 |
 |
When the Giants Come to Town, It's Bye-Bye Baby | |
|
|
When the Giants Come to Town, It's Bye-Bye Baby | |
|
Giants 40-Man Roster
Active Roster in Bold (w/'09 Salary) PITCHERS
Affeldt (3.5 M)Cain (2.65 M) English (AA) Hinshaw (AAA) Howry (2.75 M) Joaquin (AA) Johnson (8 M) Lincecum (.65 M) 60-day DL - Lowry (4.5 M) 60-day DL - Martinez Matos (AAA) Medders (.475 M) Miller 60-day DL - Pichardo (AAA) Romo Sadler (AAA) Sadowski Sanchez (.455 M) Sosa (AA) Valdez (.40 M) Wilson (.48 M) Zito (18.5 M) CATCHERS
B. Molina (6 M)Whiteside INFIELDERS
BRVMT LEAVE - Aurilia (1 M)Bocock (High A) Bowker (AAA) Burriss (AAA) Downs Frandsen (AAA) Gillaspie (High A) Guzman (AAA) Ishikawa Renteria (7 M) Rohlinger (AAA) Sandoval Uribe (1 M) Velez (AAA) OUTFIELDERS
LewisRowand (12 M) Schierholtz Torres Winn (8.25 M) OTHER
Bonds ($5 M deferred from '04 + interest)Roberts (6.5 M) Yabu (.1 M) Gigantes
McCovey ChroniclesObsessive Giant Compulsive Only Baseball Matters Orange Black and Blue Giants Win Give 'Em Some Stankeye Skaldheim Say Hey, It's Mays Field! The Cha-Cha Bowl Bay City Ball Jay's Giants Blog FanBunker Giants page Giants Cove Cot's Contracts - Giants page The Old Lefty Malo Ligas Menores
Fresno Grizzlies Stats Norwich Navigators Stats San Jose Giants Stats Augusta GreenJackets Stats Otros Beisboleros
Soxaholix Aaron Gleeman (Twins) The Soul of Baseball Batgirl (Twins) Tiger Tales The Cub Reporter Dodger Blues Cardinal Diaspora Athletics Nation The Pinstriped Blog (Yanquis) Futility Infielder (Yanquis) USS Mariner Phillies Phlow The Score Bard's Humbug Journal Fire Joe Morgan Free Agents: Post-2006 and Beyond Dugout Dollars Diccionario del Beisbol Non-Baseball Links
Live From MontrealDC Metalwork El Commandante Batista The View from Fort Miley Toshikomi The SFist The Bistro Hugo Archives
July 2009June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 
|
Furcal it seems will cost above $10 million per for at least three years. According to Ken Davidoff at Newsday, it seems more likely that the Giants will make their FA splash by getting Orlando Hudson for 2B at a 4/$36 million deal, and Randy Wolf for two years for the back end of the rotation. This would leave them with a little left over for a reliever as well, and an infield of Pablo at 3B, Burriss, Hudson, and you-pick-em at 1B. If this pans out, I think they'll take a stab at someone like Blalock for 1B in a trade.
Don't think Hudson would be a good idea. Not only does he cost you a 2nd-round pick in next year's draft, but it means that you pretty much disqualify Frandsen from the infield competition (unless you want to try him at 3rd, which he doesn't have the bat for). I'd rather go for a SS if we're going to pick up a middle infielder, but I'd say that Furcal will be at least 3/40. Too much.
>someone like Blalock for 1B
If they're going to trade for one year of a corner infielder, I'd much rather see a trade for Adrian Beltre. Blalock's LH power won't play well in Mays Field, Beltre is RH, and Beltre is a superior defender. Putting Beltre at 3B and Sadoval at 1B (in a platoon or otherwise) would improve the IF defense by leaps and bounds.
I see Furcal and Beltre as a parlay. Neither move makes a lot of sense in isolation, but if you land them both, you've got yourself a ballclub.
I've always loved Furcal, but if other teams aren't being scared off by his back problems, I'm going to stay out of the bidding.
Please, how many times must I shout: NO TO BLALOCK!!!
Look at his road numbers, I don't give a damn how well he hits at home, he won't be playing there much anymore if he is with our team. And you thought Neifi was bad...
Yes to Furcal for a two or three year deal. I think Manny Burriss is not quite ready yet offensively or defensively. I am afraid that he will flounder if not flop. Furcal will be a big offensive and defensive upgrade at a position at which it is always hard to get even mediocre offense. After they sign Furcal, yes to a trade for a big corner infield stick, hopefully with us sending away Rowand, Molina, or both. And Velez should still be a considered in contention for any future infield plans. The man can hit and I'll bet his shockingly bad defensive and baserunning fundamentals will be vastly improved after this offseason. He showed great improvement defensively after his second call up to the bigs. I think Velez' offensive skills have been proven.
Velez has not proven that he can hit. He played well at the end and thus deserve consideration but his BABIP was overly inflated and due for a fall back. Meanwhile, his BA is not that great, at least not enough to make up for his low BB%. He deserves the chance to compete but I don't expect him to win, he hasn't been that good. But if he does hit, godspeed and go give him a position.
I respectfully disagree re Burriss. the Giants expected little from him last season, but with no prep time he excelled defensively and improved tremendously over the course of the season as a hitter. He appeared to benefit as much as anyone from Lansford's tutelage: with more MLB experience and input from veterans like Winn and Roberts, he could be as good as Jimmy Rollins (excluding Rollins' MVP '07 season).
+1
If you examine Burriss's stats carefully, you will see that no matter how good or bad he was doing with his batting average, he always struck out about the same, a very low 10% (or 90% contact rate). Only the best batters can do that. So his BABIP was nearer the .300 that hitters in general hit (though each batter has his own level of competancy and could be higher or lower) when he was hitting well, very low when not, suggesting that his latter performance is closer to his "true" level of performance. That plus Carney is suppose to help his translate his strong arms into more power could give us a good hitting MI.
Velez was good too, his strikeout rate was roughly 15% or 85% contact rate and that's the minimum you want to see out your better hitters, but not "proven" or outstanding. 90% is very good. And his defense, while perhaps better when he got back (I'll give that one), is probably never going to no more than average, while Burriss appears to be there already. We can't wait much longer for development, the train leaves next season, he better figure it out (and as I noted before, he's been playing 2B for the past 6 years or so, why hasn't he picked up the position yet? Maybe he'll never figure it out.)
Burriss may have made a lot of contact, but I have never seen so many infield dribblers in my life. I think his offensive numbers may be slightly inflated due to the fact that he beat out a lot of swinging bunt sort of 'hits'. He could barely get the ball out of the infield almost the entire season, although he did seem to be hitting a few more line drives in the last couple of weeks. Still not much of an offensive display. He has no power whatsoever. Perhaps that will improve under Lansford, but Velez is clearly stronger offensively right now. Defensively Burriss has good range, but his arm is not super strong and he seemed to be unacceptably inaccurate at SS but very good at 2B. I hope he proves me wrong next year at SS because I like Burriss, but for now I still contend that he has not proven himself either offensively or defensively and I think he is a huge risk next year at SS if the starter. Also, his offensive success is over a very small sample size at the very end of the season, the rest of the season he looked bad. Slugging matters regardless of position in the lineup, and Burriss doesn't have it but Velez does. Velez is a double and triple hitting machine. When he grounds out it is often a line-out. He sometimes hit the ball so hard that he would ground into a DP even though he has tremendous speed. I think Velez has the potential to really contribute offensively if given a starting role. His base running and defensive fundamentals must show improvement for that to happen, but that should be easier for him to fix than if the problem was hitting. I wouldn't count him out of the competition. He was a rookie last year, so both his offensive and defense should improve. I'll guess we will have to agree to disagree but I hope they find a role for Velez if he shows the necessary improvement in the fundamentals.
His high flying base stealing in his 20's had no effect on his OBP. OBP is only a measure of how often a player reaches base relative to his attempts. However, Furcal would be a terrible signing, as his opportunity cost would be too high. He'll command a contract in the range of 3/$30-35MM. With that being said, expect him in a Giants uniform and Kruk and Kuip talking up his gamer status.
>>His high flying base stealing in his 20's had no effect on his OBP
Sorry. My statement was confusing. I meant in a very shorthand way that getting on base via walk or single was often as good as a double because of his base-stealing ability. Now that he'll likely be curtailed as a base stealer, his ability to get on base doesn't quite mean as much as it used to.
I would prefer not to see Furcal play SS for us but understand the motivation for such a move. If that is truly the difference in salary between Furcal and Hudson, I think I would rather have Hudson anyway. In either case, the Giants want to ensure that 2009 is a better season than 2008, so I'm OK with getting someone in that price range, I understand that they need to sell tickets.
But if it were up to me, I would pass and go with internal options and see what happens, I'm sure similar free agent options will be available next season, as ELM noted, neither are difference makers.
Speaking of internal options, I've seen other sites say that Sabean is being wishy-washy about Sandoval at 1B and now 3B. First off, Sabean did say that Sandoval was penciled in at 1B when the season ended for us. Obviously, by now, they have spoken with free agents and other teams, getting a better lay of the land of what is available and possible, and shifted his thinking to Sandoval at 3B now. Is it better to be bullheaded and try to make the market bend to your will (most lose doing that) or go with the flow on what the market is bringing to you? I would rather he be realistic. And again, penciled in means that it can be changed. Grow up and live with it.
I doubt $10M will get Furcal, that's more like floor and rising from there, particularly since he got $13M previously. But $10M, if we got him for that, is actually the market price for average players today, look at all the players who got around that much in recent years. Difference makers cost in the $15-20M range.
Furcal should be preferred over Hudson due simply to the fact that he plays SS rather than 2B and shortstop is the traditionally weaker offensive position. Plus we clearly have a greater need at SS because we have Frandsen, Burriss, and Velez all as possible 2B but the only real option is Burriss at SS. Ochoa was released, and I think we would all agree that Bocock did not look ready yet offensively, to put it in the nicest terms.
I didn't address Beltre at 3B because Sabean is indicating that they will give Pablo 3B next year, and will focus on 1B and either 2B or SS, with Burriss getting the one they don't fill.
I would prefer Beltre myself, but they seemed to have decided that Pablo can handle it for a year until Gillaspie or another option is ready and Pablo can be moved again until Posey is ready. Sabean seems to think that he can make a play for Hudson at 2B, and then focus on 1B.
I understand why many of you want no part of Blalock for 1B, but unless they are going to make a play for a big bat (Tex or Dunn) or trade a lot for one (Davis at Texas or Fielder), then you are left with trading for one that won't cost you much.
Other ideas?
Manny Burriss hit 6 doubles and 1 HR in 240 at bats. Just in case you think that was because he was adjusting to the big leagues, it should be noted that he had a total of 34 extra base hits in 820 minor league at bats. If he was a defensive whiz at short, I guess I could see handing him the starting job. But I think his better defensive position is second base. I understand being wary of giving furcal buckets of money, but if not him, who plays short? I don't see how it's Burriss by himself, sorry. This is the same guy who couldn't handle High A ball just last year.
Blalock isn't available. The Rangers picked up his 6M option and he'll play 1B.
Hudson only makes sense if the Giants were signing Teixera, and that isn't happening. Without a huge difference maker in the lineup, the slight improvement Hudson would bring is wasted. I'd rather see them sign Sheets, trade Sanchez for Encarnacion (if the Reds are interested) and let the infield sort itself out in 2009.