GDT Champs @ Raw Keys 5/17

[gp956]

Hat tip to a Bagg's commenter for mentioning Matt Downs. His line for the Astros so far:

.318/.380/.636 OPS 1.016 in 50 PA

 

[msgkings322]

Hat tip to a Bagg's commenter for mentioning Matt Downs. His line for the Astros so far:

.318/.380/.636 OPS 1.016 in 50 PA

SSS but still, :frown:

 

[Heathbar012]

Hat tip to a Bagg's commenter for mentioning Matt Downs. His line for the Astros so far:

.318/.380/.636 OPS 1.016 in 50 PA

I don't think Downsy has much better range than Fontenot, probably a better arm and he isn't left-handed, but yeah, I would certainly take him over Tejada right now. Pretty sad when a Matt Downs/Mike Fontenot platoon sounds better than putting a former All-Star in the line-up. The defense up the middle is just that important.

 

[gp956]

I don't think Downsy has much better range than Fontenot, probably a better arm and he isn't left-handed, but yeah, I would certainly take him over Tejada right now. Pretty sad when a Matt Downs/Mike Fontenot platoon sounds better than putting a former All-Star in the line-up. The defense up the middle is just that important.

I was thinking more in terms of replacing DeRosa on the roster, or, at the least, just comparing their relative contributions this year.

 

[Heathbar012]

I was thinking more in terms of replacing DeRosa on the roster.

Good call for the roster spot because he is worse than Tejada (surprisingly), but the way Mig-E6 has been playing, I would expect Downs to get more run at short. The Nada's limited range is best suited for third base these days, and Mike Fontenot just can't be an everyday player. When Panda comes back, I'd appreciate a Renteria-like regular season from Miggy on the DL. I'd be fine with giving Gillaspie a shot, and hope it wouldn't damage his development.

 

[gp956]

Good call for the roster spot because he is worse than Tejada (surprisingly), but the way Mig-E6 has been playing, I would expect Downs to get more run at short. The Nada's limited range is best suited for third base these days, and Mike Fontenot just can't be an everyday player. When Panda comes back, I'd appreciate a Renteria-like regular season from Miggy on the DL. I'd be fine with giving Gillaspie a shot, and hope it wouldn't damage his development.

I'd rather the Giants just bring up a ML level glove like Crawford, slide Tejada to 3B. And when Panda comes back, DFA DeRosa (provided Nate hasn't been traded by then). Sure, you might be bococking Crawford's development, but doing anything else is just plugging one hole for another.

 

[gp956]

So....I just heard the speculation on KNBR that it might be Gillaspie. I think that's a mistake, but it means the Giants are more concerned with the offense than the defense.

 

[nateistheshi]

So....I just heard the speculation on KNBR that it might be Gillaspie. I think that's a mistake, but it means the Giants are more concerned with the offense than the defense.

Baggs said that some major shake ups could be coming as soon as today. Without Derosa or Tejada being DFAd this doesn't strike me as that major. Perhaps Gillaspie and Belt are coming up?

 

[gp956]

Baggs said that some major shake ups could be coming as soon as today. Without Derosa or Tejada being DFAd this doesn't strike me as that major. Perhaps Gillaspie and Belt are coming up?

The only thing that makes sense to me, along the lines of a major shakeup, is if DeRosa and Rowand are sent packing, and then Nate is traded for a prospect. Then that opens up some AB for Belt, Crawford/Gillaspie. But if it's Gillaspie, there still a whole lot of suck at SS with a fonty/tejada platoon.

 

[gp956]

OK....... I see the potential Gillaspie moves is because Burriss and Rohlinger can't come up to cover for the ailing Franchez. Short term thing, obviously. My previous comments were more about the long-term issue with the D on the leftside of the infield.

 

[Heathbar012]

I'd rather the Giants just bring up a ML level glove like Crawford, slide Tejada to 3B. And when Panda comes back, DFA DeRosa (provided Nate hasn't been traded by then). Sure, you might be bococking Crawford's development, but doing anything else is just plugging one hole for another.

Gotcha. I'd be fine with that scenario, too. The bottom line: no more DeRosa, less Tejada. That's the road to improvement, much like shipping Molina out for a little bit of rental bullpen help (and a prospect that might be used in a future deal, of course).

 

[calsnowskier]

Jeez, some dude posts Gillaspie on Baggs, and the whole board goes crazy with how the move makes sense...

Who else came up with that idea before Baggs ever mentioned the potential shakeup?

 

[Heathbar012]

Jeez, some dude posts Gillaspie on Baggs, and the whole board goes crazy with how the move makes sense...

Who else came up with that idea before Baggs ever mentioned the potential shakeup?

Congratulations, cal. No he's injured. You wanna take credit for that one, too?

 

[calsnowskier]

Congratulations, cal. No he's injured. You wanna take credit for that one, too?

I read tea leaves. I don't play with voodoo dolls.

 

[Heathbar012]

I read tea leaves. I don't play with voodoo dolls.

Hahahaha. Somebody rep this man!

 

[gp956]

Gotcha. I'd be fine with that scenario, too. The bottom line: no more DeRosa, less Tejada. That's the road to improvement, much like shipping Molina out for a little bit of rental bullpen help (and a prospect that might be used in a future deal, of course).

exactly.

 

[gp956]

Congratulations, cal. No he's injured. You wanna take credit for that one, too?

Hah! Just saw that on twitter. Day to day - just like the rest of us.