2013 Rosterbation

[gp956]

lump cost all together? Cain is 120 with the option.

Bourn = 50mil
Melky = 40
Quentin = lets say 35

50 + 40 + 35 = 125.... hence almost as much as Cain? Made sense to me. I meant total cost of investment, not yearly salary.

Sure. Rowand's contract is coming off the books, need to sign someone to replace him.

 

[tzill]

lump cost all together? Cain is 120 with the option.

Bourn = 50mil
Melky = 40
Quentin = lets say 35

50 + 40 + 35 = 125.... hence almost as much as Cain? Made sense to me. I meant total cost of investment, not yearly salary.

That's kind of silly, no? Comparing apples and oranges. Like saying a $200k home and a $200k car cost the same. The first is typically paid over 30 years and the second over 5.

Put another way: how many player years is Cain's contract vs. the number of player years in this mythical OF?

 

[MarcoPolo]

Bourn isn't enough of an upgrade over Blanco/Pagan to invest significant coin into. You'd be buying at peak price, and you're already gonna do that with Melky. Pass

Exactly. Michael Bourn is having a career year. I cringe when I think of all the CFs the Giants have signed in the past 7-8 years, each one having "career" numbers just before signing with the Giants, and then flopping totally. Well, Winn didn't totally flop, but he was moved to RF for the parade of losers in CF : Steve Finley (trade, not signed), Dave Roberts, Aaron Rowand. Four new CFs in four consecutive years. And stuck with Rowand for 4 years.

That just has me shivering that signing a CF who will demand Rowand-esque bucks and years might not work out well at all. Bourn's career line isn't BAD (especially not his stolen base totals), but it's not worth the $12-$15M/yr he's going to ask for.

Frankly, rather than signing a lead-off hitter to play CF, I'd rather gamble that Gary Brown will make it in a year or two, and just keep a stop-gap in CF (Blanco/Nate/scrap). Brown started off very slowly at the plate, but has been doing much better the last few weeks. My fingers are crossed that he will be the 2014 starting CF, stealing 35+ bases a year.

 

[gp956]

Exactly. Michael Bourn is having a career year. I cringe when I think of all the CFs the Giants have signed in the past 7-8 years, each one having "career" numbers just before signing with the Giants, and then flopping totally. Well, Winn didn't totally flop, but he was moved to RF for the parade of losers in CF : Steve Finley (trade, not signed), Dave Roberts, Aaron Rowand. Four new CFs in four consecutive years. And stuck with Rowand for 4 years.

That just has me shivering that signing a CF who will demand Rowand-esque bucks and years might not work out well at all. Bourn's career line isn't BAD (especially not his stolen base totals), but it's not worth the $12-$15M/yr he's going to ask for.

Frankly, rather than signing a lead-off hitter to play CF, I'd rather gamble that Gary Brown will make it in a year or two, and just keep a stop-gap in CF (Blanco/Nate/scrap). Brown started off very slowly at the plate, but has been doing much better the last few weeks. My fingers are crossed that he will be the 2014 starting CF, stealing 35+ bases a year.

I agree with every point.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I agree with every point.

I imagine Lucifer just picked up the phone and yelled "What happened to the fucking heat down here! "

 

[Stokes1931]

I imagine Lucifer just picked up the phone and yelled "What happened to the fucking heat down here! "

Any cooling in hell has been accompanied by added heat where I now live.

 

[SFGRTB]

I'll be honest, I forgot about Brown when mentioning Bourn.

But in any case, Bourn and Rowand are COMPLETELY different players. Rowand was clearly supported by a ballpark that fit perfectly to his swing and came to a ballpark that was completely awful for his swing. Rowand was "expected" to be a middle of the order bat, Bourn would be expected to get base nocks and get on with XBH being a bonus. And Bourn hasn't gone from leadoff hitter to power hitter to average hitter to world beater in his career; he's a leadoff hitter and doesn't try to be anything but that.

 

[SF11704]

Ok - just to throw it on the table ..... we have GREAT pitching. Even with Timmy in some sort of a funk. Cain and Bum are locked. Vogs looks to be for real. Timmy has proven what he is capable of .... if he's healthy and his mechanics come back into alignment ..... what would he be worth as a trading chip over the winter meetings? As a team we have proven that we can hold our own even as he is struggling ... does this make him expendable for us?

 

[msgkings322]

Ok - just to throw it on the table ..... we have GREAT pitching. Even with Timmy in some sort of a funk. Cain and Bum are locked. Vogs looks to be for real. Timmy has proven what he is capable of .... if he's healthy and his mechanics come back into alignment ..... what would he be worth as a trading chip over the winter meetings? As a team we have proven that we can hold our own even as he is struggling ... does this make him expendable for us?

The 'trade Timmy' idea is about as tricky as it gets. It comes down to knowing/guessing how he'll come out of this, if at all.

If Timmy doesn't improve much from here, you trade him even though your return would be pretty lousy just to get someone to take his $20 mil off your hands. Because whoever you slot to replace him can't do any worse than 4-14 in games they start.

But that's the only scenario where you deal him. He is a team fixture, a marketing fixture, and he still could come back to being a solid #3. There's too many pathways to keeping him, and only one to trading him. I think we are stuck with him at least until next year's deadline.

 

[ColinCoby]

Michael Bourn has been linked to the Giants, for good reason. Blanco has been a nice story, but he has really hit the wall. I'd like to keep him around as a 4th OF, but Bourn is basically and established version of him.

IMO, signing Bourn, Quentin and re-signing Melky would make a great offseason.

What do you think about trading for Josh Willingham? He's having another solid year, and his contract is reasonable (7 million a year for the next 2.5 years).

 

[SF11704]

He is a team fixture, a marketing fixture, and he still could come back to being a solid #3. There's too many pathways to keeping him, and only one to trading him. I think we are stuck with him at least until next year's deadline.

I hear you, but I also feel that this is a 'business/organization' perspective and not the feeling of a fringe fan like like myself. I love Timmy but I love being in the playoffs and WS more. I love the excitment that it generates. Torture is a great thing ..... as long as you're winning.

My fear is that we'll be in the area of 25M for a #3 starter that has a #1 marketing value .....

 

[msgkings322]

I hear you, but I also feel that this is a 'business/organization' perspective and not the feeling of a fringe fan like like myself. I love Timmy but I love being in the playoffs and WS more. I love the excitment that it generates. Torture is a great thing ..... as long as you're winning.

My fear is that we'll be in the area of 25M for a #3 starter that has a #1 marketing value .....

Sure, mine too. But that's what happens whan an ace inexplicably turns into...what we have right now with him. There's no good news about it, it's how do you deal with it.

And the 'business/org' perspective is how you get to the playoffs as often as possible. You can't just make 10 expensive moves and hope for one WS year.

The silver lining here is either Tim will improve and we can breathe, or he won't and we only have him for 2 years when we were all begging him to sign for 5.

 

[filosofy29]

But in any case, Bourn and Rowand are COMPLETELY different players. Rowand was clearly supported by a ballpark that fit perfectly to his swing and came to a ballpark that was completely awful for his swing. Rowand was "expected" to be a middle of the order bat, Bourn would be expected to get base nocks and get on with XBH being a bonus. And Bourn hasn't gone from leadoff hitter to power hitter to average hitter to world beater in his career; he's a leadoff hitter and doesn't try to be anything but that.

I agree with this. I do know that you should always temper enthusiasms on somebody when they're playing for a contract.....that said, I'm not all of a sudden in love with his HR's. He steals bases at a great clip (and has a decent SB/CS percentage) and his speed would help track down fly balls in CF. I'm not saying one way or another whether the Giants should target Bourn, but I don't think the same thing that happened to Rowand would happen to Bourn.

I know this is SSS and I'll probably get curicified for it (and rightly so), but the Giants were playing some damn good ball (with a struggling Timmay) when Blanco was doing pretty much what Michael Bourn does at the top of the order.

 

[Heathbar012]

What do you think about trading for Josh Willingham? He's having another solid year, and his contract is reasonable (7 million a year for the next 2.5 years).

I was talking about him with some friends last week. The Twins have been pretty awful this year aside from him. That addition would make the outfield defense shaky at best, but he is certainly crushing the ball this year, young and on a reasonable contract, as you pointed out. Plus, Minny owes SabeySabes. EDIT:

 

[MarcoPolo]

I'll be honest, I forgot about Brown when mentioning Bourn.

But in any case, Bourn and Rowand are COMPLETELY different players. Rowand was clearly supported by a ballpark that fit perfectly to his swing and came to a ballpark that was completely awful for his swing. Rowand was "expected" to be a middle of the order bat, Bourn would be expected to get base nocks and get on with XBH being a bonus. And Bourn hasn't gone from leadoff hitter to power hitter to average hitter to world beater in his career; he's a leadoff hitter and doesn't try to be anything but that.

My point is that (hopefully) the Giants don't NEED to go out and buy a leadoff hitter on the open market, so the money shouldn't be spent. I'd rather get my .270/.340/.370/.710 with 40 SB and 3 HRs not to mention great defense in CF from a cheap kid than have to pay $12M+/yr for it on the open market. I think Bourne's going to want to sign for 4+ years. And as I mentioned before, since he should be coming off his best season ever, his price just went up.

And I have a special place of darkness in my heart when it comes to free agent CFs - I remember 3 consecutive years of hope replaced by despair. {shiver}

Edit: Hey, if by some strange twist of fate Bourne isn't signed by Feb 1st because he is asking way too much and nobody is biting, and is willing to sign a one-year contract with us for $6M, I'd be dancing every day for the next few weeks. But I don't think it's going to happen, and I don't think that the Giants should tie up huge gobs of money at a position where they might be able to fill it internally just one year later.

 

[SFAnthem]

Easy to say now, but did management miss the boat a little on signing Melky?

Of course, this is based without knowing how contract talks are going but I'm pretty sure the Giants fans here at the Hoop were on it regarding his impending free agency before it's become a nationally recognized topic.

Given that OF solutions from the minors are more than a year away, we were hoping to lock down him as a corner back in April/May.

I like Pagan, he's been solid but Melky is such a versatile multi-tool player that I would hate to let get away. This is not just about his hitting. It's his defense and deceptive speed that has really impressed me.

 

[SFAnthem]

My point is that (hopefully) the Giants don't NEED to go out and buy a leadoff hitter on the open market, so the money shouldn't be spent. I'd rather get my .270/.340/.370/.710 with 40 SB and 3 HRs not to mention great defense in CF from a cheap kid than have to pay $12M+/yr for it on the open market. I think Bourne's going to want to sign for 4+ years. And as I mentioned before, since he should be coming off his best season ever, his price just went up.

And I have a special place of darkness in my heart when it comes to free agent CFs - I remember 3 consecutive years of hope replaced by despair. {shiver}

Edit: Hey, if by some strange twist of fate Bourne isn't signed by Feb 1st because he is asking way too much and nobody is biting, and is willing to sign a one-year contract with us for $6M, I'd be dancing every day for the next few weeks. But I don't think it's going to happen, and I don't think that the Giants should tie up huge gobs of money at a position where they might be able to fill it internally just one year later.

This.

I hope the Blanco/Pagan/Nate situation is serviceable enough to not have the Giants as desperate buyers at the end of the season. So far, they have.

 

[SFGRTB]

What do you think about trading for Josh Willingham? He's having another solid year, and his contract is reasonable (7 million a year for the next 2.5 years).

They should have just signed him 7 months ago.

They will be asking for a lot, no need to waste prospects no when we can get a very similar player in the offseason, or even at the deadline for a lot cheaper (Quentin).

 

[gp956]

My point is that (hopefully) the Giants don't NEED to go out and buy a leadoff hitter on the open market, so the money shouldn't be spent. I'd rather get my .270/.340/.370/.710 with 40 SB and 3 HRs not to mention great defense in CF from a cheap kid than have to pay $12M+/yr for it on the open market. I think Bourne's going to want to sign for 4+ years. And as I mentioned before, since he should be coming off his best season ever, his price just went up.

And I have a special place of darkness in my heart when it comes to free agent CFs - I remember 3 consecutive years of hope replaced by despair. {shiver}

Edit: Hey, if by some strange twist of fate Bourne isn't signed by Feb 1st because he is asking way too much and nobody is biting, and is willing to sign a one-year contract with us for $6M, I'd be dancing every day for the next few weeks. But I don't think it's going to happen, and I don't think that the Giants should tie up huge gobs of money at a position where they might be able to fill it internally just one year later.

This. Again.

 

[filosofy29]

My point is that (hopefully) the Giants don't NEED to go out and buy a leadoff hitter on the open market, so the money shouldn't be spent. I'd rather get my .270/.340/.370/.710 with 40 SB and 3 HRs not to mention great defense in CF from a cheap kid than have to pay $12M+/yr for it on the open market. I think Bourne's going to want to sign for 4+ years. And as I mentioned before, since he should be coming off his best season ever, his price just went up.

And I have a special place of darkness in my heart when it comes to free agent CFs - I remember 3 consecutive years of hope replaced by despair. {shiver}

Edit: Hey, if by some strange twist of fate Bourne isn't signed by Feb 1st because he is asking way too much and nobody is biting, and is willing to sign a one-year contract with us for $6M, I'd be dancing every day for the next few weeks. But I don't think it's going to happen, and I don't think that the Giants should tie up huge gobs of money at a position where they might be able to fill it internally just one year later.

I agree with this pretty much 100%. I was just backing up sfgrtb's assertion that the same pitfalls/ails that happened with Rowand wouldn't happen with Bourn. They're not even close to the same type of player. I think Bourn would have a much greater chance to living up to an inflated FA contract than Rowand ever did.

I'm not advocating to go out and grab Bourn though.