tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post5813894067846873773..comments2024-02-23T20:49:09.057-08:00Comments on obsessivegiantscompulsive: Is it Drafty in Here? Looking at the 2012 Draftobsessivegiantscompulsivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-44617541386427265042012-06-18T12:20:29.723-07:002012-06-18T12:20:29.723-07:00I was going to try to reply to all the threads abo...I was going to try to reply to all the threads above, but maybe I should not do that, I think enough has been said.<br /><br />I totally agree with the three levers concept, I didn't realize he had that, but that's basically what I've tried to convey whenever discussing trades, that some trades make sense when the deal is done, but it just didn't work out.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-77217856118333946332012-06-18T10:09:33.952-07:002012-06-18T10:09:33.952-07:00Well, I'll say this: your title "Is it dr...Well, I'll say this: your title "Is it drafty in here?" sure did hit the spot. Just not quite how you intended I guess.<br /><br />I'll give the "Trust the Giants" one credit and one credit only: their ability to evaluate pitching. It is a strong suit, and their ability to coach up said pitching makes it even stronger. So maybe its two credits, but its not a get out of jail free card towards evaluating everything else.<br /><br />Its important to re-evaluate at different times. Lefty Malo has a "three levers" trade analysis that I like - when it happens, short term and long term. Drafts are hard, with the final evaluation can go on a dozen years later even. <br /><br />I've been in a few discussions with Fla-Giant about the Barr MO, and the pattern, and the fact one year doesn't mean a lot. And I've readily agreed that this could just be a wait and see year. I'm hoping this isn't the first or second barometer for something else, a de-emphasis on the minor league system, because it has born a lot of fruit recently. Time will tell. Good discussion topic, even if it got sideways OGC, both in your posts here and the MCC thread. Cheers.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-85989172697103546802012-06-18T08:55:55.107-07:002012-06-18T08:55:55.107-07:00I know neither of us woke up and said "lets g...I know neither of us woke up and said "lets go get in a pissing match", but that's what just happened. It is not enjoyable or illuminating. There might be 3K Giants fans who participate on some level across the web. There might be 300 who care at all about the draft. There might be 3 people in the world who care enough about the Giants to get into this discussion, which gets back to the "Hill of Beans" quote OGC and I discussed in that MCC thread. While I respect what you put down DrB, I would urge you to be more respectful of other points of view.<br /><br />It is possible that what the Giants did - draft one HS player with any expectation of signing, draft 7 pitchers in the first 8 rounds, and draft the most college seniors in MLB at a different point in the draft from the trend in MLB - was simply picking the best players on their board. There is of course the chance that one of the longshot late round picks makes the show. It is also possible that this strategy was motivated by a dictated budget and a very conservative approach, but there is a contrarian element to it that is interesting. As I have stated many times, it is quite possible this will be an extremely successful draft extremely quickly. But I'm not debating the 1st or 2nd round picks, I'm evaluating the rest of the picks drafted versus the rest of MLB. If you want to disagree with me, do it respectfully, or feel free to ignore me. I hope you both are right and I'm wrong, believe me, I root for the Giants success every time.<br /><br />I'll take the accusation towards the Giants ownership and my choice of words under advisement, and I'll watch out for the cynical comments. I accept your apology. If I could offer up any constructive criticism, I would say you should watch out for putting up strawman arguments. I'm a contrarian, and I speak my mind, sometimes that lands me in places I don't really want to be. I contribute some good stuff (hopefully) in a few blogs I like. I don't want to be a guy who gets in arguments, but sometimes it just unavoidable.<br /><br />I hope you both enjoyed a good father's day. Thanks to OGC for being a voice of reason, and Go Giants.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-44372574946112929342012-06-18T08:23:58.418-07:002012-06-18T08:23:58.418-07:00Live and learn, right DrB?
The way I see it, nobo...Live and learn, right DrB?<br /><br />The way I see it, nobody will ever be 100% right, we will always get some details wrong, but as long as we see the Big Picture and get that right, I think that is the goal for any analyst. I think we both individually got that Big Picture for a number of years now (as well as a few others).<br /><br />About Mac, I think he's clearly an overdraft, he was pick 115, which is high even for Grabusky. Even worse by BA ranking.<br /><br />But this is nothing new. The Giants have always drafted the guys they wanted, in the order their internal ranking has them. Schierholtz, Lincecum, Bumgarner, Brown, Panik, even Cain was considered an overdraft, though not by a lot (meaning more than a round) but still. <br /><br />We have no reason to believe that they deviated from that M.O., which is to your point here, one year of doing something different does not prove a pattern of anything.<br /><br />I've also come to trust the Giants judgement as well, particularly since John Barr joined the team. So while I can see complaining about any pick that you want, this is not something new, they have always "think different" when it came to the draft, we need to see how everything plays out before we start labeling it one thing or another.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-21635336892892903642012-06-18T08:11:55.125-07:002012-06-18T08:11:55.125-07:00DrB, you don't need to apologize to me, I have...DrB, you don't need to apologize to me, I have no problem with people expressing their views, as long as they articulate the reasoning why, and you have been always very good at that.<br /><br />I was just noting that clearly he took umbrage at what you said.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-72807433709713527922012-06-17T08:57:28.856-07:002012-06-17T08:57:28.856-07:00I'll put it another way:
If you say the Gian...I'll put it another way: <br /><br />If you say the Giants drafted X number of college seniors, that is a statement of fact. <br /><br />If you say the Giants drafted too many college seniors, that is a statement of opinion.<br /><br />If you say the Giants drafted too many college seniors because they are "cheap", "cynical" and were "cutting and running from upside", that is an accusation.<br /><br />It's the accusation I am taking umbrage at. <br /><br />Again, I apologize for making accusations in the process of trying to articulate that.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-24057347943801867282012-06-17T08:38:21.786-07:002012-06-17T08:38:21.786-07:00Shankbone,
I have never questioned your veracity....Shankbone,<br /><br />I have never questioned your veracity. If you go back and check, I have never said you did not hear whatever you heard about the Giants partners. Only you know the source well enough to know how much stock to put in it, but I am absolutely not accusing you of making it up.<br /><br />My only problem with your approach is the use of certain judgmental phrases such as "cheap", "cynical" and "cut and run from upside." I just think that possibly some things you have heard about Giants ownership has made it more likely you would draw those conclusions, in other words, biased you. We all have our biases. That is different than questioning truthfulness which I have never done in your case.<br /><br />In the process of trying to articulate that I may have used some judgmental phrases myself which I apologize for both to you and OGC.<br /><br />I really don't care about you giving the Giants a C or C+ grade on the draft. I think it's a B and it's OK to have our differences of opinion. I just wish we could leave it at that without ascribing ulterior motives like "cheap", "cynical" and "cutting and running from upside." It is possible to believe that the Giants picked who they thought were the best players on their board and disagree with how they ranked them without accusing them of being "cheap", "cynical" or "cutting and running from upside."<br /><br />That is all I'm asking for here.<br /><br />Again, apologies to both you and OGC if I overstepped a boundary in trying to articulate that.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-66856709522807297242012-06-16T23:20:17.843-07:002012-06-16T23:20:17.843-07:00Don't have time to say more than this.
I se...Don't have time to say more than this. <br /><br />I see many of DrB's points, but I get why Shankbone's is teed off, as DrB didn't have to bring in those words that clearly set Shankbone off.<br /><br />I wish I can make things better, but don't have any idea how to approach that, nor the time, I actually should be working right now...<br /><br />Hope you two have a great Father's Day, in any case!<br /><br />And to all other fathers reading this.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-67066991556968730892012-06-16T17:06:57.204-07:002012-06-16T17:06:57.204-07:00Again with the strawman argument, trying to redefi...Again with the strawman argument, trying to redefine what I said into something different. Did I ever say top dollar? No, I said they were cheap. The amount of money is laughable in the backdrop of professional sports. It's my opinion, and we'll know more later.<br /><br />You're responded at various points with: cheap shot, disingenuous, a joke, and now fed information, real or imagined. <br /><br />This whole discussion has gone on way too long. OGC shares your opinion and we were able to wrap it up, in a wait and see what happens. You have decided to take this to a personal level and attack my viewpoint itself and throw some choice words my way. That is a huge issue, who cares about the draft. Why is this so important that you roll like this? I'm beginning to understand why you don't want to be involved with a forum and want to be off by yourself. Is a different viewpoint that intolerable to you? Is the difference of a B to a C grade on your favorite teams draft worth going to the interwebz mattresses? <br /><br />Yes, I have some connections. I know some things about our players that would make Bacci drool. I don't share practically anything. I have leaked out a few things, and it has involved the minority partners being not big picture, to my dismay. So what? If this offends you so much, you should have said something right away. Instead you question the veracity of it. Well, what do you think MY response is going to be to that?<br /><br />Now you didn't have any problem with any analysis I did as long as it agreed with your world view. The fact you're throwing some pretty vehement bidness my way tells me you are really offended by this. Let me tell you, I never had any intention to offend you. I have strong opinions and I stick to them. You know I'm not going to back down from this, and you know there is going to be a consequence to questioning my veracity. Its a shame its over such a small matter.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-85453421000450357532012-06-16T14:56:18.536-07:002012-06-16T14:56:18.536-07:001. You are the one who has made a huge issue abou...1. You are the one who has made a huge issue about the Giants not spending enough on rounds 11-40. All I'm saying is rounds 11-40 may not be the best investment for paying top dollar since the return, at best, is dismal. <br /><br />2. You have said repeatedly that you know someone who knows someone in the Giants ownership group and have hinted that what you have heard is not complimentary. I believe that bias shows through repeatedly in your comments that include phrases like "cynical", "cheap" and "cut and run from upside."<br /><br />I'm not exactly pulling this stuff out of thin air here.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-17065382959848839962012-06-16T11:42:51.843-07:002012-06-16T11:42:51.843-07:00Strawman: By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or jus...Strawman: By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone's argument, it's much easier to present your own position as being reasonable or valid.<br /><br />I never said that it would be realistic nor wise to spend 100K a pick on 11-40. You really are grasping at straws. And have throughout this thread.<br /><br />Fed information? Imagined? OK, we are done here.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-90277601801349956832012-06-16T09:46:57.577-07:002012-06-16T09:46:57.577-07:00No, it's not what the Giants did in the draft....No, it's not what the Giants did in the draft. It's your analysis of what they did in the draft seen through a prism of MCC type bias and yeah, I do think you played to the crowd over there.<br /><br />As for rounds 11-40, I don't think it's necessarily smart at all to spend $100 K on every pick in rounds 11-40 just because you can. That's an aggregate $2.5 M on a pool of players that might produces one useful MLB player if you are lucky. Yes, I do think there might be better ways to spend that money. I do not believe the Giants are any less likely to get at least 1 useful MLB player out of their pool as they would have by spending all $2.5 M. As for all the angst over the last 4 picks, well, that's just laughable.<br /><br />Maybe you aren't looking to "bury the Gints", but you have been fed information, real or imagined, about their ownership group that biases your analysis and it shows through time after time in your comments.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-4937460131473738732012-06-16T09:19:58.534-07:002012-06-16T09:19:58.534-07:00More battle lines. Apologist or naysayer? Am I e...More battle lines. Apologist or naysayer? Am I entitled to my opinion without being lumped in with a crowd? I believe I am. I participated in draft discussions at MCC, there is no denying that. But playing to a crowd there? Sorry, I state what's on my mind, and I argue to the best of my ability my points. Those terms you're latching onto such as cutting and running, those are the result of what the Giants did, not any pre-existing bias. If the draft results were different, the analysis would be different. I'm not looking to bury the Gints, and you, having participated in many, many conversations with me, should know that. <br /><br />With only 1 HS player drafted with any intention of signing, that is clear evidence of cutting and running from upside. No other team in MLB did something this drastic. In addition, when things are totaled up, the Giants will most likely have the least money spent in rounds 11-40. If I'm wrong on this, I'll admit I was wrong. <br /><br />In this review, one more time, I clearly state its going to get nitpicky, and if you want a summation they drafted 2 very good pitchers at the top who should move fast. But I am going to disagree with you on deserving the benefit of the doubt. I said cheap, and I said cynical, but notice I didn't throw anything your way. You have continued to throw grenades at me, the latest being yet another "groupthink" type deal: "mcc crowd player". Well, I'd hate to see what you would say about me when its something that is a big deal, this is just a nitpicky draft review. And I'm not throwing myself down the stairs on any of this, I'm just stating that I"m disappointed the Giants didn't do more, it would have been very easy, for not much money, to do more. Personally, I think that's a reasonable position. I strongly suspect its because of financial concerns, shaving the farm system because they can't shave their big league payroll without scrutiny. I've also said they can change this up, and its a blip. If you don't agree, I'm fine with that. But the personal digs, I'm just not impressed with those at all.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-89569953616092888692012-06-16T08:39:33.452-07:002012-06-16T08:39:33.452-07:00One more example: I am not wild the Mac Williams...One more example: I am not wild the Mac Williamson pick in round 3 and have said so several times. I just don't believe that players who don't crack a .300 BA in college have a good enough hit tool to make it in the pros. I am not going to call the Giants "cheap", "cynical" or say they are "cutting and running" from upside because I am not thrilled with Mac Williamson. There are differences of opinion on Williamson. Grabusky had him ranked at #144 in his final top 250 and had him ranked as the #50 player available on Day 2, which is right where the Giants took him.<br /><br />So, even though I would have selected someone else with that pick, I recognize that the Giants probably see what Grabusky's sources see in him and took him because they believe he was the best choice at that spot. <br /><br />Believe me, I learned my lesson when I threw myself down the stairs over Madison Bumgarner. And to think I wanted Beau Mills instead.....! Jason Heyward still might ultimately prove to have a better career than Bumgarner, but imagine if the Giants had Heyward and the Dodgers had Bumgarner and Kershaw in the same rotation! Yeah, I've come to trust the Giants judgement on these things. That does not make questioning individual picks like why they took Mac Williamson or why they didn't take Ron Miller off limits, but it certainly should mute criticism until they are proven to be wrong.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-61227010963654449792012-06-16T08:26:43.862-07:002012-06-16T08:26:43.862-07:00See this is what my problem with your analysis is:...See this is what my problem with your analysis is: You keep throwing these little grenade phrases into it like "cynical exercise" and "cutting and running from upside." I believe this tone reveals your bias which I believe is you really are right there with the MCC crowd who dislikes Giants management and wants to make them look bad even when they are doing a good job right in front of your eyes. At the very least, it appears you are trying to play up to the MCC crowd.<br /><br />I have no problem with you saying you like Ron Miller a lot and wish the Giants would have drafted him. I feel that way too. The facts are, though, that scouting reviews on Ron Miller are mixed and the Giants drafted some guys with upside late in the top 10 rounds too, so it's unfair criticism to hold him up as an example of them "cutting and running from upside."<br /><br />I have my own pet players that I fall in love with leading up to the draft and I like to follow them and see how they turn out with whoever drafted them. That's a lot different than proclaiming the Giants to be cheap and cynical because my pet players weren't drafted by them. I realize that there are a whole lot of players out there. The Giants have a large and active scouting team that knows all those players a lot better than you or I. I've learned that my pet players don't make it any farther in the pros, on average, than the players the Giants select.<br /><br />The Giants have been as successful as any team in baseball at drafting anddeveloping a core of young homegrown players. I think they deserve the benefit of any doubt without the proclamations of them "cutting and running" and being "cynical" and "cheap."DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-91932545830254244842012-06-16T06:43:24.318-07:002012-06-16T06:43:24.318-07:00You seem to be grasping at straws now. I specific...You seem to be grasping at straws now. I specifically said, right above in my first comment, nobody was expecting Carson Kelly, and that the Giants didn't have that flexability with their budget. I also specifically compared what teams with our budget pool did.<br /><br />Ron Miller: he is a huge missed opportunity, and there is a reason to suspect he will be better than the 7 of the 9 players the Giants drafted before him. They decided to practically ignore the HS players. You are saying you trust the Giants evaluation and there is no reason to believe he'll turn out more than the other players. Well, I disagree with that, we'll see how it turns out. There are plenty more high upside players skipped over though. <br /><br />About my grading system: I said its not perfect in the beginning. I also went out of my way to explain each pick. Personally I thought it was quite light on the Giants cutting and running from any upside with the sole exception of McCall. I dinged them at 15, and at 30 and explained why. Their cynical exercise of snagging HS guys at the very end was doubly not impressive: first, they finally noticed the trend in MLB about 3 rounds late. Second, they have no intention of signing any of those players. Third, I didn't like the players relative to what was picked. <br /><br />If I gave all of those HS picks "average" grades that would be 12 points total. They got 3 points. So you're whining about 9 extra points here. No way no how was I going to give 5/5 and say Great Job Guys. I spelled out why. You do need to apologize, its bush league to imply I wanted a score a certain way. I made a system, pointed out its flaws, explained my biased outright and did a rating. End of story. Sorry you don't like the criticism, but I stand by it. The grade was a C+, there are interesting picks no doubt. You can continue to vehemently disagree, I don't mind that. But you'd better be more polite about it.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-71291441728440490172012-06-15T23:04:12.000-07:002012-06-15T23:04:12.000-07:00Sorry, I was writing that off the top of my head. ...Sorry, I was writing that off the top of my head. I meant Carson Kelly not Casey Kelly.<br /><br />And yeah, if you are looking for a team that cheaped out, look at St. Louis' first 4 picks, 2 first rounders and 2 supplememental rounders.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-971085581003910502012-06-15T22:57:01.618-07:002012-06-15T22:57:01.618-07:00I like the idea of weighting the draft picks but t...I like the idea of weighting the draft picks but the weights you assigned were arbitrary. I'm not saying there's anything more objective available, but would argue that it still put way too much weight on picks lower than 1-3. Secondly, the scores you gave each pick were your opinion that in places appeared to be biased by how you wanted the final score to turn out. <br /><br />You are right, it is wrong of me to impugn your motives but I'm not sure what to make of several zero scores coming out of the blue. What it looked like was you were going along and suddenly realized you were giving a lot of good scores and this might turn out to be a good draft grade after all and yikes, we can't have that, can we? So you popped a zero here and there to suppress the final draft grade. <br /><br />Only you know if that's not the way if happened. If it wasn't, then I apologize. It sure looked funny though.<br /><br />Lastly, I'm not sure how you concluded that the final percentage, whatever it was, was worth a C grade. I mean did you add up the scores of all the other teams and see what their percentage score was too? Again, it looks pretty arbitrary and subjective to me. What about all those seniors drafted in rounds 6-10 by other teams. I think you'd have to give them very low scores if not zeros and those picks are weighted much higher than where the Giants drafted seniors.<br /><br />So yeah, it was an interesting exercise and I commended you and still commend you for the detailed discussion of each pick. I continue to vehemently disagree with your continued assertions that the Giants cheaped out and did worse in this draft than other teams when drafting position and slot pool are taken into account.<br /><br />As for Ron Miller, what quote are you holding me to and what other players did you mention? Casey Kelly? If you want to look at a team that cheaped out, look at what the Cards did with their first rounders and supplemental picks so the could sign......Casey Kelly? You really think the Giants should have drafted Casey Kelly and met his bonus demands? <br /><br />In my opinion, the initial verdict on this draft was successful the minute they took Chris Stratton. I am confident they will get at least 1 or 2 more useful players out of it, but whatever they get, it's icing on the cake. Final verdict will have to wait a few years as there is still a long ways between Chris Stratton and the major leagues, but his combination of high ceiling and high floor is as good as anybody taken in the draft.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-30337176415032471432012-06-15T19:39:49.306-07:002012-06-15T19:39:49.306-07:00There isn't a shred? They will most likely ha...There isn't a shred? They will most likely have the least amount of money spent in the entirety of MLB in the 11-40 rounds. That is a shred. I'll hold you to the Ron Miller quote, but I've mentioned a bunch of players, not just Ron Miller. You are obviously very offended to keep at this. It no longer feels like a conversation about facts. I'm "harping". My "objective system is a joke". I'll have you know I spelled the whole thing out, and then added it up. I wouldn't have been surprised by a score in the 60s or up to 80. I did not bend anything to a conclusion, I called it how I saw it. And this feels more personal than I'm in the mood for. I've always been square with you. If you feel the way you're spouting here, I really don't see the point in you having mentioned the review in the first place.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-12140250680318812332012-06-15T17:35:14.545-07:002012-06-15T17:35:14.545-07:00Sorry, but you are the one making a mountain out o...Sorry, but you are the one making a mountain out of a molehill by continuing to needlessly nitpick at irrelevant aspects of the draft. I am not ignoring what other teams did, but the Giants can't control what other teams do nor can they draft every good available player. I believe the Giants drafted the best available players on their draft board. If you don't agree with their choices, so be it, but there is not a shred of evidence to support your continued assertion that this draft was controlled by "RDF" budgetary constraints or that they went "cheap."<br /><br />To cite just one example that you keep harping on: Yeah, I like Ron Miller and I hope he becomes a good player. I would have liked the Giants to draft him. I, however, accept that they scouted him and did not rate him as highly as you or I. There is no reason to believe that Ron Miller will turn out to be a better MLB player than any of the players the Giants selected in the first 10 rounds.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-72544761982028069142012-06-15T16:16:59.363-07:002012-06-15T16:16:59.363-07:00Completely not true. I have continued to stress t...Completely not true. I have continued to stress the drafting position and the bonus limitation, both in my review and pretty much every time I discuss it, including here. About those grades, I explained them both on your blog when you brought it up and in the review. I also assigned extremely small point values to the back end of the draft. Finally, you continue to ignore what other teams have done. That is an important factor. The draft doesn't happen in a vacuum. A little criticism is healthy. You continue to make a mountain out of that molehill.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-22160572933373489032012-06-15T14:12:21.494-07:002012-06-15T14:12:21.494-07:00Cool, I felt the same way after my MCC experience....Cool, I felt the same way after my MCC experience.<br /><br />Thank you for the links, it will be my weekend reading, looks like a lot of good stuff, much appreciated, saved me from digging them up.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-83475303266053919612012-06-15T13:23:15.313-07:002012-06-15T13:23:15.313-07:00No, not mercurial. I said you jimmied the numbers ...No, not mercurial. I said you jimmied the numbers by giving out bogus zeros in my review. Maybe you just missed that part.<br /><br />I think Stratton and possibly Agosta help the system a lot, but you aren't going to make any earthshaking system adjustments with one draft where your first two picks are #20 and #84. Critics of the Giants draft, including you, continue to ignore what they did relative to their drafting position and slot bonus limitations.DrBGiantsfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699322384438591979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-70614233501636271502012-06-15T12:27:35.645-07:002012-06-15T12:27:35.645-07:00Fair enough OGC. I have to move on from this topi...Fair enough OGC. I have to move on from this topic now. DrB is calling my statements and review a cheap shot, disingenuous and a joke. That signals that its time to call it quits. Gonna take some time off now.<br /><br />Go Giants.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-63167286285454343592012-06-15T12:17:50.385-07:002012-06-15T12:17:50.385-07:00Wow. A joke now? That's a far cry from excel...Wow. A joke now? That's a far cry from excellent review, which is what you posted before. Slightly mercurial today? Or was that what you wanted to say before? Good to know your true colors.Shankbonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803824507120403397noreply@blogger.com