mis interpreting what Steve S said). This is an option year since he has been added to the 40 man roster. Once a player is added to a 40 man roster that counts as an option year. Neyer's primer is very good, btw: http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/transanctionsprimer.html

[September 8, 2008 12:34 AM]  |  link  |  reply
David in the Desert said

Lefty,

I see Sandoval went 3 for 2 with 5 RBIs in the clean-up spot. When's the last time a rookie with 70 at bats in the major leagues batted fourth?

I know his sample size is still small, but dare we hope? Is he the second coming of Willie McCovey or simply a mirage for thirsty eyes?

We need answers, Lefty.

[September 8, 2008 2:26 PM]  |  link  |  reply
ELM replied to David in the Desert

David, I don't have a definitive answer for you. Pablo looks like he should stick, but we'll have to wait until the inevitable time when pitchers figure out his weaknesses. How he adjusts is a much better indicator of his long-term prospects than his first 70 at-bats.

[September 8, 2008 1:43 AM]  |  link  |  reply
giantsrainman said

Ryan,

No, you are not understanding correctly Neyer's primer. Connor Gillispie was not just added to the 40 man roster without also being added to the active roster and therefore this does not count as an option year. For it to count as an option year he would have to be on the 40 man roster but not one the active roster.

What is most likely confusing you is that the Neyer primer fails to account for the expansion of the active roster beyond the 25man limit that only applies thru the end of August.

A much better and more complete explanation of options (and for that matter any other baseball transaction) can be found on Cot's Baseball Contacts in his Transactions Glossary.

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2003/01/transactions-glossary.html

[September 8, 2008 3:42 AM]  |  link  |  reply
Ryan replied to giantsrainman

Well, the site you link to says:
"When a player is added to the 40-man roster, his club has three “options,” or three separate seasons during which the club may to move him to and from the minor leagues without exposing him to other clubs. A player on the 40-man roster playing in the minors is on optional assignment, and within an option season, there is no limit on the number of times a club may demote and recall a player. However, a player optioned to the minor leagues may not be recalled for at least 10 days, unless the club places a Major League player on the disabled list during the 10-day window."

It does seem that the operative condition is being on the 40 man roster, and not the active roster. So since he has been added to the 40 man roster, this would count, right? The text right below does indicate they would have 4 options (as steve s said) but all the literature I've come across is pointing to an option being used.

[September 8, 2008 4:49 AM]  |  link  |  reply
giantsrainman said

I have tried to be nice but it is becoming clear that you are not reading for comprehension but rather reading to try and find what you want to find. Cot's is very clear that being on the 40 man roster is not what makes a year an option year. What makes a year an option year is being optioned to the minors for more the 20 days in a year one is on the 40 man roster. Connor Gillispie has not been optioned to the minors this year after he was put on the 40 man roster and therefore this year is not an option year. Connor's time in the minors this year before he was added to the 40 man roster does not count as an option.

Why don't you just admit you are wrong? I do when it is shown that I am.

[September 8, 2008 4:51 AM]  |  link  |  reply
giantsainman replied to giantsrainman

Above ment to be in reply to Ryan I just forgot to check the reply box.

By the way Lefty, why do we have to both select reply and then also check the reply box? Seems like this two step process makes it way to easy to make this mistake.

[September 8, 2008 2:24 PM]  |  link  |  reply
ELM replied to giantsainman

Clicking the "reply" link should automatically make it a reply. You shouldn't have to check the reply box as well.

[September 10, 2008 1:46 AM]  |  link  |  reply
Anonymous replied to giantsainman

"Why don't you just admit you are wrong? I do when it is shown that I am."


Hooo,boy....that's a good one. The proverbial pot calling the kettle black.

[September 8, 2008 6:53 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Ryan replied to giantsrainman

Rainman,

I too have tried to be respectful of you, but what you accuse me of, may in fact be your own crime. This is not to say that you are wrong on the issue, but you have missed the issue (and question) I am trying to raise, namely what is the operative (or activating) principle of a year being counted as an option year.

Your gloss of Cot's caveat of only applies *if* the operative principle is *when* a player is added to the 40. That is, it only counts as an option if the player, plays in the minors *after* being added to the 40 man roster. Some of Cot's language can be read that way, but it isn't exactly clear (and note that his use of 'when' doesn't necessarily denote what I take to above, though it might).

If, however, the operative principle is *that* a player has been added to the 40, thereby making that year an option year (unless caveats apply). That is, this operation is logically prior to the caveats, which then may or may not apply. In this case
once a player has been added, the entirety of the year is in play as opposed to just the part subsequent to being added to the 40. The language Cot uses (Neyer as well)is open to this reading. Also note the use of 'total' Cot's caveat, as such use fits the latter interpretation.

I don't think Cot's piece (at least the parts I have read of it) answer this question. It is also highly advisable that you read your interlocutors more carefully than you are so far doing, since it does seem you are not reading for comprehension (which necessary if to counter someone), and far more a convenient eisegesis; get off yourself a bit here.

[September 8, 2008 3:40 PM]  |  link  |  reply
erikg said

Lefty -- just an FYI housekeeping thing. With this move, you have to update the 40-man roster in your right hand module.

I think they took Timpner off to put Gillaspie on.

[September 25, 2008 11:52 PM]  |  link  |  reply
Marco Polo said

When a guy on the 40-man roster is "optioned" to the minors, it counts as an option year (well, unless he spends less than 20 days in the minors).

Since Gillaspie didn't spend any time in the minors after being added to the 40-man roster, this year doesn't count as an option year.

It's really quite simple, I don't understand why everybody is making it sound so complicated.