When Brian Sabean makes a proclamation about having a goal of signing 2 specific players at MLB's Winter Meetings, you best believe he's going to get it done. Sabes just is not given to making those kind of bold statemements. The Giants went to the Winter Meetings, Sabes stayed behind due to some sort of illness, with a stated goal of getting Angel Pagan and Marco Scutaro re-signed. Boy, did they ever come through on that one!
We've already reviewed Pagan's deal and given it our stamp of approval. The Giants added Marco Scutaro yesterday for 3 years/$20 M. While it is perfectly reasonable to question a 3 year deal of any kind for a player who just turned 37 yo, I'll take this deal for Scooter. Second base may seem like an easy position to fill, but after living through Freddy Sanchez' injuries, Jeff Keppinger's statuesque performances on defense and Emmanuel Burriss' automatic out act, I've gained a new respect for how difficult it is to find the right guy there. In a market where 6 teams are reportedly in on Keppinger, including the Yankees, hey, give me Scooter, please!
Scooter does not have a history of accumulating injuries like Freddy Sanchez did. He showed good range and quick reflexes on defense last year. He appears to keep himself in excellent physical shape. The deal is lower risk than it would be for a lot of younger aged players I can think of.
Dave Cameron of Fangraphs wrote a ridiculous comment in his analysis to the effect that Scutaro's new contract is based on his 3 month performance with the Giants last year. No Dave, it's not! A contract based on THAT performance would be for about $20 M per year, not over 3 years! It's not even based on his performance over the last 5 seasons. Given that his lowest WAR was 2.4 in that time, a contract based on average past performance would be for about $12.5 M/year. $20 M is worth about 4 WAR points. To earn his contract, Scutaro has to put up 4 WAR over 3 seasons, or about 1.3 WAR per season. THAT is based on a very reasonable estimate of what he is likely to do over that time with an excellent chance for him to actually outperform the value of the contract.
The Giants are now essentially done with their offseason work. They might be in the market for a RH bat for the OF and for a power arm in the bullpen, but they can well afford to let the market come to them on those items. Personally I would be happy to have Xavier Nady, Francisco Peguero and Roger K fight it out for the two reserve OF roster spots, but I expect the Giants to bring in a low cost alternative from the market to spring training. I would also be checking out what I could get in trade for Jose Mijares, either in the form of a power arm or OF option, but we'll see how the Giants play that one. All those LOOGYs came in mighty handy last year.
Around the League: Anyone who thought Shane Victorino might be a lower cost alternative to Angel Pagan, and I was one of those, well, think again! In a rather mystifying move, the Boston Red Sox agreed to pay him $39 M over 3 years. Add in the Mike Napoli contract, and it is becoming apparent that the Red Sox have learned nothing from their past disastrous FA signings. Maybe they are counting on trading Victorino and his contract back to the Dodgers for Yasiel Puig or something?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bobby Evans did a great job. He stood his ground on average annual value, and sacrificed an extra year to secure Affeldt, Pagan and Scutaro. That's the FA market. All 3 are above average at their position, have contributed mightily in the past year, and represent solid value.
ReplyDeleteAs a big proponent of both Pagan and Scutaro, having them grabbed, winning it all and then retaining their services is particularly satisfying. Scutaro is the best contact hitter in the game. That's a good place to put your bets, because its always a gamble. Pagan is an obsessive trainer, a boxer, he is a good bet to retain his peak physical condition. Is the last year of these contracts going to look bad? Who knows, but the Giants have had injured cheerleaders for both title runs: DeRosa, Freddy, Huff and Wilson. We've managed to overcome some "bad contracts". There will always be bad contracts. When its only a couple of bets on vets, and not overwhelmingly vets, it is completely manageable risk. The Sabean signs old vets joke is dead. One of the youngest if not the youngest core in baseball. Belt is 24. Posey and Crawford are 25. Sandoval is 26. We need some vets now. Glad to have everybody back.
Good points about the dead contracts we had and still we won, and good point especially that we have a young core now and can afford to keep some good vets around (though I would note that Sandoval is about as "vet" as Pagan in terms of games played).
DeleteI still think we prefer to have no such dead contracts - it would make things easier.
DeleteAs to Scutaro's contract, if the consensus is the first 2 years are pretty solid and we are taking a chance on the third year, it is equivalent to saying we have signed him to 2 years (solid in everyone's book) and, imagine this is 2014, in 2014 we decide to take a flyer on Scutaro for the next season (2015).
How different is that from the Nationals' taking a chance (or tries to, I don't have the update on that one) on Haren for one year? Everyone is for taking a chance for one year on a lot of iffy guys.
It is kind of like accepting that it is a part of the business that bad stuff happens, kind of like accepting in accounting class that you need to account for bad debts from extending credit. You work hard to limit bad debt by instituting policies and governance, but no retail company can get away from bad debt, that is just part of the business model. Same with stolen goods.
DeleteIn baseball, risk is part and parcel of running a team. The only way to avoid bad contracts is to not give any, even to your homegrown players. You probably can keep them up to their 5th year, maybe 6th, but then you are risking a bad contract by then. And you would let your player go without trading him for prospects because, well, prospects are a risk and you cannot stand the risk of a bad contract, ergo, you should not stand the risk of trading away a perfectly good player and getting nothing in return, which is just as bad as a bad contract.
Not going to build up many long stretches of winning like this, even more likely you go through really bad stretches when the draft picks do not develop (like KC and Pittsburgh), because you would avoid paying the big contracts for the prospects, going for less cheaper options as the risk is lower there (actually, prospects are nothing but risk, but you can't run a baseball team without players).
But if you hate a bad contract, giving your top pick $5-6M is like poison because you don't know if you are getting Buster Posey or Tim Beckham, Joe Mauer or Matt Bush, it is even worse than with free agents.
Basically, you are screwed, nothing against trying to avoid bad contracts, but even contracts that look good going in can crap out on you. Ray Durham's contract looked pretty good going in but turned out so-so because of all the injuries that cropped up once he signed. And if Bonds had screwed up his knee earlier, just after signing that big contract, and then couldn't play worth crap after that, we would have had to suck it up big time there too.
And I'm being a little facetious here, but dead contracts are just a part of business life in baseball, you can try to limit it all you can, but if you don't take some risks, your franchise isn't going to go very far either.
And according to Baggs, the Gints had an offer for Ludwick out there that they pulled, and now Scott Hairston is too expensive as well. Bacci breathes a sigh of relief.
ReplyDeleteChris Haft, on the other hand, said that signing Scutaro doesn't preclude hiring another free agent, and Larry Baer said that the mantra is doing what one needs to do to get back into the World Series. Which ink-stained wretch are we to trust?
Deleteludwick i didnt want...hairston i did
Deletehairston's style of play fits into what the giants now represent...moneyball on roids
and you know, he is gonna be the bane of giants pitchers if anyone in the west signs him...pray he goes to the al
it was evil hawaain punch midget that made me blanch...and according to many sources, the offer pagan got from the unnamed other team was equivalent to the victorino deal...but angel was more interested in years than money...which makes sense when one has a young family
i have absolutely no complaints about the current roster
With the Giants ownership, I think it's fair to ask why they would spend more money...unless they think they can make more.
DeleteSure, there is the extra playoff money, but how much is it?
I am thinking if that TV deal didn't include 'incentive' clauses to make it close, if not exceed, the Dodgers' deal.
Maybe that's just wishful thinking.
I think if that rumor is true that he was offered the same 3 year, $37.5M contract that Flying was signed to, then we have to give Angel Pagan credit for taking our lesser deal. That's only $2.5M for the last year with the Giants deal, relative to that rumored deal, and odds are that he will make at least that much in the fourth year had he chosen to do that. He basically decided that he really wanted to stay with the Giants, even not at top dollar. And more years don't mean that he stays with the Giants all four years. The Giants have shown that they will eat contracts when necessary.
DeleteMarginal revenues from additional spending is lower for the Giants because they sell out the whole season. So the only upside now is raising ticket prices, which apparently they did. I think I estimated maybe an extra $5-10M in revenues from the playoffs, previously. They played in 16 games this playoff season,
But yeah, I think that is wishful thinking, our population base is nowhere near the Doyers, plus it was signed two years ago, it would have to be extremely forward sighted to adjust so greatly..
Bacci - looks like Pagan and Scutaro both gave slight hometown discounts on the AAV to get the extra year. Cards offer was 2/18. Pagan had a EHM offer of 3/37-39. Good stuff from both gents.
DeleteThe problem with the EHM - he's just a dirty player. Grabs the MI legs on double play balls, runs into Visquel to create interference. Just dirty. I'm very glad we didn't have to deal with that nonsense.
I'm with you on Hairston and Ludwick. Hairston is getting paid this year, just like Jonny Gomes. Still, a bit of a gut check to have a Hairston. Doesn't look likely now.
Read somewhere that the Giants loot from the postseason was about $20 M.
DeleteBaggs brought up something that has been overlooked a bit. Both Pagan's and Scooter's deals included up front bonuses, $5 M for Pagan and $2 M for Scooter. The players want the money immediately to avoid the higher taxes that are sure to come next year and the Giants are able to use the postseason loot to pay the bonus and keep their ongoing payroll down just a bit. Don't underestimate the Giants ability to pay upfront bonuses out of the postseason loot as a factor in getting these deals done.
And Boom goes the dynamite, story finally up, for free, on BA:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.baseballamerica.com/today/majors/awards/executive-of-the-year/2012/2614367.html
Executive of the Year, first time since 2003. Well, well deserved.
Schulman tweeted yesterday about the acrimony between BA and Sabean. Seems it follows him around all the rating services. He who laughs last laughs longest. Great job, the whole front office. I'll even curb my criticism of the ownership group. Great time to be a Giants fan.
Ha! Can't wait to read Fangraphs' take on THAT!
DeleteVery nice writeup on Sabes by BA, BTW.
DeleteGreat writeup, Like that they called out both Sabes trust in his baseball guys making gut calls and Goldfarb with some proprietary formula for analyzing hidden gem players. Frankly, Sabes and Co. have been very good at both aspects - and from learning from past mistakes.
DeleteThanks for the link, Shank.
ReplyDeleteWell-deserved Mr. Sabean. In the past, I've been somewhat outspoken in my criticism of Sabean's less successful eras. (Why give Pedro $5 million...why, why,why????) But, I digress. I was very clearly wrong.
On a side note, as the Giants hand out extra contract years, the BA article notes something:
"Ryan Vogelsong, who had the lowest ERA by a starting pitcher in a postseason since Orel Hershiser in 1988..."
Can the Giants please exercise his 2014 option? ($6.5 million) Yes, it's an unnecessary risk, but I think Vogey has earned it.
as vogey has xp coming from the pen, he would be a low risk getting the option, as it would cost the giants the same for a power arm on the open market
Deleteadd that what arms are in the system wont be ready till mid 2014...and hes a keeper
i think his lack of big league innings also weighs in his favor, as does his amazing conditioning program
you can also add that marketing dept loves he and his wife
marketing is a big deal...which is why the giants didnt really go hard on victorino...cant market an evil hawaiin punch midget
bacci...very happy to be entertained during 2013 and beyond
I saw his comment about Vogey and Oral, but, um, wasn't there a kid a couple years ago who had a post-season ERA of about 0.00? I forget what team he played for, though. Anyone remember?
DeleteIsn't it a pain when you have to crane your memory so much to remember something on the tip of your tongue? As it is very plain to see that even those in Spain, would take a plane here to see him pitch. It is my bane, I think I'm going insane in the membrane, thinking of his name...
DeleteGreat post, DrB. Yeah, Cameron was just way off on his article, I would have commented but didn't know where to start, but what you wrote is a good place to start.
ReplyDeleteFor Victorino, as much as he declined in recent years, he's being paid for the good years he had before, even if he looks like he won't ever return to that level of good production, so it is not entirely surprising, as I don't think teams always look at players in such detail as we do (which is more surprising to me).
It's probably easier to sell more season tickets if you have known, if declining, products.
DeleteThe down side to taking a chance on buying low cost is when it doesn't pan out, that $2 million or $5 million or whatever (the buy low amount) is relatively small compared to a lost season.
Justified or not, many GMs have to dread that possibility before attempting too many buy-low deals.
I would also say, most anaylyses do not realistically reflect the inequality, for example,
85% of a WAR of 1.2 > 40% of a WAR of 3.9.
How much of the above is relevant here? I guess that depends on the options. I don't know all the options they have, but they should be included in the discussion here relative to Victorino, and not just looking at Victorino alone.
So, I would add to consideration (to the already solid analysis) two things - ticketing selling and probability of WAR (not just WAR itself).
Just a thought that came to mind, reading about the importance of marketing in the comments section here:
ReplyDeleteThe Giants 2WS in 3 years has got to be a foundation for a growing fan base. Consider how many kids whose parents are meddling fans at best, but have turned the TV on since the Giants are watchable... All those kids now want to go to games, buy the merch, etc.
If the Giants keep pushing runs across the plate and winning ball games, that fan base is going to continue to swell. We all know that winning = more ticket sales at a higher price... I'm fairly confident with smart management, we'll be able to handle the Dodgers 200M+ teams that are probably on the way in the coming years.
Nate the great goes with a one year deal to the Cubs. I was hoping he'd give the short porch at Jankee stadium a shot. Good luck Nate. Stay healthy, and as long as you aren't playing the Gints, mash a little.
ReplyDeletehope he give the cards fits
Deletei too was hoping he would sign with the yanks...with the extra room and short porch, im sure he could slug a few
despite his comments, he should get a nice ovation when he comes home
dang, sabey sabes did great with trades this season...wish this had come a season earlier before he made the play for carlos...wheeler is an animal
bacci
I liked Nates power potential, and I think the cubs will give him a starting job and find that a little. Great for him
DeleteDid Christmas come early? It's like finding where your parents hid the presents and opening them. So far Santa Sabes and his Elves has filled everything on my Giants wish list - there must be a Santa Claus after all. Come to think of it Sabes has been getting a bit of a belly...
ReplyDeleteNow for some stocking stuffers: The Riot and a 4th OF with power will do nicely. Also I wish for Timmy to gain some pounds and Panda to lose some.
Sounds good! And maybe a reliever. Apparently Wilson is refusing to talk to the Giants as he goes about negotiations. That is a bummer, but oh well. It was always my fear that the marketing arm would win out over the baseball ops guys on Wilson. Nope. They are playing this the right way. I'd like them to leave the last spot open for Hembree to win, but I can understand going with a established guy, we are in defend the ring mode.
DeleteLooks like Giants are in on Grilli. MLBTR thinks he'll decide to today.
DeleteThe fact is the Giants shouldn't be paying a closer $15M++. Wilson was all set for that payday in 2013 until his injury. And I don't think the Giants were going to or that it would be a wise investment to pay that much. In other words, Wilson's injury has saved the Giants the marketing fiasco and fan rebellion of not bringing back their All Beard closer.
DeleteIf the Giants bring Wilson back now at a lower base cost/incentive laden deal, then they get both a possible upside and the movie script for TJ-II Fear - The Return of the Beard. And if they don't, then meh.
Just a thought: the strength of our pen is depth, LOOGYs and frankly 4-6 guys who can all close from the 5th inning on. The Giants don't wait until the 9th to bring in a closer - Bochy plays to keep the game close and win one run games.
So Wilson
It cracks me up that the Straw Hat tobacky spittin' Giants are actually at the forefront of the screw the established closer and just pitch your best guys when you need them movement. And Saberz and the F/G crowd won't give Bochy an inch of credit on that.
DeleteGints took a shot at a live arm with some serious erratic heat: Scott Shuman in the minor league portion of Rule 5. Here's his B/R page:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=shuman001sco
That walk rate is absolutely hilarious. John Manual called him the most intriguing pick along with the usual kudos to Tidrow.
If he somehow manages to harness his stuff he will be awesome for us.
DeleteSantiago Casilla as a 29-year-old major-league vet for Oakland, the year before he became a Giant, gave up 61 hits in 48 innings, with 25 walks to 45 strikeouts, 1.78 WHIP, 5.96 ERA. I'm guessing that there are two main causes for high but potentially remediable walk rates, one being that the pitcher overthrows, and needs to be able to rely on secondary pitches so that he isn't always flinging thrilling, desperate fastballs, and the other being that something is amiss with the pitcher's mechanics, such as his release point. To continue guessing: the second of these might be something that the Giants' great pitching coaches can fix in months; the first might take a long time before the secondary pitches become reliable in higher-leverage situations.
DeleteI see Brett Bochy being a huge asset for us in the future. He was lights out at Richmond this season before he had some elbow trouble to the end, but that's not too surprising in his first full season.
DeleteMelonhead Jr. is going to be a tough one because he doesn't have plus velocity. He relies on location and hiding the ball well. He has done very well so far though.
DeleteYeah but with a 69/18 k/bb in 53 innings, and only 29 hits, he definitely knows how to pitch. I don't know if he will close but I assume he will do really well in a 7th or 8th inning role
DeleteCasilla, it appears, could be considered a different case. Just like the Giants scouts somehow pinpointed that Torres had fixed his batting mechanics to swing the way 90% of successful MLB hitters hit, the Giants somehow noticed that Casilla had added a new pitch (can't remember which, but was in an article this season; slider?), and that made a huge difference between what he did for the A's and what he did for the Giants afterward.
DeleteDon't know if Shuman did similarly, we will see. But he had better control two seasons ago and somehow lost it the past two seasons (not that it was that great, but at least wasn't at or over 10 BB/9 like the last two seasons). This continues the Giants predilection for fallen former top prospects, who showed some good skills a few seasons back, but had struggled since then. Given how poorly he has pitched, he must have been surprised like heck that the Giants drafted him in the Rule 5.
I really like Bochy too, you don't strikeout even AA hitters at such a high rate and not have something that causes hitters to miss easily. I figure with Dad advising him, he's can't miss in terms of contributing something good in the bullpen for us.