2012 FA OF comparison

[CameronFrye]

Nate has not been given consistent ABs, except for a time this season. When he was playing consistently this year, he actually carried the team. Even when he is not hitting well, he gives GG D and offers a 5 arm.

He shows the flashes that make me think he has a ceiling as a low-end, occational all-star, and a floor of a top flight 4th OF.

I like him as a nice 3rd OF. With the roster as it sits now (sans Beltran), I see him as or best option anywhere. Torres needs to prove himself again, Belt I prefer at 1B, Ross we have already discussed.

That means that we will need to acquire THREE new OFers to get Nate out of the lineup. Who do YOU propose we get (who we can afford) that makes that the right move?

Cal - First off, Nate will NEVER be an All-Star. He's just not that good. His ceiling is a comparison to Cody Ross. His likely outcome is closer to a poor-man's David DeJesus (he'll put up better HR totals, but a much lower BA and fewer RBIs and runs).

If Cody Ross would agree to come back for $1.5 mil or $2 mil, I would definitely want him in RF every day instead of Nate. Ross >>>>> Nate. But if Cody expects to make the same $6 mil he made last year or more, then I would agree that Nate is the better choice.

And for the record, I do absolutely love Nate's defense. The guy is a monster in right field. His arm, his speed, his ability to play the caroms correctly are definitely worth something to the Giants. But I don't think they're worth an everyday spot.

A scenario I could envision for 2012 is Belt, Huff, Cody and Nate splitting time between LF, RF, and 1B. Each would get to play 5 or so days per week with the defensive lineup shifting based on who was playing that day. If one of them gets hurt, the other 3 play every day. I am not saying this is ideal, but I could see it happening.

 

[filosofy29]

That makes sense. I guess I just read too much into things when reading these boards. When I would read about Beltran and some here were saying that they'd rather have Nate play right, I guess I took it to mean they thought Nate could pull off a season he wasn't capable of. But reading your response, I think I understand that what they meant was that for the price, Nate would be a much better bargain in right field - even if his expected outcome is a .750 OPS.

This (per the bold above) and also, this board isn't like most baseball/Giants fans and isn't like most other Giants message boards. Believe, me, if the Giants had even the Phillies/Angels type of budget, nobody would be clamoring for Nate Schierholtz. Most of the time the opinions on this board (save mine of course) are coming from an educated guess and when Beltran (if we are to take him at his word) says we need a legit leadoff hitter before we can even sign him along with the fact that an AL team with most likely offer him more.....well, most of us assume that is the nail in the coffin.

Basically, with Nate, you have a Gold Glove RF who has the potential to bat .275 and hit around 12 - 15 bombs for peanuts. In THIS park, with the presumed budget and the money already allocated to a pitching heavy team, that is gold (no pun intended).

Now if the FO says they are going to field a $150million team next year, I hope Nate likes sitting on benches.

 

[msgkings322]

This (per the bold above) and also, this board isn't like most baseball/Giants fans and isn't like most other Giants message boards. Believe, me, if the Giants had even the Phillies/Angels type of budget, nobody would be clamoring for Nate Schierholtz. Most of the time the opinions on this board (save mine of course) are coming from an educated guess and when Beltran (if we are to take him at his word) says we need a legit leadoff hitter before we can even sign him along with the fact that an AL team with most likely offer him more.....well, most of us are assume that is the nail in the coffin.

Basically, with Nate, you have a Gold Glove RF who has the potential to bat .275 and hit around 12 - 15 bombs for peanuts. In THIS park, with the presumed budget and the money already allocated to a pitching heavy team, that is gold (no pun intended).

Now if the FO says they are going to field a $150million team next year, I hope Nate likes sitting on benches.

He does have plenty of practice...

$150 mil? NOW we're talking. That seems as likely as Scott Cousins having Xmas dinner with the Poseys.

 

[the_broom]

This (per the bold above) and also, this board isn't like most baseball/Giants fans and isn't like most other Giants message boards. Believe, me, if the Giants had even the Phillies/Angels type of budget, nobody would be clamoring for Nate Schierholtz. Most of the time the opinions on this board (save mine of course) are coming from an educated guess and when Beltran (if we are to take him at his word) says we need a legit leadoff hitter before we can even sign him along with the fact that an AL team with most likely offer him more.....well, most of us assume that is the nail in the coffin.

Basically, with Nate, you have a Gold Glove RF who has the potential to bat .275 and hit around 12 - 15 bombs for peanuts. In THIS park, with the presumed budget and the money already allocated to a pitching heavy team, that is gold (no pun intended).

Now if the FO says they are going to field a $150million team next year, I hope Nate likes sitting on benches.

Agreed....and I still hold out hope that with consistent playing time and not having to worry about being benched if he goes 0-8 Schierholtz develops into a middle of the pack offensive player. Unfortunately, with the budget being what it probably is...the Giants need that to happen.

 

[Heathbar012]

He does have plenty of practice...

$150 mil? NOW we're talking. That seems as likely as Scott Cousins having Xmas dinner with the Poseys.

Too soon...

 

[calsnowskier]

Too soon...

This will be the case until we hear Kuip saying...

"And for only the second time since moving to San Francisco from New York..."

 

[tzill]

That makes sense. I guess I just read too much into things when reading these boards. When I would read about Beltran and some here were saying that they'd rather have Nate play right, I guess I took it to mean they thought Nate could pull off a season he wasn't capable of. But reading your response, I think I understand that what they meant was that for the price, Nate would be a much better bargain in right field - even if his expected outcome is a .750 OPS.

And think about it: If we had had three .750 OPS outfielders this year, we'd have been in the playoffs and Wheeler would still be a Flying Squirrel.

 

[Heathbar012]

And think about it: If we had had three .750 OPS outfielders this year, we'd have been in the playoffs and Wheeler would still be a Flying Squirrel.

Definitely too soon...

 

[calsnowskier]

And think about it: If we had had three .750 OPS outfielders this year, we'd have been in the playoffs and Wheeler would still be a Flying Squirrel.

The FO stated at the time of the deal that Wheeler was available because they had other prospects that made him available.

From what we have seen of Surkamp so far, I HOPE he was not the guy they were referring to.

For Discussion sake, let's assume he was not. So, who were they referring to?

Fitzgerald (25) - AA - 3.51 ERA, 146.1 IP, 111/55 K/BB, 1.380 WHIP, .320 BABIP!!! (indicates no movement??) I do not see a prospect in those numbers. Some have been high on him, but he never really did much for me.

Westcott (25) - A+ - 3.42 ERA, 155.1 IP, 87/33 K/BB, 1.210 WHIP WAY old for the level. Not sure there is much more to say after that; his numbers are not good enough by half to support his age.

Heston (23) - A+ - 3.16 ERA, 151.0 IP, 131/40 K/BB, 1.219 WHIP, 3.19 BABIP The numbers are not OMG-good, but they are certainly promotable-good. He is also much more age appropriate than Westcott, so he looks to be legit. BTW, what is an average BABIP? I thought it was about .290. Am I whacked out on that?

Verdugo (24) - AA - His numbers were not good, but from everything I hear, he is still considered a high-ish prospect. Any pitcher who struggles in the EL, though, worries me.

Marte, Kickham, De Jesus, Mejia (!!! - may be our highest ceiling pitching prospect right now), Crick, Roibal...

We have some SERIOUS potential at A- and below, but NOTHING (outside of Surkamp and Verdugo) anywhere near MLB ready.

I hope there is someone there that we casual fans do not recognize as a prospect...

 

[filosofy29]

The FO stated at the time of the deal that Wheeler was available because they had other prospects that made him available.

From what we have seen of Surkamp so far, I HOPE he was not the guy they were referring to.

For Discussion sake, let's assume he was not. So, who were they referring to?

Fitzgerald (25) - AA - 3.51 ERA, 146.1 IP, 111/55 K/BB, 1.380 WHIP, .320 BABIP!!! (indicates no movement??) I do not see a prospect in those numbers. Some have been high on him, but he never really did much for me.

Westcott (25) - A+ - 3.42 ERA, 155.1 IP, 87/33 K/BB, 1.210 WHIP WAY old for the level. Not sure there is much more to say after that; his numbers are not good enough by half to support his age.

Heston (23) - A+ - 3.16 ERA, 151.0 IP, 131/40 K/BB, 1.219 WHIP, 3.19 BABIP The numbers are not OMG-good, but they are certainly promotable-good. He is also much more age appropriate than Westcott, so he looks to be legit. BTW, what is an average BABIP? I thought it was about .290. Am I whacked out on that?

Verdugo (24) - AA - His numbers were not good, but from everything I hear, he is still considered a high-ish prospect. Any pitcher who struggles in the EL, though, worries me.

Marte, Kickham, De Jesus, Mejia (!!! - may be our highest ceiling pitching prospect right now), Crick, Roibal...

We have some SERIOUS potential at A- and below, but NOTHING (outside of Surkamp and Verdugo) anywhere near MLB ready.

I hope there is someone there that we casual fans do not recognize as a prospect...

We're all casual fans???

 

[calsnowskier]

We're all casual fans???

Yup...

I avoid the SERIOUS fan sites. They are too hoity toity.