According to a blog by Andy Baggarly, the Giants have informed Randy Winn that his services would no longer be needed by the Giants.
Giants Thoughts
First off, thank you to Randy Winn for his many years of service to the Giants. Good luck in your future endeavors and hopefully you can make the playoffs with another team, though, of course, should you face the Giants in the playoffs, I hope you don't do so well.
Andy opined that this move might be because the Giants management is worried that Bochy would play Winn regularly instead of letting the younger players play. There is some validity in this statement. Winn started 22 games out of 28 games in August and 18 games out of 31 games in September/October, while hitting around .600 OPS over two months. To Bochy's credit, at least the percentage fell from 79% to 58%, but that type of hitting usually warrants a benching, not playing over half the games.
But he was kind of forced to use Winn. In August, Velez hit .273/.307/.405/.712 in 121 AB and Schierholtz hit .208/.255/.417/.671 in 48 AB, while Winn hit .247/.304/.301/.605 in 93 AB. Lewis did hit well in limited (34) at-bats, but that was probably mainly against RHP and probably small samples as his stats then tanked the rest of the season.
In September/October, Velez hit .239/.294/.413/.707 in 92 AB, Bowker hit .222/.276/.444/.720 in 27 AB, Schierholtz hit .222/.273/.293/.565 in 41 AB, and Lewis, balancing off his hot August with a very poor end to his season. Winn didn't do much better, .230/.329/.262/.591 in 61 AB, but he at least is a veteran with a strong track history. With the days in the season dwindling, usually betting on the veteran is a good bet.
However, his track record in the 2009 season was pretty poor. His OPS was at or below the 700 OPS range in 5 of the 6 months, he only had one month similar to his usual production in May. More importantly, he was striking out much more than he usually did, even in his poor 2006 season, and such a negative turn in his contact ability spoke to his probable physical decline and inability to make contact with pitches he once hit with authority.
The one good thing that Winn at least was able to do was to get on base a lot. Despite a lower OPS than his career, his OBP was at least presentable, unlike the other OF starter options, at the end of the season. So it was not like Bochy was totally off base with his decision to start Winn.
Personally, I would have just given the starting job to Bowker at the start of September, in recognition of his great season in 2009, much like how Sandoval and Ishikawa got to start a lot of games at the end of 2008 season. That would have also given us a look towards 2010 plus allowed him to chillax a little and show what he could do.
But when you are trying to win in the last month of the season, you don't go starting young prospects with that extra pressure on, it is hard enough to show what you can do earlier in the season when the pressure is not that high, but playoff pressure is an additional negative factor on a young prospect's performance. Though sometimes you are forced to do that.
In any case, this is a good move. Right now, LF and RF are open positions, with Fred Lewis, Eugenio Velez, Nate Schierholtz, and John Bowker competing for the two spots, with Andres Torres a dark horse candidate and Jose Guzman an unlikely possibility but still could be in the mix. If the Giants want to ensure another steady bat in the lineup, LF is one possibility to fill with a player, like free agent Chone Figgins.
However, Sabean's comments thus far suggest that they are content with going forward with their current roster of players, avoiding any early free agent signing. That is the way he likes to operate, but waiting to see how the free agent market shakes out and perhaps provide us with a nice cheaper alternative. Perhaps after the non-tendered arbitration candidates in December is one way he might go or waiting until Jan/Feb for the vets still looking for a job and perhaps ready to give the Giants a nice deal.
Plus, the Giants pick is not protected, so he most probably won't be going after any of the Type A free agent because of this and the size of the contract in terms of years and dollars that the top hitters will want.
Unfortunately, Chone Figgins is a Type A free agent (list just released today, check here at bizofbaseball for their account) so there goes my best idea of who the Giants might pursue among the free agents.
The good news for Giants fans is that Bob Howry, Randy Johnson, and Randy Winn are Type B free agents, so if some team were to sign them before the deadline for offering arbitration, they would earn us a first round supplemental pick. However, odds are that probably only Howry would beat that deadline, as the other two will probably be after thoughts, given how poorly they performed. Also, Bengie Molina is a Type A free agent, so there is some possibility that a contending team needing a good starting catcher might sign him (like the Brewers), though a rising team might want him too (like the Rays). But it is no sure bet that the Giants will get both a first round pick and a supplemental sandwich pick for Molina.
Plus, the free agents catchers I was hoping the Giants might target as the veteran backup who will backup Posey this season, either all season or keeping the starting job warm until Posey is brought up won't cost us any compensation: Ausmus, Zaun, and Jose Molina would not cost us anything in terms of draft picks (Zaun should also have an option that the Rays might pick up).
Monday, November 09, 2009
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Vets are Important to Rebuilding Teams
I have been trying to figure out a way not to chase my tail in answering people concerns (OK, really, complaints) about how the Giants have gone about rebuilding over the past few years (I consider a team to be in rebuilding mode once it has gone through two years of losses, no matter what their management's intents were at the time, as there is no way to easily research that via the data available on-line. And really, if you are losing while trying to win, that's a sign that you are fighting an upward battle and should really be rebuilding). I think I will try to create a series of posts related to rebuilding where I try to address one particular myth regarding rebuilding and this will be the first.
What got me started now is that there is a great post on Fangraphs that captures one particular aspect that I have seen people post their comments on: if a team is rebuilding, they should not be acquiring veterans. It was written by Dave Cameron and titled, "The Value of a Win To A Losing Team" and I think it discussed this issue well.
You just have to look at any team that went from bad to good to find that they never eliminated all their veterans nor did they not acquire veterans via free agent or trade to help with the rebuilding process. Why play a prospect who is not particularly good when you can get a veteran at market value who has a better odd of providing a certain level of production, so that you can play young players at other positions and thus the vets help keep the team afloat and not crashing and burning.
The Braves did not rebuild from the ashes of their 80's without signing some free agents to fill spots that could not be filled internally. Detroit in their rebuilding signed players like Magglio Ordonez to help them get over the hump. The D-gers signed players like Derek Lowe and traded for players like Brad Penny and Manny Ramirez. The Phillies signed Jim Thome to make their big push from up and down, slightly above .500, to consistently in the high 80's. And the Yankees bought their way to their pennant, they have not really rebuilt much.
I have challenged all to point out teams that have successfully rebuilt without acquiring a veteran at market value to help them in their rebuilding process. Even the Tampa Bay Rays, which some have pointed out, signed Pat Burrell last off-season to help with taking the next step forward and Troy Perceival the year before. Another team that some point out, the Brewers, signed Jeff Suppan to a big contract a few years back, plus Braden Looper this past off-season, plus acquired Jason Kendall, who had a huge contract, in a trade with the A's.
The closest would be Tampa Bay as they have pretty much built via their farm system with minimal veteran presence. But the way they did it, is it a price you are willing to pay? They had a losing record for 10 straight years, often having the worse record in the majors. They averaged 60 wins over a three year period during those 10 years, and had the first overall pick in 4 of those 10 years, a top 3 in 7 of those 10 years, and a top 4 in 8 of those 10 years. Heck, most Giants fans couldn't even stand what we went through, let alone 10 years worth. And that is one example, not how most teams have rebuilt.
The Braves, who some point at as a good example of rebuilding, had 7 straight years of losing and not just losing but losing bad, they averaged 60.7 wins in one 3 year stretch, finished 6th in a 6 team division 4 times, and was 5th two other times. They had a top 3 pick 4 out of those 7 years, a 5th pick and a 6th pick. Sabean Naysayers were beating the drums on him just 2 or so years into the losing, saying many of the same things that Braves fans were probably saying about Bobby Cox.
And really, the Braves went through a rebuilding period from 1967-1991 (they moved to Atlanta in 1966), as they were not able to sustain any period of winning beyond two seasons, and only did that once, in 1982 and 1983.
And really, any team that has rebuilt has gone through stretches of losses at least 4-5 years in length, and most a lot more. And those teams that finally made it from rebuilding to perennial playoff contenders relied on key veteran players who they acquired either via free agency or trades.
Of course, that does not mean that the veterans the team acquires is the right type of vet to acquire, but that's another topic. It is a myth that teams rebuild solely by the draft without any veterans on the team.
What got me started now is that there is a great post on Fangraphs that captures one particular aspect that I have seen people post their comments on: if a team is rebuilding, they should not be acquiring veterans. It was written by Dave Cameron and titled, "The Value of a Win To A Losing Team" and I think it discussed this issue well.
While rebuilding teams have to look towards the future, they also have to avoid the death spiral that can occur when a small revenue team fails to put a good product on the field, drives away the fan base, and in the process lowers future revenues. There is a financial cost to losing that is magnified when teams are uniformly awful, and that cost can inhibit a team’s growth potential in the long run. Developing a fan base is in many ways like developing a farm system – it requires a present term investment that theoretically returns greater future value...
Sometimes, that value will come in the form of a thirty-something nearing the end of his career, but the value they can add in the short term can make that kind of player a better choice for a rebuilding team than giving an inferior young player playing time in the name of rebuilding.
You just have to look at any team that went from bad to good to find that they never eliminated all their veterans nor did they not acquire veterans via free agent or trade to help with the rebuilding process. Why play a prospect who is not particularly good when you can get a veteran at market value who has a better odd of providing a certain level of production, so that you can play young players at other positions and thus the vets help keep the team afloat and not crashing and burning.
The Braves did not rebuild from the ashes of their 80's without signing some free agents to fill spots that could not be filled internally. Detroit in their rebuilding signed players like Magglio Ordonez to help them get over the hump. The D-gers signed players like Derek Lowe and traded for players like Brad Penny and Manny Ramirez. The Phillies signed Jim Thome to make their big push from up and down, slightly above .500, to consistently in the high 80's. And the Yankees bought their way to their pennant, they have not really rebuilt much.
I have challenged all to point out teams that have successfully rebuilt without acquiring a veteran at market value to help them in their rebuilding process. Even the Tampa Bay Rays, which some have pointed out, signed Pat Burrell last off-season to help with taking the next step forward and Troy Perceival the year before. Another team that some point out, the Brewers, signed Jeff Suppan to a big contract a few years back, plus Braden Looper this past off-season, plus acquired Jason Kendall, who had a huge contract, in a trade with the A's.
The closest would be Tampa Bay as they have pretty much built via their farm system with minimal veteran presence. But the way they did it, is it a price you are willing to pay? They had a losing record for 10 straight years, often having the worse record in the majors. They averaged 60 wins over a three year period during those 10 years, and had the first overall pick in 4 of those 10 years, a top 3 in 7 of those 10 years, and a top 4 in 8 of those 10 years. Heck, most Giants fans couldn't even stand what we went through, let alone 10 years worth. And that is one example, not how most teams have rebuilt.
The Braves, who some point at as a good example of rebuilding, had 7 straight years of losing and not just losing but losing bad, they averaged 60.7 wins in one 3 year stretch, finished 6th in a 6 team division 4 times, and was 5th two other times. They had a top 3 pick 4 out of those 7 years, a 5th pick and a 6th pick. Sabean Naysayers were beating the drums on him just 2 or so years into the losing, saying many of the same things that Braves fans were probably saying about Bobby Cox.
And really, the Braves went through a rebuilding period from 1967-1991 (they moved to Atlanta in 1966), as they were not able to sustain any period of winning beyond two seasons, and only did that once, in 1982 and 1983.
And really, any team that has rebuilt has gone through stretches of losses at least 4-5 years in length, and most a lot more. And those teams that finally made it from rebuilding to perennial playoff contenders relied on key veteran players who they acquired either via free agency or trades.
Of course, that does not mean that the veterans the team acquires is the right type of vet to acquire, but that's another topic. It is a myth that teams rebuild solely by the draft without any veterans on the team.
Monday, November 02, 2009
Giants Sign Freddy Sanchez: 2 years, $12M
Announced late Friday, the Giants signed Freddy Sanchez to a reported (Chron's Schulman then Merc, based on what sfgiants.com's Haft wrote), 2 years, $12M contract. Reports from sfgiants.com, Chronicle, and Merc. As a side note, Noah Lowry (unsurprisingly), Justin Miller, and Kelvin Pichardo have been released, freeing 3 spots on the 40 man roster. Baggarly also noted that the following players are eligible for arbitration: Tim Lincecum, Brian Wilson, Jonathan Sanchez, Brandon Medders and Ryan Garko. Plus, the Giants are having conversations with all their free agents, but only about what the Giants are thinking, not that the Giants necessarily want them back.
Sanchez could have had an $8.1M contract for 2010 if he really wanted to, so in essence he is being paid $3.9M for 2011. Given that Hudson, a comparable 2B, last season only got $3M plus incentives (which eventually got him a total about $8M, if I recall right), Sanchez was trading off the risks that 1) he could be in Type A free agent hell for two years, not knowing who he would be playing for, and getting stuck with which ever team happens to be looking for a cheap 2B, and accepting whatever contract they offer, particularly considering his injury problems this season, and 2) he could be injured again, you never know considering he's entered his 30's, look at what happened to Ray Durham, healthy all his 20's then every, s-i-n-g-l-e season he's injured.
For that, he knows he's playing for a good rising team that was in the playoff hunt in 2009 and possibly the next two years plus don't have to worry about where he's going to be for the next two years nor what contract he might end up with. And there's the injury thing.
Also, for what it's worth, he felt bad that he was not able to contribute to the pennant run, as was intended by the trade, and that the Giants traded a "pretty high prospect" for him.
Giants Thoughts
Not surprised about a deal, I expected a deal to happen. But 2 years at $12M was an unexpected and nice surprise. I thought that perhaps the 3 year $20M offer that Sanchez gave Pittsburgh might be resurrected, but this is even better. Perhaps he wanted security for now but wanted to test free agency with a healthy body next time. Taking one year at lower pay when there is an $8.1M option doesn't make sense, but a 2 year at these terms does.
That's why all the hand-wringing a lot of Giants fans (i.e. the section of Sabean Naysayers out there) did, worrying about what might happen, was all for naught. They just automatically think that Sabean is going to screw it up in some way, but as I noted, it made sense for both sides to work out a deal for a reasonable amount of money. So we did end up with somebody good for Alderson, and given how poorly he was doing in AA for the Pirates, it looks like we sold high, and all the angst over Franchez was much ado over nothing.
Not surprised that Lowry was released (technically, his option was turned down and then he was outrighted, so as to avoid arbitration, and now he has the right to turn down the assignment and become a free agent, which will happen). His agent accused the Giants staff of incompetance, which is pretty silly because Lowry had problems that had never been seen in baseball before, they had to go to another sport to find such an instance. The Giants said that they are still open, but there is no way they can come back to the Giants and not look bad for the lawsuit that appears to be percolating on Lowry's end. Good luck with your career Noah, thanks for all the good pitching.
I was a little surprised by Miller being outrighted until I found out that he's up for arbitration. With so many players up for arbitration, they probably thought that they could outright him and then try to keep him as an option for next year, since he was signed to a minor contract last year and had his arm surgery. Medders, however, would have been a hot item on the free agent market. I think Miller will stick around and the Giants are talking with him.
Kelvin Pichardo's release possibly ends the Michael Tucker saga in SF. Pichardo was who we got in the trade for Tucker and for a number of years, it looked like he might make the team as a reliever, but despite good numbers in the minors, he never got the call up to the majors, even when basically every pitcher on the 40 man got called up and got at least a cup of coffee in the majors, in 2008. He's probably gone, probably will sign up with someone else since it doesn't look like it's going to happen here.
I am good with the deal for Sanchez. Forget his great season, that's ain't happening again. Still, if you average what he did in his other four seasons, that's a .326 OBP and .407 SLG for a .733 OPS. Plug that into the lineup calculator, compare batting 2nd (which is where the Giants envision him hitting, though apparently 3rd is an option too; .250/.299/.332/.632) with what we got from batting 2nd last season (guys hitting 2nd in lineup didn't do much better than the 2B too; .236/.281/.329/.611), and we add roughly 0.15 to 0.2 runs to the lineup, just with that one move. That would move us from 4.06 runs per game to at least 4.2 runs per game, maybe 4.25 runs scored per game, which, if our pitching holds up, would add two wins to our team.
We should also have improvements at 1B (Ishi-Garko platoon) and SS (Renteria healthy and back to normal offense), plus possibly 3B (Sandoval produce over full season) and RF (someone got to do better than what Winn provided, either Schierholtz or Bowker), leaving LF for a possible free agent or trade acquisition for an upgrade.
Plus, over the last two months of the 2009 season, after the acquisitions for the offense, the team averaged 4.24 runs per game. Obviously, a big chunk of that was from Uribe (who according to the press conference is looking to go free agent, not surprising), but what I wanted to show is that improvements we already have now at 2B, 1B, and SS (relative to 2009), should be at least equivalent to that uptick in offense, meaning that is not a pipe dream that the offense could be improved over last year's 4.06 runs scored without any new additions.
Still, hopefully the Giants can take a calculated risk in the free agent market and improve the team to get us to the 90+ win range. And not just by adding a power hitter but also by adding a #5 starter who can do better than what we got from our #5 starters, Randy Johnson, Ryan Sadowski, and Joe Martinez (obviously, Brad Penny did pretty well). Plus, if Sanchez can continue to improve, that would also help too. Same with Zito.
As I've been noting, I'm happy with how the Giants are set up for 2010. We have clear areas of possible improvements in both our offense and pitching that look like we have a pretty good chance of improving on the number of wins we get in 2010 over 2009. Still, enough could go wrong that we could take a step back in 2010 too.
As much as I would like to see Posey starting, I think the Giants are going to follow the Orioles/Weiters route and acquire a catcher to be the starter holding the seat warm for Posey in 2010. Given that Weiters is considered a better hitter than Posey and yet did not do that well in the majors until his last month, it might behoove the Giants to keep Posey in AAA for most of 2010, and just get him ready for the starting job in 2011. Research by Baseball Foreaster showed that it is usually better to keep the prospects in AAA for a whole year in order to have a better feel for the prospect's true abilities and have a better chance that he succeeds when he does make the majors, than to assume his good hitting over a partial season will hold up on the majors.
According to the news from the press conference announcing Sanchez's deal, Sabean "sees a late-developing free-agent market, particularly for the Giants, because he feels no desperation to sign players." That does not preclude the Giants from pursuing one of the bigger names (Holliday and Bay) as they are usually late developing too, particularly Boras clients. But it probably does mean that it will be a relatively slow off-season for Giants news, as the Giants will not be actively pursuing many (if any) free agents for a quick signing. That probably means no quick signing of a reliever, like we did last year with Affeldt and Howry, or a LF, at least initially. And that could have been predicted once the season ended, not a lot of spots open on the team, as much as people want wholesale changes on offense.
Late (meaning Jan/Feb 2010) signings for LF, RF, 1B, and 3B (and I suppose C) are possible as the Giants take a chance on somebody and giving them a chance to win a starting spot or a vet is unsigned and looking for a spot. That's also when teams have released arbitration eligible players in December and they could be available in that time frame and desperate for a shot somewhere, anywhere. I would also throw out Dallas McPherson's name out there, if he's healthy and hitting in spring, he could push Sandoval to 1B and get a semi-starting job at 3B.
Sabean also noted that he's working on stabilizing the top of the order (1-4), and the only way we can stabilize leadoff is via signing a free agent leadoff hitter. The premier free agent there would be Chone Figgins, who could play 3B or LF for us full-time, or move around as needed, though he would probably prefer to be in one spot, and as a free agent, that could become something that he is looking for in a team. If they got him, the Giants would be set at three of those spots: Figgins, Sanchez, and, of course, Sandoval, and might leave batting 3rd open for Schierholtz or Bowker to try to win.
Also, since they are looking at Franchez batting 3rd, I have to assume that could mean Renteria 2nd, Franchez 3rd, and Sandoval 4th. The news keep on focusing on getting a cleanup hitter, but Sandoval is that already, in my opinion, so they could go this route during the season. And that would work if Renteria was back to his normal self (heck, if he's back to his normal self, he would probably be better off hitting 3rd).
Sanchez could have had an $8.1M contract for 2010 if he really wanted to, so in essence he is being paid $3.9M for 2011. Given that Hudson, a comparable 2B, last season only got $3M plus incentives (which eventually got him a total about $8M, if I recall right), Sanchez was trading off the risks that 1) he could be in Type A free agent hell for two years, not knowing who he would be playing for, and getting stuck with which ever team happens to be looking for a cheap 2B, and accepting whatever contract they offer, particularly considering his injury problems this season, and 2) he could be injured again, you never know considering he's entered his 30's, look at what happened to Ray Durham, healthy all his 20's then every, s-i-n-g-l-e season he's injured.
For that, he knows he's playing for a good rising team that was in the playoff hunt in 2009 and possibly the next two years plus don't have to worry about where he's going to be for the next two years nor what contract he might end up with. And there's the injury thing.
Also, for what it's worth, he felt bad that he was not able to contribute to the pennant run, as was intended by the trade, and that the Giants traded a "pretty high prospect" for him.
Giants Thoughts
Not surprised about a deal, I expected a deal to happen. But 2 years at $12M was an unexpected and nice surprise. I thought that perhaps the 3 year $20M offer that Sanchez gave Pittsburgh might be resurrected, but this is even better. Perhaps he wanted security for now but wanted to test free agency with a healthy body next time. Taking one year at lower pay when there is an $8.1M option doesn't make sense, but a 2 year at these terms does.
That's why all the hand-wringing a lot of Giants fans (i.e. the section of Sabean Naysayers out there) did, worrying about what might happen, was all for naught. They just automatically think that Sabean is going to screw it up in some way, but as I noted, it made sense for both sides to work out a deal for a reasonable amount of money. So we did end up with somebody good for Alderson, and given how poorly he was doing in AA for the Pirates, it looks like we sold high, and all the angst over Franchez was much ado over nothing.
Not surprised that Lowry was released (technically, his option was turned down and then he was outrighted, so as to avoid arbitration, and now he has the right to turn down the assignment and become a free agent, which will happen). His agent accused the Giants staff of incompetance, which is pretty silly because Lowry had problems that had never been seen in baseball before, they had to go to another sport to find such an instance. The Giants said that they are still open, but there is no way they can come back to the Giants and not look bad for the lawsuit that appears to be percolating on Lowry's end. Good luck with your career Noah, thanks for all the good pitching.
I was a little surprised by Miller being outrighted until I found out that he's up for arbitration. With so many players up for arbitration, they probably thought that they could outright him and then try to keep him as an option for next year, since he was signed to a minor contract last year and had his arm surgery. Medders, however, would have been a hot item on the free agent market. I think Miller will stick around and the Giants are talking with him.
Kelvin Pichardo's release possibly ends the Michael Tucker saga in SF. Pichardo was who we got in the trade for Tucker and for a number of years, it looked like he might make the team as a reliever, but despite good numbers in the minors, he never got the call up to the majors, even when basically every pitcher on the 40 man got called up and got at least a cup of coffee in the majors, in 2008. He's probably gone, probably will sign up with someone else since it doesn't look like it's going to happen here.
I am good with the deal for Sanchez. Forget his great season, that's ain't happening again. Still, if you average what he did in his other four seasons, that's a .326 OBP and .407 SLG for a .733 OPS. Plug that into the lineup calculator, compare batting 2nd (which is where the Giants envision him hitting, though apparently 3rd is an option too; .250/.299/.332/.632) with what we got from batting 2nd last season (guys hitting 2nd in lineup didn't do much better than the 2B too; .236/.281/.329/.611), and we add roughly 0.15 to 0.2 runs to the lineup, just with that one move. That would move us from 4.06 runs per game to at least 4.2 runs per game, maybe 4.25 runs scored per game, which, if our pitching holds up, would add two wins to our team.
We should also have improvements at 1B (Ishi-Garko platoon) and SS (Renteria healthy and back to normal offense), plus possibly 3B (Sandoval produce over full season) and RF (someone got to do better than what Winn provided, either Schierholtz or Bowker), leaving LF for a possible free agent or trade acquisition for an upgrade.
Plus, over the last two months of the 2009 season, after the acquisitions for the offense, the team averaged 4.24 runs per game. Obviously, a big chunk of that was from Uribe (who according to the press conference is looking to go free agent, not surprising), but what I wanted to show is that improvements we already have now at 2B, 1B, and SS (relative to 2009), should be at least equivalent to that uptick in offense, meaning that is not a pipe dream that the offense could be improved over last year's 4.06 runs scored without any new additions.
Still, hopefully the Giants can take a calculated risk in the free agent market and improve the team to get us to the 90+ win range. And not just by adding a power hitter but also by adding a #5 starter who can do better than what we got from our #5 starters, Randy Johnson, Ryan Sadowski, and Joe Martinez (obviously, Brad Penny did pretty well). Plus, if Sanchez can continue to improve, that would also help too. Same with Zito.
As I've been noting, I'm happy with how the Giants are set up for 2010. We have clear areas of possible improvements in both our offense and pitching that look like we have a pretty good chance of improving on the number of wins we get in 2010 over 2009. Still, enough could go wrong that we could take a step back in 2010 too.
As much as I would like to see Posey starting, I think the Giants are going to follow the Orioles/Weiters route and acquire a catcher to be the starter holding the seat warm for Posey in 2010. Given that Weiters is considered a better hitter than Posey and yet did not do that well in the majors until his last month, it might behoove the Giants to keep Posey in AAA for most of 2010, and just get him ready for the starting job in 2011. Research by Baseball Foreaster showed that it is usually better to keep the prospects in AAA for a whole year in order to have a better feel for the prospect's true abilities and have a better chance that he succeeds when he does make the majors, than to assume his good hitting over a partial season will hold up on the majors.
According to the news from the press conference announcing Sanchez's deal, Sabean "sees a late-developing free-agent market, particularly for the Giants, because he feels no desperation to sign players." That does not preclude the Giants from pursuing one of the bigger names (Holliday and Bay) as they are usually late developing too, particularly Boras clients. But it probably does mean that it will be a relatively slow off-season for Giants news, as the Giants will not be actively pursuing many (if any) free agents for a quick signing. That probably means no quick signing of a reliever, like we did last year with Affeldt and Howry, or a LF, at least initially. And that could have been predicted once the season ended, not a lot of spots open on the team, as much as people want wholesale changes on offense.
Late (meaning Jan/Feb 2010) signings for LF, RF, 1B, and 3B (and I suppose C) are possible as the Giants take a chance on somebody and giving them a chance to win a starting spot or a vet is unsigned and looking for a spot. That's also when teams have released arbitration eligible players in December and they could be available in that time frame and desperate for a shot somewhere, anywhere. I would also throw out Dallas McPherson's name out there, if he's healthy and hitting in spring, he could push Sandoval to 1B and get a semi-starting job at 3B.
Sabean also noted that he's working on stabilizing the top of the order (1-4), and the only way we can stabilize leadoff is via signing a free agent leadoff hitter. The premier free agent there would be Chone Figgins, who could play 3B or LF for us full-time, or move around as needed, though he would probably prefer to be in one spot, and as a free agent, that could become something that he is looking for in a team. If they got him, the Giants would be set at three of those spots: Figgins, Sanchez, and, of course, Sandoval, and might leave batting 3rd open for Schierholtz or Bowker to try to win.
Also, since they are looking at Franchez batting 3rd, I have to assume that could mean Renteria 2nd, Franchez 3rd, and Sandoval 4th. The news keep on focusing on getting a cleanup hitter, but Sandoval is that already, in my opinion, so they could go this route during the season. And that would work if Renteria was back to his normal self (heck, if he's back to his normal self, he would probably be better off hitting 3rd).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)