Comments on: Giant of a Steal

By: phil

phil — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:56:20 +0000

where did this myth of xavier nady being a player worth pursuing come from? guy has one sick month as a yankee and now all of a sudden he’s a legit corner outfield starter? nady, the 30 year old with a sub .800 career ops who plays mediocre at best defense?

the giants already have randy winn (who is similar, but plays much better defense) and fred lewis (who is basically the exact same player, only cheaper and younger). why the fuck would they give up anything for nady, much less a kid who at least has the potential to be a good #2 or #3 starter?

By: Miguel

Miguel — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 23:18:59 +0000

Me contenta mucho que Pablo Sandoval sea considerado en tan alto nivel por los fanaticos de los Gigantes. Falta poco para que termine la temporada de baseball en mi pais (Venezuela) y Pablo Sandoval será con toda seguridad el lider bate del torneo.

Lo mejor en este nuevo año a los lectores (y creadores) de esta estupenda pagina

Miguel

By: Drew

Drew — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 14:08:13 +0000

I don’t really see what the commenters are missing here.

It’s not a good move because it’s going to magically propel the Giants into the playoffs, though it does improve them.

It’s a good move because RJ is worth more than someone like Jamie Moyer, who recently got paid a lot more than he’s worth (and more than RJ) because he had 15 wins in 2008. RJ was underrated in 2008, and now he’s underpaid.

By: hilarie

hilarie — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:58:53 +0000

Johnson is an ok baseball signing but looks like more of a marketing signing (since they fell short of three million attendance for the first time ever at AT&T Park. All the talk about “contention” is more or less marketing as well. Sabean’s stated philosophy has long been “once you get into the playoffs anything can happen.” This is ball-less flip-a-coin marketing-centric nonsense. Yes, seven game series tend to increase the luck factor, boosting a weak team’s chances. And yes, the team with the best four-man — and sometimes three-man — rotation gets a better shot, and a strong bullpen that includes starters at critical points is also useful. But given decent pitching (and adequate defense), what wins short series most reliably is a lineup whose hitters all consistently contribute game-changing plays, which translates to (yawn) high OBP and SLG throughout. Pitchers rarely win a game with a single pitch. Batters win with a single swing often. Get a bunch of hitters with high potential for contributing to big innings, pair them with adequate pitching, and you have a juggernaut. Focus exclusively on pitching and you have a strategy based on hoping the competent offensive teams never get lucky. They will.

By: OnetoNothing

OnetoNothing — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 20:39:53 +0000

Ah, the old “they’re young so they’ll all collectively get better!” argument. Maybe some will, others probably fall off, some will find out they’re not MLB-quality players (and cost the Giants some wins in the process). In any case, the Dodgers’ young squad is just as likely, if not more so, to get better this season from last. Those 25-27 years are where guys usually peak.

RJ is predicted as having “a slightly worse version of Kevin Correia’s 2008.” Um… that’s the guy whose spot he’s taking… so it’s not an improvement. Renteria had almost the EXACT same WPA in 2008 as Vizquel, so another non-improvement. They did get Bob Howry’s 5.35 ERA (-.79 WPA) and Affeldt’s decent 3.33 ERA(-.19 WPA). If you see some massive improvement somewhere in there, I’d like those rose-colored glasses back.

The Giants have a nice rotation now, I’d give them the edge over the Dodgers. Their lineup is still atrocious though, and the Dodgers’ is pretty good, that’s the difference.

By: Tom Au

Tom Au — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:57:02 +0000

Giants in the World Series? Not as likely as the New York Yankees but not out of the question either, and this rotation gives them a shot, at least in the “offensively challenged” NL West.

Who would have thought the St. Louis Cardinals in 2006, or the Colorado Rockies in 2007, or the Tampa Bay Rays in 2008 (okay, the last two didn’t win but even so). We’ve all seen “stranger” things happen.

By: Matt H.

Matt H. — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 16:05:36 +0000

I will never ever understand how Yankees fans think of crazy stuff like this. Nobody wants Melky, OK?

By: Milendriel

Milendriel — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:51:50 +0000

Just eyeballing the projected lineup and going with WAR estimates based off my gut evaluations of the players’ offensive/defensive talent (and using 50 wins as replacement level for a team), I get ~78 wins or so. Seems quite plausible that they contend for the division, but they likely need another piece or two. I don’t know that they’ll get much more than 10 war from their position player starters (including defense). Ouch.

By: BrianBokake

BrianBokake — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:26:21 +0000

Those are nice rose colored glasses. What major free agent pitcher are you expecting the Dodgers to sign? Also, run differential is hardly a predictive stat, especially when you consider the lack of experience for the majority of the Giants players last season. (Lewis, Schierholtz, Burris, Velez, Ishikawa). To me it would only seem reasonable to expect improvement.
You’re also excusing an awful lot when you mention potentially losing your offensive catalyst (Manny) as well as Lowe and Penny.
How is it at all reasonable to expect a full season out of Rafael Furcal when he is coming off of a major back surgery?
Lastly, your 4 of 5 question marks comment on the rotation… I would love to see you try to explain how a Billingsley, Kuroda, Schmidt (wow btw), Kershaw, and Stultz rotation is more of a sure thing than the Giants rotation.
I’m not saying the Giants will win the division but your selective reasoning is unreasonably dismissive of what has been the lone productive off season in the NL West.

By: OnetoNothing

OnetoNothing — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 07:54:16 +0000

Whoa… I know it’s exciting for educated fans when a team makes a smart signing, and as a Dodger fan I’m pissed about this (thought RJ would fit in perfectly in LA)… but the Giants contending? Seriously??

Let’s get some perspective… the 2008 Dodgers had a run differential of +120. The Giants were -50. So far, the Giants have added a couple of their typical “Farewell Tour”-type players (Renteria and RJ), plus a couple of mediocre bullpen arms. The Dodgers have lost Manny (who they only had 1/3 of the season), Brad Penny (6.27 ERA), and Saito (old and unreliable). They also lost Derek Lowe, which hurts, but they’re certain to sign at least one other major FA to replace him. Plus, it’s reasonable to expect they’re going to get a full year from Clayton Kershaw and Rafael Furcal in 2009. I don’t see a makeup of 170 runs anywhere in there.

The Giants’ rotation does look nice on paper now, but having major question marks about 4 outta 5 seems like a bad thing. Add to that their horrendous lineup, and this deal is nothing more than a “get-butts-in-the-seats” signing. The Giants will not contend.