A-Gon

[Stokes1931]

I see this as a no-brainer.

You beat me to it, Cal.

I am driving to the Fresno game tonight, may see filo there.

 

[Mays-Fan]

Which status quo are you referring to?

(opening day payrolls)
2012 - $117M (does not include Rowand)
2011 - $118M
2010 - $98M
2009 - $82M

The G's have increased payroll 16M, 20M and 11M in the last 3 off seasons.

Excellent point. One of the reasons I am so enthused as a Giant fan is that every metric of the club overall is trending in the right direction.

I think the Giants' owners and management must be excellent businessmen. I suspect the club is doing quite well financially, and that the owners understand that they have to field the best product they can afford to keep that going.

There have been sizable payroll increases every year, and, without looking, I'll wager that those increases are greater %-wise than the overall MLB average. I expect that trend to continue.

The minors have been more productive in recent years than anytime in memory, and I expect that trend to continue as well. While we have made some trades recently that weakened our prospects, we haven't gutted it as in the past, and our scouts, drafts, and coaches have been very productive.

The main reason we aren't up by 8 or more games right now is Timmy's sudden dropoff, and in fairness to mgmt, no one saw that coming to the degree that it has occurred.

Next year, Rowand's and Huff's contracts roll off, and Melky's $12-$15 million placeholder can be used. In 2014, Zito rolls off, and Timmy can be re-evaluated. We've had great success in recent years despite some horrific contracts, and it appears mgmt has learned that lesson. And looming larger is the mortgage payoff, making another $15-$20 mill/yr available for improvements.

The point was made earlier that of the regulars from 2010, only Posey remains. The positive here is that we have made the transition from a one-player franchise (Bonds) to a brand that is bigger, much bigger, than any one player. And that is a very, very good thing.

 

[msgkings322]

Excellent point. One of the reasons I am so enthused as a Giant fan is that every metric of the club overall is trending in the right direction.

I think the Giants' owners and management must be excellent businessmen. I suspect the club is doing quite well financially, and that the owners understand that they have to field the best product they can afford to keep that going.

There have been sizable payroll increases every year, and, without looking, I'll wager that those increases are greater %-wise than the overall MLB average. I expect that trend to continue.

The minors have been more productive in recent years than anytime in memory, and I expect that trend to continue as well. While we have made some trades recently that weakened our prospects, we haven't gutted it as in the past, and our scouts, drafts, and coaches have been very productive.

The main reason we aren't up by 8 or more games right now is Timmy's sudden dropoff, and in fairness to mgmt, no one saw that coming to the degree that it has occurred.

Next year, Rowand's and Huff's contracts roll off, and Melky's $12-$15 million placeholder can be used. In 2014, Zito rolls off, and Timmy can be re-evaluated. We've had great success in recent years despite some horrific contracts, and it appears mgmt has learned that lesson. And looming larger is the mortgage payoff, making another $15-$20 mill/yr available for improvements.

The point was made earlier that of the regulars from 2010, only Posey remains. The positive here is that we have made the transition from a one-player franchise (Bonds) to a brand that is bigger, much bigger, than any one player. And that is a very, very good thing.

Actually to be fair if Timmy were still pretty good we wouldn't be up an additional 6 games but 3 is reasonable to think.

Nice post though. I too am pleased with the team the last few years. I just hope they recognize the new SoCal threat(s) and don't think they can just ignore the developments.

 

[SF11704]

Actually to be fair if Timmy were still pretty good we wouldn't be up an additional 6 games but 3 is reasonable to think.

Nice post though. I too am pleased with the team the last few years. I just hope they recognize the new SoCal threat(s) and don't think they can just ignore the developments.

THIS!!!!

It also lends itself to some of my more basic concerns as well. I agree that if Timmy was was still pretty good we would be up by another 3 games ... but that would be three games up on LA based on a team without any of thier recent acquisitions. I'm more than a little concerned what the current LA team could actually produce over a full 162 game schedule. Although I think our SP is better than theirs they are not exactly running a bunch of junk out to the mound. IMHO I think Kershaw is as good as anyone we have and their number 2 and 3 starters aren't exactly garbage. This year will just have to play itself out. As we move forward I have to agree with MSG: I don't think they can ignore the recent developments.

 

[Mays-Fan]

Actually to be fair if Timmy were still pretty good we wouldn't be up an additional 6 games but 3 is reasonable to think.
Nice post though. I too am pleased with the team the last few years. I just hope they recognize the new SoCal threat(s) and don't think they can just ignore the developments.

The Sports Network - Inside the Numbers

San Francisco Giants Starting Pitcher Team Record Units W/L
Madison Bumgarner 16-10 +476
Matt Cain 16-9 +391
Eric Hacker 0-1 -100
Tim Lincecum 9-18 -1185
Ryan Vogelsong 16-8 +919
Barry Zito 14-11 +635
Team Totals 71-57 +1136

So the team with Timmy pitching compared to others is:

6 games behind Zito
7.5 games behind Bum
8 games behind Cain
8.5 games behind Vogey

Just sayin' - it's much worse than you think this year when Timmy starts.

 

[msgkings322]

The Sports Network - Inside the Numbers

San Francisco Giants Starting Pitcher Team Record Units W/L
Madison Bumgarner 16-10 +476
Matt Cain 16-9 +391
Eric Hacker 0-1 -100
Tim Lincecum 9-18 -1185
Ryan Vogelsong 16-8 +919
Barry Zito 14-11 +635
Team Totals 71-57 +1136

So the team with Timmy pitching compared to others is:

6 games behind Zito
7.5 games behind Bum
8 games behind Cain
8.5 games behind Vogey

Just sayin' - it's much worse than you think this year when Timmy starts.

Good point. Just shows that for all the worry about Belt, Crawford, Blanco, etc....it's not the lineup that's our problem. And the heck of it is, if Timmy weren't $20 MIL TIMMY MR. CY YOUNG and was say our 4th starter and pitching like this, we'd have shut him down or sent him to the minors or the DL. But we can't do that, because of who he is, and also because we have no one else to slot there (although if he were just a guy we'd have likely tried to get a pitcher at the deadline)

 

[Robotech]

The Sports Network - Inside the Numbers

San Francisco Giants Starting Pitcher Team Record Units W/L
Madison Bumgarner 16-10 +476
Matt Cain 16-9 +391
Eric Hacker 0-1 -100
Tim Lincecum 9-18 -1185
Ryan Vogelsong 16-8 +919
Barry Zito 14-11 +635
Team Totals 71-57 +1136

So the team with Timmy pitching compared to others is:

6 games behind Zito
7.5 games behind Bum
8 games behind Cain
8.5 games behind Vogey

Just sayin' - it's much worse than you think this year when Timmy starts.

Good point. If you flipped around his record to 18-9, the Dodgers would need a telescope to see us.

 

[msgkings322]

Good point. If you flipped around his record to 18-9, the Dodgers would need a telescope to see us.

And we'd have 4 legit aces, like the 2011 Phillies never turned out to have.

I wonder if the baseball gods simply can't abide that much awesome starting pitching on one team?

If you mixed around the names in that post to what they 'should' have been based on expectations, Tim would have Vogelsong's record, Zito would have Tim's, and Vogelsong would have Zito's (good but not great, a regression from 2011).

So yes Timmy has killed us, but it's been mitigated by Vogelsong doing so well and Zito finally doing so-so.

 

[gp956]

Stan Kasten on The Dodger Way:

Is there a salary budget or will you spend whatever it takes to win?

"There's no number in my head, but obviously there are limits. We just want to do all the things we can and we are going to try to not to be dull about the things we do. We do need to rebuild this and we think the more energy and effort and resource that we dedicate to scouting and player development, the less need there will be in the future for deals like this. But for now to get us back to where we think the Dodgers should have always been we think we had to make moves like this. I think it's important to remember that none of the players we got do we have beyond the age of 35 or 36. We are not hamstringing ourselves to players who will be bad for 4 or 5 years…We don't think. Now who knows what will happen. That's our calculus that we are getting guys for most or all of their useful life and guys who can help us win while we take our time to rebuild a farm system that is frankly in need of rebuilding particularly internationally. We are doing those things as well, but we are not asking everyone to wait five years. We are just going to try to do this right now."