I have said it before and will say it again, if the Giants only concern with the Panda catching is the increased risk of injury then they are morons. If we were talking about a career for Pablo at catcher that would be one thing but one year at the most of catching isn't going to be any riskier then him playing third and chasing foul balls into the dugout like he did several times last year.

Catching will wear out your knees ala Mike Piazza and could cause some back issues in some cases like with Joe Mauer but one season of catching isn't going to hurt the big Panda one bit and would create a much better situation for the Giants to improve via trade or some of the free agent options.

I have heard the rumors that the Giants are trying to acquire Kouzmanoff from San Diego and if so I have to say I do not object. Although he is less then ideal, I think Kouzmanoff is young enough and has enough potential to fill the 5th spot in the lineup and if it costs us Frandsen and Lewis or Bowker or even Gillespie, I have no problem with it. If this trade goes through and we don't get fleeced I will have some nice things to say about Sabean.

The obvious objection for me is the existence of Buster Posey. I think given the choice between Sandoval at catcher and Posey at catcher one would choose Posey - I get the impression that he's more suited for the position, less likely to have injury risks at the position, better stamina, etc. So going forward I think Posey is the catcher and Sandoval is at third.

Of course, since we've been told Posey won't start this season at catcher, it leaves open the possibility of Sandoval being this season's starting catcher. But the logic of doing that is that it allows you to sign a better bat at third. And that doesn't make much sense to me over the long-term, unless we move him over to first and that's just stupid. In other words, having Sandoval as a catcher only makes sense if we can get someone with an above average to good bat to play third. And while it's theoretically possible to do that, it seems like Sandoval is only going to be playing catcher for a season or two at most, leaving us with the question of what to do when Posey comes up. Do you move Sandoval to third and the new guy over to first? Do you move Sandoval over to first? But both of those suggestions are exactly what you said we SHOULDN'T do. It makes more sense to me to just upgrade first, where we're kind of bad, and where there should be more good offensive options available. That also has the benefit of not causing problems going forward - it would be much better in the long term to get a good first baseman, instead of having to move a good third baseman over to first.

To sum up: we should have Posey playing catcher in the very near future. That means we shouldn't move Sandoval there to upgrade third. Instead, we should keep him at third and upgrade first (which theoretically should be much easier than upgrading third anyway).

Sorry for the long response.

I have to agree with Doug. I think the flaw in the argument is to think in terms of individual players instead of a team. Although Sandoval might be (theoretically) the best catcher in the NL, and only the third best third baseman, the Giants are best served by having both Sandoval and Posey in the lineup ASAP. The fact that there is a larger percentage advantage at one position than the other is irrelevant unless vacated positions can also be filled in with superior players. There is enough flexibility (with Pablo, and others) to consider that, but without the bats to plug into the holes, the mental exercise goes nowhere.

I don't disagree with any of your comments, I think they are all valid points and I would have no problem starting Posey. The only thing to consider is that Posey is not ready to produce right now and his first few months are going to be rough.

If he played all year at AAA and came up next year he still is going to go through a rough patch for a while until he gets to know the league. I saw him a few times in San Jose and I like his approach at the plate, his patience, and he has shown some ability to hit in the clutch.

He also has a little defensive work to do but he has some nice tools like a canon for an arm. I would prefer to ease him in this year and start the year with Pablo behind the dish for a month or two to give Buster a chance to get going in AAA before he gets thrown in the mix.

The other advantages to having Sandoval catch is we wouldn't have to spend money on a catcher and could go out and get a ligit impact bat like... well we could get DeRosa or maybe Beltre although I would prefer to pay less for 2 years of Branyan or maybe Byrd with enough money left over to sign an end of the rotation SP.

Lastly, I am worried that the Panda will lose his catcher eligibility in fantasy as I have him in a keeper league and his value is much higher at catcher!

I think the Giants do not want to put any roadblocks in the path of Pablo continuing to develop in the elite offensive player he has show the potential to be. They believe that asking him to return to catching (even for just 2 or three months) and thus having to focus on the responsibilities a catcher has with regards to leading a pitching staff would be such a roadblock. I for one am in agreement with this accessment.

I think Doug's assessment may be off somewhat. Looking at the relative difficulty of each position, Panda manned a position (3B) which is rated as the average (difficulty) of all positions. Moving him to the right, to a more difficult position, on the assumption that it would not affect his wOBA, is questionable...

One of the things that bothers me the most about Sabean and the Giants management is they can't seem to be honest with the fans. I don't expect them to tell us everything but there is a consistent theme every year with them where they like to say one thing and then change their minds or do the exact opposite.

Last year it was saying at the end of the year that Burris would be our starting shortstop and then going out and getting Renteria the first chance they had. This year they have waffled on Posey first proclaiming that he is not ready and then doing a complete 180 and saying he is now an option.

All they would have had to say a week ago was that they ideally would like Posey to start in AAA but are not against the idea of him being their starting catcher next year instead of saying very convincingly that everyone decided he is not an option and then a week later claiming that he is.

They don't say how much money they actually have to spend and at the first sign that a trade or signing might be difficult they use it as an excuse as to why it didn't get done. "The Pudge signing is not going to help in our situation," Oh well, we might as well pack up our shit and go home!

I just feel like no other GM's in the league really take Sabean very seriously, they know he is gun shy from being taken advantage of in the past and they probably laugh in his face when he offers guys like Frandsen and Lewis for major league ready talent. Everyone is untouchable to Sabean except his AAAA misfits that nobody wants. I am sure he already has that excuse ready to go when the season starts and no improvements have been made; we tried to make some moves but other teams were just asking for too much!

News flash for you Brian, other GM's are not stupid like you and they don't want our garbage. If you really want to get a trade done then you will have to part with some of our young talent. Otherwise just tell the fans the truth, that this is a rebuilding year and we don't expect to compete but we will be giving our young guys a chance to develop. Fans will appreciate the honesty and our expectations will be where they belong. Unfortunately, he has already convinced Neukom that we will be competitive this year and is now scrambling around trying to figure out how in the world he is going to make it happen.

As many have pointed out, the move proposed by Walter Guest is high risk: Perhaps there would be greater risk of injury, perhaps Panda's wOBA would fall, given all of the demands of catching.

On the other hand, moving Panda to catcher for half (and filling 3B with a utility man until Posey comes up) makes use of one of our few (perhaps only) strategic assets on offense: despite being overweight Kung Fu Panda is an extra-ordinary athelete who breaks the mold (ambitextrious, hits well outside the strike zone, plays multiple positions, and effortlessly learned 3b). Although moving him to catcher might be risky, this might be seen as the sort of risk you take in asymettrical warfare. Without risks (and without playing to your strengths) you will always lose when playing a below-average offense.

This is, of course, an iconoclastic point of view, and I fully realize it is unlikely to happen.

I think it could be smart for the Giants in 2010 to play Sandoval at C but stupid for the long-term. So it depends on what is more important to you, doing well in 2010 or doing well in 2011-2014.

Sure, we could put Pablo at C and he would be extra-valuable there. Then we would put him back at 3B, where he just missed all spring training playing there plus 2-3 months of the season, or a full season if Posey don't bring it this season (for some reason).

Meanwhile, you now have to play Pablo at 1B because we signed an "above-average" 3B (who is this mythical creature? I don't see anyone there who is above-average), once we are done using him at C.

As Guest shows, Pablo at 3B is just marginally lower in terms of premium-ness at hitting. Meanwhile, I would bet that his defense at 3B probably more than makes up for that difference over how he would be playing catcher full-time again after not catching for a long while.

Why jerk Pablo around? This is not a "roll-the-dice" fantasy game. It's a real person dealing with different situations, and even the best could not help but be distracted and less productive being moved around like a chess piece.

Leave him at 3B, let him get comfortable there, so that maybe he can be even more comfortable hitting. Clearly, playing defense at 3B does not interfere with his hitting; playing defense at C might. His maximized long-term value is if he can stay at 3B for at least the years we control him. Playing him at C for even just a couple of months would probably set him back defensively and offensively.

Why risk that? Why not feel glad that we have a bonafide, year-in, year-out, All-Star 3B, and just build from there?

Pablo is not a china doll or a piece of antique furniture. When he came up to the bigs he was a CATCHER!! He caught all through the minors and kicked ass! It is a short term solution and I agree that I would rather see him at 3B, the fantasy reference was meant as a joke!!

The problem is there are very unattractive alternatives at C including Posey. None of the options there will help improve this team getting the Giants competing for the playoffs like your buddy Neukom proclaimed they would. Here is the solution for you and it isn't a very good one but would work and at least provide a slight glimmer of hope:

Start Panda at C and sign Blalock for 2 years. Blalock can play 3B to start the year and then slide over to 1B once Posey is ready to take over at C and Panda would move back to 3B. I don't like Nick Johnson much but if you prefer him then sign him for 1B and resign Uribe to babysit at 3B until posey is ready.

I can't get excited about either of these lineups but it would be better then doing nothing.

option 1:

1. Torres/Velez LF
2. Nate RF
3. Sanchez 2B
4. Panda C
5. Blalock 3B
6. Ishi/Guzman 1B
7. Rowand CF
8. Renteria SS

option 2:

1. Velez/Torres LF
2. Sanchez 2B
3. Nick Johnson 1B
4. Panda C
5. Uribe 3B
6. Nate RF
7. Rowand CF
8. Renteria SS

Posey is a great prospect, but not the only one in baseball. Seems that there could be a fair trade out there for a top of the line 1b, 3b, LF type comparable prospect to Posey. The question comes down to this, if Panda can catch, then is there a better hitting (by a good margin) prospect than Posey (this hitting ability must make up for the difference in position)? If so, get er done Sabes!

When well-meaning people like Walter use statistical analysis with baseball, my eyes often glaze over. It seems to me that a lot of those that take part in such analysis trust the numbers more than they trust their eyes in actually watching the game and players.

I see people defend the Renteria signing because at the end of the day his numbers appeared ok, when the actual reality is that he was awful and that his contract was awful.

Any significant upgarde at third above what Panda could produce or at first base will not be achieved unless you throw $10 mill a year type of contracts to people like Beltre, whose numebrs would no tbe better than Panda.

The idea to throw Panda behind the dish would work if we had those significant pieces in place for first and third and that putting Panda at catcher would put us over the top and lock in a playoff run. This team as constituted will in no way be guaranteed a playoff run, let alone winning 80 games.

So if a playoff run is not a likelihood, why the hell would you put the one significant offensive piece we have at risk playing the most demanding physical position in the game. The net result would be an obvious decline in his offense. It is one thing for a Joe Mauer playing in the AL with a DH to put up fantastic numbers, no one else in baseball at catcher can put up those kind of numbers, not even close.

There has been a clear diminution in catchers since steroid testing testing came into being...is there a surprise? In addition to lacking the significant pieces at third and first that would be a notable upgrade over Panda, adding those two pieces would at least add $15 mill in payroll minimum to this team and there is no evidence the Giants this year are going to do that.

So even though people think on paper and in stats, moving Panda to catcher makes sense, even for a half a year, you put at risk the health of the one offensive force we have. If you were weighing the benefit versus the risk, the heavier side would be on the risk side of the calculation.

Interesting comments and mostly valid. My main point, which apparently no one except Sabean disagrees with, is the Giants have a better chance of winning in 2010 with Sandoval catching.