Willing to trade for Ohtani?

[tzill]

I agree with this statement. They signed Zito to the huge contract, and they were pretty much panned by the whole baseball world for it. Since then, for the most part, I think they have strategically positioned themselves to offer the 2nd best package to every “target” FA.

I think they legit went all in to actually land Judge, though. But I think that was a rigged game. I suspect the Yanks told Judge to negotiate his Yankee contract with the Giants. The Giants had enough egg on their faces from those proceedings that they jumped too soon on the Correa negotiations. Luckily, they caught themselves before putting ink to paper on that one, though.

You didn’t see the Giants go on tilt when they lost out on Harper or Sebathia. That tells me that they didn’t really want Harper or Sebathia. They DID really want Judge.

That's a nice conspiracy theory. One which the Correa negotiations disproves. Unless, you think they wanted to get an agreement and reject the medicals on purpose. Judge is another example, as was the original negotiation with Ohtani. He wanted to go to LA. Judge wanted to stay in NY. None of that has anything to do with ownership willingness.

 

[calsnowskier]

I've given you several examples of ownership completely willing to execute on a huge FA deal. You're either trolling or dense. I'm not sure which.

They didn’t want Harper. They strategically lost that negotiation.
They got Cueto and Samardzjia, but neither of those contracts were franchise-breaking.
Correa was a tilt-call after the bad river card on the Judge hand.
They have lost out on a number of international big names, supposedly being the #2 contender.

This FO/ownership, right or wrong, wants to be in the discussion, but doesn’t want to actually pony up.

And for the most part, I don’t fault them for not paying for the super-FA. This org has a history of building through trades, not through FA acquisitions.

 

[calsnowskier]

That's a nice conspiracy theory. One which the Correa negotiations disproves. Unless, you think they wanted to get an agreement and reject the medicals on purpose. Judge is another example, as was the original negotiation with Ohtani. He wanted to go to LA. Judge wanted to stay in NY. None of that has anything to do with ownership willingness.

Did you read my post, or just what you wanted to read?

 

[tzill]

They didn’t want Harper. They strategically lost that negotiation.
They got Cueto and Samardzjia, but neither of those contracts were franchise-breaking.
Correa was a tilt-call after the bad river card on the Judge hand.
They have lost out on a number of international big names, supposedly being the #2 contender.

This FO/ownership, right or wrong, wants to be in the discussion, but doesn’t want to actually pony up.

And for the most part, I don’t fault them for not paying for the super-FA. This org has a history of building through trades, not through FA acquisitions.

You're imputing intent based on results. I'm saying that's not proof, just opinion.

And if your theory were correct, they wouldn't have been all in on Correa or Judge.

I'm not a huge proponent of big FA deals, but to conclude ownership doesn't WANT to make them...or as a strategy is TRYING TO FINISH second...is whole cloth bullshyte.

 

[tzill]

Did you read my post, or just what you wanted to read?

I did, and I've read similar 'the ownership just doesn't want to pay' theories.

We can disagree, but I think it's horse crap.

 

[calsnowskier]

You're imputing intent based on results. I'm saying that's not proof, just opinion.

And if your theory were correct, they wouldn't have been all in on Correa or Judge.

I'm not a huge proponent of big FA deals, but to conclude ownership doesn't WANT to make them...or as a strategy is TRYING TO FINISH second...is whole cloth bullshyte.

Of course it is opinion. I have never claimed otherwise. I have never met Charles Johnson or Larry Baer. I met Magowan once, back in ‘94 or ‘95, but that is the extent to my rubbing elbows with the Giants decision makers.

Again…

Read my fucking post. I addressed Judge and Correa specifically.

 

[tzill]

Of course it is opinion. I have never claimed otherwise. I have never met Charles Johnson or Larry Baer. I met Magowan once, back in ‘94 or ‘95, but that is the extent to my rubbing elbows with the Giants decision makers.

Again…

Read my fucking post. I addressed Judge and Correa specifically.

You did...

AND STILL CONCLUDED THE GIANTS ARE TYING TO FINISH SECOND.

Again, horse crap.

 

[tzill]

If they were trying to finish second, they wouldn't have gone all in on Judge wherein he could have chosen them. They wouldn't have gone all in on Correa, or Ohtani, or Harper, etc. etc.

The fact that those FAs went elsewhere doesn't prove ownership wouldn't spend. Or that there is some internal policy to "finish second." It's a silly tin foil narrative that gains traction with frustrated fans who want a star. Not saying that's you. I'm just tired of it, b/c the facts on the ground don't support it.

 

[calsnowskier]

You did...

AND STILL CONCLUDED THE GIANTS ARE TYING TO FINISH SECOND.

Again, horse crap.

you are beyond dense sometimes.

I specifically said they TRIED to sign Judge. He was their blue whale. But you don’t understand what I wrote, apparently.

I also acknowledge they “signed” Correa. But that was a tilt move in response to not landing Judge. And when they de-tilted, they looked at it objectively and backed out (I believe it was legit based on medicals, but it was also their reset button).

But if you look at their history, their big acquisitions are TYPICALLY trades, and are typically surprises. Cueto and Samardzjia were not telegraphed. Rodon was not telegraphed. Harper, Ohtani, Judge were all telegraphed. Harper, I strongly suspect, was much more for PR reasons than an actual pursuit. I think they were interested in Ohtani, but I don’t think we were ever really an option for him (he wanted the option of DH).

I am not speaking in absolutes. I am looking at what has happened over the last 35/40 years (the current ownership group) and using that history to try to discern trends. Maybe I am close to the mark. Maybe I am way off. But you are the only one who is aggressively declaring that you KNOW the Giants strategy, even when 40 years of evidence goes against that stated strategy.

 

[tzill]

you are beyond dense sometimes.

I specifically said they TRIED to sign Judge. He was their blue whale. But you don’t understand what I wrote, apparently.

I also acknowledge they “signed” Correa. But that was a tilt move in response to not landing Judge. And when they de-tilted, they looked at it objectively and backed out (I believe it was legit based on medicals, but it was also their reset button).

But if you look at their history, their big acquisitions are TYPICALLY trades, and are typically surprises. Cueto and Samardzjia were not telegraphed. Rodon was not telegraphed. Harper, Ohtani, Judge were all telegraphed. Harper, I strongly suspect, was much more for PR reasons than an actual pursuit. I think they were interested in Ohtani, but I don’t think we were ever really an option for him (he wanted the option of DH).

I am not speaking in absolutes. I am looking at what has happened over the last 35/40 years (the current ownership group) and using that history to try to discern trends. Maybe I am close to the mark. Maybe I am way off. But you are the only one who is aggressively declaring that you KNOW the Giants strategy, even when 40 years of evidence goes against that stated strategy.

You remind me of a trial attorney who cites to adverse law in order to ignore it.

You can't do that. The Judge and Correa negotiations DID happen. You can't say "yeah, but....blue whale...tilt move...." and dismiss them. They fundamentally DISPROVE the theory. I don't disagree with anything else you wrote here (except the Harper/PR comment). And I'm not looking at four decades of ownership, as that ownership has changed both in makeup and attitude. I'm looking at the time period of FZ forward. I don't KNOW the Giants strategy, but I sure as hell am not advancing a tin foil theory that flies in the face of facts on the ground. I tend to take most things at face value. The Giants have tried to sign big FAs, it rarely has worked out. Doesn't mean there is an internal policy to TRY to finish second.

You could absolutely be 100% correct. It is, as we say here in the Bay, hella unlikely, but it is possible. I prefer Occam's Razor. We can disagree.

 

[calsnowskier]

You remind me of a trial attorney who cites to adverse law in order to ignore it.

You can't do that. The Judge and Correa negotiations DID happen. You can't say "yeah, but....blue whale...tilt move...." and dismiss them. They fundamentally DISPROVE the theory. I don't disagree with anything else you wrote here (except the Harper/PR comment). And I'm not looking at four decades of ownership, as that ownership has changed both in makeup and attitude. I'm looking at the time period of FZ forward. I don't KNOW the Giants strategy, but I sure as hell am not advancing a tin foil theory that flies in the face of facts on the ground. I tend to take most things at face value. The Giants have tried to sign big FAs, it rarely has worked out. Doesn't mean there is an internal policy to TRY to finish second.

You could absolutely be 100% correct. It is, as we say here in the Bay, hella unlikely, but it is possible. I prefer Occam's Razor. We can disagree.

Only in an absolute world.

the exception to a trend does not prove that the exception IS the trend. It proves it is the EXCEPTION to the trend.

 

[msgkings322]

I've given you several examples of ownership completely willing to execute on a huge FA deal. You're either trolling or dense. I'm not sure which.

 

[chappee11]

I've given you several examples of ownership completely willing to execute on a huge FA deal. You're either trolling or dense. I'm not sure which.

Are you sure it’s me trolling here? You listed 4 guys as examples of the Giants willing to sign big free agents. The only issue is that the Giants didn’t sign any of them. The only 2 FA’s I’ve come up with who got 5+ years or $100+M are Cueto and Zito. I guess we can go back to Bonds 30 years ago, too. He got more than 5 years. That’s the precedent here. That’s it. I think the Giants ARE content to say “see! We tried to sign that big ticket guy, it just didn’t work out!”

Regardless, there is no way they are signing Ohtani.

 

[tzill]

Only in an absolute world.

the exception to a trend does not prove that the exception IS the trend. It proves it is the EXCEPTION to the trend.

We aren't going to reach common ground on this, so I'll move on. All I want to reflect on his is your use of the word "prove."

 

[tzill]

Are you sure it’s me trolling here? You listed 4 guys as examples of the Giants willing to sign big free agents. The only issue is that the Giants didn’t sign any of them. The only 2 FA’s I’ve come up with who got 5+ years or $100+M are Cueto and Zito. I guess we can go back to Bonds 30 years ago, too. He got more than 5 years. That’s the precedent here. That’s it. I think the Giants ARE content to say “see! We tried to sign that big ticket guy, it just didn’t work out!”

Regardless, there is no way they are signing Ohtani.

The fact that guys didn't get signed isn't conclusory evidence that they didn't want to do so. I think that's a pretty straightforward assertion. You are free to think what you think, but the recent evidence contradicts it.

I agree they won't get Ohtani. Where we disagree is on their willingness to get him. I think they will be willing to match whatever the doyers offer...and he'll still pick LA.

 

[chappee11]

The fact that guys didn't get signed isn't conclusory evidence that they didn't want to do so. I think that's a pretty straightforward assertion. You are free to think what you think, but the recent evidence contradicts it.

I agree they won't get Ohtani. Where we disagree is on their willingness to get him. I think they will be willing to match whatever the doyers offer...and he'll still pick LA.

You think the Giants would be willing to give a (roughly) 10yr/$500m contract to a free agent. I don’t see anything in their history that suggests this is true. We’ll see if the Dodgers make the highest offer, though. The bidding should be bonkers.

 

[pachyderm]

I've given you several examples of ownership completely willing to execute on a huge FA deal. You're either trolling or dense. I'm not sure which.

"Dense trolling"?

 

[pachyderm]

You remind me of a trial attorney who cites to adverse law in order to ignore it.

You can't do that. The Judge and Correa negotiations DID happen. You can't say "yeah, but....blue whale...tilt move...." and dismiss them. They fundamentally DISPROVE the theory. I don't disagree with anything else you wrote here (except the Harper/PR comment). And I'm not looking at four decades of ownership, as that ownership has changed both in makeup and attitude. I'm looking at the time period of FZ forward. I don't KNOW the Giants strategy, but I sure as hell am not advancing a tin foil theory that flies in the face of facts on the ground. I tend to take most things at face value. The Giants have tried to sign big FAs, it rarely has worked out. Doesn't mean there is an internal policy to TRY to finish second.

You could absolutely be 100% correct. It is, as we say here in the Bay, hella unlikely, but it is possible. I prefer Occam's Razor. We can disagree.

@chappee11 has turning on ourselves.

 

[LHG]

The fact that the Angels are now "slightly open" to trade offers on Ohtani means that I wouldn't be surprised that he is gone by August 1st.

Angels Will Reportedly Consider Shohei Ohtani Trade Offers; Deal Seen As Unlikely

As the trade deadline is now just over two weeks away, various clubs on the fringes of contention will have …

www.mlbtraderumors.com

 

[msgkings322]

The fact that the Angels are now "slightly open" to trade offers on Ohtani means that I wouldn't be surprised that he is gone by August 1st.

Angels Will Reportedly Consider Shohei Ohtani Trade Offers; Deal Seen As Unlikely

As the trade deadline is now just over two weeks away, various clubs on the fringes of contention will have …

www.mlbtraderumors.com

Of course...and as they plummet in the standings they will become wide open to it