The Giants lineup was missing two of their 3 best hitters and Tim Lincecum returned to being consistently inconsistent. The result was a loss to the Pesky Padres. Key Lines:
Brandon Belt- 1 for 4, 2B. BA= .230. If there was a silver lining to this one, it's that Brandon Belt's AB's appeared to get better as the game went on and he finished the day off with a ringing double to RF that started a 2 run rally in the 8'th inning. I still think he needs to back off the plate a bit or else choke up on the bat. Pitches on the inside corner are right about even with his elbows when he swings. I don't think that it's an accident that his double came on a pitch just outside the middle of the plate where he could extend his arms normally and still barrel it up.
Tim Lincecum- 4.2 IP, 7 H, 5 R, 3 BB, 5 K's. ERA= 5.88. The pitching line speaks for itself. It's so similar to so many of his other lines this year and that's the way it was watching it on TV too(I had to take a day off to get my A/C fixed). Just really frustrating to watch.
The Dodgers and D'Backs play later tonight.
Giants get the day off tomorrow to see if Pablo can heal quickly. Matt Cain gets the next start Friday against TBD for the Dodgers. This would have been Nate Eovaldi's spot in the rotation.
PS: Anybody else think Chase Headley would look very good in a Giants uniform? I wonder what it would take?
PS: Dodgers lost to Cards in bottom of 12'th inning. They remain 2.5 games back of the Giants. D'Backs lost to the Rockies to remain 6 games behind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As always, thanks for the game wrap; love to different perspectives on the games. Headley would be a great fit. I also think Huston Street (at the right price) would be an excellent addition with Casilla's struggles.
ReplyDeleteI have to say, I don't think the Giants can continue their great season with the likes of Burriss, Christian, Arias, etc. as their bench and role players. These are guys that wouldn't even be on another good team's roster, let alone starting. The sad thing is that we could've had a decent bench had we kept two perfectly "keepable" guys: Fontenot (who we HAD!!) and Cody Ross.
It's scary to think all of our competition is making moves to get better and fill holes, and our lovely GM thinks we just need "minor deals". Today showed you what a couple weeks without Pablo could look like, and it was U-G-L-Y. So to think that Sabean will go out and acquire another Garko is sickening.
Headley is probably not the HR threat the Ian is looking for, but he'd be a good fit with the Giants: Switch-hitter, Gap-to-gap power with occasional dinger, hits for a fairly high average with good OBP, Can play LF, 3B or 1B. He would lengthen the batting order and drive in a few more of those RISP's that are being stranded as the Giants get to the bottom 3'rd of their order.
DeleteA lineup with HSanchez behind the plate, Buster at 1B, Pablo at 3B, Headley in LF, Pagan in CF, Melky in RF would give the Giants 5 switch-hitters in the lineup!
DeleteOh, and Headley does not become FA eligible until after the 2014 season.
DeleteI imagine we can't get Headley with without giving up a Brown/Crick/Joseph and we would probably have to give 2 plus others
DeleteWhat about a Carlos Lee or Josh Willingham?
DeleteLee has already been traded. The Twins are said to be asking for the moon for Willingham. Padres want a lot for Headley but seem motivated to trade him. Not sure why with his controlled contract for 2 more seasons, but that's the word. Since he would be controlled for 2 more years, he might be worth giving up a top line prospect for. What about Belt or Brown Plus Kickham and Rosin? If it was just a rental like Beltran, I'd say no way but for 2 more contract controlled years? I think you have to consider it.
DeleteI'd be down with that except Brown would be the sticking point maybe pegs instead of brown? Also what about a Mark Reynolds and bat him 8th because we have a high OBP lineup that he is always hitting a home run or strikeout and with the pitcher behind him it is not so bad
DeleteWhy is everybody so adamant about Brown? I mean even the people who are still griping about the Wheeler trade balk at the suggestion that they Giants could/should have traded Brown instead of Wheeler, and Wheels is far and away the better prospect, IMO. Don't get me wrong, I like Gary Brown, but to me he's a faster version of Dan Gladden. Valuable, but hardly someone who is going to tip the balance of power in any division. To me, trading Brown for a chance to win another World Series now plus 2 more years of Chase Headley is a no brainer.
DeleteThe problem with Mark Reynolds is he is complete clankmitt.
DeleteReynolds is a total clankmitt. I've always liked him though.
DeleteHeadley would be great. It would take Brown, and despite the struggles I am very high on Brown. If a trade doesn't hurt, its most likely a pipedream. With Hembree shut down as well as Surkamp TJ, we really don't have much in the top 10 to offer. Plus the Pads system is stacked. I bet they are playing chicken with the Pirates over one of their 2 stud pitching prospects for Headley.
I am just hoping for some sort of upgrade over Manny Burriss on the bench.
In addition to Reynolds or Headley there is another option... It will no longer require Matt Cain... Sunglasses at Night. He can play 1B or LF, he's owed 10MM for 2013. Yup, Corey Hart is the guy. Baggs is floating Aramis Ramirez but that looks like too much money and too many years. The Brewers have some interesting pen arms as well NOT named FRod.
DeleteI was just looking at Corey's numbers last night. Not too bad. Aramis Ramirez would be a problem. He's too old, owed too much money. We are not the solution to someone else's contract problems.
DeleteHopefully we won't let the Pads fleece us on Headley. He's better than the Petco-massaged numbers, sure. But Chase, while solving many problems, doesn't really hit dingers.
Well, there is a good reason Sabean thinks we are in a good spot: because we are. We are 12 games above .500 while missing Sandoval for half the season (so far) and Lincecum for most of it. I expect Panda to be OK and play most of the rest of the games and I don't think Lincecum will be as bad as in the first half, both good boosts going forward. Everyone else is performing at a level that looks sustainable, as well, no big outliers to me. Plus Crawford is starting to pick it up nicely in hitting, and Belt was nearly there just a month ago.
DeleteI would not trade Belt for Headley. He's an average type hitter, whereas Belt could become a change maker. Peguero is a better one to let go, in my mind, for Headley. I would be OK with Brown in concept, but the future Giants need a leadoff hitter, and I like Brown's potential to be very good there for us, plus CF.
I think he could be much better than a Dan Gladden, who didn't really get on base that much, nor hit for much power, leading to poor OPS. Brown should be plus in OBP and if he can continue to develop, plus in SLG as well, leading to an above average OPS. Add to that lots of steals and gold glove in CF with his blazing speed, and that is a great package for the future Giants.
Here's why I think the Padres are trading Headley now.
DeleteMainly, he's 28 YO already. Some players start their decline at 29 sometimes. Even if he doesn't, the Padres are not that close to contending again seriously, and Headley would be 30 YO for the 2014 season.
They have a well stocked minors and the guys they picked up this winter plus those prospects will be the core of the future (hopefully in their minds) but it will take a while for them to develop and gel. 2014 is the soonest to hope for that, and Headley would be 30 and one foot out the door.
Better to trade him now, while his value is high still, both for performance and years of control remaining. Teams will give up more for him now because of both. But he's not a top tier player, so the Padres won't miss him as much or thus have much reason to keep him and hope he stays slightly above average in 2014.
In addition, by selling their better players now, the team will end up with a much worse record than now. They currently have a Top 5 pick now, which is right on the edge of where teams can expect to still find a pretty good prospect in the draft with a high probability. By trading their good players now, they will help ensure they keep at least a #5 pick, and perhaps move into the top 3.
Meanwhile, that makes it harder for the teams just behind - Seattle, KC, Brewers and Phillies - heck and even Miami, from catching up and taking that #5 pick away from them as they trade off players, Miami just begun, both KC and Milw are expected to trade off players, there are rumors the the Phillies will trade off Victorino, and Seattle just traded off Ichiro, though honestly, he wasn't doing much anyway, so that could be an improvement for them.
With all that dumping of talent off behind them, plus Cubs and Twins are expected to be sellers too, they need to do the same or end up with a much worse draft pick.
My draft study found that the odds dropped, during the draft period I studied, significantly after the 5th pick. #1 was high (but still under 50%, worse than coin flip, for finding a good player), and #2-5 was just slightly below, but then the odds dropped a lot after that pick, generally, roughly in half, then dropped half again by the 21st pick.
So it behooves them to do all they can to keep their #5 pick, so trading their best older players is one thing, and the other is pushing younger players up here even though they might not be ready yet. They get extra development at a high level, giving the team valuable opportunities to try out borderline prospects and see where they really are in terms of development.
Personally, I rather Giants go for gap hitters because there is a lot of room out there for line drives. HR bats have to get all the ball at ATT, or it is landing in someone's glove standing in the gap.
ReplyDeleteI would like the Giants to hang on to Crick, Kickham and Joseph. Belt, Noonan and Brown is sufficient.