2009 Winter Meetings News So Far

There have been a number of reports out about the winter meetings: Haft, Baggarly 1, 2, 3, 4, and Schulman 1 and 2, plus a trade rumor regarding San Diego's Kouzmanoff. I will run through all the news I have available right now.

Kouzmanoff

I'll start there as that's pretty exciting if true. However, I'm not sure what they would want back in return. The notice mentioned Fred Lewis and Kevin Frandsen as the trade offer from our end, and I agree, I would not be excited by that.

Then again, Kouzmanoff has not been that great in the majors, his OPS the past two seasons were low 700's whereas Fred Lewis has hit better than that during his time in the majors, even when he was struggling last season. Still, that's great power to get, it would secure 3B with Pablo moving to 1B (good bye Ishikawa and Garko), I think he was at least OK defensively, and even if he is in arbitration, he would still be getting only $3-5M according to the article (given his poor OPS, I would think that it would be closer to $3M, as the formula for the first year in arbitration is normally (if I remember right) around 40-60% of the average pay he would get as a free agent, and Pedro Feliz being about a similar player getting $5M at 3B, that would put him in the $2-3M range.

It is mentioned that the Twins might be in play, offering Glen Perkins, but I would rather have Lewis ALONE instead, rather than get Perkins. Pucetas at minimum, should be able to match what Perkins has done so far in the majors.

According to Baggarly, however, the 'Dres don't want Lewis. If Frandsen and Pucetas gets the job done, this would be an overpay over what the Twins are offering, but I would do the trade (of course, all speculation, don't know what the Giants are offering, if anything, it is a rumor after all). I would rather trade Martinez with Frandsen, if possible, as I like Pucetas.

Velez/Torres Lead-Off

Well, this would put a tight crimp into my thoughts on how the 2010 roster might fall out. If both are kept on the roster, then either Bowker or Schierholtz gets RF (with either Bowker returning to AAA or Schierholtz DFA?; I also read somewhere that the Giants were not happy Bowker left winter league and he wasn't happy about them ordering him to winter league).

Lead-off? Ugh! That would not be acceptable to me. I would rather leadoff with Bowker instead, or even Lewis. Velez is not the option for lead-off yet, after his hot return to the majors, after sucking early in the year, he cooled off totally.

To Aug. 9: .429/.458/.661/1.118, 3BB/10K in 56 AB with 1 SB and 1 CS (50%)
8/10 to end:.233/.282/.358/.640, 13BB/37K in 193 AB with 9 SB and 4 CS (69%)

So not only would his defense harm the team, his offense would not even make up for it. And there is a reason Torres was a journeyman when we signed him. He just got lucky this year with his hitting. Maybe he finally learned how to hit, but are we really going to bet on him learning? That would not seem to be the Giants or Sabean's way of doing things in the past.

This news does not make me happy with Sabean.

Marlon Byrd in the hand?

There is also talk about the Giants pursuing Marlon Byrd, which would preclude having these two as leadoff, though I don't know who would start otherwise, other than Aaron Rowand again. Plus, Byrd has benefited GREATLY from hitting in one of the most hitter-friendly parks in the majors, his OPS in his three years there was around the low 700 on the road, so any deal he signs would be an overpay if they are basing it on his overall numbers, which is very nice, with Texas the past 3 years. He was roughly a high 600 OPS before Texas, which rings true with his road numbers with Texas, so NO THANKS, PLEASE!

Signing him for big money would not make me happy with Sabean either, even more so, as I think Velez/Torres should be able to do what Byrd did and for much less in pay.

Johnny Damon Lead-off?

Another possibility is Johnny Damon, who the Yankees would no longer need if they trade for Curtis Granderson, as rumored. He would totally upgrade lead-off and he has been decent defensively in the outfield, if I remember right. I only wonder what his price would be, but if the Giants are willing to pay it (and not prevent us from keeping our pitching in the future) I would be OK with an overpay, he's been a pretty good player, though getting old, so there is that risk.

Panda Clean-Up

But this does make me happy: Pablo Sandoval has been annointed the new clean-up hitter. That is where he should have been hitting at the end of last season except that Bengie Molina would have had a gamer hissy-fit probably and bemoan his lack of respect, and by the way, he's no clean-up hitter and did he mention that he deserves more years and more money?

Middle Hitter

With Sandoval crowned the cleanup hitter, now we need to settle 3rd and 5th. The team is apparently still looking and Sabean noted that there are more options in the infield than outfield at the moment. I would think that could change once it is learned which players were non-tendered. Apparently there are two "what-ifs" regarding 3B, so Sandoval, while clearly cleanup right now, could play at 1B or 3B.

Payroll: Low $90M

That is about what it was last season, though a slight raise, as I think they started with a high $80M last season. About what could be expected. Hopefully Neukom will open the purse a little more if Lincecum wins more money in arbitration than expected.

No Catching for Sandoval or Garko

That is good news to hear. I'm tired of Giants fans suggesting that we start Pablo there. He is too valuable to play behind the plate, we need him in the lineup for as many of the 162 games as he can, and if he were catcher, he would probably miss at least 20 games if not more if he is injured.
Garko, I would have been intrigued to see him hit there, but since it has been so long since he started, it would not be fair to him to try to start catching again, let alone be the starter, even if it is temporary until Posey comes up. In any case, I read somewhere that the Giants are not even sure they want to be paying millions of dollars for Garko in arbitration if he is platooning with Ishikawa at 1B. Sounds like the Giants have to decide whether Garko is the starter or not, and if so, then that means Ishikawa is gone. I would be fine with him being paid more and platooning, but it's not my money.

No Penny Pickup for Giants

It probably has already been announced already, but Brad Penny appears to have signed with the Cardinals for $7.5M plus $1.5M in incentives. He tried to get more years and similar money from the Giants, but they backed off and he signed with them.

That's OK with me. I think Pucetas would be adequate in the #5 starting spot, and perhaps be decent even, instead of just average. With Lincecum's payday possibly huge, I think we have to pass on Penny unless he's at a good price. That's not a good price.

Another pitcher who is noted as a possible Giants target: Brett Myers, late of Phillies, also part-time closer for Phillies too. I would love to have him as our 5th starter. Jason Marquis is also mentioned, but while he would be OK as our #5 starter, I don't want to be paying him very much to do so for us, under $5M, but I don't expect him to sign for so little. I would pay more for Myers.

The Giants are looking at some international pitching free agents as well.

They are also considering Bumgarner as the 5th starter, though they then would want a veteran reliever in the bullpen if that is done. I'm not sure what the connection there is, though. Because they expect him to pitch less innings?

Other internal options include Joe Martinez, who pitched nicely in the AFL and Kevin Pucetas, who is being asked for in trade conversations, which confirms for the Giants that he would be an OK option for #5 starter. As I noted somewhere, Pucetas' MLE would put him in the mid-to-high 4 ERA which would be great for a #5 starter.

Keeping Medders

Speaking of pitching, the Giants appear to be keeping Medders, by tendering a contract and offering arbitration to him, unlike Garko who is on the bubble. I like what Medders did in 209 and would love to have him in the bullpen again. He would push out someone in the configuration I had in a prior post, but that would be OK with me, he did well for us.

Uggla Trade?

Appears to be coming to a head, the Marlins are ready to unload Uggla to the highest bidder, but right now the Giants appear to not be among the front runners. Still, they could come in with a late bid and try to win him. I think I would rather have Kouzmanoff, if possible, especially if it is Lewis and Frandsen for him. About similar hitting, better defense from Kouz than Uggla, whether Uggla plays 2B or 3B.

But if, as Baggarly notes, Uggla's trade value plummets because the Marlins waited too long (see Twins botching of Johan Santana trade), and we can get him on the cheap, in terms of prospects traded, then it would be great to get him, even at the big price he would probably net in arbitration. He also noted that even if the payroll was used up in this scenario, Neukom could OK raising the payroll to fit him in.

Starting Catcher

With Posey pretty much dismissed at the opening day starter (with the caveat that spring training could change things), the Giants are now looking for a starting catcher who is OK with not starting should Posey prove to be ready. Hard to find anyone like that unless you overpay someone for 2010. Sabean said that he's taking his time on this, which to me means that they probably have a few names who they are targeting and they will keep close tabs on all of them, and once all but one is signed, he would work at signing the last catcher for as low as he can get away with it in January.

Trade Value of OF

A scout was asked about the value of Giants OF, and the answers are not surprising to Giants fans who follow the farm system closely: Lewis, None; Schierholtz, basically none; Bowker, some. I would argue that Schierholtz would be worth more than that, but not much more, so I don't have a problem with that assessment. Nate is doing well in Puerto Rico and so that is good to hear.

Burriss in Limbo

Emmanuel Burriss had setback to the same foot that kept him out most of the season. That is not a good sign as that is his main value as a ballplayer, his speed, and a recurring or hard to heal foot injury could end his major league career before it really began. Too bad, I think he had some promise to become our starting 2B, with great D, good plate discipline, and great speed and SB.

Giants Trade for Garko, Loses Barnes

As the saying goes, to get talent, you have to give up talent. Ryan Garko is a talented power-hitting 1B who can play the OF in a pinch, and probably could catch in a pinch as well, he played C when he first started professionally but obviously it was decided that he wasn't that good there. Scott Barnes was an 8th round revelation who was having a great season for us in San Jose.

Giants Thoughts

Garko's plus is his power and he's a right-handed bat, but his defense is pretty bad at 1B and probably bad in LF too. He isn't hitting much better than Ishikawa has been since May 10th, who has been much over .800 OPS since then. I see this as a bad trade, because Barnes is a good lefty dominating in Class A, and we didn't get much of an upgrade at 1B plus force a hitter who has been hitting well onto the bench. That's assuming the obvious, that Garko's playing 1B.

He's also putting in time in LF, and that's where the Giants could benefit, because we have so many lefties in the OF, and he could play 1B and LF, giving Ishikawa more time at 1B against LHP still. Garko could be in LF a lot with Rowand banged up and nobody taking LF by the horn.

He's also a tradeable chip that could be moved to another team for someone the Giants like more, combined with other prospects.

Overall, if this is it, it depends on how the Giants use him. If they platoon him with Ishikawa at 1B plus play him in LF against RHP, then I think that's valuable and an improvement over the offense we had before. If it cuts into Ishikawa's time, then it's a poor trade. If it is a springboard to another move that nets a better hitter (like maybe Garko in a package to the Nats for Willingham), then that could be good for us too.

But I'm underwhelmed for now.

ADDENDUM since for some reason I cannot comment:

I also realized that I should look at Barnes and Garko's stats more indepth. This tempers my feelings, though if Garko cuts into Ishikawa's time at 1B beyond a platoon, it's a bad deal.

Garko really mashes against LHP and does OK against RHP. If he plays 1B against LHP and LF when Lewis and Schierholtz don't match up well in Bochy's gut against the RHP, then he'll be well utilized on our team. He has plus home stats so he might decline some with us.

Scott Barnes is doing really well, but there are some caveats. First of all, it's only Advanced A and he wasn't that dominating, though good. Plus, he benefitted from the strikeout factor at home due to the poor hitting background there:

Home: 2.55 W/9, 9.99 K/9
Away: 3.45 W/9, 8.16 K/9

So he's not that dominating away, FIP of 4.22 and that's not even the MLE.

What that means is that while he is good in Advanced A, he wasn't so good that he still needs to develop more to make the majors. Don't mean that he won't just that this is a requirement and pitchers like that peter out in AA or AAA if they are not able to develop that extra pitch. And the Giants typically do not trade prospects unless they are on their Available list (as opposed to their Don't Trade list).

However, he had a slow start to the season and really turned it on in June and July, so perhaps he has already figured it out, but most likely not, as his FIP was still 3.07 in July. As contrast, Pucetas, Alderson, and Bumgarner easily outdid Barnes in San Jose, even his great July.

So getting an average major league hitter for him is good value, to me, since he may never develop enough to pitch in the majors.

The main problem I have with the deal is that it most probably cuts into Ishikawa's playing time, particularly against LHP, where we need to see if he can handle or not, though it won't be the worse thing to have them platoon together the next three years.

In addition, it costs us a tradeable chip that could be used to get a player we really need, like a better hitting 2B or consistent LF, though if Garko is tradeable, then that's not as much of a factor.

I am still underwhelmed, but not by as much as before now. And it still depends on how he is used and his impact on Ishikawa.

But with Jesus Guzman up, it could be that Garko is strictly a LF for now, plus occassional 1B. And Guzman had played 2B before (not well, but still) so he could be utilized there as well, so that is the mix we are facing in playing time.