2019 Rosterbation

[calsnowskier]

Assuming Gray is fairly reasonable (a low-level lotto ticket or high-level reliever type) I'd take him over Stratton easily. If they bring Holland back, then maybe I don't really think it's worth the investment.

That being said, I can easily envision the Giants getting a great ROI by flipping him at the next deadline. Give up a Melvin Adon now, possibly get two Melvin Adons in July, or even better a Logan Webb.

I would hate giving up a Melvin Adon. I see him as more than just a lotto ticket.

And the rental-flip just isnt in the Giants DNA.

 

[SFGRTB]

I would hate giving up a Melvin Adon. I see him as more than just a lotto ticket.

And the rental-flip just isnt in the Giants DNA.

I think it's fair to say we don't know what the Giants' DNA is at this point. At the same time, they also flipped Nunez and Cutch the last two years

 

[SFGRTB]

I would hate giving up a Melvin Adon. I see him as more than just a lotto ticket.

And the rental-flip just isnt in the Giants DNA.

re: Adon.... it all depends on what the team does with him. I can see the Yankees getting Adon where he needs to be, not so sure about the Giants if they keep insisting that he's a starter.

 

[LHG]

I think it's fair to say we don't know what the Giants' DNA is at this point. At the same time, they also flipped Nunez and Cutch the last two years

Nunez is a valid point but the McCutchen flip was a very reluctant move on the part of the FO. I would venture to guess that, had they made the move in July instead of August, they could have gotten a little more in return. Maybe I'm wrong and the FO tried in July but I thought that the team wanted to keep him and only traded him when it was obvious that keeping him wouldn't make any difference to the season.

 

[calsnowskier]

I think it's fair to say we don't know what the Giants' DNA is at this point. At the same time, they also flipped Nunez and Cutch the last two years

Fair about the current DNA, but I don’t consider Nunez a flip. They bought him when the needed him, sold him when the season was busted. The way the potential Gray acquisition was stated was more along the lines of how the Padres do their flip-transactions. Buy low with the intention of flipping. The Giants have never done that.

 

[SFGRTB]

Fair about the current DNA, but I don’t consider Nunez a flip. They bought him when the needed him, sold him when the season was busted. The way the potential Gray acquisition was stated was more along the lines of how the Padres do their flip-transactions. Buy low with the intention of flipping. The Giants have never done that.

I mean if the Giants are competing (don't laugh), he can be a useful piece. If there's talent available for a reasonable price, you go get it. Flipping him later is just a possible side benefit. The other is that he's a strong rotation piece on a winning team.

If the price isn't that bad, I don't really see a downside to this

 

[tzill]

From the Athletic today; big article about the Giants blowing it up:

1. Re: Bum

If the Giants can get an exciting return for him this offseason — say a top-30 prospect, a top-150 prospect and an interesting throw-in or two — they ought to pull the trigger. Holding out for more backfires at least as often as not. However, if the offers don’t include a top-30 guy, they might as well hold in the hopes that Bumgarner rebuilds some value before the trade deadline.

2. Re: Craw

But unless the Giants want to pay a big chunk of the contract, Crawford is probably only worth a couple of mid-level prospects.

3. Re: BB9

Teams are going to need to see him shake off that ugly second half before taking on the $48 million he’s owed through 2021. If he can do that, the Giants can pick up an intriguing prospect or two (though we’re still not aiming much higher than “intriguing” here).

4. Re: Dozens

If he can return to the roughly 2-win player he was in 2016 and 2017, he’ll be worth parting with some young talent for a contending team.

5. Re: Longo

He still won’t be worth much in terms of prospects, but if he has a strong first half, the Giants could move him.

6. Re: MVP

The dream scenario is that the hip surgery helps him rediscover some power, but that’s not something the Giants, or more to the point, any other team, will place any big bets on right now.

7. Re: The Bully

Will Smith is death on lefties and can get righties out, too. A lot of teams would pay up for him. Tony Watson is a lefty without big platoon splits who is signed to a very affordable deal and just had one of the best seasons of his career...If [Strickland] can have a good couple of months, the Giants can pass that hot potato to a contender willing to take a gamble...[Moronta,]a wild, flame-throwing reliever is a volatile, replaceable commodity. The Giants should see what he’s worth to other teams...Teams would pay for Black right now just based on the fastball and team control, but the Giants have time to build his value.

 

[stanford the manford]

Nunez is a valid point but the McCutchen flip was a very reluctant move on the part of the FO. I would venture to guess that, had they made the move in July instead of August, they could have gotten a little more in return. Maybe I'm wrong and the FO tried in July but I thought that the team wanted to keep him and only traded him when it was obvious that keeping him wouldn't make any difference to the season.

who the hell though in july that things would end up significantly differently than they did?

if the fo was seriously believing things would fall the g'nts way, they are more than glass 1/2 full optimists, more like glass 99/100 myopic

 

[tzill]

who the hell though in july that things would end up significantly differently than they did?

if the fo was seriously believing things would fall the g'nts way, they are more than glass 1/2 full optimists, more like glass 99/100 myopic

what is it about not wanting to wave the white flag in july that you find difficult to comprehend?

I swear, I get you're pissed, but damn.

They are NOT going to do a tear down. Not in July. Not this offseason. Too much revenue to lose.

 

[stanford the manford]

what is it about not wanting to wave the white flag in july that you find difficult to comprehend?

I swear, I get you're pissed, but damn.

They are NOT going to do a tear down. Not in July. Not this offseason. Too much revenue to lose.

with 30k season tix sales, 2018 revenue was in the bag. at some point the fo needs to think about 2019+.

if i were the fo i'd be a little more concerned about getting into contention asap and not worrying about rolling out non-productive over-bloated contracts. the butts in the seats the last 1/2 of the season were out of market tourists,, season tix holder seats were for the most part empty

having sat though decades of candlestick seasons where vendors outnumbered the fans and the spectre of corporate sales going to the warriors very soon, i'd be very aggressive in fielding a competitive team and not trying to milk the legend of the triplets/bonds/att..... sf doesn't support fools

 

[tzill]

with 30k season tix sales, 2018 revenue was in the bag. at some point the fo needs to think about 2019+.

if i were the fo i'd be a little more concerned about getting into contention asap and not worrying about rolling out non-productive over-bloated contracts. the butts in the seats the last 1/2 of the season were out of market tourists,, season tix holder seats were for the most part empty

having sat though decades of candlestick seasons where vendors outnumbered the fans and the spectre of corporate sales going to the warriors very soon, i'd be very aggressive in fielding a competitive team and not trying to milk the legend of the triplets/bonds/att..... sf doesn't support fools

Sure, but you're NOT the FO, with real skin in the game.

From the Athletic today:

The new executive would inherit marching orders that are not expected to change. As much as the Giants ownership group could financially afford to take a step back and sign off on a multiyear rebuild, there is a strong belief within the organization that such a cliff dive would be a risk at a time when the Warriors are building an arena on the Giants’ doorstep and baseball is struggling to remain as strongly relevant in other markets. The longstanding strategy has been to keep the top spinning for as long as possible, and that isn’t expected to change.

 

[stanford the manford]

Sure, but you're NOT the FO, with real skin in the game.

From the Athletic today:

The new executive would inherit marching orders that are not expected to change. As much as the Giants ownership group could financially afford to take a step back and sign off on a multiyear rebuild, there is a strong belief within the organization that such a cliff dive would be a risk at a time when the Warriors are building an arena on the Giants’ doorstep and baseball is struggling to remain as strongly relevant in other markets. The longstanding strategy has been to keep the top spinning for as long as possible, and that isn’t expected to change.

you are correct, i’m not the fo. im just stating what i see on a daily basis and predicting that IF the fo proceeds in this glide path it’ll just prolong the time to when the g’nts again become competitive.

in terms of revenue i believe in integrals, not derivitives

 

[msgkings322]

Sure, but you're NOT the FO, with real skin in the game.

From the Athletic today:

The new executive would inherit marching orders that are not expected to change. As much as the Giants ownership group could financially afford to take a step back and sign off on a multiyear rebuild, there is a strong belief within the organization that such a cliff dive would be a risk at a time when the Warriors are building an arena on the Giants’ doorstep and baseball is struggling to remain as strongly relevant in other markets. The longstanding strategy has been to keep the top spinning for as long as possible, and that isn’t expected to change.

If 'keeping the top spinning' means 4 more years of 75-80 win seasons I don't see how revenues don't suffer. And then they take a hit later when they do the rebuild they should have now. Might as well rip the band-aid off.

The FO may have different ideas, but no one is perfect and they would be making a mistake.

 

[calsnowskier]

While we all think it is best to tank and rebuild, look what the dogs did. They did a competitive rebuild. Look what the Yanks did. They did a competitive rebuild. Look what the Sox did. They did a competitive rebuild.

It is possible. Especially for one of the power-orgs.

 

[LHG]

If 'keeping the top spinning' means 4 more years of 75-80 win seasons I don't see how revenues don't suffer. And then they take a hit later when they do the rebuild they should have now. Might as well rip the band-aid off.

The FO may have different ideas, but no one is perfect and they would be making a mistake.

If that article is correct, then I don't see some truly "next-gen" GM being brought in, just some younger guy hungry for the power seat and willing to take marching orders that look amazingly like the past couple of years.

 

[LHG]

While we all think it is best to tank and rebuild, look what the dogs did. They did a competitive rebuild. Look what the Yanks did. They did a competitive rebuild. Look what the Sox did. They did a competitive rebuild.

It is possible. Especially for one of the power-orgs.

Weren't most of their farm systems a bit further along and didn't they also trade off veteran pieces for upper end prospects?

 

[msgkings322]

While we all think it is best to tank and rebuild, look what the dogs did. They did a competitive rebuild. Look what the Yanks did. They did a competitive rebuild. Look what the Sox did. They did a competitive rebuild.

It is possible. Especially for one of the power-orgs.

There's no path to that for these guys. No can't miss prospects, no impact FAs they can or would sign. It's gonna be a while and it will be quicker if they just do it right.

 

[calsnowskier]

Weren't most of their farm systems a bit further along and didn't they also trade off veteran pieces for upper end prospects?

The Cubs did hand-deliver half the rebuild to the Yanks, granted. But if the Giants can play the Bum situation properly, they can get a similar package. As for trading off other vets, who have they let whither on the vine to date? Should they have traded Pence this past July’s for a top 50? Should they have traded Cain last year for a top 100?

They didn’t have a Chapman to trade. They do need to hit better in the draft, but that can be said for every team.

 

[msgkings322]

The Cubs did hand-deliver half the rebuild to the Yanks, granted. But if the Giants can play the Bum situation properly, they can get a similar package. As for trading off other vets, who have they let whither on the vine to date? Should they have traded Pence this past July’s for a top 50? Should they have traded Cain last year for a top 100?

They didn’t have a Chapman to trade. They do need to hit better in the draft, but that can be said for every team.

They do now: Bumgarner.

It's still gonna take a while because even if they do it right and trade Bum, Belt, Panik, Crawford, and a couple relievers, they will only get great prospects back for Bum.

 

[calsnowskier]

They do now: Bumgarner.

It's still gonna take a while because even if they do it right and trade Bum, Belt, Panik, Crawford, and a couple relievers, they will only get great prospects back for Bum.

So why trade those guys? No point.

If they go after Dozier or LaMahiue, I can see them punting Panik. If Posey can’t catch anymore, I can see them moving Belt. Craw ain’t going anywhere. Bum SHOULD be traded. I have been saying that for a couple years now. Longo will not be traded. Jones has shown absolutely nothing.