2016 Rosterbation

[calsnowskier]

I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, that he has retired.

Sanchez is the poster boy for the concept of "do not reward a player by giving him a nice expensive contract *simply* because he gave you a great 3 months".

Huff and Scutaro are very insulted by your act of ignoring them...

 

[Mays-Fan]

I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, that he has retired.

Sanchez is the poster boy for the concept of "do not reward a player by giving him a nice expensive contract *simply* because he gave you a great 3 months".

Thank you, Captain Hindsight. I know you were disappointed the job didn't go to...

A. U. GENIO!!!!!

AIEEE YIEEE YIEEE!!!!!

EZ ALL GOOD !!!!

 

[Mays-Fan]

Bobby Evans on where we go from here:

Giants GM On Bobby Evans On Left Field, Bullpen

"given our commitments in pitching, I think now is a good time to look at left field and versatility there has value for us,” Evans told MLB Network Radio (audio link). “We look at [Gregor] Blanco and, he’s been our starting left fielder in the World Series and our starting center fielder in the 2014 World Series so we don’t want to dismiss his ability to help us for a ton of at-bats and a ton of games but if we could put him more in a fourth outfield spot, we feel like we would be stronger.”

When discussing the possibility of further additions this winter, Evans pointed out that the team still has “flexibility” to spend..."

$$$$$$$$$

Bobby has been reading my posts.

 

[LHG]

Barry Bonds on his return to the field - Barry Bonds discusses being a hitting coach

 

[LHG]

Mike Leake maybe signing with the Cardinals or Dodgers.

It seems strange that he may have offered discounts to both the Giants and D-Backs to sign with them and neither picked him up. Wonder if proximity to home could come into play with who he signs with. - Reports: Cardinals close to deal with RHP Leake - NL Central Notes: Melancon, Cardinals, Leake

 

[calsnowskier]

Leake reportedly signed a 5/75 with St Louis.

I like this signing a lot (for the Cards). They get the youngest SP on the market for his prime years at a GREAT rate. I really do not understand why the Giants were not interested in him. I would have preferred him to Scrabble.

From a Giants perspective, would we have preferred he sign with the Cards or the dogs? The Cards, I think, are more of a contender this year, so I hate to see them get stronger. But the dogs are the dogs.

 

[calsnowskier]

DrB has a GREAT write up about opt outs in general, and Cueto's in particular over on his site today. He makes a very strong case that opt-outs are good for both players AND teams, and that the Giants got a real value with this contract.

When the Giants Come to Town...: Thoughts on Opt-Out Clauses

 

[xxERICSMITHXX]

Thank you, Captain Hindsight. I know you were disappointed the job didn't go to...

A. U. GENIO!!!!!

AIEEE YIEEE YIEEE!!!!!

EZ ALL GOOD !!!!

I got a good laugh from this. Well played.

 

[calsnowskier]

I got a good laugh from this. Well played.

Unfortunately, I doubt Marco gets the reference. He was not at diz-neh.

 

[calsnowskier]

BTW...

WB, Eric. Hope you spend more time with us...

 

[xxERICSMITHXX]

DrB has a GREAT write up about opt outs in general, and Cueto's in particular over on his site today. He makes a very strong case that opt-outs are good for both players AND teams, and that the Giants got a real value with this contract.

When the Giants Come to Town...: Thoughts on Opt-Out Clauses

I completely agree with that. I was very happy to hear about the opt out clause. The Giants would be stuck with him no matter what if he tanks with or without the opt out in the contract, but can lock him down for a couple of good years without the inevitable suck at the end of the contract caused by old age.

 

[xxERICSMITHXX]

BTW...

WB, Eric. Hope you spend more time with us...

Thanks. I'm going to try to spend more time here and get caught up on all things Giants now that I'm done with law school.

 

[calsnowskier]

Thanks. I'm going to try to spend more time here and get caught up on all things Giants now that I'm done with law school.

Oh No!!

Another tz alt!!

 

[MarcoPolo]

Thank you, Captain Hindsight. I know you were disappointed the job didn't go to...

A. U. GENIO!!!!!

AIEEE YIEEE YIEEE!!!!!

EZ ALL GOOD !!!!

I was 100% against that contract from the get-go - as soon as it was announced. I could have been regretfully neutral about it had it been a single year, but you just shouldn't give multi-year contracts to aging players with a long history of injuries. It was the same deal with Scutaro - I would have been thrilled with a single year, could have lived with a 2-year contract, but the 3-year deal pissed me off. He had a more than decent history, but he was 37 when he signed that deal! I figured he could at least teach the youngsters about plate discipline and usingthe entire field.

With the Huff contract I had no complaints at the time it was signed. He was 34, it was only for 2 years, his history gave no indication that he would drop into total suckitude after signing (his last two years were arguably the worst 2 of his career, if you exclude his first 2 partial seasons).

 

[tzill]

Leake reportedly signed a 5/75 with St Louis.

I like this signing a lot (for the Cards). They get the youngest SP on the market for his prime years at a GREAT rate. I really do not understand why the Giants were not interested in him. I would have preferred him to Scrabble.

From a Giants perspective, would we have preferred he sign with the Cards or the dogs? The Cards, I think, are more of a contender this year, so I hate to see them get stronger. But the dogs are the dogs.

Leake's best ERA+ year was 2013 (112) where he pitched like a 2/3. He typically pitches into the 7th, strikes out 6 and walks 2, gives up a bomb and 3 runs. There's value in that.

SamJams's had two better years than Leake's best (ERA+ of 132 and 125) where he pitched like a 1/2. He typically pitches an out or two deeper into the game, strikes out 7, walks 2, gives up less HR and gives up less than 3 runs. There's more value in that.

Simply put, Leake is a fine #3, but that's his ceiling. SamJam could be a 1/2. The Giants think they can get the 2014 All Star SammyJam, and paid a bit more for the potential.

 

[tzill]

Thanks. I'm going to try to spend more time here and get caught up on all things Giants now that I'm done with law school.

Congrats on finishing the JD. Did you sit for the bar?

 

[calsnowskier]

Leake's best ERA+ year was 2013 (112) where he pitched like a 2/3. He typically pitches into the 7th, strikes out 6 and walks 2, gives up a bomb and 3 runs. There's value in that.

SamJams's had two better years than Leake's best (ERA+ of 132 and 125) where he pitched like a 1/2. He typically pitches an out or two deeper into the game, strikes out 7, walks 2, gives up less HR and gives up less than 3 runs. There's more value in that.

Simply put, Leake is a fine #3, but that's his ceiling. SamJam could be a 1/2. The Giants think they can get the 2014 All Star SammyJam, and paid a bit more for the potential.

I see the upside with Scrabble. I really do. I just ALSO see the upside with Leake...

1) He would not have cost a pick
2) He would have been 15M cheaper (makes getting that stud LF/CF easier)
3) His bat is legit. If he accounts for a run every 3rd start, that is a drop of approx .4 from his ERA
4) His age. His contract with St Louis only takes him through his age 32 season

I understand that Scrabble probably has a higher ceiling. I also understand that "value" only goes so far. Every WAR point is not worth the same.

I am not crying over my beer over the swap. I am just saying, ASSUMING THE GIANTS COULD HAVE HAD THE SAME CONTRACT, I would have preferred Leake to Samardzija.

 

[Mays-Fan]

I was 100% against that contract from the get-go - as soon as it was announced. I could have been regretfully neutral about it had it been a single year, but you just shouldn't give multi-year contracts to aging players with a long history of injuries. It was the same deal with Scutaro - I would have been thrilled with a single year, could have lived with a 2-year contract, but the 3-year deal pissed me off. He had a more than decent history, but he was 37 when he signed that deal! I figured he could at least teach the youngsters about plate discipline and usingthe entire field.

With the Huff contract I had no complaints at the time it was signed. He was 34, it was only for 2 years, his history gave no indication that he would drop into total suckitude after signing (his last two years were arguably the worst 2 of his career, if you exclude his first 2 partial seasons).

IIRC, the deal with Freddy was 2/12, which IMHO seemed fair at the time. He was huge down the stretch for us in 2010, with a .762 OPS post-ASB, and .865 in Sept. There were no other quality, affordable 2B's at the time. Frandsen? Noonan? Velez? We had just won the WS, and it became apparent that (duh) if you want to keep winning them, you should have quality players at every position - guys who aren't holes, guys you can count on. At the time he was signed, there was no reason to believe that Freddy wasn't the right guy.

Not every contract works out. Every team has dead money. If you don't take risk, you don't get reward.

 

[dredinis21]

Leake reportedly signed a 5/75 with St Louis.

I like this signing a lot (for the Cards). They get the youngest SP on the market for his prime years at a GREAT rate. I really do not understand why the Giants were not interested in him. I would have preferred him to Scrabble.

From a Giants perspective, would we have preferred he sign with the Cards or the dogs? The Cards, I think, are more of a contender this year, so I hate to see them get stronger. But the dogs are the dogs.

Agree. I really liked Leake. I am seriously puzzled as to why the Giants wouldn't extend him.

 

[xxERICSMITHXX]

Congrats on finishing the JD. Did you sit for the bar?

Thanks. I will in February.