#30 Jake Dunning, RHP. 6'4", 190 lbs. BD: 8/12/1988.
High A: 6-3, 4.74, 76 IP, 24 BB, 71 K, GO/AO= 1.47, 10 Saves.
Jake Dunning is a converted college shortstop with one of the loosest, whippiest arms I've seen. He struggled in the SJ rotation early in 2011 then flourished in the bullpen later as he recorded 6 of his 10 saves in his last 10 appearances. I saw him pitch a couple of times last year. He showed a FB that ran 93-96 MPH with a sharp breaking ball to go with it. He could develop into a strong setup man with an outside shot at becoming a MLB closer. He could also move back to starter and eventually be a #3 in MLB. He's a bit on the old side for his level, but has low mileage on his arm and is still learning how to pitch, so the age vs level thing is not as big a deal with him as with some prospects. I would expect him to move up to Richmond in 2012.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Drb, I thought about another former converted shortstop while reading this who developed into a great closer: Joe Nathan.. I'll be happy if Dunning comes close to Nathan's sucess..
ReplyDeleteLG
I don't think that comp is a stretch at all.
ReplyDeleteDrB, I know the Giants have had a bunch of SS converted into starters, I'm aware of Nathan and Dunning, but I recall that there were others, but can't recall them. Do you?
DeleteHe's one of the guys I've been following since I saw you pointing him out, sounds very promising and exciting with this description. Is it his age that puts him down on your list, or him being a reliever, or both, or plus others? High K, high GO, good BB, sign me up, that really sounds good otherwise, without further context.
Giants just signed Ryan Theriot for $1.25MM and with incentives up to $750K. Mike Fontenot must be excited because they went to LSU together and are great friends. I like this sign a lot but I am worried it will take AB's away from Crawford. I hope they just did this so that Crawford would not have to face lefties.
ReplyDeleteThe Riot! I am the soothsayer of the offseason with my Pagan and Theriot calls. LSU also extends to Brian Wilson! We'll see how it goes with Crawford and Bochy. Theriot's bad: not much power, not much range, a rep as not the best mitt on the field. The good: Mashes lefties, can play 2B AND SS, is a feisty Cajun, dovetails very nicely with his LSU bud the Hobbit.
DeleteVery nice signing in my opinion. Especially the price.
Gets better. Its a MLB contact but he has to make the squad just like Hensley. Sabey Sabes is turning on the clever. This is his wheelhouse, the dumpster dive. I like it a lot. Having a pest who can get on base late innings and be Freddy/Crawford insurance for 1.25MM? Awesome.
DeleteI don't think this will take away AB's from Crawford unless Crawford stinks it up offensively even worse than he did early last season.
Deleteyes, I was going to point it out, but you called it Shankbone.
I think The Riot fixes what commenters have been noting here as a weakness of the roster, MI depth. The Riot is insurance in case either Crawford and/or Franchez don't cut it and can't play. He and Fontenot will probably platoon, should either starter be out for a while for whatever reason. That works, Fontenot actually hits OK against RHP (not bad LHP last year, tolerable in short stints) plus played great defense at SS last year per DRS, so he'll get most of the starts, with Theriot blasting LHP and his defensive shortcoming is limited by his starts.
Certainly better than the rumored Bloomquist acquisition.
Nice pickups by the Giants, first Hensley, then Theriot. I wonder if Fontenot had any hand in signing Ryan, given their friendship, whether on either side, encouraging him or enticing the Giants, or both. That could explain this late signing, maybe Ryan wanted a starting job but if he's going to be a bench player, why not join his best buddy on a great team that should make the playoffs, plus with the uncertainty about Crawford and Franchez, there is the possibility that he might end up a starter anyway.
So now the bench is now getting crowded. Backup catcher will be either Stewart or maybe Hanchez. Fontenot and Theriot are sure bench players, leaving two spots. If Belt beats out Schierholtz, then Nate would presumably get a bench spot, leaving one spot. I guess that means that Brett Pill and Emmanuel Burriss would fight for that last spot, and the loser would get DFAed, or does Pill still have options, I know Burriss is out. But I just don't see Pill not getting a spot. And Theriot used to steal more bases, so he could be the speed guy off the bench, though he hasn't done much in recent years.
Probably should expect some SP getting minor league offer from the Giants to compete with Zito and perhaps provide depth in the minors during the season.
Well, its also going as you predicted here OGC - the Giants bringing in competition for Crawford and Belt. I prefer this immensely over Bloomquist, and can see the wisdom in having Theriot instead of Scutaro for 1/6th the cost, less with the spring training cut actually, and it doesn't cost a prospect. Scutaro has better defense for sure, but I think its a pretty good trade off. Crawford has struggled against lefties, so there is a nice option split to protect him. Which is something that Bochy does with young players, and nobody gives him credit for (including me once in a while yes). Bochy is actually very good at putting young players in situations to excel. I think its very important to give Crawford some days off against tough lefties, especially if he's struggling. They can always sub him in for defense late in the game as well.
DeleteHaving Freddy insurance is important. Theriot and Fonty are a pretty nice albeit light hitting platoon. I think its just as important to get somebody who can hit if Franchez isn't ready or goes down. Crawford should be able to let his bat hit enough to let the defense sing. If he doesn't, at least the G's have a cheap insurance policy. A platoon that costs 2.25-3MM bucks is just fine for 2b and SS.
I think unless Handy Manny comes up big it'll be his spot. But Pill has to show something as well. These are all nice low key pickups, and the kind that are either discarded or make a big difference. Sabean specialty.
So who is the SP? Harden or Kazmir? Webb? Duke? I think its going to be Kazmir. He has the most upside. Lost in the Vogelsong hoopla is he was quite talented. Harden is as well, but he is a righty and seems more likely to get a major league deal.
Oh, I shouldn't say he mashes lefties. Anybody with 17 HRs in his career doesn't mash. He has good splits against LH pitchers, including a very nice OBP. He can get on base, which is more than Manny Burris has shown so far. In a pinch hitting spot, he'll inspire more confidence, and he used to steal bases. Not sure if that's LaRussa's philosophy or some injuries slowing him down. He has a rep as a spaz on the bases. Remember he's a feisty Cajun and also American Indian as well, one of only a few in MLB. I am very happy to have the depth up the middle.
DeleteI think you're right on with the signing. Fonty might have had a hand in it, and the Giants just waited out the MI market and got themselves a bargain. No starting SS jobs for The Riot available, he took the next best thing he could get. Well played Sabey Sabes.
Roger - Wilson wasn't on the 2000 WS losing LSU Tigers, he came in 2001 - along with The Riot, The Hobbit, there was also Aaron Hill and some chap named Todd Linden on the squad.
DeleteI just came up with an idea for reliever/SP to sign: Micah Owings. AZ for some inexplicable reason rewarded his nice 2011 season by non-tendering him even though it was estimated that it would only cost them $1M, hoping to re-sign him at less money. If I were him, I would be too pissed to sign with them.
DeleteHe could replace Mota as our long-reliever, plus be an extra pinch-hitter off the bench, and he could be our first SP to go to should we need to replace a starter in the rotation. I guess he could also battle for a starting spot against Zito as well.
Owings would make another nice bat off the bench too.
DeleteOGC - Owings is listed on BR as a "pitcher and pinch-hitter". That's funny. Seems like a nice long man. Mota is pretty good though - he seems to have maintained velocity very well and has that rubber arm. Plus they have the interesting minor league deal going for the 2nd year? Looking back on last year its possible they had a handshake agreement then as well. Mota is just so damn funny in the clubhouse that has to count for something. He has some bad nights, but a lot of that is during cleanup. He pitches pretty well under pressure. Still, Owings is definitely somebody to look for.
DeletePill was just added to the 40-Man last year, so I BELIEVE that means he still has 3 options left?
ReplyDeleteHe was DFA'd by the Giants after the '10 season to remove him from the 40, and I am not sure what that does to option years, though...
I was wondering that too. He was on the 40 man before, and I don't know how many options he used then, plus maybe an option for 2011, not sure how that works exactly, though technically he did not get sent back down to the minors so no option used for 2011? Or is that a technical procedure at the end of the season to bring the roster back down to the 25-man roster?
DeleteSomeone on MCC is going to come to this site to see how the signing of Theriot can be justified, since they're getting teary over our not having paid 6 million bucks plus a prospect for the 36 year old Scutaro and settling insted for Theriot, four years younger, at about 15% of the price and no prospect. Might the justification look like this? Bill James projects Scutaro to have an OBP in 2012 of .341 and an OPS of .719, while he projects Theriot with an OBP of .338 and an OPS of .682. Looks like pretty much of a muchness there. But in the field Scutaro is Honus Wagner, and Theriot, a recruit from an Old Folks' Home, huh? But no. Scutaro's dWAR in 2011 was -1.1 and Theriot, -.6 (Baseball Reference).
ReplyDeleteThe other guy to compare to is of course scrapper extraordinaire Jamey Carroll. The G's got themselves a pest at a fraction of the cost of that as well. And avoided a 2 year deal.
DeleteRight. Carroll's projected OBP for 2012 is a bit higher (.353)than that for Theriot (.338), but his projected OBP is virtually identical, and his last year's dWAR too, -.4. Like Scutaro, he is of an age--he's five years older than Theriot--when one can reasonably anticipate decline. One would think, as you suggest, that the MCCoven are hungering for veteran grit.
DeleteGotta say, congrats to Shankbone for calling this one as well as the Pagan trade. Nice predictin' there, Shanks!
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about you Shankbone after hearing about The Riot coming to the bay. I have nothing bad to say about this move although it is just about as bare minimum as they could have done. I was pushing for Cuddyer or Barmes but at 1.25 mil this is a way better deal even though offensively he isn't gonna light the league on fire.
ReplyDeleteOne pattern I see with Sabey Sabes that I don't really like regarding these dumpster dives is that they could end up blocking younger players development whether it be Crawford or Belt or Pill or Nate, seems like they have an alternative for all of them if they aren't going 3 for 4 every night. The Giants worst fear besides every time they have to sign Zito's paycheck has to be giving their young players too much rope and watching them hang themselves. So instead of too much rope they don't give them enough and then wonder why they don't perform.
Manny Burriss is going to be the one that ends up getting screwed on this deal. Not that I am a Manny supporter but that guy never got a shot and this signing pretty much guarantees he is gone. Crawford could be hindered simply because now there is an alternative and the Giants have itchy trigger fingers if you don't perform. Belt is another who may be hurt by sporadic PT. If we had more stars in our lineup, it would be easier to leave a young guy in even when they are struggling but we can't afford someone hitting .200 all year since we have to fight for every run we score. All in all I am OK with the offseason now but just like Sabes with young players, I am going to have a short leash on my criticisms if they don't perform.
I understand how you feel, but aren't you inconsistent? Cuddyer would have blocked either Belt in LF or Nate in RF; Barmes would have blocked Crawford. As to how any of these guys perform, why will you have a short leash, since probabilities are all Sabean and you have to go on? No one knows whether the players will do better or worse than the probabilities reflected in the various projections that ZIPS et al. make, and the team makes. Those probabilities are the basis on which you and Sabean are "OK with the offseason." Or do you mean a short leash if underperforming players ("someone hitting .200 all year") are kept in the lineup despite the damage that they're doing?
DeleteI don't know that Manny Burriss is the odd man out if there are no more deals. Burriss can play OF and 1B defensively while Theriot only plays IF as far as I know. There is talk that Brett Pill may be the odd man out, but they could keep Pill, CStew, Fonty, The Riot and Burriss as the 5 reserves and send Belt to Fresno. Belt would be a better bat off the bench than Burriss, but I think Belt will be a starter, either in SF or Fresno. I suppose Belt could stay and start in LF with Melky moving to RF and Nate to the bench which would leave Burriss out. Belt could stay instead of Pill but then that gives you two LH hitting 1B in Huff and Belt so Pill seems like the better fit to be the RH bat off the bench.
DeleteNow, if the Giants sign another RH hitting OF like Conor Jackson or Marcus Thames, then Burriss would definitely be the odd man out.
If we believe the UZR's, I would hope that Crawford would still start the bulk of games at SS as he is a far superior defensive SS to Theriot.
Thanks DrB, its sort of a joke with The Riot, but I think Sabes should be commended for playing a bit of moneyball here. Low risk, medium reward moves are just fine. And character guys like Theriot can catch fire at times. He did briefly in the playoffs for the Cards, before slumping badly. He's a little Scutaro, a little Carroll, but he's younger, and cheaper. We need Freddy AND Crawford insurance, and we only have so many spots. He fits perfectly and hilariously with his buddy The Hobbit.
DeleteI don't understand the "Bochy won't play Crawford now" line. I also don't understand the sudden need for older vets as Campanari pointed out. 27, 30 and 32 and the guys on the wish list are 36.
I've bashed Manny Burris a fair amount. I like him, he just hasn't been able to hit. MLB is a harsh, harsh place. He's now staring down the barrel of a gun. Brett Pill is as well. The latest rumor is mutual interest from Xavier Nady (33) RH OF who has pretty nice splits against LH pitchers. I've made a mess of saying "mash" so I will now reserve the term "mashing" for above 900 OPS such as Cody Ross, a legit lefty "masher". Nady's line is 290/358/804 for a 111 OPS+ against lefties. Like Cody, he's closing in on 100 career homers. If they sign him up, I'd say that seals Belt's fate to AAA to be the cavalry once he proves out and things break down.
Pato - I hear you on being ready to criticize. It is easier to drop a 1-2MM contract then eat Miggy T's 6.5MM. I think Sabean has been very disciplined with the years, and its starting to pay off. I am just happy if Freddy goes down or isn't ready the Giants don't have to burn off prospect arms as the first move. Maybe it'll be the second move, for sure, but maybe this turns out. I like The Riot. Scrappy middle infielders are sort of my wheelhouse though once I stop dreaming of 5-tool guys.
Also, I think maybe Sabey Sabes needs to ease his breaks, brother. Nady was a great call... 4 years ago. 2 Tommy Johns and 2 bad years is a pretty big red flag. I think both Hensley and Theriot are great low risk low cost moves (also, apparently The Hobbit is on the exact same Major league/cut 'em deal), but we don't need to clog up the OF. Its already got a fair amount of play with Christian, Graham and Blanco there. Pitchers, Sabey Sabes, Pitchers.
DeletePeople will believe what they believe, guys. It is just human nature.
DeleteI prefer data, so every time I see someone complaining about how the Giants screwed up the development of one of our young prospects, I go through, game by game, following the pattern of usage by the team, and I find that Bochy does usually give their better (key word here, better, as a lot of fans have varying thoughts on what constitutes "better") prospects at least a month to figure things out before he pulls them out of the lineup. Belt, I'll admit, he didn't give a month, I think Bowker too, but in both cases, both were flailing so badly by that point that he had to pull them down, they were just in a downward spiral in performance.
But generally, the Giants give their better prospects a lot of rope. They generally signal to the masses how good each is by specifying who they think are starter material. Thus Ishikawa was installed as the starter, while Ortmeier was only noted as a possibility.
Just because a prospect fail, it does not necessarily signify a failure on the part of the Giants training and development staff. They are the ones talking with the guys everyday, they have the pulse on how badly emotionally they are handling the bad hitting. They even commented on it last season, noting how Crawford didn't take bad ABs back to the field, but Belt just kept on lingering and thinking about his failures with the bat.
People are also fooled by their hopes and dreams. Fred Lewis boils the ocean for two weeks, exactly what they imagined, and after two months people point to his OBP as being good, but for the prior two months before the benching, his OPS was in the 600's and dropping, they don't realize that he was super productive with the bat for 2 weeks, then fallow for the next 8 weeks. Belt did the same too, last season, he would come in, hit a homer or two, get everyone's hopes up, but soon afterward, he starts freezing and striking out a lot, but everyone remembers the homers and wonder why the Giants don't give him more rope, they are ruining his development, and yet they fail to notice - because the early hitting masks everything - that his OPS was in the 400's and 500's for a long while with 30-50% strikeouts.
So give me a player who the Giants "ruined" their development by not playing him enough. I went through enough of these to know that the Giants would give them plenty of starting playing time, at least a month generally unless they are really doing badly, in which case you pull the ripcord and try to preserve the prospect's confidence and not have it crater. There are sometimes more important things for a player's development than playing him.
A big part of the lack of confidence (perceived or otherwise) in the prospects is because they haven't been very good for the last 20 years. So how long do you let a mediocre prospect suck at the major league level (Bocock, Burris, Linden, Niekro, Frandsen, etc.) before pulling the plug? I am not as opposed to the way those "prospects" were handled because they all clearly weren't guaranteed to be stars. My fear is that the lack of confidence they have shown in guys like these will make them less patient with guys who have the potential of Belt or even Pill IMO. How patient were they with Jesus Guzman and how productive was he last year for San Diego? Not a world beater by any means but batted cleanup most of the year and put up decent numbers all things considering (better then Huff).
DeleteSome prospects need to be coddled and eased into their roles and some need to go 4 years of sucking at the major league level before they finally start showing some of their potential (Alex Gordon). Gordon was a second overall pick I think so obviously they are going to be more patient with him but sometimes you have to let the young players struggle and have growing pains, it teaches them to be humble and find ways to persevere and overcome obstacles.
Buster Posey and Pablo were 2 exceptions because they both got hot when they came up and carried it long enough to instill confidence in management but Belt and Pill to a lesser extent weren't allowed to work through their dry spells.
That's why you need more facts before putting down a statement like that about Guzman.
DeleteLooking at his stats, his numbers look good solely because of his .360 BABIP in 2011. I would have to check but even a speedster like Ichira cannot maintain a BABIP that high. Dropping him to .300 BABIP (which is mean for all players; every player's BABIP is individual but we don't enough stats to know that about him, other than that he is not a speedster, so it is unlikely that his BABIP is above .300.
Also, looking at his splits, his overall numbers were also helped by him getting a large portion of ABs against LHP, who he mashed. He also hit well against RHP, but nearly 40% of his PA was against LHP, and I think that is usually around 25% for a full season, generally.
Furthermore, he actually hit much much better in SD than on the road (.963 OPS vs. .757 on the road), which has to be an anomaly as well. I would think that his 2012 season will be closer to .757 than his overall .847 OPS.
I would be greatly surprised if he were to duplicate that batting line in 2012. I think it should fall by at least 60 OPS, and up to 120 OPS. He walks a lot but strikes out a lot as well, and age 28 for the season, is catching up to the league average age, so he is probably at or maybe even past his prime already.
Meanwhile Huff clearly had a down year with his BABIP, similar to two years ago, though thee was a decline in contact rate, so his time is probably nigh possibly, but I think he should be better able to put up a better batting line than Guzman in 2012.
Regarding the Giants handling of Posey/Pablo vs. Belt/Pill, while I agree generally with your second paragraph, I think you are missing another view of the situation: when the prospect is drowning, and his confidence is crashing.
DeleteBochy implied as much about Belt, noting that he was bringing every poor at-bat to the field and to the next AB. Crawford, on the other hand, wasn't doing that.
People, I believe, were too blinded by how well Belt would hit his first week or so in the majors, as that confirmed their image of him based on all the projections of greatness that was predicted for him. Then the doubt and lack of confidence crept in and he sucked totally, with his overall numbers buoyed upward by that nice first week, he was really crappy as a hitter for a long time after that before the Giants pull the plug. So the fans think that the Giants don't believe in him and not giving him a chance.
As I noted before, believe it or not, the Giants thought that Belt was a good prospect long before the fans did. They were the ones who re-did his whole batting stance and changed a pretty much blah and suspect college hitter into one of the major's top prospects. Maybe we should trust that when they think he needs to be sent down or sat down, they are doing it for his own good. They are much closer to the situation, have a much better grasp of his pulse.
Pounding your head on the ground repeatedly does nothing for your confidence. Sometimes the prospect needs a break from the action to collect himself and let his talents shine. That is what the Giants did with Cain and Sanchez, for example. Belt did better at the end of the season, as DrB aptly noted, he hit very well HR-wise at the end of the season, and continued that into the winter league. Honestly, though, I think he would benefit from starting the year in AAA and working his way up, rather than have all that pressure put on him from the get-go.
We had another young hitter who struck out a lot and it took a number of years before he was able to figure it out at the major league level: Matt Williams. As you noted, Alex Gordon took some time too. Could the Giants perhaps have a better view into the player's psyche than we do, and know better than us when a player needs to find himself, away from the pressure?
And we should have seen it with that Franchise show on Showtime, where he cried when he learned he had made it to the majors. Emotional people sometimes carry failure with them, hard. While I wasn't there, I would bet that when Will Clark, Barry Bonds, Tim Lincecum, and Buster Posey got the call-up, they weren't crying, they were, like, "about time!" While, maybe Panda would like, "Cool! Whatever!" Belt is more like Barry Zito, thinking too much about failure, then failing because of that.
And about Pill in general, he's just evidence of fans falling in love with a prospect, based on one good season.
DeleteThere is a reason why fans were not clamoring for Pill in prior seasons: he wasn't that good. He was so bad that when the Giants removed him from the 40 man roster, no team was interested enough to claim him, so the Giants retained him to be an organizational player.
So he was not mishandled in 2011, in my opinion. Given how poorly he hit before, the Giants rightly had to think that maybe he was just getting lucky, at least until late in the season. Ron Shandler's research found that teams had a much better success rate in evaluating whether a prospect will be successful when he is called up when that player played a full year in AAA before his call-up. Teams are apparently also blinded enough (like the fans) by a good partial season performance that ends up not holding up when the guy plays a full season. Sort of like the Francoeur situation.
I think that is doubly so with a player who was never much of prospect, like Pill. Same thing happened with Bowker, he wasn't really doing much of anything, then had that one great year, but was never able to bring that to the majors.
And by the time, maybe, in the second half where a team feels that maybe he might have something, then to put him at the major league level as, say, the starting 1B, which is what I perceive as what people who think Pill was mishandled thought should happen, because they were down on Huff, well, that I would certainly label mishandling prospects.
Earl Weaver thought the pressure serious enough that this is what he recommended teams should treat young players: he tried to bring up starting pitchers first as a long reliever, so that he could put them into situations where they could succeed, and to acclimate to being a major leaguer and not let the pressure crush the young player.
So I thought Pill was handled very well, they brought him up after he proved himself over a full season, let him acclimate and do some stuff in the majors in September, and not just throw him into the fire, like Dusty Baker did with Salomon Torres against the Dodgers on the last game of the season, playing for the playoffs.
Campanari: having Cuddyer or even Barmes in your lineup would be a ligitimate upgrade over guys like Crawford and Nate so I wouldn't consider them "blocking" them. That is a little like saying that we shouldn't sign Prince Fielder because he will block Belt. My concern is that the dumpster dives get opportunities to play over young unproven players in situations where the young player struggles and isn't given a chance to get himself out of the slump. I would be ok with Crawford batting .200 all year if it helped him develop into an eventual .250 or .260 hitter but my point is that there is no way the Giants are going to leave him in the lineup if that is what he is batting after 25 games.
ReplyDeleteI am going to have a short leash on my criticisms, just like sabes has a short leash with young players when they don't perform (seems very just since he has no patience to let a kid struggle through their pains, why should I be patient with him?). Sabean is building a team much like how Billy Beane built the A's during the moneyball year. He is finding pieces to compliment other players weaknesses so that he can mix and match and get maximum production at each position from multiple sources. When the A's were doing it with their 40 million dollar budget it made a lot of sense and made Beane look like a genius but when you have to do it with a budget at over triple what Beane had to work with, it really highlights how poorly you have spent money in the past and how cheap you have become because of it.
For years I heard Sabes and Giants brass say how the Zito signing hasn't prevented them from going after high priced free agents and they use the excuse that nobody wants to come and play here because of the ballpark instead. That may have been true 4 or 5 years ago when this team was horrible but if you pay the free agents enough I guarentee they will come. Here is another crazy idea, move the fence in right center in 50 feet and put more seats in. We have great pitching so if offensive players don't want to come here then why not give them a shorter fence while creating more seats which means more revenue for the Giants? Not quirky enough for you fans of wide open spaces and stand up triples? Raise the center field fences and move them back 10 feet to compensate for moving in the right center wall but give offensive players somewhere they know they can pull the ball and get it out.
What is $40 million in 1999 today?
Delete$100 million? $90 million?
Me again.
DeleteSabean is like vet who has won the big one. Putting him on a short leash is like putting Posey, Panda or Cain on a short leash. And you can say you want to put him on a short because he's putting one of them vets on a short leash (I can see the exact parallel); otherwise you put him on a short leash because you want to put him on a short leash.
Well, Frank McCourt bought the Dodgers for just under $400 M in what, 2003? Looks like he's going to get north of $1.5 B for them sometime this year.
DeleteThe Giants payroll was somewhere around $50-60 M in 1999 and now it's $130 M.
Pato,
You need to have just an ounce of patience here. The Zito and Rowand contracts were signed years ago and we are nearing the end of both. It has been reported over and over that at least the Zito signing was owner driven. Given that the Giants won a World Series with Zito and Rowand under contract and not contributing, I think Sabes has actually done an admirable job or working his way around them and an even better job of not saddling himself with even more long term contracts while waiting for them to expire.
As I wrote above, patience is one thing, it is another to leave a player who is struggling mentally in there to flail away. Just because you think Sabean/Bochy is not being patient does not mean that you know the entire situation that is happening with the player. As Bochy noted in post-season interviews, Belt was really struggling with his offensive problems, bringing them on to the field and into the next at-bat, whereas Crawford wasn't.
DeleteHello? Beane never won a World Series, never even made it there. Sabean has brought the Giants twice, winning once.
As the others note, you are comparing different times. It would be like complaining about gasoline prices, how they used to go for 25 cents back when I was a kid, and now look at the prices.
I also don't see the mix and match complement analogy either. The A's in 2000, their first playoff year in their Moneyball days had 7 starting position players with either 140+ games played or 600+ PA or both. They had 3 main starting pitchers, 1 mostly main (27 starts) and the #5 guy was a mix and match, as Zito first came up. Total payroll that year was $30.4M. Bonds was being paid $10.7M, for comparison.
Top players today are being paid roughly $25M per season.
And - old news - it has been reported by Andy Baggarly that both the Zito contract and the Rowand contracts were not driven by Sabean, that, essentially, ownership drove those signings. (meaning Magowan) So Sabean, as DrB noted, has been hampered by ownership's mistakes costing him $30M of the payroll for the past five season, meaning he was essentially working with a $70M payroll for a number of years until ownership boosted the payroll in 2011 and 2012 to its current levels, which was roughly the same payroll the A's have been operating with the past few years as well.
What is Beane's excuse for not competing recently? Trading away Ethier for a player who couldn't even outperform Ethier in his first season. Trading away CarGon for so far nothing (Street too). Trading away Hudson for nothing. Signing the wrong player to a long term contract (Chavez), talk about being handicapped, while losing the other two (Tejada and Giambi) for magic beans, er, draft picks.
Shankbone (and I think DrB too) still thinks that Sabean did drive the Rowand contract, but I have no reason not to believe Baggarly's sources. Just because it seems like a Sabean deal does not mean that it was, the way I see it. Baggerly, as well, as been an excellent source of inside information over the years, I don't recall one thing that he plainly got wrong.
Dr. B, If they leave Pill off this team I think it will be a big mistake. I would rather see Belt go to AAA and start every day as I don't like him as much as Pill in a bench role but Pill is one who I think could thrive or at least perform adequately in a part time and off the bench late in games role. Speaking of short leashes, I would have a 30-40 game leash with Huff and if he can't get back to his 2010 ways then I would give the job to Belt and leave him there. Platoon Pill there against lefties if you want but Huff is blocking Belt and unless he is performing significantly better then the opportunity cost of getting Belts career on track then they need to dump him and move on.
ReplyDeleteP-Duck good call on the Belt/Pill option versus Huff. I really hope Bochy won't be tempted to play Huff until he comes around again (all year). Huff needs to be on a short leash simply because he is blocking Belt/Pill and because he won't be here next year. Plus the Giants really need to track Belt for success when he takes over full-time in 2013. Belt and Pill will be key cost-controlled players (plus Posey/Pablo/Brown?/Panik?) for the Giants offense to build around going forward, Huff not so much
DeleteFrom all the interviews I've seen from Sabean and Bochy, it is pretty clear that the Giants want Posey to play 1B, and mostly against LHP, to give the 1B a blow against LHP. They seem to be leaning towards Belt at 1B, where he is most comfortable, and playing Huff in LF, which means that essentially Belt will platoon with Posey at 1B, more or less. And that works because Stewarts hits adequately against LHP.
DeleteI don't see how Pill doesn't make the 25-man roster unless he totally stinks it up in spring training. With probably Stewart as backup C, Theriot and Fontenot as MI utility and likely Schierholtz as the 4th OF, they will need a righty power bat off the bench, which means Pill. I think Burriss is the loser with the addition of Theriot, not Pill.
And there is no way they would put Belt on the bench, he clearly needs experience to improve, so he's going to start, whether in majors or minors.
Bochy seems to get up in player's grills around mid-May if they are not hitting, so that would be around 40 games, or so, so I can see Huff getting benched around then if he's scuffling, with Nate taking over as starter in RF, Melky moving to LF. But he was a great offensive force when he's locked in, like he was in 2008 and 2010, so they will still give him every chance to snap out of it, probably to the trade deadline or so, until they move on and eat the contract. Unlike, say, Rowand, who hadn't been good since his first year of the contract.