Official July 31 trade deadline thread

[MarcoPolo]

John Shea ‏@JohnSheaHey 5m
Bud Norris wanted to be traded to the black and orange. Not sure he got his wish. He's going to the #orioles.

He did go to the black and orange.

He *didn't* go to the orange and black - he'll have to learn to live with it ...

 

[Mays-Fan]

So, you're saying that we'll be average next year?

Realistically, I see us having arced past our near term peak. Our quality starting pitching next year is Bum, maybe Cain, and a whole lot of question marks. We aren't going to get FA starting pitching without paying through the nose and sucking up our payroll budget, and even then it's a crap shoot. We have few if any players in the high minors to step in as starting pitchers or outfielders, our biggest needs. Heck, the only real non-question marks in my mind at this point for 2014 are Buster and Bum. Yeah, Panda and Craw and Scoots and Belt and Cain are probably OK, but they all have their issues.

I love JLo as a LOOGY, but he pitched all of 36 innings last year, and is on a similar pace this year, and he's 36 now. Is that worth $4+ million if you aren't a serious contender? IMHO, no, especially since we have so many other needs. Affeldt is 34, Romo a creaky 30.

Yeah, one could say I'm being pantshatty, but it's also arguable that I'm just keeping it real.

 

[msgkings322]

Realistically, I see us having arced past our near term peak. Our quality starting pitching next year is Bum, maybe Cain, and a whole lot of question marks. We aren't going to get FA starting pitching without paying through the nose and sucking up our payroll budget, and even then it's a crap shoot. We have few if any players in the high minors to step in as starting pitchers or outfielders, our biggest needs. Heck, the only real non-question marks in my mind at this point for 2014 are Buster and Bum. Yeah, Panda and Craw and Scoots and Belt and Cain are probably OK, but they all have their issues.

I love JLo as a LOOGY, but he pitched all of 36 innings last year, and is on a similar pace this year, and he's 36 now. Is that worth $4+ million if you aren't a serious contender? IMHO, no, especially since we have so many other needs. Affeldt is 34, Romo a creaky 30.

Yeah, one could say I'm being pantshatty, but it's also arguable that I'm just keeping it real.

It's only 'keeping it real' if that's what actually turns out to be the case...otherwise it's 'keeping it wrong'

You can and do make the case that the team is in fact 'done' with their championship window, and that's certainly one (dark) opinion to have. But the logical conclusion then would be to do a total teardown, dealing everyone but Bum, Cain, and Posey, to restock for the next championship run in perhaps 2016-2017.

The fact that the Giants aren't doing any such thing, that they chose to stand pat, means that the front office feels very differently. And I think we can all agree that the FO knows about 100x more about how to run a championship winning ballclub than we do here.

 

[Mays-Fan]

It's only 'keeping it real' if that's what actually turns out to be the case...otherwise it's 'keeping it wrong'

You can and do make the case that the team is in fact 'done' with their championship window, and that's certainly one (dark) opinion to have. But the logical conclusion then would be to do a total teardown, dealing everyone but Bum, Cain, and Posey, to restock for the next championship run in perhaps 2016-2017.

The fact that the Giants aren't doing any such thing, that they chose to stand pat, means that the front office feels very differently. And I think we can all agree that the FO knows about 100x more about how to run a championship winning ballclub than we do here.

No. I did not say with certainty what our record will be or where we will finish in the standings, just that we will likely not be contenders in the end. That doesn't mean I will be "wrong" if I am trying to be realistic.

And there is no logical conclusion to what I said about keeping only Bum, Cain, and Posey, and dealing everyone else. That is absurd. Nowhere did I say we don't have a chance. We have several decent players outside those three who could improve in 2014, but they likely wouldn't bring enough in return to make dealing them worthwhile. I never advocated trading away any of our 2014 potential core players. And the FO only stood pat for now. The real maneuvering will take place in the off-season.

 

[msgkings322]

No. I did not say with certainty what our record will be or where we will finish in the standings, just that we will likely not be contenders in the end. That doesn't mean I will be "wrong" if I am trying to be realistic.

And there is no logical conclusion to what I said about keeping only Bum, Cain, and Posey, and dealing everyone else. That is absurd. Nowhere did I say we don't have a chance. We have several decent players outside those three who could improve in 2014, but they likely wouldn't bring enough in return to make dealing them worthwhile. I never advocated trading away any of our 2014 potential core players. And the FO only stood pat for now. The real maneuvering will take place in the off-season.

Well it's pretty clear that if they don't contend, then you are wrong. Pretty simple, most of us think we'll be in the mix next year, and you dont. nothing wrong with that.

So if the FO agreed with you that we don't have a playoff team core that just needs one or two tweaks, why wouldnt they tear it down and try to build a future contender? Or are you saying that we will contend next year, but only after they make some major changes in the offseason? not being argumentative, trying to figure out where you're at. if you dont think we're a tweak or two away, explain why you wouldnt deal everyone but those 3 to start over?

 

[MarcoPolo]

Because the Giants don't do that - the most important thing for them is to *appear* to be trying to put a good team on the field, so that butts will be in seats. That is MUCH more important than winning.

Remember 2008 and 2009?

 

[tzill]

Because the Giants don't do that - the most important thing for them is to *appear* to be trying to put a good team on the field, so that butts will be in seats. That is MUCH more important than winning.

Remember 2008 and 2009?

Yeah, they're all about hollow appearances, as evidenced by the lack of trophies...oh, wait...

 

[calsnowskier]

Yeah, they're all about hollow appearances, as evidenced by the lack of trophies...oh, wait...

Also, '09 was a legit contending team.

If it weren't for Mo...

Grrrrr...

I SAID, DON'T GET ME STARTED!!!!

 

[tzill]

Also, '09 was a legit contending team.

If it weren't for Mo...

Grrrrr...

I SAID, DON'T GET ME STARTED!!!!

If that team had had ANY offense besides Panda, it'd been real fun to see in the playoffs...

 

[MarcoPolo]

Also, '09 was a legit contending team.

If it weren't for Mo...

Grrrrr...

I SAID, DON'T GET ME STARTED!!!!

I'm going to pretend you aren't being sarcastic.

The "big" signings before the 2007 season were : decrepit Barry Bonds and journeyman Barry Zito.

The "big" signings before the 2008 season were : Aaron Rowand.

The "big" signings before the 2009 season were : Jeremy Affeldt, Edgar Renteria, and Randy Johnson.

They simply wanted to "look good" with the signings, hoping to keep the seats filled.

 

[calsnowskier]

I'm going to pretend you aren't being sarcastic.

The "big" signings before the 2007 season were : decrepit Barry Bonds and journeyman Barry Zito.

The "big" signings before the 2008 season were : Aaron Rowand.

The "big" signings before the 2009 season were : Jeremy Affeldt, Edgar Renteria, and Randy Johnson.

They simply wanted to "look good" with the signings, hoping to keep the seats filled.

No sarcasm.

Zito was a headline-grabber. It also got an owner fired. When was the last time that happened?

Bonds was an over-pay, but I suspect McG had something to do with that. It really hasn't happened since he had the keys taken away. However, no way they wanted him going elsewhere and breaking the record in a different shirt. They were going to pay him just about whatever he wanted.

Rowand was a bad signing. Wo would you have preferred, given info at the time?

2009 happened before they thought it would. They were still stinging from Zito and Rowand, so they pulled the reigns back a bit. However, they still got a vet SS to avoid a Bocock redux, a bully/SP versatile pitcher that ended up being a key to two trophies, and a place-holder SP who would make the org decent $$.

I see nothing wrong with the '09 signings.

 

[MarcoPolo]

And yet you don't see the series of signings as "let's do enough to keep butts in the seats" ??

 

[calsnowskier]

And yet you don't see the series of signings as "let's do enough to keep butts in the seats" ??

As opposed to what?

Signing Cliff Lee?

Albert Pujols?

Josh Hamilton?

Jason Bay?

Carl Crawford?

I know you aren't this guy, but you are sounding like the fan who wants the owners to ignore finances and sign every big-named FA out there. A budget is part of the real world. They fucked up with Zito and Rowand, and they were still able to collect TWO rings with those albatrosses on the payroll.

Did the FO bat 1.000? Absolutely not. But hey did find Huff, Vogelsong, Casilla, Lopez, Gaudin, Pagan, Torres, Blanco, etc.

Putting asses in the seats allows them to up the payroll to 140M from 90M in about a 5 year period.

 

[MarcoPolo]

No, I'm not that guy. But they so obviously just went out there and signed somebody, *anybody* to make it look like they "did something". I was upset with every one of the signings at the time (well, except Affeldt) - yes, even bringing back Barry (at that price). They were all marketing moves.

 

[calsnowskier]

No, I'm not that guy. But they so obviously just went out there and signed somebody, *anybody* to make it look like they "did something". I was upset with every one of the signings at the time (well, except Affeldt) - yes, even bringing back Barry (at that price). They were all marketing moves.

I guess we just place the "line" in different spots. For the most part, I don't have a problem with marketing signings.

If the teams makes a buck with this guy, they can spend an extra buck on that guy.

Again, they have been bitten in the ass by this strategy in the past, but the overall results have been outstanding, so no major complaints from me.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Again, they have been bitten in the ass by this strategy in the past, but the overall results have been outstanding, so no major complaints from me.

I would say that the outstanding results have been *in spite of* stupid signings like the ones I mentioned. With the exception of Affeldt (which was NOT made as a marketing move, but was a sound baseball decision), all of the other signings were pure BS and they played like shite and generally didn't help the team (well, except Bonds, who was simply overpaid).

Although I did swear on Nov 1, 2010 that I would consider forevermore that Renteria's $18M was money very well spent.

 

[calsnowskier]

Johnson was not a bad signing.

We needed an arm in the rotation, and he signed a 1-year deal. The org got the bonus of riding his quest for 300. He also was a HOFer for Timmeh and Matty to absorb greatness from.

Zito was a headline grab as the team was spiraling without direction.

Rowand was a mistake. Too much $$ for too many years to a REALLY good 4th OF.

Affeldt was a stroke of genius.

Edgar was signed long term to be a leader. We had nothing in the pipe at SS and the position was very dry league-wide. Not a gold-star signing, but there were no other options. The timing of the signing was suspect, but that is just Sabes MO (getting a jump on the market).

Anyway, I think we are squabbling about nothing. We both acknowledge that marketing plays a role in roster moves. You don't like it, I am pretty much OK with it. Fair enough.

 

[tzill]

No, I'm not that guy. But they so obviously just went out there and signed somebody, *anybody* to make it look like they "did something". I was upset with every one of the signings at the time (well, except Affeldt) - yes, even bringing back Barry (at that price). They were all marketing moves.

Of course they were marketing moves...and they were also baseball moves. I was ecstatic when we signed Zeets -- I thought he'd be a bona fide ace for years. I was wrong; so was the FO. Rowand wasn't to "put butts in the seats," he was signed because he's a gamer and would be a good clubhouse glue guy who would put up decent numbers without bitching about the park. It didn't work out.

Seriously, for a guy as obviously bright as you are, why the carping and whining about the FO? They won two effing WS.

 

[SFGRTB]

Renteria was not a "put butt's in the seats" type of signing, nobody wants to see that (unless it's in the playoffs). Retaining Omar Vizquel would have been more of that mold.... I do miss that guy.

 

[calsnowskier]

Renteria was not a "put butt's in the seats" type of signing, nobody wants to see that (unless it's in the playoffs). Retaining Omar Vizquel would have been more of that mold.... I do miss that guy.

He was pretty much "done" after us. IIRC, he caught on with Texas as a minor-league FA. The fact that he got a second wind and tacked on a few more semi-decent years was a shock, and is one of those things that happens.

Kinda like Vogey.

You can't blame the org for moving on from Omar (not saying you are "blaming).