2013 Rule 5 Draft: Giants Add 1, Lose 1

The Rule 5 Draft was held the other day, BA has a nice list of all the players taken at their website.

The Giants lost one player in the AAA Phase, Round 2, RHP Cameron Lamb.  Here is what BA said about him:

Aussie has yet to pitch in full-season ball, but coming off solid season in Northwest Lge

But in the AAA Phase, Round 1, the Giants selected RHP Scott Shuman from the Rays. Here is what BA had to say about him:

Pitches at 93-95 mph with power slider. Tough look for RHB (36 SO% at Double-A)

ogc thoughts

Not sure why the Astros took Lamb.  He's 23 YO and hasn't even pitched for a full-season team yet.  And in the Short Season Northwest League, he was hardly dominating with 6.5 K/9, though nice control, with only 2.4 BB/9.  Good luck to him.

Shuman look very interesting.  His 2011-2012 seasons was not anything to look at, his K/9 was great 14-15 K/9 but his BB/9 was horrid, 10-12 BB/9.  He is 24 (25 next year March) and just pitched in AA.  As BA noted, mid-90 power with power slider and is a bit of a Roogy. But, ugh, that walk rate!

This pick, I think, shows the influence of John Barr.  Since we got him, the Giants started to take more fliers on prospects who once was a big talent but for whatever reasons, lost a bit of their shine and fell a bit or a lot.  Shuman was ranked the Rays #24 prospect after his 2010 season.

His 2010 season was what was so interesting.  Age 22 so old for A-ball, but he had a 3.01 ERA, 13.9 K/9 and 4.8 BB/9, high but doable when you strikeout nearly 3 times as many.   And he only gave up 50 hits in 71.2 IP, plus only 5 HR (a trait he kept on his way up the ladder, low HR/9).

That reminded me of another 22 YO (though LHP so that is special) with mid-90 velocity who did well in A-ball:  Jonathan Sanchez.  He was a starter but in 125.2 IP, had 8.7 H/9, 0.6 HR/9, 2.8 BB/9, and 11.9 K/9. It was the K/9 that was very interesting.  Walks could be worked on, Matt Cain used to be a wild thrower with us in the minors, it is amazing to see him control his pitches so well now compared to then.

Not that he'll necessarily be like Dirty, but he showed some potential in A-ball before getting lost the past two seasons.  Hopefully Tidrow, our pitching doctor, will prescribe something good for him and get him back on the prospect path.  And if not, no big loss, we only paid $50K to get him, and if the other team takes him back, we get $25K back, so at worse it costs us $25K to take a look at him and kick his tires.  Tidrow loves power arms like this, who knows what might happen?

The Hall of Shame: Marvin Miller and Barry Bonds

I just had to get this out there.  As a big cosmic intersecting synchronicity, Marvin Miller, the famed, long-time union leader for the MLBPA passed away, just days away from Hall of Fame announcement of who got in this year, with Barry Bonds being one of the big steroid question marks on the ballot, along with Clemens and Sosa as well.

ogc thoughts

Marvin Miller Should Have Been in the Hall of Fame While Alive

It just makes a big joke of the Baseball Hall of Fame that Marvin Miller is not in there.  Whether you like the results that he brought into the game or not, he was a huge figure in the middle of the breakthrough years for the players association where they broke out from the yoke of slavery to the MLB, then turned it all around with arbitration and free agency.  That is everlasting fame that the Hall of Fame should not and cannot deny.  Shame on the Hall of Fame for not putting him in while he was alive, he lived to 95 for gosh's sake and he battle liver cancer the past few years as well, so it wasn't like people didn't know it wasn't coming, if not just for the age, but the disease.  That he died without getting in - in fact, he was bitter about this and said in recent years that he would turn down the honor if it were to finally be given to him - is a blot on anyone who had a hand in keeping him out.

Barry Bonds Should Be Voted In First Ballot

Bonds could be the next embarrassment for the Hall and the baseball writers.  McGwire has already gone through the gauntlet and survived enough to stay on the ballot.  But he really was more like Dave Kingman than he was an Hall of Famer, in my mind, so he was not a real test of the fervor of the writers about steroids, as even without that stain, given the boost in homers in that era, he should have been borderline anyway.

Two things make Bonds a different case.   First and most of all, he already had a no-doubt Hall of Fame career when he was suspected to start taking steroids.  Whether he willingly took the drug or was tricked into it by his friend/trainer, I don't think we'll ever know the full story, but either way it looks pretty sure that he took the stuff.  However, most agree that he already had Hall of Fame career stats when he reportedly started taking.  So a non-vote for him represents punishment by those writers for him taking the drug, in spite of his achievements prior to using.

Second of all, it is still not all that publicly clear what taking steroids does for a baseball player.  Many claims are being made by writers and fans.  Plus, baseball is a different sport, where finesse and form is more important than physical strength, though strength helps if you already have the skills.

But the evidence, as gathered by famed sabermetrician Eric Walker, of The Sinister Firstbaseman fame and the A's internal Bible fame, suggests that it was a juiced ball, not juiced humans, that powered the Homer era of 1993-2008, and on top of that, his research shows that steroids does not do anything to help improve performance in baseball.  Assuming this is true - I have not had the time to exhaustively read all the citations, but I have read through the website -  I will quote one of his ending statements:

There seems little point in "punishment" for an effect-less "crime".

To me, it seems like the writers want to do this to absolve themselves of the fact that they did NOTHING all those years to investigate when it was so obviously happening.  And I'm throwing into this their shame for letting amphetamines stay in the game for over 50 years when it was happening all over the clubhouse, in fact, Krukow said in his morning KNBR show today that the team's trainer was OPENLY HANDING THEM OUT when he came up to the majors in the mid-70's.  In any case, in my mind, steroids does not help a player hit better, muscle power is not how homers are hit, for if it were, skinny Hank Aaron (when he started) would have never gotten the career record.

The Hall of Shame

The Hall of Fame is not supposed to be used as a form of punishment.  But that is what happened to Marvin Miller, making him bitter about it in his last days.  It could and probably will happen to Barry Bonds, as well as Clemens, who is also clearly a Hall of Famer (Sosa, I can go either way, but he was also caught corking too, I would note, and he was another one-note freak like Dave Kingman;  I would have to look at his career with more detail).

Which is all the shame because the writers do not know beyond a shadow of a doubt that steroids helped players.  If they would just, you know, maybe be a journalist, research the topic, starting with Walker's great website, they might realize that there was a lot of hand waving and sermonizing (and demonizing) happening with regards to steroids.

What if Bonds usage was more akin to placebo using than performance enhancing?  For if they think that they got egg on their face for not facing the steroid era head-on, from the moment that stuff was found in McGwire's locker for all to see (really, not one enterprising reporter thought to follow-up and investigate that one?  Gary Hart would sure would have had a different career in that case), imagine how bad it will look if they held out Bonds on high moral grounds that proved to be quicksand?  If all Walker presents is true, then Bonds is guilty of taking snake oil medicine or leeches, neither of which helps a player avoid a strikeout (which he did to great extremes) or hit a baseball well.

I have placed these Walker links in various places in the cyberspace, particularly websites that is known to draw a lot of readers, like The Hardball Times and Fangraphs.  I would frankly be very surprised if at least one reporter has not see the links before, not that I'm that full of ego, but I cannot imagine that the journalism profession has degenerated down so much that they do not even read baseball websites like these.  And I don't think that it is a coincidence that after years of me putting my performance box on the side, showing the team's record when a certain number of runs are scored or given up, I have started seeing this type of stat noted in the press as well.  Reporters do read websites.

So why isn't the press showing the other side of this issue?  Why not expose the demagoguery around this topic?  Maybe Walker got it wrong, but why not at least tackle the issue since people are making so many decisions and judgments based on possibly false "facts"?  And if he is correct, then it would be a huge scoop on their fellow sports writers, that person would gain a lot of fame for exposing the Emperor's New Clothes regarding steroids and bringing it to the public.  Yet nothing so far.

Amphetamines Was the True Difference Maker

To me, if anything, amphetamines was a bigger blot on baseball records than steroids.  It allowed players to play at their standard level of play, instead of being too tired to perform at that level.  That greatly affected all career records set in the last 60 years or so, since World War II brought that drug into common usage.  It is like caffeine (a legalized form of stimulant, I would add, so nobody is clean in my mind if you drink coffee or any cola drink), only better.  Where is the outrage for that?  Particularly since a number of players were exposed to have used the drug as far back as the 1960's, when Jim Bouton's book, Ball Four, came out and talked about the Yankee's drug use.

And sportswriters must have known about it.  Again, Bouton's book exposed it and yet no enterprising journalist thought to investigate this illegal drug use (perhaps because many of them were using themselves).   And reporters probably took them too when they were in the field reporting on World War II, someone somewhere must have known that usage would have gotten into baseball as well, tie the links.

Pete Rose Should Be In Too

And, in any case, the Hall of Fame does not exist to punish people, it is to honor the accomplishments that a person has made that made baseball what it is today.  That is why I think Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose should belong in the Hall too, especially Mr. Hustle, he may have gambled but the proof is only when he was a manager, and I also can't imagine that he would ever bet against himself or his team if he had done it as a player (and there appears evidence that Shoeless Joe was just a witless participant, particularly given that he hit .375/.394/.563/.956 in that series that he supposedly "threw").

Nobody drives themselves relentlessly, particularly without much pure baseball talent - Rose was a mostly modestly skilled player - and then throw a game.  He didn't achieve greatness throwing games, I think that would be impossible to do, a guy like him don't do that on a part-time basis, either you believe or you don't, and he believed in himself and pushed himself to greatness.  You can't do that part-time.

And even if he could, he's still the LEADER IN HITS ALL-TIME.  How do you keep that out of the Hall, even if he did do the unthinkable and bet against himself like a psycho, he still had more hits than anybody else in baseball history.  It is not a real Hall of Fame if the hit leader is not in there.  Instead, it is a Hall of Shame for all and any participants in the decision to keep Marvin Miller out, Pete Rose out, and, most probably, Barry Bonds out.  If ethics were so important, then they should retroactively throw out all the racists and other person with vices that is not palatable now, that is how the Olympics does it when they re-award competitions.  It would be hypocrisy not to.

MLB.com's 2012 Giants Top 20 Prospects: Post-season Edition

The MLB.com's Jonathan Mayo publishes a Top 100 Overall and Top 20 by Team ranking both before the season as well as after.  He just released the post-season rankings.  The Top 100 is here.  The 2012 Giants Top 20 is here.

Wicked Witch of the West: The Empire Returns

Wow, Boston and LA pulled off the huge trade. as reported by MLB Trade Rumors:  LA receives Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett, Carl Crawford, and Nick Punto for James Loney and four prospects, Rubby de la Rosa, Alan Webster, Ivan De Jesus, and Jerry Sands.   Apparently Toronto screwed with the deal by claiming Rubby, so he was pulled off waivers and will be traded as a player to be named later in the off-season to complete the trade.  MLB Trade Rumors also provided their take on the prospects.

They also followed up with a post on future obligations.  $189M in 2013 and that does not include arbitration eligible players or pre-arb players (in particular, Clayton Kershaw).   Wow, all the talk about Yankees West appears to be coming true.

Your 2012 Giants: BP's Adjusted Standings Show Giants Well

I just ran into Baseball Prospectus' Adjusted Standings report, where they analyzes all team's win/loss record, and adjusts them based on a a variety of factors, such as Pythagorean (they use the Pythangpat's formula however), the Pythagorean using adjusted runs scored (though I wonder why they don't do one with adjusted runs allowed as well), and lastly one adjusted for quality of competition as well as the other adjustment.

Interesting enough, the Giants should be leading, by about 1-2 games, but over the D-backs, not the D-gers.   The D-gers have been playing above their heads and should be close to, if not under, .500, which is where I opined they would be this season.  Of course, it helps that Kemp is out, but they are also being propped up by pitchers doing better than previously.

Of course, the Giants should be above their Pythagorean:  they are currently 4 games over .500 in 1-run games, which most teams regress to zero, but as my research showed, Bochy is the rare manager who can manage a winning record in 1-run games.  So that regression that BP expects with the first order win percentage probably will not happen.

Still, even with all that, the Giants are about where they are expected to be, statistically.  And the D-backs are the real team to be worried about, as they have been underperforming.  I don't know how they are doing it but for the second season in a row, their pitching staff is in shambles the first couple of months, then somehow they regroup, find some new pitchers and start rising up the standings quickly.

They also have playoff odds.  The Giants are currently at 83.5%, best in the NL.

Your 2012 Giants: International Free Agent Signing Day

The Giants made a big splash today by signing two top prospects, Gustavo Cabrera and Natanael Javier.

BA's Announcement on Cabrera, who they ranked #5:

Dominican center fielder Gustavo Cabrera, the fifth-ranked international prospect for July 2, has signed with the Giants for $1.3 million. 

Cabrera, who is 6 feet, 190 pounds, is a 16-year-old righthanded hitter who stands out for his tools and athleticism. Several scouts believe Cabrera has the best tools in Latin America, though his bat is the main question mark. He played in the Dominican Prospect League and trained with Christian Batista, who is known as “Niche.”

ESPN's pre-signing article noted: "Cabrera is a five-tool center fielder who has been evaluated by all MLB clubs, but sources say he agreed to an offer weeks ago and it will be announced next Monday."  Apparently the Giants were the ones who had him eyeballed already.   This sounds almost like the Villalona signing where the Giants had developed the relationship long ago and won the trust of the family.

MLB.com ranked Cabrera #1:

Cabrera has dazzled scouts with his bat speed, hitting mechanics and raw power, but he has also opened eyes with his instincts on the bases. In other words, he can run, too. His all-around speed combined with his aggressive style, strong arm and athletic body have brought about comparisons to Arizona outfielder Justin Upton when he was the same age. 

Cabrera’s prior experience in the United States could prove to be an advantage in his development. Last year, he was named the MVP at the 2011 RBI World Series in Minnesota and also participated in a showcase in Orlando with his trainer. This year, he starred in the Dominican Prospect League and was part of the league’s All-Star travel squad that played exhibition games and participated in showcases at big league sites in Arizona and Florida during Spring Training. 

The biggest knock on Cabrera is the notion that he only has one gear: full speed. He is still harnessing his skills and working on the fine art of playing under control.

BA's note on Javier, who was not in their Top 20 ranking:

The Giants have agreed signed 16-year-old Natanael Javier from the Dominican Republic for $475,000. 

Javier, 16, is a big-framed third baseman at 6-foot-3, 200 pounds. A righthanded hitter, Javier was named the MVP of the Dominican Prospect League's PG International Series all-tournament game last month when he went 3-for-3 with a double. He trains with Basilio Vizcaino, who is known as "Cachaza."

MLB.com ranked Javier #11:

Javier comes from a baseball family. The younger brother of Sony Javier, a prospect with Toronto, and the son of Narciso Tapia, a trainer in the Boca Chica area, baseball is in the young prospect’s blood. 

The big third baseman is considered a solid all-around player and is projected to hit for average and power in the future. He has impressed scouts with his large body frame, lean muscle mass and high baseball IQ. He appears to have the perfect body for third base but might have to move to first base if he gets too big to play the position. 

Some believe Javier is second only to Gustavo Cabrera and Wendell Rijo in terms of upside and overall talent. Javier just might have all the tools Major League scouts look for in a prospect, and he has the potential to be a special bat with plus power. 

Trained by Basilio Vizcaino in Santo Domingo, Javier starred in the Dominican Prospect League and was a member of the league’s All-Star travel squad that at big league camps during Spring Training.

Perfect Games had this note on them from May:

The 2012 DPL class is brimming with talent, and six of the top 10 top international prospects (according to PG scouting reports and MLB.com rankings) are expected to be in attendance at this event. They include top-ranked outfielder Gustavo Cabrera, along with shortstops Amaurys Minier, Richard Urena and Frandy De La Rosa; middle-infielder Wandell Rijo and third baseman Nathanael Javier. 

Perfect Game had this to say about Cabrera after DPL prospects performed for scouts in a series of workouts and in several games during a tour of Florida and Arizona in March: 

“Cabrera has a tightly wound athletic body reminiscent of Justin Upton. In fact, Cabrera’s tools at the same age are very reminiscent of Upton’s. He ran the 60 in 6.34 seconds in Arizona and has an explosive first step that enables him to steal bases at will (he had 5 steals in one game in Florida) and the aggressiveness and instincts to use his speed. He throws 90-plus mph from the outfield with a very quick release and his speed will give him well above average range at any outfield position.”

So Perfect Games ranked both in their Top 10 and Gustavo their #1 ranked prospect.


Giants Thoughts

Giants swoop in again and make the big signings, making many fans happy, particularly the prospect hounds, like Shankbone. I feel more comfortable with the Cabrera signing, despite its size and the poor history of top international prospects doing well, because he apparently has played games in some of the top U.S. amateur showcases, as noted in the MLB.com announcement.  That to me would give our scouts better proof points on how his talent compares with other U.S. amateur talents.

The announcement also noted that the Giants spent a total of $1.8M on the two (BA notes exactly ($1.775M).  With a $2.9M cap on spending for all teams, the Giants have $1.125M left to spend on other International free agents.  Given the stat I heard on KNBR today, that 20% of all major leaguers are from the Dominican Republic, the Giants need to be active there and have been, picking up Angel Villalona previously (now playing in the Dominican Summer League) and Rafael Rodriguez (now playing for Augusta and showing some potential there now).

Here is what the announcement said about the two prospects:

From Santo Domingo Norte, Dominican Republic, Cabrera's bat speed, raw power and overall athleticism in the field has brought comparisons to Arizona's Justin Upton. In 2011, Cabrera was named the RBI World Series MVP in Minnesota, and also participated in a showcase in Orlando, Fla. He played in Spring Training exhibition games this year as part of the Dominican Prospect League's All-Star travel squad.

Also from Santo Domingo, the 16-year-old Javier projects as a solid future option at third base. Possessing discipline at the plate, a large body frame and a high baseball IQ, Javier could bypass Chris Dominguez, Conor Gillaspie (Triple-A Fresno) and Adam Duvall (Class A San Jose) as the team's future at third base.

The Giants have always liked players with high baseball IQ.

It was also noted that in future years, the cap will depend on the team's winning percentage and the range will be from $1.7M to $4.8M.  Assuming the Giants will be on the lower end since they should be competitive, they did the right thing to spend so much and dive right in, because they might not have as much spending cap in future years.

Both sound very intriguing and of high potential.  Both appear to have plus power potential and Cabrera appears to have five tools, though his hit tool is most suspect.  Justin Upton appears to be the common comp for Cabrera, bringing a combination of speed and power, plus a great arm.  While Javier got a much lower signing bonus, one noted that he was second only to Cabrera and another player in terms of upside and talent, so that is pretty good, two of the top three players in upside and talent.  And the Giants still have $1.1M to spend on other prospects, so they might not be done yet.

Angel on the Field

Baseball America reports that Angel Villalona returns to baseball but in the DSL, not in the U.S., as U.S. immigration continues to delay issuing him a work visa that would allow him to enter the U.S.  But at least he got into his first professional game in three years and he got a knock, going 1 for 4 with a strikeout in the Dominican Summer League.  Now 21 years old, he was recently placed on their 40-man roster so that other teams could not draft him via the Rule 5 draft.

While it might be unlikely that another team would have selected him, as BA noted, I would think that there might be another team willing to take a flier for just, what, $100K, to hold who was once a Top 40 prospect in all of baseball, like a rebuilding team like Houston, who is probably finding it hard to fill their 40 man roster and thus could hold onto Angel's rights for a couple of years, while he tries to get back into the U.S.

Your 2012 Giants: Congrats to Matt Cain for Perfecto!

What an amazing game!  Matt Cain throws the 22nd Perfect Game in MLB History.  14 K's to boot!  First perfect game in Giants history, 128 years of franchise history.  Many great Giants pitchers, Mathewson, Hubbell, Marichal, Perry, Lincecum, but Cain is the first one with a perfect game.  He Cained the Astros.

I tweeted a number of these:

I've been waiting for this since Matt Cain threw a 2-hitter complete game with 8 K's on 9/9/2005.  We've all been waiting for this no-hitter.  YES!  PERFECTO!

Chris Stratton is probably kicking himself right now that he didn't delay signing one day (he was here yesterday but said that he was flying to Phoenix immediately).

What an ice-cold assassin Matt Cain is!  Worth every penny we committed to him!

Giants no-hitters I have listened to:  Halicki, Montefusco, Dirty, and now Cain's Perfecto.

I am feeling verklempt now...

D-ger Deal Viability Questioned But Maybe New Owners Have Grander Plans

Very interesting article on ESPN regarding the D-ger sale deal.  Economists are also shocked at the $2.15B price tag (the actual details seems to vary with the wind, but the latest I understand is it is $2B for the team, and $150M for the parking lot, where they own half and McCourt owns half, but the team would control everything and receive all monies generated, but any development would then benefit both).

Andrew Zimbalist, an economist who writes a lot of articles and books on team valuation, noted "At the end of the day, you have to question the deal."  Mark Rosentraub, a University of Michigan sports management professor said "It's the craziest deal ever; it makes no sense.  That's why you saw so many groups drop out.  I don't get it.  The numbers just don't work.  It doesn't make business sense.  ... [it] is over $800 million more than what pencils out for a profitable investment for a baseball team.  If making money doesn't count, this is a great move.  But now we're into buying art and I can't value art.  I can just run the model numbers and it doesn't make sense."  That extra money is basically McCourt's profit off the deal, from what I can tell from the articles I've read, he is suppose to come out of this with $7-800M after paying off debts and his ex-wife.

The article noted, "The problem economists have with the sale of the team being tied to the television contract is teams use their television deals as revenue to improve the team, not to offset the costs of overpaying for a franchise."

One of the economists also noted McCourt's continued involvement as a stunner, but as I noted above, subsequent info from the buying group stated clearly that McCourt's involvement is nil except as an equity partner.  Though I agree with the economists, for the money they paid, they should have been able to buy out everything and push him out completely, when you are overpaying by that much.  They also make the interesting point that McCourt has been in court frequently in the past suing his partners for one thing or another, which would be a headache that the new owners would have to deal with.

Lots of good info on TV deals reiterated here, so I thought I would bring that up.  Fox had offered McCourt a 20-year, $3B deal, which was basically what the Angels got last December from Fox, worth "at least $3B" and apparently the Rangers got a similar deal at similar terms as well. It also noted that a TV deal is not a done deal, that they could start their own regional sports network like the Yankees have with the YES Network (and Red Sox with their NES Network).  Looking this up on Wikipedia, the Giants own 30% of CSN Bay Area, with 45% owned by NBCUniversal (formerly Comcast) and 25% owned by Fox.

Giants Thoughts

Nothing like good D-ger turmoil to warm a Giants fan's heart.  Baer had his "play nice with your neighbors" message about it being good to have a competitive D-ger team, but I am more than happy to see the D-gers fall on their faces for an eternity.

I didn't look too deeply at the numbers, but I thought the deal looked kind of squirrelly financially, but I couldn't put my finger on it.  But the comment above confirmed the thought I had, that the potential TV deal appears to pay for the valuation, but then where is the money for the team?

But either economist noted that most teams are not bought for their financial flow into their owner's coffers.  They are usually bought for their long-term appreciation, which is when they would get their money back.  Still, overpaying by double is a sure way to reduce your ROI by a lot.

Here is how I think the value works out for the owners.  It has to do with the land involved and the new owners wanted to be aggressive and win the bidding outright, without much thinking on the part of McCourt or the MLB before they agree on the deal.  So that's why I think Magic's group went with their "Buy It NOW" bid, a la eBay (this article on Yahoo supports this notion, noting the new owner wanted to "win by two touchdowns."; this article has another figure on a TV deal, $4M over 20 years).

As Mark Purdy notes in his column, the new owner is the CEO of a huge $125B financial firm called Guggenheim Partners, and the official name of the new D-gers ownership group is Guggenheim Baseball Management LLC, and not named after Walters or anything else, implying that the assets of this firm could be intertwined with the D-gers in some way.  What is the mission statement for the new owner?  "all I want to do is get to the World Series."  (Sidenote:  obviously, he's never spoken with Barry Bonds, who, after losing the 2002 World Series, his wife at that time told him, "well, you got what you wished for, you wanted to get to the World Series, and you did...").

In the Purdy article, he noted that Andy Dolich, a long-time sports management executive in the Bay Area (stints with A's, Warriors, and 49ers), who was an advisor to one of the bidders, had his financial people run a financial model and came up with a bid of $1.2-1.3B as the one that made the most economic sense, which is in line with what one of the professors was quoted (he noted it was $800M over).  So he was blown out by the actual winning bid.

One of the theories he came up with that could explain the grander plans is one where Dodger Stadium would be razed and a new one built near the Staples Center, in the L.A. Live District, which is owned and run by Anschutz Entertainment Group.  AEG would partner with Guggenheim to build the new baseball park, which would benefit the L.A. Live District since there are 81 baseball dates each year (and 3-10 more if playoffs), while Dodger Stadium would be razed to build a new football stadium complex at Chavez Ravine.

And that is basically what I thought is how they plan on making the big money, doing something with the Chavez Ravine property, because it is a huge tract of mostly undeveloped land in land-locked LA, though this baseball-football plan is way beyond what I would have thought.  Kind of like what was envisioned for the 49ers, where there would be a hotel and commercial complex built around the stadium, where synergies would feed off each other for additional revenues beyond just the team itself.

Purdy also noted that Jed York once worked for Guggenheim, so Walter could have perhaps contacted him to discuss the NFL.  It makes sense, as Walter, per this theory, would be very interested in the 49er's quest for their stadium.  But this theory is a bit of a stretch, Walter won't know every employee who has ever worked in his $125B company, and it is not like people from rich families will necessarily seek either other out.  Still, you never know, maybe York sought out Walter's advice at some point, for some reason, when he was pursuing his 49er's stadium deal.

Meanwhile, Walter/Guggenheim has so much money that they do not need to pocket the $150-200M per year TV deal in order to make their investment work for them, cash flow is not the only way to benefit from an investment, which is what the economists above statically assumed.  This reminded me of the situation when the Texas Rangers were sold to their prior owner, he bought up all sorts of land around the stadium, with plans to build, build, build and profit off the synergies thereof.

It didn't work for him, but this football-baseball stadium theory makes a lot of sense.  As nice as I've heard Dodger Stadium to be, it is now around 50 years old, and even Yankee Stadium, the House that Ruth built, was razed (though Fenway and Wrigley still are kicking).  Stadium technology is way beyond now, and you know L.A. love their glitz and glam, and as nice as Dodger Stadium might be, it is neither.

And as the Giants park showed, and I'm sure other parks too, there can be a lot of commercial synergies between the park and the surrounding area, which will show up in the financial statements of the owners in some way, just not necessarily from their Dodger's investment (which was the Texas owner, Hicks, idea).  The owner does not care how the money gets into their pockets, whether through the Dodgers or their other investments, as long as it gets into their pockets.  And given the high probability that the new L.A. NFL franchise should be a huge money maker for the new owner (remember, Walter has many more billions that he can tap into, $2B is pocket change for him), if they can come in with a grand plan for a stadium/commercial complex, the NFL will probably come hat in hand with the coveted L.A. franchise.  

Which means that however the Dodgers go with their TV situation - a deal with a cable outlet or their own network (better bet given the big money involved) - that money stream will probably go straight to the team to be used for payroll and everything, not retained by the owners to get a return on their $2B investment.  And thus they will be a big bidder for free agent riches next offseason, much like the Angels were this off-season, when they signed Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson.

So hopefully Baggerly's report that the negotiations between the Giants and Cain "have picked up talks again" is accurate and shows that both sides want to get things done.  As I noted in my post yesterday, it made sense that there would be a stall in negotiations to see what happens with the D-ger sale, to get a better feel - for both sides - of how much of a threat the new D-ger owner might be in the free agent market next off-season.  I think this boosts Cain's leverage a lot, and think something in the $110-120M range for 5 years is now possible, though anywhere from $100-120M is possible I think, the only clear thing now is that he probably will reach 9 figures.

Baggerly reported today that Baer participated in a chat via Twitter with fans and said that it is a mischaracterization to say that there is a hard deadline or that the Giants are lowballing Cain.  Given that talks have started up again, I rather doubt that the Giants were lowballing Cain (else, at this point, why bother continue talking with the Giants?), but rather, Cain's agents have been asking for the moon on the assumption that the new D-gers owners would be spending big bucks next season.  Particularly given the rumor that the Giants were willing to meet them halfway between their offer and Cain's agent's asking but was turned down.

While I think that the D-gers will be spending, that is not a certainty given what is known right now about the situation, it does look like the new owners overpaid and that they will be soaking in the TV deal to make their return on investment, per what the economists said.  And that situation will not be clarified for a long while, perhaps not even by next off-season, so if Cain's agents were to wait for free agency, they could be taking the chance that the D-gers might pass on free agents next off-season and not get into free agency in a big way until they get all their plans lined up.

Cain does not appear to be a dice roller, so I expect the negotiations to move a lot faster now that the D-ger situation is cleared up for his agents, and a deal will get signed at some point.  I would guess given Baer's statement, most likely no deal will get done before the start of the season, but that there will be more media  announcements like this that the two sides are continuing to talk and moving closer to agreement.  You have to talk tough as a negotiator and nicely once the deal is done, for maximum image as a negotiator in the public eye.

I still think that $20M per season is fair market value for Cain.  I have seen comments that C.J. Wilson's deal sets Cain's price higher, but in researching it now, I see that most of those people were mixing contract numbers.  They saw him signing for 5 years and $78M and assumed the Marlin's $100M deal was for 5 years, but all the instances I found stated that was for 6 years, so really, the Angel's offer was actually very similar to the Marlins, only one year less.  So he only got roughly $16M per season, not the $20M that I saw some quote.

But the D-gers are now a wild card bidder that will provide some upward loft on Cain's salary.  While no sure thing, it is enough of a threat that the Giants will move higher than they had intended, but enough of a question mark that Cain's side must drop their asking price, because not many teams can afford $20M per season and most of the big spenders have spent their money already.  Cain's agents don't want to get into a situation like Madson this off-season or Ivan Rodriguez in 2003, where a very good player has to take a one year deal to wait for a big money team to offer big bucks to him.

That's huge additional risk to take when your client is a pitcher, as Ryan Madson's agent found out, pitching for a contract year to year.  His agents can't advise Cain to leave a 9 digit deal on the table, that would be fiduciary incompetence on the part of his agents, especially in light of the slow growth in the U.S. economy that threatens to implode if the EU or China hits a speed bump in their economies (or debt deals), as well as the possibility that the number of MLB bidders might be limited (the Mets are surely out).

But agents and players have done stupid things before.  There have been players before who turn down big deals (like the Red Sox's Nomar Garciaparra) or asked for contracts way beyond the market interest (like the Giants's Rich Aurilia) who lived to regret doing that.  And I don't want the Giants to accede to stupid outrageous salary demands, should Cain's agents be doing that as a big show for their big new client.

For as sure as it is now that Giants fans complains about the Zito signing, if Cain signs an outrageous deal and, say, his elbow implodes and he's no longer productive (see Noah Lowry for how fast things can change), you will find the same fans who derided the Giants for not giving Cain all the money in the world will be the same ones saying what idiots the Giants were to sign Cain to such a huge contract.

Mike Newman Prospect Chat on Fangraphs And Giants Spring Training!

On the eve of the start of the Giants spring training for the 2012 season, ran across a chat by a Mike Newman, who writes a blog named Scouting the Sally.  He writes for Fangraphs and, er, scouts the South Atlantic League, or Sally to afficionados.  He had been a player, scout and coach, and wanted to get back into the game in some way, and took this route.

Here are some key moneyshots of Giants and NL West prospects:

Brandon Belt

Comment From Tony in SLC:  Having a hard time letting go of the dream called Brandon Belt, if he gets playing time he's easily the 3rd best hitter on the team, right? Thursday February 16, 2012 4:16 Tony in SLC
Mike Newman: Well, Belt is teaching prospect followers that age-versus-level does matter regardless of the numbers. However, he really does need 600 plate appearances or the chance to go somewhere else. I can see Huff playing because he's being paid well, but Schierholtz? 28 with a .750 OPS is a find 4th outfielder, but no way he's a starter on a first division ball club.

obsessivegiantscompulsive:  Again, people assume the Giants don't like him.  They were the ones who discovered and nurtured him.  He is far from a failed prospect, he will get his chances, he is not like Freddy Lewis or John Bowker, or even Nate Schierholtz, all unheralded prospects, Belt was rated in the Top 20 last year and the Giants have been very good at identifying who to keep and who to not keep.  They know what they got, and they will give him a lot of chances. 

Given the comment by management about rushing prospects, I expect the Giants to be more conservative in 2012 in bringing him up.  Meaning first that he will need to beat out Nate Schierholtz for a starting spot in spring training, and if he doesn't, he'll start in AAA until either an OF or Huff struggles enough for the Giants to bring up Belt (assuming he isn't totally struggling).  I hope that doesn't happen, but you never know - just look at last season.

My expectation is that Huff will be good, high 700 OPS range, but not 2010 good, Pagan will be an OK placesetter but nothing special enough that Gary Brown will be blocked, and Melky will be good enough that the Giants will probably try to sign him to an extension of some sort, as he'll be a free agent at the end of the season.  However, as much as I like Nate, he has a history of extreme hot and coldness plus eventual injuries that I expect one of them to happen, resulting in the opening of 1B for Belt at some point, pushing Huff to LF.

But that comment about Nate starting not a sign of a contender is a result of what I call the lack of understanding how powerful it is to have a pitching staff and fielding defense as great as the Giants have.  With such a strong overall defense, keeping the RA/G very low and among the top 3 the past three seasons, and which I expect to happen again in 2012, you only need an average offense to win.  And Nate, if he can handle a full season at .750 OPS is average, when you include how great he is on defense plus how well he runs the bases, generating a lot of extra bases each season, is perfectly fine for us in RF.

Gary Brown

Comment From Jack: From most top prospect lists, I get the feeling that Gary Brown is one of the more controversial players. Why, do you think that is?  Thursday February 16, 2012 4:54 Jack
Mike Newman: College players dominate the California League. He more or less did what he was supposed to do. Francisco Peguero did the same thing and was a meh prospect. Should Gary Brown repeat in double-A, I'll buy into his production much more.

ogc:  As nicely as Brown did, I do agree to a certain extent that Brown's overall numbers were not great, and thus a concern.  However, that is why you need to sometimes look into his monthly splits and see what he actually did. 

First Inning provides his splits and his April/May look like one talent performance set, then he was out of sync in June and then July/August (Sept small samples; for example his K% of 16% would be OK 12% if you take away one strikeout) is another set.  Initially, he was striking out a bit, and borderline OK, around 85% contact rate, which is the mark of a good hitter.  He also walked nicely in April but settled into his talent rate in May.  He struggled in July and struck out a lot more.  Then he got his strike rate down, kept his walking, and looked a lot better than July, clearly, or even early in the season.  He adjusted.

His overall .405 OBP looks great, but if you take out his struggles in July then he was around .430 OBP for the season.  His OPS of .922 was pretty good, but not clearly outstanding in the league.  However, without his July, he would have been around 1.100 OPS for the season, which is extremely good for the season.

Of course, the key question is whether he's going to struggle for a month again in AA, then AAA, then the MLB continuously.  They way I view it, prospects will have these in-season adjustments.  Obviously, if he can keep it going for the whole season, that makes it much easier to discern, yeah, he's good.  But obviously, at some point, for the better players, the league can't adjust back, and he's consistently good, that month would be gone from his full season performance.  I think one month of adjustment, versus many months of good play is what you want to see on the players who are more borderline in terms of prospect certainty (many doubted Brown's ability to adjustment, particularly his ability to take walks).

I really like his track record of adjustments.  He wasn't that great in college, he adjusted and by his junior season, he had the highest OPS of any hitter in the Big West League.  In the Cape Cod League, his first year was not that good, but he came back the next year and he was pretty good.  In the pros, where there is a lot more games, that adjustment happens in-season instead of between seasons.

I also like his attitude that I've see in all his interviews online.  These have been a boon, in my eye, to getting a feel for the guy's psyche.  He has a good head on his shoulder, does not take himself seriously, and just views the challenge as getting better all the time. 

The good news too is that with his great defense, he could rise to the majors and be an average player sooner because with his speed and good eye at the plate, his BABIP should be above average, helping him to keep his OPS at least replacement level to begin with as he adjusts to the league and improves.  And his OBP should be good enough initially to justify inserting him at leadoff sooner than later, and the power should come later, as that is part of his game that he says he works on, in the interviews I've seen.

I've very excited by him, I was excited after my analysis after the Giants drafted him and I'm even more excited now that he's had a great first pro season.  As much as the Giants talked about not rushing prospects, I think that if he does well in the Eastern League to start, they will promote him to AAA by mid-season, to see if he can take over the lead-off/CF position well enough so that they can let Pagan go in the off-season or if they need a lead-off guy for 2013.  I am drinking the Kool-Aid enough to think that he will do this and get some call up experience in September, before making the team in 2013.

LAD's Rubby De La Rosa

Comment From Rick: Did I read that Rubby De La Rosa has the best fastball that you've seen in the Sally ? Thursday February 16, 2012 5:00 Rick
Mike Newman: No, Rubby has the best fastball I've ever scouted... period. He never pitched in the Sally. I scouted him twice in Chattanooga last season before his promotion.

ogc:  Ugh, that's not good to hear.  He could help the D-gers recover from losing Kuroda, someone to watch for 2012.

AZ's Paul Goldschmidt

Comment From Philip: Speaking of 80 power, what was Goldschmidt considered to have when he was there? Thursday February 16, 2012 5:05 Philip
Mike Newman: I'm honestly not a big Goldschmidt guy, but may have been a little too hard on him when I scouted him last summer. I saw a touch of slider bat speed and wondered if it would translate well to the bigs, or if he'd be destined to make a living off of bullpens and #5 starters. I'm still not sold, but a 25-home run first baseman with strong walk rates has considerable value for sure.

ogc:  I am not a big Goldschmidt guy either.  Looking at his numbers, I think he was very lucky and will have a regression season in 2012, where playing the full season he'll be exposed.  Still, as he noted, power like that could keep him in the lineup, he could be their replacement for that strikeout-homerun 3B Mark Reynolds who they traded to the Orioles.   But back to the Giants, a regression like that will be good for the Giants, they will probably have to sit him down, and he'll probably have a season similar to Belt's 2011, except that he'll get a lot more AB's and playing time, because I don't think that they have any good alternatives.

SD's Cashner/Rizzo Trade

Comment From AJ: Who will end up getting the better deal in the Rizzo/Cashner trade. Is rizzo's wing too long to be abel to hit for avg and/or good power numbers in chi? Thursday February 16, 2012 5:21 AJ
Mike Newman: I didn't understand that deal from SD's perspective. For Chicago, buying low on Rizzo for Cashner who seems like a closer (maybe) in the end strikes me as a steal.

ogc:  Yeah, I didn't get the trade either unless SD is pretty sure that Cashner is a future dominant closer.  Then again, maybe they saw something about Rizzo that didn't look good to them and sold low.

SD's Casey Kelly

Comment From Tom: ETA and ceiling for Casey Kelly? And general question - do you think too much emphasis is put on K and BB rates below AA ball for pitchers? Thursday February 16, 2012 5:29 Tom
Mike Newman: Kelly will be up this year and now appears to be more of a mid-rotation guy. As for K/BB rates, for older prospects, they are laughably blown out of proportion. For age appropriate guys, they deserve a closer look for sure. however the numbers can be tricky as hitters simply can't handle fringe breaking balls at the lower levels in general leading to crazy numbers.

ogc:  This chat make the A-Gon trade look worse and worse.  Rizzo is sold low on for maybe a closer, and Kelly is now profiling as a middle rotation guy now.  For A-Gon, you would hope to get more.  Maybe that's why Hoyer left now, while the getting's good, as he maybe felt that he was on the ledge with SD's management.  Good the Giants if they don't get good value for A-Gon, that and the Latos trade could help to keep them in the cellar.

I highlighted the last two sentences because I believe in them.  If the prospect is older than the league, then his extra experience and development should lead him to dominate, so you have to take any good performance with a large grain of salt.  If the prospect is age appropriate, then the way I see it, you want to see him among the league's leaders, as confirmation of his goodness.  This is especially so for prospects who are younger than the league.  The more of any outlier they are, the better the probability that he can translate that to the majors.

If you look at the league leaders, you will always find players who are older than the league up there, and if you go far back enough and look to see if they are in the majors, most are not.  They will need to prove that they are good at every level they rise to.  And most usually fail at some point.

But if you find age appropriate (Shandler books says 22 YO is age appropriate for AAA, 21 for AA, 20-ish for Advanced A, and 19-20 for A), then if he is among the leaders then that is a good performance for him.  And if he is younger than these ages, then his rating goes even higher.  These types of players have a greater probability of making it in the majors, at minimum as a regular starter for a while, and if he develops, an all-star.

Villalona's Nearly Here: Got Work Visa

Andy Baggarly of the Merc reported here that Villalona got his work visa and will be able to return to the U.S. to play ball for the Giants.  Here are some key excerpts, the URL is usually shut down after a certain period of time:

The Giants expect him to be at Scottsdale Stadium when position players report Feb. 23.

Major League Baseball removed Villalona from its restricted list late last year, and the Giants added him to their 40-man roster to prevent another club from plucking him away in the Rule 5 draft. All players on the 40-man roster receive automatic invitations to big league camp in the spring.

Villalona already has a flight booked to the U.S., Evans said. But the club hasn't yet received confirmation that Villalona has gone through the final step in the process to take possession of the visa. That process involves a face-to-face interview, an identity check and proof of travel documents.

He's considered a premier, power-hitting first baseman and has been working out at the Giants' complex in the Dominican. According to scouting reports, he still has plenty of the bat speed that made him a standout talent as a teenager.

Villalona is not a candidate to make the Giants' opening-day roster, but there's a good chance he will be assigned to Single-A San Jose at some point this season.

Giants Thoughts

There has not been a lot of news about his condition or anything so this is pure nuggets of information.  First, it is not like he is totally rusty, he has been working out at the Giants Dominican complex, and presumably facing live pitching there, as they note that his bat speed is still there.  Which was what I expected, that is why I've been excited about his return to the Giants farm system.  Basically, a top 40 level prospect has been dropped back into our farm system, a 5 star prospect, boosting our overall farm system talent level.

San Jose sounds about right, that was the level he was at before his career detour, and he was doing OK there, not great, and at age 21 now, he is age appropriate for top prospect level at the Advanced A level.  Though most probably the Giants would start him off in instructional league, then when they think he is ready, either Augusta or even Salem-Keizer, then finally San Jose, maybe for the second half.  That should be more than enough to get his feet back on the ground, hopefully.

Also, hopefully he has worked off a lot of his baby fat and is more compact and muscular now, though he should always be a big boi.  From what I recall, he was really big, making Sandoval look like a Twiggy in comparison.  With all that time off, I hope he worked every day at getting himself into better shape.

If he can get back up to speed, he can still possibly be a good young prospect when he makes the majors, assuming he can get his career back on track.  I figured if he had great bat speed when he was 13 YO, there should be no way he would lose it while out of organized baseball.  At worse, he can take swings off a tee or other batting equipment, and with his money, he can at least have a pitching machine setup built at his home so that he can bat off of it.  That would help keep his reaction speed good enough for when he returned to organized baseball.

With Sandoval and Belt, though, the Giants should be set at those two positions - 1B and 3B - for years, so unless he learns to play the OF (unlikely at his size) or Belt gets pushed out to LF again, Villalona could be just a big trading chip the Giants can use to obtain more pitching or whatever else that they need, when the time comes.